German Lingerie Ad Lifts the Veil on Muslim Women

[-Cp]

What makes an effective lingerie ad? If you guessed a niqab, a type of veil worn by some Muslim women, kudos to you for thinking outside the box like the creators of this spot by German lingerie retailer Liaison Dangereuse.

Be assured, however, that there are also plenty of sexy curves in this ad.


The spot begins with a dark-haired woman stepping out of the shower. With vaguely Middle Eastern music playing, she applies mascara, steps into high heels, slips on black lingerie and garters and spins in front of the mirror, clearly admiring her body and the lingerie she's wearing. Up to this point, it's typical lingerie commercial fare, but then the ad leaps from the mundane to the surprising: the woman quickly flips a niqab over her head. With only her mascara-ed eyes visible, she gazes out of a window. Then the tag line appears: "sexiness is for everyone."

<object width="400" height="220"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=7203691&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;sho w_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;ful lscreen=1" /><embed src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=7203691&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;sho w_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;ful lscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="220"></embed></object>

[Agnapostate]

You know, some will say that the fact that Muslims have a particularly violent reaction to things that simply offend their sensibilities (as this racy ad might) is evidence of the repressive nature of Islam itself, but I suspect that very similar reactions would occur if Pat Robertson or James Dobson ever had the same sort of combined political and religious authority over a country that the Supreme Leader of Iran does. You can see it with every red-faced hillbilly who screams that he'll beat the shit out of any young-blooded Fabio who puts a hand on his daughter.

[glockmail]

You know, some will say that the fact that Muslims have a particularly violent reaction to things that simply offend their sensibilities (as this racy ad might) is evidence of the repressive nature of Islam itself, but I suspect that very similar reactions would occur if Pat Robertson or James Dobson ever had the same sort of combined political and religious authority over a country that the Supreme Leader of Iran does. You can see it with every red-faced hillbilly who screams that he'll beat the shit out of any young-blooded Fabio who puts a hand on his daughter.

Yeah, Dobson = Ahmadinejad. :rolleyes:

[Agnapostate]

Yeah, Dobson = Ahmadinejad. :rolleyes:

You're not in a position to know what the nature of domestic conditions would be if Christianity had the sort of theocratic influence that Islam has in some countries. We can speculate, since both religions contain the same sort of authoritarian and regressive scriptures, and since there was intense oppression when Christianity did have such influence prior to the establishment of the separation of church and state (the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, etc.)

Incidentally, Ahmadinejad is not the Supreme Leader of Iran. Study up.

[Trigg]

You're not in a position to know what the nature of domestic conditions would be if Christianity had the sort of theocratic influence that Islam has in some countries. We can speculate, since both religions contain the same sort of authoritarian and regressive scriptures, and since there was intense oppression when Christianity did have such influence prior to the establishment of the separation of church and state (the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, etc.)

Incidentally, Ahmadinejad is not the Supreme Leader of Iran. Study up.

We could speculate that the reason Christianity had such influence back during the Spanish Inquisition is because the population was, for the most part, uneducated.

The same can be said for the majority of the population in Muslim countries at this time.

I'd say that the more educated a population becomes the less likely they are to be taken advantage of by their religious leaders. Because of this I do not think Christianity would be able to get the control that Muslim countries have. With a 90% literacy rate people have other options for getting their news and information.

[Agnapostate]

We could speculate that the reason Christianity had such influence back during the Spanish Inquisition is because the population was, for the most part, uneducated.

The same can be said for the majority of the population in Muslim countries at this time.

I'd say that the more educated a population becomes the less likely they are to be taken advantage of by their religious leaders. Because of this I do not think Christianity would be able to get the control that Muslim countries have. With a 90% literacy rate people have other options for getting their news and information.

You'll need to provide evidence to support that claim, considering the fact that theocratic institutions are quite solidly supported by the skilled classes of those countries, engineers, physicians, lawyers, scientists, etc., while those classes are the most likely to be secular elsewhere. And my contention is not whether Christianity would be able to get the control that Islam has, but whether it would be different in nature if it had the same degree of influence over a society. The Pope's legal powers over Vatican City and the Holy See are still those of an absolute monarch, technically. What if he had control of a country of 100 million, as the Supreme Leader of Iran does?

[Trigg]

You'll need to provide evidence to support that claim, considering the fact that theocratic institutions are quite solidly supported by the skilled classes of those countries, engineers, physicians, lawyers, scientists, etc., while those classes are the most likely to be secular elsewhere. And my contention is not whether Christianity would be able to get the control that Islam has, but whether it would be different in nature if it had the same degree of influence over a society. The Pope's legal powers over Vatican City and the Holy See are still those of an absolute monarch, technically. What if he had control of a country of 100 million, as the Supreme Leader of Iran does?

Your really going to argue that Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somolia have an education system that comes close to the US or any other industrialized country?? Especially when many women can't even attend classes?

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/afghanistan_statistics.html
http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/somalia_statistics.html
http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/pakistan_pakistan_statistics.html

Since I've never heard Pat Robertson preach on the subserviance of women in society, I don't know his position. However Islam is quite clear on this. If you can find quotes on Robertson's position on this topic than we can discuss whether his control over society would be different.

[bullypulpit]

The misogyny inherent not just in some sects of Islam, but in the extreme interpretations of many religions, are rooted in the deep seated insecurity and feelings of inferiority and helplessness of the male practitioners of said religion.

It places the blame for males being unable to control their lusts, and other emotional extremes, on the object of those emotions...In this case, women. Thus any acts of violence carried out against women by such men can attributed to the "shamelessness", "lewd behavior", "licentiousness", pick your adjective...of the women. Thus they are held blameless in the eyes of their favorite invisible sky wizard and the law in the most extreme cases. It's no different from a rapist defending himself in court by saying his victim was "asking for it" because she was wearing a skirt above the knee line.

We see an American analog of this practice amongst some of the more lunatic fringe elements of mormonism and other strange, inbred and mutated off-shoots of christianity in this country.

[bullypulpit]

Your really going to argue that Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somolia have an education system that comes close to the US or any other industrialized country?? Especially when many women can't even attend classes?

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/afghanistan_statistics.html
http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/somalia_statistics.html
http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/pakistan_pakistan_statistics.html

Since I've never heard Pat Robertson preach on the subserviance of women in society, I don't know his position. However Islam is quite clear on this. If you can find quotes on Robertson's position on this topic than we can discuss whether his control over society would be different.

<center><a href=http://www.cybercollege.com/antiwoman.htm>Women in the Bible</a></center>



As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (NIV, 1 Corinthians 14:33-35)

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (NIV, 1 Timothy 2:11-12)

[Nukeman]

<center><a href=http://www.cybercollege.com/antiwoman.htm>Women in the Bible</a></center>



As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (NIV, 1 Corinthians 14:33-35)

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (NIV, 1 Timothy 2:11-12)

Yet the Christian faith continues to evolve to admit women as clergy in almost every branch!!!!!??!??!? Wonder why that is Bully, could it have something to do with the fact that Christianity changes with the times and is NOT stuck in the mind set of the 1400's ??????

I understand that there are a few fringe groups out there but they are NO WHERE near the mainstream religion.

As Trigg pointed out the more educated a population becomes the less it can be religiously oppressed. Just look at the current state of Iran... They had a religious uprising in the 70's and one of the goals of that was to no longer have a "dumbed" down population that could not compete for themselves.... Fast forward 40 years and the fruits of that labor are wide spread dissent due to the oppressive nature of the religious leader and the EDUCATED masses are not going to take it and are uprising because of it....

[Abbey Marie]

You know, some will say that the fact that Muslims have a particularly violent reaction to things that simply offend their sensibilities (as this racy ad might) is evidence of the repressive nature of Islam itself, but I suspect that very similar reactions would occur if Pat Robertson or James Dobson ever had the same sort of combined political and religious authority over a country that the Supreme Leader of Iran does. You can see it with every red-faced hillbilly who screams that he'll beat the shit out of any young-blooded Fabio who puts a hand on his daughter.

You'll need some evidence to support your suppositions for them to be given any weight.

[Abbey Marie]

The misogyny inherent not just in some sects of Islam, but in the extreme interpretations of many religions, are rooted in the deep seated insecurity and feelings of inferiority and helplessness of the male practitioners of said religion.

It places the blame for males being unable to control their lusts, and other emotional extremes, on the object of those emotions...In this case, women. Thus any acts of violence carried out against women by such men can attributed to the "shamelessness", "lewd behavior", "licentiousness", pick your adjective...of the women. Thus they are held blameless in the eyes of their favorite invisible sky wizard and the law in the most extreme cases. It's no different from a rapist defending himself in court by saying his victim was "asking for it" because she was wearing a skirt above the knee line.

We see an American analog of this practice amongst some of the more lunatic fringe elements of mormonism and other strange, inbred and mutated off-shoots of christianity in this country.

Apart from your derogatory wizard remark, I must agree. The supposed inability of males to keep their zippers zipped when confronted with a woman whose limbs are showing is scary. Is this true? If so, what keeps the vast percentage of men in line? Is it just the law? Spouses/girlfriends? Faith? I sometimes wonder what it would take for you all to go ape on us. Anarchy?

No, this is not exclusive to Islam, though they seem to have dragged it kicking and screaming into the 20th, and now 21st, centuries

[Abbey Marie]

<center><a href=http://www.cybercollege.com/antiwoman.htm>Women in the Bible</a></center>



As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (NIV, 1 Corinthians 14:33-35)

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. (NIV, 1 Timothy 2:11-12)

I don't think Mr. Roberston wrote these words. ;)

[DragonStryk72]

You know, some will say that the fact that Muslims have a particularly violent reaction to things that simply offend their sensibilities (as this racy ad might) is evidence of the repressive nature of Islam itself, but I suspect that very similar reactions would occur if Pat Robertson or James Dobson ever had the same sort of combined political and religious authority over a country that the Supreme Leader of Iran does. You can see it with every red-faced hillbilly who screams that he'll beat the shit out of any young-blooded Fabio who puts a hand on his daughter.

Actually, that's pretty much true, it's why the Founders went through and set our government up like they did, so that there wasn't a single supreme authority, following the idea that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". As to your last part, that would be the reaction of most dads, anyhow, if someone messed with their daughter. I am by no means a hillbilly, but yeah, there would a good old-fashioned Irish ass whipping for whoever messed with my little girl.

[glockmail]

You're not in a position to know what the nature of domestic conditions would be if Christianity had the sort of theocratic influence that Islam has in some countries. We can speculate, since both religions contain the same sort of authoritarian and regressive scriptures, and since there was intense oppression when Christianity did have such influence prior to the establishment of the separation of church and state (the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, etc.)

Incidentally, Ahmadinejad is not the Supreme Leader of Iran. Study up.

Never said that he was. Read up before requesting others to study up.

Many nations of Europe were founded in Christianity. (I would argue that the US was as well, but that would likely derail the discussion.) England, of course, for years claimed that the King was given power by the Christian God. Although far from a perfect past, these countries have had a net positive influence in the world.

Perhaps you should study up.

[HogTrash]

<object width="400" height="220"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=7203691&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;sho w_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;ful lscreen=1" /><embed src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=7203691&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;sho w_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;ful lscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="220"></embed></object>Somewhere there's some little pervert diaper-head watching this, choking his chicken and retrofitting his vest bomb

to jihad the people responsible for producing this commercial, while fantasizing about his 72 virgins.....Hubba-Hubba!