Sacked for Being too Attractive? Iowa and Islamicists Might’ve Changed History.

Cleopatra tempts Caesar?Ptg. by JeanLeon Gerome

Michael Kimmel wrote a July 16, 2013 NYTimes piece  regarding lookism where he pointed out that Melissa Nelson’s recent legal case rests not on her beauty but on her employer’s perception of her beauty. Her dentist boss felt she would injure him by tempting him into cheating on his wife if she remained in his employ. (Writer Timothy Beneke notes the “danger” beautiful women represent is reinforced in the terms people use to describe them—bombshell, knockout, stunning, femme fatale.)

Kimmel asks “Where have we heard th[is] before — that men’s vulnerability to women’s sexuality and attractiveness is so great that women must be prevented from showing any part of their bodies to them?”

He answers: We’ve heard it from Mullah Omar, the leader of the Taliban ousted from Afghanistan (who ACTUALLY had western art paintings in his home depicting nudes).

The Taliban and some Islamicist fanatics would have women clothed in hijab veils and burqa robes so as not to tempt weak, susceptible men!

So, a Taliban tribunal implementing Sharia Law might send an At-a-Boy to the members of the Iowa Supreme Court that upheld Dr. James Knight’s right to fire anyone who might conceivably tempt him.

Just think how history might have unfolded if Cleopatra, Anne Boleyn, Catherine the Great,  and other beautiful women had been required to be covered fully from head to toe.

Kimmel is a professor of sociology and gender studies at Stony Brook University.

What’s your take on reverse lookism?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
To learn about CLEFT HEART: Chasing Normal, click the Amazon or Barnes & Noble buttons in the margins. Or click the image of the book cover. My coming-of-age memoir has intertwining love stories, mystery, tragedy, and triumph.

Speak Your Mind


CommentLuv badge