Hoe

What makes a hoe, a hoe ?

Pretty much everyone on earth has heard the term ‘hoe’ at some point now. Well what is it exactly ? Is there a concrete definition ? What is one supposed to look like  ? Well here’s what a few women we asked said: 

“Honestly I think a “hoe” defines more of the person who is using it than towards the person it’s being thrown onto. It displays a level of jealousy, envy or dismissive attitude”

“…A HOE IS A HOE if we talking gardening tools …But a HOE (whore ) is A promiscuous person no matter the gender .. who sleeps with or makes excessive sexual advances to another individual who they have no ties with.. Paid or unpaid .. yous a hoe .”

“People only call those a hoe who have no ties and don’t conform to social beliefs.We are animalistic. It’s simple. It’s also called ‘Dating & Mating’”

“Mating process of natural desire of sex and intimacy. I think our bodies can withstand the stresses of sex physically now spiritually is a different argument. Not everyone has the same spiritual meter or capacity as the next so it’s up to that person to understand how much energy they can hold.”

Now when type “define hoe” into the google search bar the first thing you get is some dads in boots gardening. Valid.

If you start clicking around and you happen to land on urban dictionary, you get these definitions:

“Justin Bieber.”

“A trash bag who thinks who thinks having sex with only one person means one person at a time. Has sex with multiple people and thinks it’s ok to do that. Can be male or female.”

“Who sleeps with a lot of guys that girl is a Hoe.”

So ask you can see there’s quite a few definitions in just two different platforms. I didn’t find official definition so maybe it’s just whatever you make it. 

What’s your definition ? Let us know in the comments !

Standard
Hoe

Promiscuity

For most people the main line between hoe and holy is promiscuity. Which just like everything else, is completely made up and borderline ridiculous. Throughout history, sex and mass sex, group sex, sacrificial sex, just sex of all kinds have been a large part of religion actually. 

Check out what our homies at Deseret had to say:

Feminism swept into American culture during the 1960s in the name of women’s equality. While much has been said about feminist efforts to alter gender roles and workplace dynamics, scant attention has been paid to the dramatic changes wrought in response to inequalities in sexual relationships. Feminism sought an end to the double standard that winked at promiscuity in men while condemning it in women. But in response, society made a tragic misstep.

Rather than seek an equal standard by demanding sexual fidelity from men, the feminist movement encouraged women to “imitate the promiscuous tendencies of men.” Sexual relations outside of marriage became a mark of women’s independence. Natural feelings of commitment and relational interdependence, often associated with female sexuality, were condemned as outdated norms that subordinated women and made them dependent on men. No more. As Steven Rhoads aptly summarizes, women were told to negotiate sexual relations for personal desire and pleasure, rather than for love and familial bonding.

Their arguments worked. In Jean Elshtain’s pithy expression, “the new woman” became “the old man” Though premarital sexual relations began to be more common after World War II, it was still socially frowned upon. And sexual relations between people who did not plan to marry was unacceptable. But from 1943 to 1999, with widely available contraception and abortion, attitudes toward premarital relations changed dramatically, particularly among young women, whose approval increased from 12 percent to 73 percent (young men’s increased from 40 percent to 79 percent). This trend has continued, with millennials holding the most sexually permissive attitudes of any generation.

Such dramatic change has little to do with equality. Rather, it represents a fundamental shift in how our society sees sexuality itself. Human intimacy had long been respected as the power to bond men and women and create new human life. That power demanded boundaries to protect those who could be victimized by it and to channel it into the formation of families that are the building blocks of communities and nations. But in the wake of the 1960s, sexuality was socially transformed from a respected power that demanded boundaries and responsibility to a personal right that demanded free expression.

And there begins the irony of so called “sexual liberation.” Perhaps nothing has brought more devastation to modern family life than the dramatic changes in social norms around sexual behavior. In 1960, the out-of-wedlock childbearing rate was 5 percent — in 2014, it was 41 percent. In the same period, the rate of cohabitation increased more than 17 times, with 50 percent of women today between ages 25-39 currently cohabitating or having cohabitated sometime in the past. This has had significant implications for marriage. Premarital sexual relations with someone other than one’s spouse have consistently been linked to divorce.

And it is children and their mothers who have borne the brunt of the negative outcomes associated with these changes. Children of single mothers “have negative life outcomes at two to three times the rate of children in married, two-parent families.” Children whose parents divorce don’t fare much better, even when their parents remarryChildren living with cohabitating biological parents are at a similar risk for negative outcomes, in part because cohabitation is associated with high breakup rates (50 percent within five years), lower household incomes and higher levels of child abuse and domestic violence. Mothers in cohabitating, step- and never-married family structures are also at much greater risk for poverty and unhealthy and unsafe relationships. Among college women, one in four undergraduates last year reported being physically forced, or threatened with force, into unwanted sexual contact.

Feminist Sally Cline concludes that what the sexual revolution achieved was “not a great deal of liberation for women but a great deal of legitimacy for male promiscuity. …” That legitimizing of promiscuity has left many victims, including men.

Turning back such a tide might seem impossible. But there is one influence that consistently stands out as making a difference: religion. Weekly church-goers are much less likely to have premarital sexual relations and, for those who do, to restrict those relations to their future spouse. Adults who attended church weekly during adolescence, as well as those who consider religion to be “very important,” are eight times more likely to be abstinent compared to those who do not.

This influence should not be taken lightly. To a culture that says there is no way to proscribe sexual behaviors, religion provides an alternative, channeling the sacred power to procreate into the formation of families, and protecting those who would be victimized by its misuse.

Jenet Erickson is an affiliated scholar of the Wheatley Institution and a former assistant professor at Brigham Young University.

Standard
Hoe, Holy

Holy & Hoe

Holy Hoe is somewhat of a contradiction. We are all walking contradictions in one way or another. Other people would describe someone who continuously contradicts themselves a hypocrite. Maybe though it’s just possible to have two opposing forces working within you at once ? It’s definitely worth exploring.

One of the better fitting words that comes to mind is DICHOTOMY. A dichotomy is a contrast between two opposing or sharply different things. Also, according to the dictionary, a dichotomy is “a division of a class of something into subclasses that are mutually exclusive; I.e. they are separate. 

Another word that comes to mind is ‘duality’. Right off bat, the suffix du- let’s you know it’s two of something. Duality is “a classification into two subclasses or opposed parts. I.e. two parts of one whole.” Duality embodies even more so the idea of being both separate and together. Polarity is the “manifestation of two opposite or contrasting principles or tendencies; I.e. two ends of a spectrum.”

We then have the word ‘enigma’. An enigma is someone or something that’s considered puzzling or to be a riddle, a conundrum even. These four words, or phenomena, fascinate me when it comes to exploring humans; figuring out what we do and what we stand for. If we’re so complex and so dynamic why do we take every opportunity possible to stuff each other into a box with a single label ? Why do we act as if all things are mutually exclusive much more often than not ? Is life a choice of perpetual opportunity costs or can we have it all ?

Our goal is to give you a slice of it all wrapped together. Our tagline WEAR YOUR TRUTH is encouraging you to both love and be in tune with yourself as a totality. As an imperfect compilation of perfection. It doesn’t necessarily have to be half holy and half hoe. Embrace any dichotomy that is beautifully you. 

How would you describe yourself ? Let’s talk about it !

Standard
clothing

Cotton

Cotton is the most used fabric in the entire world. One reason is because it’s just super abundant. There is no shortage of cotton like anywhere, ever. Also, cotton is one of the most breathable fabrics making it ideal for everyday wear. You can find cotton hiding in unsuspecting places like in your favorite denim jacket or your child’s school uniform khaki pants.

So no one actually knows how old cotton really is (mainly because no one can even agree on how old the earth itself is) but scientists hanging out in Mexican caves have found some cotton pieces that seem to be at least seven thousand years old. We do know that in Pakistan cotton was being grown and woven into cloth as early as 3000 BC. Shortly after, Egyptians started wearing cotton clothing on a regular basis.

Fast forward to about 800 AD and you find Arab merchants traveling to Europe to sell their cotton clothing items. Then boom, several centuries later Christopher Columbus “finds” cotton in the Bahamas in 1492 and now the rest of the world finds out about it and thinks cotton is all that and a bag of chips. They were right.

Cotton wasn’t machine-spun until about 1730 in England. The industrial revolution of that area and the US invention of the cotton gin got us to where we see cotton today. The cotton gin was able to work ten times faster than what it would take to do things by hand. After the cotton gin, cotton went from about a $150,000 value to an over $8,000,000 value !

Today you’ll find a lot of research and sustainability efforts to keep cotton alive. It’s been a cash cow for so long that certain people are afraid that we’re going to completely milk it dry in the very near future. What do you think ? What’s your favorite fabric ? Let us know in the comments !

Standard