A server at a resturant yesterday had her head and neck covered.Â Â Obviously, it had something to do with her religion.
It got me to wondering whyÂ it is so imparative that in some religions, the man and woman’s heads must be covered, in others it is the female breast, then it is everything but the female eyes and hands and in some aborigine cultures people just go naked.
A fellow blogger pointed out the other day that in marathon run in Â San Fransico some of the runners were naked.Â There was no such thing in the Fargo Marathon.
All of this makes one wonder why the various gods have different rules on which parts of the body are sinful to reveal and which are OK.Â Â Whether it is our faces or our “private parts”, they are all part of our bodies.Â It seems it should be no more “sinful” toÂ uncover one part of these bodies than any other part.
We’ve gone through periods in the past few decades whereÂ undressing taboos were exposed (pardon the pun). During the Woodstock period, young people went nude in public.Â Then, there was the “streaker” period.Â Â But, exceptÂ for riske swimsuits and necklines, not much has changed.
From my observation, theseÂ religion-base rules of covering various part of the body apply to women more than men.Â Â So, my own conclusion is that the various rules on what must be covered have something to do with the exercise of power.