I feel my heart palpitating. Good fucking Jebus, the arrogance is stupefying!

Magshashave at magpapagupit si Pepe!

"...expressing one's emotions is one of the biggest reasons why people write...."

I agree with you, maching_sagana. You have to realize however that Marguerite's article forwarded several biased questions that leaned towards a single distasteful answer.

"What other reason is there for women to wear revealing clothing other than to attract attention?"
"Why bother wearing something revealing if sexual attractiveness is not the message you’re willing to convey?" -Marguerite

Sure, you can write with your emotions. I do that frequently myself! If you're going to forward an argument, however, that argument will inevitably be subject to scrutiny. And if you're always going to attach your ego to every argument that you make known in the public fora then sooner or later you'll be left in shambles.

I'm only saying that "there is absolutely no need for you to attach your emotions to the things that you write" with respect to the act of making your arguments known and not to the writing process itself. You can be as emotional as P.S. I Love You or MMK while you're writing, for all I care, but please, for the sake of your own sanity, don't beat yourself up when someone points out a fault within your argument.

That is all. :)

"Language matters. Culture matters."

I only had to read this and I knew I was reading a gem.

There is absolutely no need for you to attach your emotions to the things that you write. These are mere ideas, Marguerite. And, as ideas out in a public forum, these should always be open to criticism. Scientists in my field often get irritated or confused or angered when other scientists disagree with their methods, their data or their interpretations. That shouldn't be the case! By being open to criticism, everyone's bad ideas are inevitably weened out and the few great ideas do eventually shine.

It should always be about getting to the truth and never about our own egos. :)

"Just because society at large expects you to dress a certain way because you're a woman doesn't mean you deserve any bad thing that happens to you if you don't. "

This is my point exactly. :)

"What other reason is there for women to wear revealing clothing other than to attract attention?"
"Why bother wearing something revealing if sexual attractiveness is not the message you’re willing to convey?"

I mean no offense when I say that it's really unusual to hear these sexist and condescending questions from none other than a woman. Clothing (and the connotations attached to it), propriety and modesty are all human constructs, and, like all human constructs, they are prone to being taken as is without question. But that shouldn't necessarily be the case. We only have to look at the many tribes that find nothing wrong with topless women and and the many tribes that find nothing wrong with pants-less men to see through our own biases.

Our prevailing negative conceptions of propriety could thus be addressed in two ways:

1) Attack the pieces of clothing themselves as well as the individual's motivations to wear such "revealing" articles (as your question implies) or

2) Attack the prevailing negative biases and mindsets among individuals and the groups they belong to by de-sensitizing them to these biases.

Religion often resorts to the first option. Jeiel's example captures this best. The first option does nothing to challenge the inherent sexism within our biases, and it probably even reinforces the negativity within these biases.

The second option, I believe, is the method of attack chosen by these women who dare engage in these "Slut Walks". And rightly so, if I might add. It certainly worked for the African-American movement in the 1950's. No doubt it also worked for the LGBT Civil Rights movement in the 1960's.

Sure, it is well within your rights to reserve your own preferences, but movements such as these seek to address exactly these kinds of preferences and try to keep them that way - merely as preferences - and not as some moral impetus that women such as yourself should conform to.

I hated the nosebleed meme when I was in UP Diliman and I still hate it now. It just reeks of idiocy, of timidity and, as you so wonderfully put it, of anti-intellectualism.

Well, Red, just see it this way.

When the RH bill passes into law, the mortality rate of newborn babies will drastically decline and our runaway population growth will soon follow. The government resources that would've been allotted for feeding a runaway population will then become available for educating a controlled one. Fast-forward to 2040 and we will finally have more educated Filipinos who will simply not tolerate religious proselytizing within a secular government.

A loss for secularism today is a win for our education tomorrow. A win for our education tomorrow is a loss for religious bigotry forever.

Birds of the same feather flock together. I guess it also is true for idiots.