Showing off your waist in a sari, might be vulgar to someone
Blouse or kameez without sleeves might be vulgar to someone
Jeans which reveals the shape of legs might be vulgar to someone
Tops without scarves might be vulgar to someone
Skirts which reveal the calves might be vulgar to someone
Skirts or shorts which reveal the thighs, might be vulgar to someone
Halter tops, plunging necklines, might be vulgar to someone.
One piece swimsuit might be vulgar to someone
While only Bikinis might be vulgar to someone
Pamela's dresses might be sexy not vulgar to somone
But could become vulgar to the same someone, if worn by a close one.
The list I have said from the first line might be vulgar to someone
Or the last few lines of list might be vulgar to someone
Or none from the list might be vulgar to someone.
What is vulgarity for someone need not be vulgarity to everyone
In Taliban era even women exposing ankles was vulgar, no?
But even there, she could be raped inspite of covering herself from head to toe.
Whats vulgar to someone might be sexy to someone or inviting to someone.
But eveteasing, molesting or raping is the right of NO ONE
Vulgarity cannot be an excuse for eveteasing,molestation or rape.
For these incidents happen, not because of the dress, but because the offenders, fail to see the human wearing the dress.
Our sense of decency and the right to protest against vulgarity by Someone
Shouldnt mean we support Outrages against Anyone.
The above post had been about vulgarity and women dress
But surely some men too dress vulgarly.
Would it be "understandable", if a guy got molested or raped because of it by a woman (there are other ways a woman can rape a man other than an overdose of viagara, read the law on female rape to know more about its equivalent) or by a bisexual or homosexual man?
To my knowledge, there isnt a law, to deal with it, so its not even illegal. (In case of sex between 2 men its illegal for both and so the onus lies on the victim to prove it was forced)
And just curious to know if "understandable" if lesbians molested women who dressed vulgarly.
While many can be sympathetic to women getting molested, the same is not extended to men. Since many think that every man would enjoy anything related to sex (perhaps an exception would be made in case of a man raping another)
Still we dont have neither the law nor the social support for men who would come forward to complain against rape/molestation by other men.
I am sure the readers are not molestors and rapists.
But there are many who think, while they are capable of controlling themselves when someone dresses provocatively (which is not the same as vulgar though colloquially both imply the same), who believe its the responsibility of the women to see that their attire doesnt provoke anybody. And many rapes and molestations can be prevented if the women dressed in a way that wouldnt attract or ignite the rapists mind.
The rape laws go into the character of the victim but not the accused. Added to it the prejudice that a woman can provoke the action, puts the onus on the victim. This combined with the other anamolies in the law and its execution, leads, to victims not complaining and provoking the abusers to abuse further.
The attitude of the society which doesnt put enough responsibility on the abuser and implies being molested or raped is a stigma, and the loopholes in the law coupled with faulty execution are more provocative according to me, than just the dress of a woman or a man.