>>15487874I agree that dresses are a representation of femininity, however they are in no way meant to offer quick and easy access to the pussy. They highlight her womanliness, but they also highlight her dainty frail femininity which was supposed to be something precious. Of course, men and women were kept in line through various cultural and social values, norms, restrictions and also rights (a happy marriage meant stability, for both a man and woman and the children).
A dress is empowering to a woman and keeps her value intact. Pants CAN too if accompanied by sustainable values/norms. But we live in a hypersexual society. Women fuck around more than ever. Some do this out of "fun", "finding themselves", others get conned hard or emotionally fucked and think they have to "give themselves sexually" in order to receive love from the right man (this is tragic and very damaging for a woman, and it shows why she should be protected/cherished and not taken advantage of, if we are to be real honorable men).
>>15487878Also this. Dresses =/= easy access (per se, it's different when a woman goes out in a sexy dress to a club, which is meant for easy access and fucking around).
