With the habit of wearing clothes, which at first began occasionally, clothes soon became a status symbol, and this became a fashion. The visible wearing of status symbols, however, promotes envy, and where envy arises, the temptation of stealing is not far, robbery is followed by robbery, and robbery is followed by murder: clothing promotes the propensity for criminal activity.
On the other hand, the open bearing of status symbols demonstrates the superiority and power of being senior in hierarchy. Open expression of superiority and power quickly leads to repression and abuse of this power. Clothing thus establishes and consolidates inequality between people, creating conflicts and dependency.
Nevertheless, clothing eventually became normality, and at some point, much later, social dictate to wear clothes was introduced. In biblical Judaism, lack of clothes is associated with poverty and dishonour, an indication that nudity was soon deliberately defined as negative in the clothed societies.
Clothing covers – even in its simple form of an apron – the genitalia and the excretion organs as subject to shame of the body. Of course, that supports social rules such as the taboo to "stare", as the objects of eager looks disappeared under the clothing. Under these circumstances, the rules of the social code could be more lenient, although the more serious offences such as sexual assault on others continued to be under severe threat of punishment even in clothed societies – as in peoples living in the nude.
The fact, that the development towards clothing was by no means inevitable, is proved by innumerous societies, which were able, to do without clothing completely or almost completely until modern times and ven nowadays. There is no doubt, that the civilising achievements of these peoples, to develop and maintain a functioning social code – often without written law – for their coexistence, far outweigh the civilisation achievements of those peoples who have "made things easier" by dictating to wear clothes.