Letter to the editor: Articles don’t help women’s plight


In the last issue of the Collegian, two articles were featured discussing the pros and cons of dressing in revealing costumes on Halloween.

The pro article, titled “Revealing costumes empower women, not objectify the body,” argued girls should be allowed to dress provocatively on Halloween and not be judged for it, while the con article, “Showing less leaves more to the imagination,” claims women should dress modestly to preserve a sense of dignity.

Unfortunately, neither article serves to help the female population’s plight of becoming more than a walking, talking object.

They do nothing but reinforce the idea that women must dress a certain way to be wanted or loved by others.

While the article claims to be about empowering women, “Revealing costumes empower women, not objectify the body,” does just the opposite.

Instead of discussing how women’s bodies are theirs to control and flaunt and cover whenever they so please, the author argues that Halloween is the only day of the year that women are allowed to “rejoice in glitter and mini tutus.”

Does that mean that the rest of the year women should be subjected to hatred and judgment based on how they are dressed?

Should Halloween really be the only day that women are able to feel the freedom that comes with choosing an outfit, putting it on, loving how it looks and flaunting it?

How does claiming that smart women dress to compete with other women really empower them?

None of these important questions are answered, and while the article discusses the importance of sexual liberation, it does so in a way that makes it less of a personal growth and more about impressing other people.

At least the article gives women some respectability, even though it comes with limitations.

For some reason, modesty has almost always been equated with self-respect, as if someone who shows off a little skin cannot possibly respect themselves or deserve the respect of others, and “Showing less leaves more to the imagination,” embodies this idea perfectly.

The author asks, “Don’t girls want that “Notebook” love?” assuming that all girls want the love of a man and only dress up to please him, and insinuating that girls who dress scantly will not find true love.

Nowhere is it discussed that some girls dress for their own pleasure, their own personal sexual liberation.

To feel good when you look in the mirror and not care about the opinions of other closed minded people.

Bashing a women’s level of respectability on whether she covers up objectifies her more than her own wardrobe choice.

A few looks from someone on the street does less harm then telling women that “no one wants to see [your] probably rolls of a stomach,” which not only tells women that they need to have a certain body type to be seen as pleasing, but also that once they achieve this body type they are still not allowed to show it off because it will attract the wrong kind of attention.

Once again, it is assumed that all women dress specifically to please and attract others. Regardless of a women’s choice of apparel, be it on Halloween or any other day of the year, she should be given the same amount of respect and courtesy as everyone else.

A women’s body is not an object, and her clothes are simply an expression of her style. And in regards to the opinions of others, if someone, be them male or female, judges you or doesn’t talk to you because of how you are dressed, you haven’t missed out on anyone special.