Anonymous ID: 8b43f6 July 12, 2022, 10:18 a.m. No.16723942   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>3951 >>4002

>>16723895

The initial context was a universal blanket smear of buying and selling clothes.

Clothes, since they objectively defend against harsh elements, WOULD OF COURSE become a commodity of value, where specialized skills in clothes making, division of labor, allows the clothes makers to buy food and shelter by exchanging for a highly marketable commodity(money).

 

The missionaries knew that clothes can protect the natives, not because nakedness is shameful, that's a false history pushed by dialectic practitioners seeking to smear religion.

Nice try.

Anonymous ID: 8b43f6 July 12, 2022, 10:43 a.m. No.16724111   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>4119

>>16724002

False.

Hermit crabs clothe themselves.

Humans are not the only animals that 'require' clothing, humans are the only animals that have REASON to grasp and understand the objective benefits clothing brings so as to systematically bring about a steady production of clothes consumer items.

If animals were smarter, they'd clothe themselves too.

And many kinda sorta do already, for example NESTS are a form of clothing for vulnerable baby animals needing protection from the elements.