That had me puzzled for a bit until I saw it as a double entendre on "uncovered" and that rather than any head gear or hair the context in which she used it suggested "uncovered = nude". Good one Silviefor her signature line, Silvie wrote:Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
Sure

However that once again brought 1cor 11:3-16 into my mind and I went to look into it again. Curiously I found the statement in Adam Clarke's commentary
while he was writing particularly about verse 10, the whole scripture passage is a pretty pretty much "difficult scripture", but then Peter said that was the way with much in Paul's writings (2 Pet 3:16).Adam Clarke wrote:There are few portions in the sacred writings that have given rise to such a variety of conjectures and explanations, and are less understood, than this verse
So now the passage quoted for your convenience
In 1Cor 11: Paul wrote: 3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man.
9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.
12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.
13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?
14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.
16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.
But what is Paul really on about here? After reading numerous commentaries (Clarke was right

A. --This might well be the case where cultural norms provide this,
B. -- If you are wondering how I got this notion, then just line up a whole bunch of commentaries and start reading. None of them specifically said that, but it was my notion that it seemed to be a plausible theme in them. (maybe I am wrong, I remember being so at least once

Now to my questions:
1.-- How many different manifestations of this hair/head covering are there among Christian denominations. (the more bizzare may be more entertaining).
2.-- What is your take on the matter.