Teenage Disco bans inappropriate outfits

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

I found their Facebook page. The 'outrage' is from teenage girls throwing tantrums and talking nonsense about 'slut shaming' and 'body shaming'.

I'd put money on it that the same girls would express disapproval of girls and women being objectified.

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

quite a scary thread.

Nah, I don't think you really think it's "scary".

That H.L. Mencken person seems extraordinarily smug by the way.

You are making some rather bizarre leaps on this thread. In my opinion, the auld "Irish people are so oppressed because of catholic guilt" mantra is a really juvenile, overly simplistic, generic assessment. In Ireland, there has been a mass (no pun intended!) turning-away from the catholic church since the early 1990s from the generations born in about the early 1960s onwards. This hasn't been the case in other predominantly catholic countries. If "we" are so repressed, how come there is a culture here of being as sexualised as possible now? "Getting the ride" is an integral part of social life today - how does that correlate with this puritannical Ireland you seem so keen to hold onto? How come if someone is sexually inexperienced they are a "loser"?

And the view about OTT barely-there clothing which you describe as catholic repression... how come this view is held by people who aren't Irish or catholic so? As I mentioned already, people from sexually liberated, usually protestant or secular countries, find the excessively stripperish/hookerish clothes way too OTT and bizarre. Yet you still have just kept on repeating your mantra about "catholic Ireland" and throwing veiled insults at people whom you do not know anything about in relation to their views on religion/sex... neither of which are even necessarily relevant to the topic at hand.

There is also this bizarre false dichotomy here from you and a tiny handful of others of "Having the opinion that stripper-esque clothing looks tacky and trashy = thinking girls and women should only dress like the women in The Handmaid's Tale". It's just silly. There is an in-between you know.

And it is just an opinion - it's not stopping them from wearing the OTT clothes.

As for the self respect thing - part of that comes down to: do they want to wear those outfits? The shoes are crippling, they wear the barely there clothes when it's bloody freezing... I am not sure that all of them want to wear them at all. But there is the feeling of being required to look sexy (and I agree with someone who said it's probably moreso girls putting pressure on themselves rather than men doing so) and that is a pretty repressed view of sexy.

Hatrickpatrick, not all sexually active 15-year-olds actually want to be sexually active but feel they have to be, so that they won't be seen as frigid (now that's repressive - but it ain't coming from the catholic church). Your claim that they are all really into it and very copped on and with a healthy outlook on sex, is a bit too idealistic tbh (although I acknowledge it's applicable to some). It's become a cliche that the first time if very young can be awful, awkward, embarrassing, sore... the wish that they had waited until they were older and it was with someone they really fancied. It's beyond me how a culture of feeling forced to have sex very young = a healthy outlook on sex. It's surely the very opposite. Extreme promiscuity (or wholehearted endorsement of it) is not necessary at all for someone to demonstrate that they don't think sex is wrong and bad.

By the way, your generation is far from the first one to be sexually liberated (insofar as getting pissed and giving someone head in a haze behind a building is "sexually liberated" ).

And a person does not have to be a prude or old to think the idea of young teens giving head/getting fingered (always found the latter one bizarre - a lad with no experience sticking his finger into the vadge; every girl's dream ) behind the Wes or wherever is just skanksville. Believe me, there are plenty of teenagers who think that too, but it's uncool to say it.

Not one person has said here that Ireland should go back to the dark old days when sex actually was considered a sin though. Not one person. Ridiculous leap. Again, there is quite a spectrum in between convincing yourself that any casual sex between 14-year-olds is ok, that a young girl dressing like an over-18 prostitute is just fine and dandy... and believing sex should only be after marriage or at least only with someone you're in love with, and that girls should wear robes at all times. Both extremes are repressed.

I just think there are some here falling over themselves to show how sexually liberated and enlightened and openminded they are by saying it's no biggie for a woman nearly to have her breasts in full view on a thoroughfare of a Friday night (and somehow a distaste for this = having a problem with breastfeeding or nudist beaches or something) and silly stuff like it's fine for 14-year-olds to have casual sex with random people.
But such views don't seem enlightened at all - they just seem to come from another place of repression: the fear of looking like a prude (as if there's only prude and libertine and nothing in between). And with all the accompanying insults towards people who don't agree with them, they certainly don't seem openminded.

If a person actually wants to be really promiscuous with random anonymous people, that is their business and it isn't harming others once it's safe sex. If a person thinks "That wouldn't be for me" and prefers to know someone a bit before they have sex with them, they are not a prude or repressed!