Is this the thin edge of the wedge? Is this the start of the implementation of 'Sharia Law' in London?
London (UK) now has a Muslim Mayor named Sadiq Khan, Mr. Khan has banned this ad from London transport. I wonder just how you are supposed to advertise ladies hose in a full burqa?
That is the only part of the picture that was changed besides adding a black strap across the back; they darkened up the middle of her behind. The words, I assume, would have been there no matter what; they did nothing to improve the tastelessness but the darkening did. Actually the bare back didn't matter. They are advertising these as tights but the appear to be sheer hose.
This post was edited by Thriftymaid at October 13, 2017 4:38 AM MDT
There is a link to the full article in one of my replies to JakobA above, there you will see why the ad had to be changed, butt cracks are not mentioned.
Feminists strongly dislike the sexualisation of women in advertising - and British women have one of the highest proportions of feminists.
That image is probably more athletic and joyous than it is sexual - except perhaps for the possible reactions of particular men who are sexually repressed and frustrated.
But the image shows far more of the pantyhose than is necessary for the sake of an ad. A better ad would show an extreme close-up of how the hose resists a run if caught on a snag, or how the hose can make shoes more comfortable.
Last point, no manufacturer of hose needs to advertise at all. Waste of money. If a woman needs hose for work or whatever, she knows what kind of shop to go to, she usually knows what features she needs, and if she needs help the assistant knows which product fits.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at October 13, 2017 4:43 AM MDT
While I agree with you that 'sharia courts' are already in operation in London, I would point out that these courts are for Muslims only as are the banks whose banking charges more than make up for the usury lost. This ad and the ruling imposed by Mr Khan effects all people using public transport regardless of their religious beliefs or lack of them. I accept that their must be some sort of standard set but in this case I feel that it surpasses the rules in that there is nothing sexual in that ad.
So just how does that work? What happens when the Sharia court makes a decision that's in conflict with British law?
Sounds to me like it's the camel's nose working its way under the tent flap. Pretty soon Great Britain is going to be called The Islamic Republic of England.
As I understand it these courts do not cover criminal matters only civil law based on Muslim beliefs for example a fight over someone's will and all parties must agree that it should be settled by the sharia court. I agree with you about the nose under the flap and that is why I posted this question.
Well, one of the problems is some courts are reluctant to grant divorce to Muslim women even if they are in an abusive relationship, therefore leaving these women unprotected. English law doesn't recognise Muslim law.
It's like all those Muslims are enjoying Diplomatic Immunity. Whatever happened to "when in Rome", that "one for all, all for one" thinking? They should be subject to the laws and courts of the country that they're physically in, not the laws from "back home". You can damn well bet that if an Englishman was in their Islamic home country and committed some offense that British law (and penalties) would NOT take precedence over the local laws.
But on the other hand I could always declare Somalian citizenship, which still has no laws and no court system, and then be free as a bird to whatever the h I pleased . . . So maybe it's not such a bad idea after all . . . NOT.
myonemaster 