fully clothed nudity

fully clothed nudity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

ljmac -> fully clothed nudity (6/17/2008 11:59:35 PM)
"For me, wearing pants is the same as being naked." Such is the religious belief of Fatuma Hassan, a muslim recently employed by Mission Foods tortilla factory in New Brighton, MN. She was fired because she refused to comply with the dress requirement, to work naked with clothes on. my birthday suit

lightshineon -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 12:12:19 AM)
Well dress codes are usually for pratical reasons, maybe she should look for a job where she can be clothed in whatever that does not make her feel naked. This is wierd it is going to make me have naked dreams. You know those dreams where you feel vaunarable, and unclothed in church or something. Sorry, but I am sleepy and this is probaly the last thing I am going to read.[sm=icon_smile_yikes.gif]

wing2000 -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 12:59:17 AM)
If this woman were Amish would you mock her?

dramagal -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 2:17:08 AM)
There comes a point where you make a choice: your culture/beliefs or a job. As a Christian, I would never take a job at a casino. Nor would I take a job at Hooters (pretending I was young and vivacious again!). So, if it is so important for a Muslim woman to not wear pants, or to have a head scarf - but those are deemed unsafe on the assembly line - , then she should look for a job elsewhere. I heard on the radio today of a Sikh man suing DisneyWorld for a job. They have a proscription against facial hair. You know what, Disney can project whatever image they want, and if they want all their employees to be clean shaven, then that's their perogative. Likewise, if the local Tower Records or bar wants to project an image of "edginess", they can require that all their employees sport either tattoos or piercings. It's a big country, with lots of different kinds of places to work. And people can make their own choices, but they shouldn't sue companies into submitting to their wishes.

mapachito13 -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 6:07:19 AM)
"Mission Foods had implemented the new dress code for all factory workers and told its Muslim workers that their traditional clothing was too loose-fitting and posed a safety hazard near machines." (Quote from original article, emphasis added.) We have a sizeable Muslim community in the city next to us due to the presence of a mosque and Assadiq Education center. The Muslims have adapted their style of dress to comply with religious stipulations as well as safety or pragmatic concerns. These Somalis seem to have a "my way exactly or the highway" approach with employers giving them directions to the interstate faced with that choice. BTW, I am sure the employers mentioned don't tell these people to wear outside of work so their freedom of religion is not being trampled on with the dress code issue. Not letting them pray is a different matter. Maybe some Muslim entrepenuer can open a company with Islam friendly work rules! BTW, I am starting a religion where you need to pray 20 times a day by being on the internet. Effectively you'll work one hour in an eight hour day. Any takers? Oh wait, I just described the work habits of a major portion of the workforce already. Darn and I really could've used your tithes to pay my bills!!![:D]

lexie -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 8:08:02 AM)
A few women here were laid off from their job because they were working in warehouse jobs were the loose fitting skirts they wore were considered dangerous (in that they could get caught in machines). They were given a choice of wearing something else or losing their jobs. Interesting how a company that is actually interested in your safety (well, actually they are more interested in their safety record) then gets in trouble when they say they are worried about you getting killed by a machine. I live in a very conservative Muslim neighbourhood. Most of the women wear pants. Not the same pants I would buy at the store, but Islamic dress pants (which are looser fitting around the leg and tapered at the bottom). They were longer shirts down to their thighs. I'm sure, looking at what they wear, an agreement could be reached between them and their companies. (Except for the women that wear long robes and cover their faces, but those aren't usually the ones that go out to work.) As well, I don't believe that this a religious belief (meaning her salvation depends upon it) as it is just a cultural or personal belief. I see Muslim women here dressed in all sorts of ways - from head to toe covered, down to full Western dress, some revealing more than I would. Tons of Muslim women are working jobs in my neighbourhood that require them to wear uniforms like the one this woman would wear, and they have no problem doing so.

lightshineon -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:21:03 AM)
Disney will not hire those over forty years old either, their company their rules. An owner of a company has the right in Oklahoma atleast to fire you for whatever reason it wishes. That is a little dramatic, though she is only twenty two, to say she feels "naked" in pants. If a Christian left their work station to pray loudly, they would be fanatics according to the world, so no tears from me, because they are wasting time praying to a false God. BTW I never seen an Amish woman working anywhere, so no we would not be talking about her dress, just that an Amish woman was working outside of the home. People can be maimed in machines, it happens often. Those under eighteen cannot work on certian machines, you do not hear them complain. I know those who have ben mamied and even killed in factories with heavy machines, it is serious stuff.

Sophie11 -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:25:37 AM)
For me, it has nothing to do with her choice of religion. Employers should definitely have the right to make rules and expect them to be followed, after all it is their business. If someone has a problem following those rules, then they ought to go find another job that suits them better.

Roberta_ -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:30:02 AM)
I agree Sophie.

kernsfamily -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:31:15 AM)
quote: Disney will not hire those over forty years old either, their company their rules. says who? or, is it only certain jobs in certain capacities? i just looked online, and it says, "Disney is an equal opportunity employer." It is the policy of The Walt Disney Company to provide equal opportunity for all employees and applicants for employment without regard to race, religion, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, age, marital status, covered veteran status, mental or physical disability, pregnancy, or any other basis prohibited by state or federal law. hmmmm.....have any "documentation" on the "no one over 40" rule?

rnershigh -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:37:06 AM)
Well, it's a factory. You work around machines. Loose clothing can present a safety hazard. The employer is seeing that their employees don't get torn to pieces if their clothes gets caught in machinery by enforcing a uniform that includes pants. Can you imagine the liability for the company if that were to happen?

kernsfamily -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:40:17 AM)
quote: As well, I don't believe that this a religious belief (meaning her salvation depends upon it) as it is just a cultural or personal belief. I see Muslim women here dressed in all sorts of ways - from head to toe covered, down to full Western dress, some revealing more than I would. Tons of Muslim women are working jobs in my neighbourhood that require them to wear uniforms like the one this woman would wear, and they have no problem doing so. we have a growing number of "former-Muslims" at our church, who have accepted Christ...and, they come to church in their more "middle eastern" apparel. So, for them it IS "cultural"....since, they really aren't "muslim" anymore, but, still "identify" with being Saudis, or Iraqis, or from wherever they came from.

lightshineon -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 9:52:35 AM)
Hi, well the Disney age thing I saw on the news, just the other day, and, I will try and find documentation. It is ok also if the people come to church dressed thier cutural norm, as long as they are safe that is no problem. Lawsuits would abound if a person dressed in improper clothing became injured, maimed, killed. The argument would be then, why was the machines not designed to fit the cultural dress. Trust me this would happen, it would be a nightmare.

ljmac -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 11:57:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wing2000 If this woman were Amish would you mock her? I want to hear you defend the statement that "wearing pants is the same as being naked." Wearing clothes is the same thing as being clothed. Wearing nothing is the same thing as being naked.

uncabeeil -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 1:19:31 PM)
quote: An owner of a company has the right in Oklahoma at least to fire you for whatever reason it wishes. This is known as an "at will" employer. All states have the same rules, but enforce them differently. Basically it means you can be hired or fired at the company's discretion. Here's a good explanation. In this case the woman wouldn't have a case in NJ. There is a dress code, she is in violation of the dress code, the company has every right to fire her.

Kat_D -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 1:58:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ljmac "For me, wearing pants is the same as being naked." Such is the religious belief of Fatuma Hassan, a muslim recently employed by Mission Foods tortilla factory in New Brighton, MN. She was fired because she refused to comply with the dress requirement, to work naked with clothes on. my birthday suit She has a choice. She can always return to Somalia...they'll let her wear her Muslim garb. If I worked for that company, I'd have to wear that uniform and may have all kinds of objections to it, but I'd do it because I needed my job. Get a grip, you can't have it all!

tafkam -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 2:05:23 PM)
Expect a successful lawsuit on this....after all Muslims are demanding and being granted more in the way of workplace accommodations every day.

rnershigh -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/18/2008 2:32:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tafkam Expect a successful lawsuit on this....after all Muslims are demanding and being granted more in the way of workplace accommodations every day. If it is successful, I want to know what this woman thinks she's gonna do on the assembly-line floor. What happens if her loose clothing gets caught in machinery and she gets seriously injured? Complain and file another lawsuit that the company didn't install Muslim-appropriate machines??[sm=hammerhead.gif]

FunBetty -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 12:14:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lightshineon Disney will not hire those over forty years old either, their company their rules. An owner of a company has the right in Oklahoma atleast to fire you for whatever reason it wishes. That is a little dramatic, though she is only twenty two, to say she feels "naked" in pants. If a Christian left their work station to pray loudly, they would be fanatics according to the world, so no tears from me, because they are wasting time praying to a false God. BTW I never seen an Amish woman working anywhere, so no we would not be talking about her dress, just that an Amish woman was working outside of the home. People can be maimed in machines, it happens often. Those under eighteen cannot work on certian machines, you do not hear them complain. I know those who have ben mamied and even killed in factories with heavy machines, it is serious stuff. Um, I work for disneyworld and have for the past 12 years and I can say that they definitely hire ppl over the age of 40. Some people retire and go to disney for "fun" work. It's only frustrating when they put some of them in roles they cannot physically do because of their age/condition. When I worked at the pirates ride there was an older couple (in their 60s) that was hired to work at that ride, and they could barely handle a flight of stairs (and the building is three floors with CONSTANT going up and down stairs/ladders- no elevators). Sorry, that's off-topic but I wanted to set the record straight.

3cappuccinosmom -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 7:31:46 AM)
quote: I want to hear you defend the statement that "wearing pants is the same as being naked." I don't see what's so hard about that--she considers pants-wearing and nakedness to be in the same category: Immodesty For her, to wear pants is just as immodest and unacceptable as walking around naked. <shrug> I really don't see why the need to mock her. Many people, including many Christians, share similar beliefs. That said, I don't think she has reason to sue. Private businesses have a right to make their own dress code, particularly when it comes to the safety of employees. I wear only dresses/skirts and that is something I have had to accept when I was younger and in the work force. Fortunately for me, the last two jobs I held were very willing to let me present my case and not require pants, but I certainly wouldn't have sued them if they couldn't make the excpetion. [8\|]

ljmac -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 11:47:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 3cappuccinosmom quote: I want to hear you defend the statement that "wearing pants is the same as being naked." I don't see what's so hard about that--she considers pants-wearing and nakedness to be in the same category: Immodesty For her, to wear pants is just as immodest and unacceptable as walking around naked. <shrug> I really don't see why the need to mock her. Many people, including many Christians, share similar beliefs. That said, I don't think she has reason to sue. Private businesses have a right to make their own dress code, particularly when it comes to the safety of employees. I wear only dresses/skirts and that is something I have had to accept when I was younger and in the work force. Fortunately for me, the last two jobs I held were very willing to let me present my case and not require pants, but I certainly wouldn't have sued them if they couldn't make the excpetion. [8\|] If she wears a shirt with her pants, is she topless?

3cappuccinosmom -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 2:25:16 PM)
quote: If she wears a shirt with her pants, is she topless? [8\|] I think you are purposely "misunderstanding" so you can continue to mock the woman. Shame on you. [:@] Once more, to her, wearing pants is immodest. It exposes more than is acceptable to her, and is therefore no better than being naked. She cannot anymore wear pants and consider herself modest than she could wear nothing and consider herself modest. It's not about clothing vs. nakedness. She did not say wearing pants is nakedness. She said that to her, it's like being unclothed because to her, it's just as immodest/exposes too much. It's about modesty vs. immodesty. How much clearer do you need it? [&:] Heck. Why do I even bother? [:@]

PaleHawkWoman -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 3:02:43 PM)
According to some interpretations of sharia, or Islamic law, a woman should not show the division between her legs-which a pair of pants does. I have many muslim friends and no one I know cares as long as one is dressed modestly. Some dress traditionally, some dress according to American styles including slacks and blouse and no hijab(headscarf). I see muslim women at work in retail, factory, and office jobs and no one seems to mind wearing pants. One friend of mine wears dress slacks and a tunic-style jacket to her office. It's stylish, modest, and entirely professional. Her headscarf can be worn over her head or about her neck or shoulders and is an attractive accessory. Her apparel is tailored and often more "together" than most other women in the average office setting. A factory job does require "safe" clothing, and most employers do provide uniforms designed to meet federal safety standards. Any employee who does not comply with the dress code- which was designed for their safety- should not remain employed. Not only do they risk their own safety but that of their co-workers as well should they grab at them or the co-workers attempt to rescue them if they become caught in the machinery.

ljmac -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 5:29:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 3cappuccinosmom quote: If she wears a shirt with her pants, is she topless? [8\|] I think you are purposely "misunderstanding" so you can continue to mock the woman. Shame on you. [:@] Once more, to her, wearing pants is immodest. It exposes more than is acceptable to her, and is therefore no better than being naked. She cannot anymore wear pants and consider herself modest than she could wear nothing and consider herself modest. It's not about clothing vs. nakedness. She did not say wearing pants is nakedness. She said that to her, it's like being unclothed because to her, it's just as immodest/exposes too much. It's about modesty vs. immodesty. How much clearer do you need it? [&:] Heck. Why do I even bother? [:@] "For me, wearing pants is the same as being naked." Wearing clothes is the same as not wearing clothes. A fully clothed person is not naked. Where did you get that "like being unclothed" quote? I don't see it anywhere. Wearing pants is not the same as being naked. Going without clothes is the same as being naked. Before you question my ability to think clearly, consider that it is not difficult to tell the difference between a clothed person and a naked one.

Kat_D -> RE: fully clothed nudity (6/19/2008 5:37:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ljmac Wearing clothes is the same as not wearing clothes. HUH? Okay, Sherlock... "wearing clothes" is not the same as "not wearing clothes" last time I checked. [sm=shakinghead.gif]

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI