Bikinis are immodest - why exactly?

[Vico]

chevalier, you wrote: “Skin alone doesn’t do it, it’s the way it’s presented (or perceived).” and “What certain designers are making of it doesn’t apply backwards to the whole idea.”

Say the “whole idea” then is a suit to bath or swim in which will be modest. Then the first sleeveless wool jersey tank suits of the 1920s evolved to forms that show all but the illegal areas today. If the first suits presented the “whole idea” then what we have today is no longer the “whole idea” because current suits show a lot more than the lower legs and arms of the first suits, except for some Muslim suits and some other modesty suits available today that protest the one piece, two piece, and bikini, and others.

Many factors come to play, including the location of the exposed skin, and the shape of the body are significant. Is a designer example necessary for the practice? Prada designed a skirt with a see through lace cutout along the buttocks cleavage (Feb 2008 Milan), similarly to a lace covering used over the breast cleavage. Modesty calls for us to avoid fashion trends, and ideologies that promote what is undignified or disrespectful of our souls.

Also: “Looking good is not a sin and trying to isn’t either. What’s wrong is getting people to think about sex or testing their limits.”

As you acknowledge here that scandal is a sin. However, trying to look good can be a sin, or even letting others see how good you look.

“2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. … 2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. … 2286 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion. … 2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. “Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!” (Lk 17:1)” – Catechism of Catholic Church

And you wrote: “You can’t avoid scandalising someone somewhere no matter what you do.”

We should not intentionally lead another, directly or indirectly, into sin or it is a mortal sin, and we also are accountable for our venial sins, from which although forgiven, we must be purified. Sin is dependent upon the action and intent of the actor.

It has even been recommended by some that men and women not swim together. There has always been the possibility of same sex attraction to contend with also. We should safeguard others.

 

[dranzal]

The trouble with bikinis is that they cause long threads.

Yep.

Bikinis and circumcisions…

 

[Vico]

cerad, you asked: “Are Catholics really so repressed that a little skin will turn them crazy?”

Definition of repression: to hold back by an act of volition.
Definiton of crazy: distracted with desire or excitement.

You are asking if the desire results from holding back. The desire is there by human nature not by repression. Sexual activity reduces the desire temporarily.

 

[Consecrated]

Also to elongate the legs and slim the appearence, which are desireable features.

I have a skirt (flowy ankle length) and top (knit, scoop neck, falls down over the hips) that I wear with 2 in. sandal heels. I love this outfit b/c 1) it elongates my legs, and 2) it slims my appearance, 3) it’s undeniably pretty and feminine, 4) it’s modest, not attention grabbing, and 5) DH loves me in it.

Just sayin’.

 

[shannyk]

Well, I start from the other end and wonder why insist on covers and covers and covers when the essentials are covered anyway. We don’t get born in burkhas.

Well, you can work backwards if you want I guess, but since covering our bodies with dress is the norm since…well since Adam and Eve fell to temptation, then I don’t know if you’re going in the right direction.

Look, though some people want to make the leap from burkha to bikini, there really is a lot of happy medium in there. Bearing more skin has absolutely no effect on the functionality of the clothing here, swimsuit vs. bikini, so then I still wonder what IS the purpose of wearing one? From what I can surmise, and knowing women the way I do (since I am one) the only conclusion I can come to is that bearing more skin, is exactly the point.

 

[Vico]

This sin must be unclear, based upon the comments I read. Or maybe the people are not Catholic.

(Catholic) Baltimore Catechism:

“Q. 1318. Are impure thoughts and desires always sins?
A. Impure thoughts and desires are always sins, unless they displease us and we try to banish them.”

In other words, one does not even have to get excited, just persist in the thought.

 

[Baron_Korf]

An interesting and very long thread. Here’s an over-consider opinion from an American man who has spent many nights trying to understand why he is tempted by this.

Clothing is a form of communication. One piece swimsuits convey the image of a barrier, an off-limits sign that many men would understand. Two piece swimsuits convey openness, ease, and availability, which is very tempting to us fallen men.

Also there is the history and culture of the two-piece to be considered. While an individual might have honest and innocent intentions wearing one, the fact is that bikinis, and two-pieces by extension, are thought to be worn by “a certain type of girl, one who wants attention and lacks moral fortitude. Good girls don’t wear that kind of clothing.” So even if you are a good and wholesome lady, you will be associated with this. I wish this were hyperbole, but I can honestly say that is how men think. That’s how I think; even when it is someone I know well, the thought will lurk in the back of my mind. Bikini = bad girl, and all that comes with it.

From a physiological and psychological stance, the two-piece is as alluring as you can get and still be clothed. Why is that? Well according to a study done at the University of Texas, that spread across a wide spectrum of tastes and cultures, the single uniting factor in who men consider sexy was the waist to hip ratio, with the waist being measured at the navel. Other factors helped, but that was the main driving force. So when you expose the midriff, it brings that to our attention, even if only subconsciously.

That coupled with the above thought makes for a powerful temptation. It probably won’t even manifest itself externally then, although our Blessed Lord told us that if we lust in our hearts then we have already sinned, but it will linger and can poison the mind and weaken the resolve for the future. A man can act like a gentleman, but still have his mind and eyes wander.

Blame the Fall for it. Personally I wish you could wear whatever you want and not cause a scandal for anybody, but that’s not how it works. We still must live with the effects of Original Sin, even though the sin itself is washed away.

So remember, please, that you are your brother’s keeper. We should try to do our part, but please don’t make it any more difficult for us than it already is.

 

[chevalier]

Well, you can work backwards if you want I guess, but since covering our bodies with dress is the norm since…well since Adam and Eve fell to temptation, then I don’t know if you’re going in the right direction.

Actually, Adam and Eve’s case was all about covering the essentials. In fact, if you recall any piece of art depicting the two, they’re wearing only leaf skirts. Sorry, I win.

Look, though some people want to make the leap from burkha to bikini, there really is a lot of happy medium in there. Bearing more skin has absolutely no effect on the functionality of the clothing here, swimsuit vs. bikini, so then I still wonder what IS the purpose of wearing one? From what I can surmise, and knowing women the way I do (since I am one) the only conclusion I can come to is that bearing more skin, is exactly

the point.

I still contest the issue of baring vs not covering, and we need to look at the fact that baring skin is actually neither right nor wrong on its own, it depends on the intent. Catching the sun is not a bad intent. In fact, attracting attention wouldn’t necessarily be so. It would have to be sexual, i.e. wanting to lead to sin or recklessly ignoring the temptation one’s posing while feeding one’s pride.

This sin must be unclear, based upon the comments I read. Or maybe the people are not Catholic.

(Catholic) Baltimore Catechism:

What makes the Baltimore Catechism superior to other Catholic Catechisms?

“Q. 1318. Are impure thoughts and desires always sins?
A. Impure thoughts and desires are always sins, unless they displease us and we try to banish them.”

The topic is bikinis, not impure thoughts. You are making a logical error by smuggling impure thoughts in and selling them off as a given. Ain’t gonna work that way, sorry.

In other words, one does not even have to get excited, just persist in the thought.

No connection.

 

[johngh]

My way of looking at it is this.

If you were in your underwear, and someone walked in on you, you would freak out. You would yell at them to go away, try to cover yourself, etc.

However if you are in a bikini and someone walks in the room, you don’t even react.

Logically, this makes no sense. Both underwear and bikinis cover the exact same amount of skin. The only difference is the material they are made out of. Are you really going to say that material determines whether something is modest or not? (though admittedly sometimes it does, as with shear clothing that is all too popular these days).

The simple fact is, bikinis are immodest. However most women refuse to accept that because we are all products of a secular world, and you want to fit in and for people to not look at you weird. However, that is absolutely no excuse. We are called to be real followers of Christ, not followers of Christ whenever it does not effect our “image”.

I really don’t see how anyone can get around the fact that wearing a bikini is a sin…because it is.

 

[chevalier]

I’m gonna dispel the above easily. By your logic, wouldn’t you freak out when wearing a white-cotton equivalent of one-piece suit? If you would, then your argument is invalid. If you wouldn’t, well, there’s some explaining to do.

This said, many of today’s designs are in fact immodest. They send sexual messages of all kinds and they’re downright annoying in that regard. However, from time to time, you will find a decent two-piece that covers enough and isn’t too sheer. There is nothing wrong with that kind of swimsuit merely on the ground that it’s two piece. The proper reason why any swimsuit is innocent is by attempting to draw attention and titillate spectators instead of providing essential cover while swimming, tanning or relaxing.

 

[Big_Willis]

The body is a thing of beauty. The nude body, in my opinion, can be more appropriate than one sporting a bikini or something similar. The nude body is something beautiful, and to be thought of as such. Nudity isn’t supposed to be viewed as sexual. The bikini, on the other hand, can convey sexual messages. A bikini, underwear,or the like are OK if one doesn’t use them to convey sexual messages. They can be problematic because they can cause lust and desire. If you’re hot at home, strip down if you want to. Just be careful and coniderate. in public, for your sake, and for those around you.

 

[Vico]

chevalier, you wrote: “I still contest the issue of baring vs not covering, and we need to look at the fact that baring skin is actually neither right nor wrong on its own, it depends on the intent. Catching the sun is not a bad intent. In fact, attracting attention wouldn’t necessarily be so. It would have to be sexual, i.e. wanting to lead to sin or recklessly ignoring the temptation one’s posing while feeding one’s pride.”

It is not necessary to have the intent to lead another to sin to commit the sin of scandal, for the sin may, in that case be venial. Additionally that temptation that leads another to scandal does not have to be sinful at all. Example, giving a drink to an alcolholic. The sin of scandal is elaborated on in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

CCC 2284-6 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. …
takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. … can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion. …
2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. …

You also asked: “What makes the Baltimore Catechism superior to other Catholic Catechisms?”
My answer is that it is not superior. Above is not from the Baltimore.

Your wrote, “The topic is bikinis, not impure thoughts. You are making a logical error by smuggling impure thoughts in and selling them off as a given.”

There is no assumption that an impure thought will result, only the possibility of sin as a result of the bikini (or other style of dress). We are called to avoid the occassion of sin, which in this case is giving scandal, venial or mortal in gravity. (There are also other sins associated with bikini wearing besides scandal that are not detailed here. Just one example: the wearer could get a sexual thrill from being seen in it, or by simply wearing it with no observer.) I mention impure thoughts to show one way the sin can occur.

 

[Vico]

To paraphrase St. Thomas Aquinas (from The Summa Theologica): sometimes an accidental scandal is a mortal sin, either because a person commits a mortal sin, or because of such contempt for another’s spiritual welfare that he does not forego what he wants to do.

This can happen due to our lack of charity in protecting others from the occasion of sin that could occur due to the immodest style of dress (or immodest speech, etc.).

 

[neemer]

Hi, thanks for sharing so many ideas and suggestions for swim wear. I have also lots of trendy and antique collection of swimsuits. For the coolest and trendy look of swim wears you can visit this site.
Thanks!!
Women’s swimwear

 

[Catholicdude92]

What an interesting thread . . . probably the most interesting part (to me) is that in 5 pages of posts, it’s been all women posting with one (maybe two?) exceptions. So let me give my two cents worth as a man. I make no judgments on what people choose to wear or why. I just give you my thoughts as a man. Take it for what it’s worth.

I thought it was only men who didn’t understand women. This post has shown me that perhaps I was wrong . . . women also don’t understand men. Do men look at women in bathing suits and it triggers sexual thoughts? Yes. And when I say yes, I mean ABSOLUTELY!!! What a man does with this is up to the man. In my younger years, I searched for more. In my return to the Church and to the confessional, I try to distract myself with anything I can. I try to remind myself that yes, she is beautiful . . . a beautiful child of God.

In trying to follow the teachings of the Church, trips to the beach have become VERY difficult for me. Avoiding the near occasion of sin pretty much means avoiding the beach for me.

Do bikinis attract men’s eyes where they shouldn’t be? YES!!! The tops accentuate and say, “Look at these!!” The bottoms, as someone said in an earlier post, are a triangle. YES! Where does that triangle point?

That’s the nature of the suit. And truth be told, it has more to do with the suit and not the body in it. To you women who think you are not the one being looked at in this way because there are younger women with “better” bodies around, think again. The nature of the suit draws attention from men to where it shouldn’t be, regardless of how “unattractive” you may think you are. Your attractiveness is in the eye of the beholder . . . and I can assure you that EVERY SINGLE ONE of you in these bikinis are being looked at in this manner. Without exception.

Does a one piece bathing suit do this for men? Not nearly to the extent a bikini does. Not even close. I was at the beach last weekend and saw a young woman in a one piece suit. It really caught my eye because she was the only one. And I thought, “wow, this is a beautiful girl yet the one piece suit doesn’t draw the same attention from my eye.” I wish more women would start this trend. (And she happened to be Catholic, because I saw her make the sign of the cross!)

To all of you who will say that this is my/other men’s problem, I understand. I try to stay close to the sacraments, particularly confession, and always remember that Jesus said to look at another woman with lust in your eye is to commit adultery. I will continue to try to avert my eyes at the beach. But how many men at the beach will be going to confession afterwards? What do you think the rest are doing with their thoughts?

Something to think about, ladies, the next time you put on your bikini. I hope I don’t offend anyone, just trying to give some truthful, helpful advice. Take it or leave it. At least you know.

Well put. As a guy I agree with everything.

 

[Catholicdude92]

I’m gonna dispel the above easily. By your logic, wouldn’t you freak out when wearing a white-cotton equivalent of one-piece suit? If you would, then your argument is invalid. If you wouldn’t, well, there’s some explaining to do.

This said, many of today’s designs are in fact immodest. They send sexual messages of all kinds and they’re downright annoying in that regard. However, from time to time, you will find a decent two-piece that covers enough and isn’t too sheer. There is nothing wrong with that kind of swimsuit merely on the ground that it’s two piece. The proper reason why any swimsuit is innocent is by attempting to draw attention and titillate spectators instead of providing essential cover while swimming, tanning or relaxing.

but two piece does not equal a bikini. Much depends on the definition of the word “bikini”

 

[jesusfreak4ever]

In my opinion, bikinis look like underwear. If I wouldn’t walk around in public wearing only a bra and panties, I don’t think a bikini is appropriate, either.

I totally agree. Also, bikinis give boys the wrong message because of that. it’s like, a girl wouldn’t let a random guy that she doesn’t even know (or even if she does know him, still) see her in her bra and underwear, would she? no. So therefore bikinis are the same thing. Plus, many bikinis are bust-enhancing and very low-rise.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

This thread is almost a year old.

 

[jesusfreak4ever]

oh. oops. now i feel stupid. I’m sorry. I didn’t know, i"m a real newcome to Catholic answers.

 

[child_of_God85]

I usually wear a bikini top with board shorts. I don’t find it imodest.