All these quotations and historic reports confirm the view that shyness and modesty being among the causes of covering, and that the motive behind wearing mantle by man being not protection against coldness and heat or ornamentation and ostentation. Nevertheless, these motives can never be negated in regard of manner and kind of clothes. The other point that can be obtained out of these quotations being that observing modesty and chastity between women and men differed proportionately to creation of every one of them. And women always used to wear more clothes than men. So if coldness and heat be the only stimulant, these differences would never be liable to analysis. Even beautyseeking merely for showing off can never respond to them. The transition that came in sight through the past fifty years, especially in industrial countries, in regard of clothes had a special cause. Some researchers have analysed this phenomenon in this way: "With the beginning of the world war II, the war that shocked the structure of civilisation, the development of costumes took a revolutionary shape. Thenceforth clothes, which reflect the economical capability, political standpoint, cultural and social abilities, religious beliefs and official and traditional obligations, have been put under influence and domination of capitalist regime. In this system, clothes found another position, transforming to a merchandise that having a binary value. In other words, clothes could meet the human needs, with turning to an article for sale. Then they should, like any other article, give the maximum profits, and when they attain to this goal, time would not be convenient for them; As the articles should be capable of consumption for a long time, so as they can have the most extensive bazzar, that is the largest number of consumers and purchasers. 170 If the world nowadays has some kind of freedom and liberation in clothes, but no one has liberalised immodesty and unchastity,
لطفا منتظر باشید ...
