Home > Christianity, Conservative, Faith, Humor, politics > SPF vs. Good Ol’ Fashioned Clothes

SPF vs. Good Ol’ Fashioned Clothes

Meghan McCain featuring duct tape

The other night I happened to turn to Hannity. He featured a five-minute debate regarding modesty in dress. The segment stemmed from the recent so-called, “Slut walks.” The protests, by mainly liberal women, are in response to comments by a Toronto police officer, who said women could avoid being raped by not dressing like sluts. The segment featured Rebecca St. James, Christian recording artist and purity advocate and left-wing liberal Tamera Holder. Here’s the clip:


I watched it once and couldn’t watch it again, due to fears of hypertension, cardiac failure, and all around self-combustion. The highlight of the entire “civil” debate is when Ms. Holder proceeded to tell Ms. St. James that she was “seriously disturbed.”

Yes, any woman who believes that dressing sexually provocative leads to sexual objectification is, clearly, off her rocker.

Most ALL of us can agree that rape under ANY circumstance is WRONG. That’s not the debated issue here. The infiltration of “Skin is in,” however, is. Television, billboard advertisements, magazines, music, and water cooler conversations (maybe the water, itself?) are all tainted and downright plastered with sexual image, innuendos, and suggestive lyrics. But, I’ve noticed in the last few years that even a “charitable” cause is now on the “ooh la la” list. (I thought having a “cause” was supposed to be revolutionary and about the need, itself?)

Oops. I did it again. I underestimated the use of sex to sell ANYTHING.

In an effort to promote awareness to younger generations and men (??), campaigns for Breast Cancer Awareness even revved up the sexuality a couple notches. (I really should’ve seen that one coming, I suppose) Now my kids get to see fun car magnets, like “Feel your boobies” and “Save the ta-tas.” That’s a great conversation for tiny tots, right? And I just love seeing adolescent boys wearing bracelets that say, “I love boobies.” Classy. That will really bring out the responsibility and awareness….

For the last several years, PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals) has even jumped on the sex wagon. (Its supposed to be about ANIMALS for crying out loud!!) Ads promoting fur boycotts by featuring a Hollywood starlet in nothing, but, well, nothing have taken off (pun intended), “I’d rather go naked, than wear fur…” being the caption.  (Well, good for you!  You know here in the 21st century, there are alternatives to fur?!  I’d go with cotton, personally.)

Why does everyone think that promoting awareness involves the loss of the clothes? Peep shows for pets??? REALLY?

Do they think the people who are hooked by this marketing style really give a care about the actual cause?? Riiiighht…

The last straw for the diatribe rehashed by yours truly, came this morning with the new advertisement featuring the likes of Meghan McCain, Brandi, and some other B and C-list celebrities stripping down to promote skin cancer awareness. COME ON!!!! Are you kidding me???!! Seeing their naked derrières is not going to prompt me to put SPF on anything!

Here’s an idea! Why don’t you put some clothes ON and then your butt won’t get burnt!!!

Flashback: “Hitch it up, honey!”

  1. Karen Helmer
    May 12, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    Amen, sister!!!!!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: