An Argument Against Makeup

  • Thread starter Thread starter XJ9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Call me lazy then, I put on mascara and that’s it. I’m 53 years old have clear skin, and no one seems put off by my appearance, so…

I really couldn’t care less what other women do. Sometimes I think it’s over done, but I certainly don’t say anything to them, I just move on. Some women may wear what others consider a lot of makeup because they have a skin condition that they are embarrassed about. I wouldn’t want to compound that issue for them by being snarky.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Nah it’s perfectly fine to wear makeup 😉
 
JanetF said:
Call me lazy then, I put on mascara and that’s it. I’m 53 years old have clear skin, and no one seems put off by my appearance, so…
Click to expand...
Lucky you. My act of charity to this world is to put on a lot more makeup. My skin hates it though. :confused:
 
Personally, I don’t wear it. It’s expensive, and I have very sensitive skin. My daughter does and so do most women I know.
I think there are a lot more important things to worry about.
 
That is why a beauty implement came out not too long ago. It removes a woman’s mustache and any hairs she has on her chin.
 
Sin has alot to do with intention. Does the makeup wearer believe that she is actually improving on Gods creation, as if she could do better with a few brushstrokes.
 
Wearing make-up “to enhance what God has blessed them with” is literally what he’s talking about. I’m not sure what you think the pertinent difference between 13th and 21st century make-up is.
 
Reply to Objection 2. Cyprian is speaking of women painting themselves: this is a kind of falsification, which cannot be devoid of sin. Wherefore Augustine says (Ep. ccxlv ad Possid.): “To dye oneself with paints in order to have a rosier or a paler complexion is a lying counterfeit. I doubt whether even their husbands are willing to be deceived by it, by whom alone” (i.e. the husbands) “are they to be permitted, but not ordered, to adorn themselves.” However, such painting does not always involve a mortal sin, but only when it is done for the sake of sensuous pleasure or in contempt of God, and it is to like cases that Cyprian refers.

It must, however, be observed that it is one thing to counterfeit a beauty one has not, and another to hide a disfigurement arising from some cause such as sickness or the like. For this is lawful, since according to the Apostle (1 Corinthians 12:23), “such as we think to be the less honorable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honor.”
 
No, but his opinions enjoy a very high degree of theological weight (not that this was his private opinion mind you), and no one has introduced any cogent counter-arguments.
 
The Magisterium not having pronounced on a matter isn’t a justification for doing as one pleases. In order for an action to be morally licit, the opinion that it is objectively right must be either intrinsically or extrinsically probable.
 
Cogent to you. I’m not trying to persuade you or any fundamentalist type (and I suspect that is where the OP got the idea makeup is sinful; the preachers typically like to control their flock, especially the women, under the guise of holiness) or MRA/Redpill types who will say anything to make women look bad. I’m putting it out there for people who might be susceptible to scrupulosity so they don’t start seeing sin somewhere it isn’t.
 
Accusing Aquinas of being a “fundamentalist” is certainly not a cogent argument.
 
I didn’t suggest that. I said that is where I thought the OP got this idea. There is a lot of control in some fundamentalist churches/cults, Gothardite-esque, and the leaders often make-up rules under the guise that it is pleasing to God.
 
Last edited:
LumineDiei said:
Did your wife wear make-up prior to marriage or if you are single, would you court a woman who wore make-up?
Click to expand...
Or, perhaps more relevantly, do you even notice women who don’t wear makeup?

Sad to say, our beauty expectations are calibrated to at least light makeup use, so women who don’t use it are often going to look “plain” or under-dressed.

Case in point, this no makeup photo of Marilyn Monroe poolside:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/12/16/marilyn-monroe-without-makeup_n_4452565.html

(I have to mention that she totally is wearing makeup in the top photo, just a lot less than usual.)
 
Last edited:
Okay I misunderstood you.

That’s certainly true of some Protestant denominations, but in this case (wherever the OP heard this), it isn’t some idiosyncratic thing made up by a cult somewhere.
 
LumineDiei said:
Yes! I think sometimes those who don’t wear make-up themselves (especially men) think a woman wearing concealer and foundation to hide dark circles, blemishes, and uneven skin tones is actually not wearing any. I have seen some beautiful, natural make-up on the models in those modesty blogs that would appear to be make-up free to the average guy.
Click to expand...
And frankly, even I get fooled, and I’m a lady.

I have a good friend who is Hispanic and she says that makeup is very important in her culture. I occasionally notice her looking especially nice–and when I mention it, it always turns out that she’s wearing makeup. She’s just so good that I don’t notice the makeup, I just notice her.

This is an area where guys need to tread carefully, because a fair number of women wear makeup because their husbands appreciate it, and you’re potentially creating a situation where you’re getting between a woman and her husband over something that’s pretty trivial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top