Ogling - the uncurable sin

It wasn’t long ago when I recalled in a column here about a past event wherein the Flathead County Commissioners ruled that “starting immediately” all women in the courthouse should wear clothing that came down over the knees. The ruling lasted about one day before being canceled amid great local fun and laughter. My column about the situation referred to the commissioners as Larry, Curly and Moe.

What some folks see as sin, obviously does not bother many others, so the age-old battles over how people should dress will probably be with us forever. That issue is being discussed at many social levels today because of its relationship to the huge numbers of sexual abuse claims and revelations about high ranking politicians, entertainment celebrities and business leaders swamping the media.

You readers should enjoy my April 2015 report, which covered the rampant sin of “ogling”:

There was great glee and laughter across Montana at the start of this year’s Legislature when a woman in the Republican Party attempted to impose a dress code on all women in the capitol wearing “revealing” clothing. As a reminder, this issue is not new. I’ve dug out a related column from 20 years ago, August 1995:

A passage in the Bible states men should avoid serious “ogling.” It says “He who so ever looketh upon a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery in his heart… and that too is a sin.”

That act of human weakness is the very sin to which President Carter admitted guild in his Playboy interview: and, as “some” believe, was why he lost the White House to Ronald Reagan. Clinton critics have mentioned related moral problems, but you just do not hear anyone accusing Bill of “ogling”… no sirreee! Dole’s inclinations are still uncertain at this printing, but perhaps a few ogling facts could come out during the campaign.

Ogling is on of the oldest degenerate visual activities known to man, even preceding the “original sin.” The world will be freed from adultery, prostitution and unplanned pregnancies once we get rid of this insidious ogling.

Now, there is a glimmer of hope. It isn’t a death blow, but it could be a start, and some say, “It’s about time.”

Minneapolis Public Works Official, Carl Markus, is the pure crusader who has the guts to say “Enough.” His ban against ogling reads, “It has come to my attention that people in our crews working in the downtown area have been ‘eying’ the women walking by.” Anyone reading that simple declarative sentence can tell right off that Mr. Markus may have been traumatized early in life but he is far above average in personal powers of observation. Carl then stated that first-time violators would face verbal warning and repeat offenders could be fired. “Go get ‘em Carl.”

In a generous effort to help, and out of reverential respect for the crusader’s program, one of the affected construction workers, Brian Gisslen, erected “NO OOGLING ZONE” signs at his job site, a thoughtful show of support for righteousness.

It would help members of the Minneapolis paving crews as well as other males if an “International Dress Code” was passed and enforced. It is a proven fact that ogling hit an all-time low during they very short life of the “sack dress fad.”

If Carl Markus manages to get the whole world to follow his crusade to end ogling, it would create utter chaos. I would recommend buying sunglass manufacturer’s stock, because so many of us men are born sneaky … and weak.

G. George Ostrom is an award-winning columnist from Kalispell.