View Single Post
Old 06-23-2013, 08:55 PM
Dirtclustit Dirtclustit is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Middle of Oregon
Posts: 422
Default I was joking

But I do think the author of that chapter was intentionally subverting an alternate meaning. I don't take any of Paul's words seriously. Not only is that chapter completely misogynistic, it was pretty sly in his reasoning. If he was't alluding to pubic hair, why is it the long hair can serve as a covering on women but not men? long pubic hair cannot hide an erect penis, so a man can't cover his private parts, but a female with long pubic does provide for a covering
Reply With Quote