http://www.news.net/...
City council member Ritu Tawde said she proposed the mannequin ban because such displays degrade women and could provoke men to attack them.
Indians have increasingly demanded stronger protections for women since the gang rape and killing of a student on a bus in the capital of New Delhi in December.
"Such people get provoked by mannequins. After all, a mannequin is a replica of a woman's body. That's why I oppose it, because mannequins do not suit Indian culture," Tawde said. However, shop owners will still be able to display mannequins how they want inside their stores, she said.
I'll grant this to Ms. Tawde, at least she's showing consistency in her views. And that's the only complement I'll dare give her. I would like to ask her this:
1. If lingerie mannequins trigger rape, how come these rapes don't happen right there at the store? Would this suggest that the men are...waiting to rape? Which means they are...planning to rape? Which is...exactly what sexual assault awareness advocates have said for a long time?
2. Why specifically the mannequins? Why not the clothing itself? And as the article pointed out, why stop there? What about sensual or erotic movies or art? Or sexting? Or anything like that?
3. When can we expect the municipal ordinance requiring women to wear burqas in public?
And finally, and most importantly...
4. What year is this??