[LMB] OT: clothing regulations

[Mark Allums]

paal at gis.net wrote:

>>> There has recently
>>> been a case in Toronto of a Muslimah losing her job at an airport
>>> because she lengthened her skirt--not to dangerous drag-the-floor
>>> level, but to her ankles.
>> Yes. There are an increasing number of cases like this in Canada,
>> partly because of the increasing number of Muslim immigrants, partly
>> because the social ambience is more conducive to their speaking out
>> than it has been in the past.
> 
> One of the issues is how much is the cultural value imposing restriction
> upon the members, that is, cover-up-the-women social requirements, are
> social restrictions that prevent women from physical freedom and often
> reflective of that, emancipation and running their own lives.

I apologize in advance if this has been mentioned, but the long skirt 
issue is one of security, not race/religion.  The fact that, in this 
particular case, she is Muslim, is a bit of a side issue, though, of 
course, there is much moaning and wailing on the subject.

Put as simply as possible, one can *hide* things under a long dress or 
skirt.  The rules say no long skirts, no tolerance allowed.  Options: do 
it, quit, or be fired.  It's strictly an overreaction on the part of the 
security Gestapo.  Not a cultural thing.  (Unless you consider the 
current tightening up and general tyranny of governments worldwide to be 
a cultural issue.)

(Also apologizing for the "skirting" of the boundaries of the Topic We 
Must Never Discuss.  Well, no I'm not, actually.  I think it needed to 
be pointed out.  And it was in Canada, so, technically, it's not U.S. 
politics.  :)  Notice, I'm not defending either side, here, they are 
both wrong.)

--Mark Allums