You have not answered my query, in your own words. If a woman desires to roam about naked, in public; what injunctions, we have to deny her this freedom, besides those of religious scriptures? This question has always disturbed me. May be, there are many other similar social issues.
None, to deny her her freedom.
We, however, have the duty to avert our gazes. This is clearly laid down, in at least one set of principles, and I have found them deeply influential (in the Leviticus chapter I have mentioned above).
I was to attend a board meeting at Preston, a whimsical decision by the British side of the combined board; I found myself in a very small, but very comfortable hotel in Preston, that is a very small town with a very large factory. One of my Indian directors was lodged there with me, to my deep discomfort. I was suddenly summoned to an impromptu meeting, to discuss the meeting on the morrow. When I met the man, slightly older than I was, then, in the lobby, he instantly haled me off to the heated swimming pool. It was filled with little girls, pre-teeners, and in their early teens, and boys of the same age, and to my disgust, the man insisted on standing there, to a side, and uttering disjointed phrases that had no relevance whatsoever, while staring bug-eyed at the kids.
I lost all respect for that man that day.
Individually, anyone may want to do anything. But societies have their own norms.
In Indian subcontinent (and most of the non-western world), women moving around in bikinis on beaches will be ogled at. Which is not wrong. Our societal norms does not consider it okay. We dont need to ape the west.
On the other extreme are the abhorrent black tents. Like a walking creature inside a garbage bag. Like a scary ghost. Like a dead (wo)man walking.
Both extremes are unacceptable / not okay in Indian subcontinent (and most of the non-western world).
Personally, I find the black tents most abhorrent. Particularly because of the arguments used to defend it:
1) Women are like ice-cream/chocolates and should remain covered: A woman with self-respect would revolt against her treatment as a consumable thing.
2) An uncovered women is like a meat and all men are cats looking for meat: This is a direct declaration that all men are potential rapists and women's exposed body is responsible for rape. As a man, I consider it demeaning that ALL men are declared as 'cats looking for meat 24x7'. Women too should consider it demeaning to be called 'meat'.
3) Muslim women are 'precious things' and 'precious things' are kept hidden: This is an allegation that kafir women are not precious and/or kafirs dont value their women
The logic given for black tent is worse than the black tent itself. Making it most abhorrent. The women supporting black tents are classic examples of Stockholm syndrome.
I totally disagree.
We cannot apply our own norms to others.
It is horrible to see the masses of northerners who arrive at Goa with the express purpose of drinking their fill of the nudity that they pray to find. As far as the other end is concerned, that of burkhas, not hijab, but full-on burkha, I believe that we have to distinguish between what is imposed by a patriarchal segment within each society, and what is a spontaneous act of independence by a woman.
www.google.com
Get intelligent for once.
