"Girls should wear modest clothing"

[KathleenElsie]

Well at least she is **at **church.

Well then this could also mean string bathing suits and nudity. Respect for the Holy Mass and others has been neglected since the 1960s “do your own thing” era. This is now almost 50 years of decline in general modesty.

I am always glad when someone goes to Mass even if they have no concept of the actual faith behind the Mass or Liturgy. Someone that knows what the Mass is and they still disrespect everyone else by deliberately wearing offensive clothing or skimpy clothing to Mass is a different matter.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Well, I love shopping so I’m happy to share some of my finds!

modestwithstyle.blogspot.com/
This is a great blog that shows cute, modern clothes that are also incredibly modest!

Nice and cute good almost anywhere

Now, the dresses at mikarose.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=3

Real nice would turn heads in a nice way.
and

aprilcornell.com/Landing/Ladies.aspx

Some good some not so good. Yet alot better then what you find most places. Young and not so young could find nice things here.

are the antithesis of frumpy. Whereas…
liliesapparel.com/cover89_07.jpeg
Would be the end of me.
Nice family picture. Hearkens back to the 1950’s and everyone looked happy. Someone that dresses like this tends to be very sure of their self worth and just does not care about being fashion savvy.

 

[thomfra]

Well then this could also mean string bathing suits and nudity. Respect for the Holy Mass and others has been neglected since the 1960s “do your own thing” era. This is now almost 50 years of decline in general modesty.

I am always glad when someone goes to Mass even if they have no concept of the actual faith behind the Mass or Liturgy. Someone that knows what the Mass is and they still disrespect everyone else by deliberately wearing offensive clothing or skimpy clothing to Mass is a different matter.

See your point. But nobody seems to bother. I mean, surely the OP and others who have such a problem should be concentrating on their relationship with God, and the mass, what father is saying, not on other members of the congregation and what they are wearing. Deary me. Are we so easily distracted?

 

[thomfra]

This thread is useless without pics.

That’s right. We need pictures of these girls in the hot outfits to make a proper assessment. he heh

 

[CentralFLJames]

OK I would like an opinion on this one.

I am dating a very attractive young woman who has a stunning figure - something like what one might see in a tasteful and wholesome fitness magazine. She is classy - no tattoos, nicely manicured, well mannered and polite etc. but not currently going to Catholic church (which I am on her case about). She and I have both in prior times spent time traveling to Europe and have in the course of travel both been to beaches and resorts where the convention was that woman most often go topless. She has done this often. Thus, in this social background and context it has not previously been really a provocative thing for me to see a woman’s breasts. Perhaps it was when I was a young man in my 20’s - but not really anymore in midlife. While those expositions were not quite as innocent as a mother publicly nursing her children (another thing I saw often as a boy growing up in the south), it is not so stimulating to cause me to consciously lust or have illicit thoughts when I see a woman’s bare breasts that are presented in a non-provocative way.

So, I suppose my question takes on a character of of moral relativism which I am inclined through intellectual insight to believe that as a general category is in general not a licit excuse for the case I am about to present.

But this woman likes to go topless on the boat when we go out together on outings. She always waits till we are away from the public and other boaters and really does it just to get a tan and to enjoy the warmth of the sunshine. I am comfortable with it and of course enjoy see the natural beauty of it - she is really almost a living work of art. I am a very disciplined man who is comfortable with this from prior cultural exposure. I do not have sexual thoughts or fantasies but rather get a genuine sense of appreciation and feelings of privilege that she is comfortable enough around me and with herself to let me see a greater dimension of her natural beauty. In essence I read her lack of overt concern and lack of self consciousness as a signal that she is comfortable with our relationship and trusts me not to take it wrongly as an invitation to sensual misconduct.

But I just recently heard a priest on an EWTN program say that petting or touching your partner and stimulating oneself visually is “in the neighborhood” of mortal sin. In these recreational settings where she was topless we have previously drawn close and have kissed casually and affectionately but not to the degree of what I would call “passionately”. From the radio program I am now worried that this is a serious sin. In fact I have lost sleep over this information and now have to reassess my entire notion of what is permitted fun. Frankly, this new guilt thing is starting to take a lot of the spontaneity and sense of adventure out of life and making it hard for me to enjoy life as much as I used to. Now I feel as though I need to think through and examine everything I do and have to ask people to refrain from things that we used to do.

We have only dated a few months so are not engaged. We have never had sexual relations but have strong affections for each other and enjoy each other’s company. The “topless thing” is no big deal to either of us on a sensual level but its certainly fun and pretty to see and share that level of trust and mutual comfort levels. For me its more a sense of appreciation that she is comfortable enough with me to be herself around me and not feel self-conscious about it. For her I think she just enjoys the freedom from bikini-tan-lines and the pleasantness of the sunshine but also clearly is proud of her own attraction and gets some satisfaction in sharing more of her physical beauty with somone who is special to her and who appreciates it.

Opinions please. Is this really wrong in my case if I have not really had improper thoughts? And must I ask her to keep it all on the next time we go out?

James

 

[thomfra]

OK I would like an opinion on this one.

I am dating a very attractive young woman who has a stunning figure - something like what one might see in a tasteful and wholesome fitness magazine. She is classy - no tattoos, nicely manicured, well mannered and polite etc. but not currently going to Catholic church (which I am on her case about). She and I have both in prior times spent time traveling to Europe and have in the course of travel both been to beaches and resorts where the convention was that woman most often go topless. She has done this often. Thus, in this social background and context it has not previously been really a provocative thing for me to see a woman’s breasts. Perhaps it was when I was a young man in my 20’s - but not really anymore in midlife. While those expositions were not quite as innocent as a mother publicly nursing her children (another thing I saw often as a boy growing up in the south), it is not so stimulating to cause me to consciously lust or have illicit thoughts when I see a woman’s bare breasts that are presented in a non-provocative way.

So, I suppose my question takes on a character of of moral relativism which I am inclined through intellectual insight to believe that as a general category is in general not a licit excuse for the case I am about to present.

But this woman likes to go topless on the boat when we go out together on outings. She always waits till we are away from the public and other boaters and really does it just to get a tan and to enjoy the warmth of the sunshine. I am comfortable with it and of course enjoy see the natural beauty of it - she is really almost a living work of art. I am a very disciplined man who is comfortable with this from prior cultural exposure. I do not have sexual thoughts or fantasies but rather get a genuine sense of appreciation and feelings of privilege that she is comfortable enough around me and with herself to let me see a greater dimension of her natural beauty. In essence I read her lack of overt concern and lack of self consciousness as a signal that she is comfortable with our relationship and trusts me not to take it wrongly as an invitation to sensual misconduct.

But I just recently heard a priest on an EWTN program say that petting or touching your partner and stimulating oneself visually is “in the neighborhood” of mortal sin. In these recreational settings where she was topless we have previously drawn close and have kissed casually and affectionately but not to the degree of what I would call “passionately”. From the radio program I am now worried that this is a serious sin. In fact I have lost sleep over this information and now have to reassess my entire notion of what is permitted fun. Frankly, this new guilt thing is starting to take a lot of the spontaneity and sense of adventure out of life and making it hard for me to enjoy life as much as I used to. Now I feel as though I need to think through and examine everything I do and have to ask people to refrain from things that we used to do.

We have only dated a few months so are not engaged. We have never had sexual relations but have strong affections for each other and enjoy each other’s company. The “topless thing” is no big deal to either of us on a sensual level but its certainly fun and pretty to see and share that level of trust and mutual comfort levels. For me its more a sense of appreciation that she is comfortable enough with me to be herself around me and not feel self-conscious about it. For her I think she just enjoys the freedom from bikini-tan-lines and the pleasantness of the sunshine but also clearly is proud of her own attraction and gets some satisfaction in sharing more of her physical beauty with somone who is special to her and who appreciates it.

Opinions please. Is this really wrong in my case if I have not really had improper thoughts? And must I ask her to keep it all on the next time we go out?

James

My god. It’s like the first half and the second half of the post is written by completely different people.

Be the man the the first half. Confident. Controlled. Stop worrying about what everybody else thinks.

There is no objective or subjective immorality in being topless, or in the admiration of a beautiful human body.

 

[GraceDK]

**MarieVeronica;
I remember my dear Dad (now deceased) telling me, when I was a young teenage girl… that a real man doesn’t respect a woman who dresses immodestly. I never forgot my father’s words of wisdom. **

Your dad was a sinner with wrong jugdement in this case. Should he himself be treated with respect? was he worthy ? No one is good but God, says Scripture.
Your dad’s “words of wisdom” as you call them are as far from Christlike behaviour as it gets. If Jesus had said like your dad we would have known He was not the true messiah. Our Lord gave us the utmost honour and respect even though we all deserved hell for our actions and he saw the dirt each one of us carry around with us in our heart… And if we dont have God-given love but indeed follow the “wisdom” of your dad we could all go around disrespecting each other - how is that thought for you?

 

[AverageJohn]

Ecclesiasticus: Good & Bad Women

"11 A drunken woman is a great wrath: and her reproach and shame shall not be hid.

12 The fornication of a woman shall be known by the haughtiness of her eyes, and by her eyelids.

13 On a daughter that turneth not away herself, set a strict watch: lest finding an opportunity she abuse herself.

14 Take heed of the impudence of her eyes, and wonder not if she slight thee.

15 She will open her mouth as a thirsty traveller to the fountain, and will drink of every water near her, and will sit down by every hedge, and open her quiver against every arrow, until she fail."

 

[CentralFLJames]

**MarieVeronica;
I remember my dear Dad (now deceased) telling me, when I was a young teenage girl… that a real man doesn’t respect a woman who dresses immodestly. I never forgot my father’s words of wisdom. **

Your dad was a sinner with wrong judgement in this case. Should he himself be treated with respect? was he worthy ? No one is good but God, says Scripture.
Your dad’s “words of wisdom” as you call them are as far from Christlike behaviour as it gets. If Jesus had said like your dad we would have known He was not the true messiah. Our Lord gave us the utmost honour and respect even though we all deserved hell for our actions and he saw the dirt each one of us carry around with us in our heart… And if we dont have God-given love but indeed follow the “wisdom” of your dad we could all go around disrespecting each other - how is that thought for you?

Grace, I understand what you are trying to say here. But I think you are being a tad bit harsh on Marie by disrespecting her dad’s fatherly advice. Clearly, her dad counseled her out of love and concern for her happiness and from the advantage of his own experiences in life. He probably expressed it differently that maybe you may have expressed the same underlying concept. But I think where the man was coming from was from the heart not from self righteousness and judgement. Immodesty is somewhat subjective and may also be a function of social context. I think the concept he was trying to teach is that women who do not respect their own self dignity will never engender in others more self respect than they themselves judge and project of their own perspective of self respect.

As a man I can say that it happens to be true that men in general lose a lot of the natural inclination to extend extra-respect for women who present themselves in a trampy manner and project their own lack of self esteem in so doing. There was a time in the culture of the country when things were more genteel and when men would fall over themselves to conspicuously extend extraordinary respect to women as a normal social courtesy for being society’s child-bearers and protected class. That of course has all changed thanks to women being liberated from that obtrusive male bondage that held women back from realizing their full potential . Radical feminism really tore the heart and soul out of a lot of our western culture in a way that I suspect most women now regret and what men who can remember now shrug off with a long sigh. So the proper term I think is not so much as “immodest” (since that brings up images of Victorianism and prudishness) as it is in dressing “tastefully” and “respecfully” in a way that does not cause discomfort to others and facilitates people extending the benefit of the doubt about a person’s character without causing people, men in particular, to look like complete fools. No man want to toss his pearls of charitable doubt and consideration into the mud each time we tip our hats in the face of clear self-contradiction.

James

 

[GraceDK]

Grace, I understand what you are trying to say here. But I think you are being a tad bit harsh on Marie by disrespecting her dad’s fatherly advice. Clearly, her dad counseled her out of love and concern for her happiness and from the advantage of his own experiences in life. He probably expressed it differently that maybe you may have expressed the same underlying concept. But I think where the man was coming from was from the heart not from self righteousness and judgement. Immodesty is somewhat subjective and may also be a function of social context. I think the concept he was trying to teach is that women who do not respect their own self dignity will never engender in others more self respect than they themselves judge and project of their own perspective of self respect.

As a man I can say that it happens to be true that men in general lose a lot of the natural inclination to extend extra-respect for women who present themselves in a trampy manner and project their own lack of self esteem in so doing. There was a time in the culture of the country when things were more genteel and when men would fall over themselves to conspicuously extend extraordinary respect to women as a normal social courtesy for being society’s child-bearers and protected class. That of course has all changed thanks to women being liberated from that obtrusive male bondage that held women back from realizing their full potential . Radical feminism really tore the heart and soul out of a lot of our western culture in a way that I suspect most women now regret and what men who can remember now shrug off with a long sigh. So the proper term I think is not so much as “immodest” (since that brings up images of Victorianism and prudishness) as it is in dressing “tastefully” and “respecfully” in a way that does not cause discomfort to others and facilitates people extending the benefit of the doubt about a person’s character without causing people, men in particular, to look like complete fools. No man want to toss his pearls of charitable doubt and consideration into the mud each time we tip our hats in the face of clear self-contradiction.

James

James… read the quote again: "A real man does not respect a woman who … " … and now I ask you if this fits with what Jesus taught and how he acted.
Again… As I saifd in another post, I have met many people, especially men, who I at first thought were very pure, holy and chaste and then who confided their struggles to me about a sinful past with promiscuity, a struggle with masturbation and porn sometimes not even finished at the time they spoke to me. Should I have disrespected them because the devil had a foot hold in their life when I am but a worm in my self and completely unable to do anything of value without God??? You tell me that. And if I respond rather harshly to that sister in Jesus its because I think she has been taught pharisaism instead of the Gospel of Christ and for that the Church will suffer as always when her children do not understand what they are called to do.
The devil and the flesh/pride tells us to treat people (anyone, anywhere and for whatever reason) disrespectful.
The Holy Spirit, in total contrast, tells us to merely love the sinner because we have been loved first. And the one who says he has no sin is a liar as John said. But a man who says to disrespect women because of their attire may try to make a scare campain in order to make the women in his family dress properly… but it should not be called “wisdom”.
Try turning the situation around a little bit James. Put in another gender … and some other sins… and you might see things a bit more from my perspective. Its not pretty.

Ps. I know its comfortable to pad each others shoulders and always be good pals with everyone here… so now I am the big bad wolf… but I dont mind that.

 

[CentralFLJames]

James… read the quote again: "A real man does not respect a woman who … " … and now I ask you if this fits with what Jesus taught and how he acted.
Again… As I saifd in another post, I have met many people, especially men, who I at first thought were very pure, holy and chaste and then who confided their struggles to me about a sinful past with promiscuity, a struggle with masturbation and porn sometimes not even finished at the time they spoke to me. Should I have disrespected them because the devil had a foot hold in their life when I am but a worm in my self and completely unable to do anything of value without God??? You tell me that. And if I respond rather harshly to that sister in Jesus its because I think she has been taught pharisaism instead of the Gospel of Christ and for that the Church will suffer as always when her children do not understand what they are called to do.
The devil and the flesh/pride tells us to treat people (anyone, anywhere and for whatever reason) disrespectful.
The Holy Spirit, in total contrast, tells us to merely love the sinner because we have been loved first. And the one who says he has no sin is a liar as John said. But a man who says to disrespect women because of their attire may try to make a scare campain in order to make the women in his family dress properly… but it should not be called “wisdom”.
Try turning the situation around a little bit James. Put in another gender … and some other sins… and you might see things a bit more from my perspective. Its not pretty.

Ps. I know its comfortable to pad each others shoulders and always be good pals with everyone here… so now I am the big bad wolf… but I dont mind that.

Grace this may be a language barrier thing. Do you speak English as a native language? Her father WAS NOT instructing men to disrespect women if they dress inappropriately. He was saying that in the real world, most men (i.e. “real men” that one really encounters) being less than objective and perfect WILL as a condition of their humanity hold such women with less respect. This is a very common teaching and belief (and true I might add) that fathers and mothers tell their daughters. It is not intended to scare so much as it is to tell them to protect their self-respect and not give others a cause to harm their reputation. It was just expressed in less than perfect high-English grammar and it probably indicative of sold middle class values and social standing. It’s innocent.

Have you never heard this before when you were growing up?

James

 

[slyboots]

Yes and so should boys and men and women.

 

[CentralFLJames]

My god. It’s like the first half and the second half of the post is written by completely different people.

Be the man the the first half. Confident. Controlled. Stop worrying about what everybody else thinks.

There is no objective or subjective immorality in being topless, or in the admiration of a beautiful human body.

Thanks for your perspective. But I am not getting a lot of responses so far and the silence is starting to be indicting. I am hoping others weigh in since I no longer trust my own objectivity on the matter.

James

 

[ghaybyers1]

My god. It’s like the first half and the second half of the post is written by completely different people.

Be the man the the first half. Confident. Controlled. Stop worrying about what everybody else thinks.

There is no objective or subjective immorality in being topless, or in the admiration of a beautiful human body.

100% Agreed, Thomfra!

James, I’m sorry to take so long in replying. I’m sure this has been weighing on you.
We are called to do our best to live our lives in the example of Jesus. Do you think Jesus would have thought of your friend sexually? No, and neither have you been. You’re completely fine! Don’t allow what society expects of you (to be a sexually charged thinker) degrade your personal feelings of self-worth. I can watch the degradation take over you as you wrote that post! Be strong, pray, continue living chastly as you have been.

 

[GraceDK]

**CentralFLJames; Grace this may be a language barrier thing. Do you speak English as a native language? **

No. Its my second language… so you might be right.

**Her father WAS NOT instructing men to disrespect women if they dress inappropriately. He was saying that in the real world, most men (i.e. “real men” that one really encounters) being less than objective and perfect WILL as a condition of their humanity hold such women with less respect. **

Ahaaa… okay. Yes, we got something totally opposite out of the little word “real”- I took it to mean a positive character: a REAL man… that is a good man, a man of high morals etc… but you saw “real” to mean: all them secualar men out there who take everything at face value and dont know Christ.

This is a very common teaching and belief (and true I might add) that fathers and mothers tell their daughters. It is not intended to scare so much as it is to tell them to protect their self-respect and not give others a cause to harm their reputation. It was just expressed in less than perfect high-English grammar and it probably indicative of sold middle class values and social standing. It’s innocent.

Okay. I dont know much about this since I am coming from a continent where the inner rather than the outer person is most important from the Christian perspective. Clothes is seen merely as clothes. Here people wear what they want and things seem to work out just fine… no one is bothered. I first encountered the “nude-slamming” from Catholic American men.

Have you never heard this before when you were growing up?

No… I was never taught that I should dress in certain ways in order to have a good reputation and respect. Its logic to anyone born and raised in this world that I dont dress like a prostitude if I am not one, and I dont dress like a doc or a police officer if I am neither…
However… Some times my mother would have bare breasts in the garden of our house and she wears tang tops and shorts without blushing. My dad will go without a shirt on… and well… whereas I dont appreciate seeing my mother being without a bra (someone might suddenly come and see her) the conditions I was raised under is somewhat different from what you are. I have not learned to look at a male upper body - or cleavage - as a sexual trigger per se… neither have I been told by my dad to respect my self through my dress. I have however learned to act decently and know what was expected. I would any day wear a bikini on the beach and not think anything wrong with it here because in my culture people dont associate and react the same way with bikinis as the American Catholic man has learned to react to it.

Anyway… I am happy I misunderstood the other poster.

Peace to you James.
Ps… I hope your meeting went well

 

[SDA2RC]

Grace,
It may be more meaningful if you replace the word “respect” with “appreciate”. I think this was the intended meaning. We certainly respect the person… as you pointed out… it would be unchristian to do otherwise.

 

[Ruthie]

James, you wrote:

*I do not have sexual thoughts or fantasies but rather get a genuine sense of appreciation and feelings of privilege that she is comfortable enough around me and with herself to let me see a greater dimension of her natural beauty. In essence I read her lack of overt concern and lack of self consciousness as a signal that she is comfortable with our relationship and trusts me not to take it wrongly as an invitation to sensual misconduct.

But I just recently heard a priest on an EWTN program say that petting or touching your partner and stimulating oneself visually is “in the neighborhood” of mortal sin.*

I think you have answered your own question. Looking at her with lust would be “stimulating oneself visually.” Having “sexual thoughts or fantasies” would be lustful. You seem to be well able to control yourself there.

Since she doesn’t uncover herself where other people can see, she (and you) are avoiding scandal pretty well.

(Note: I mean scandal as defined by the Church:

[2284](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/2284.htm’) Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.)

Ruthie

 

[peary]

I agree that girls should wear modest clothing at all times, but somtimes I am confused, because alot of guys I know say that, and then gape at models in magazines. A girl in a mini-skirt walks by and they stare and say “wow she’s hott!”
Girls want attention from guys. Not really this kind of attention, but it is hard to remember that, and we wind up settling for the bad attention.
I wish instead of just saying that girls should wear modest clothes, when guys are around “real girls” they would try to complement them on their God-given inner qualities instead of staring open mouthed at air-brushed pictures of models, which makes girls feel like they will never be good enough.

What do you think?

At Fatima (1917) Our Lady was very concerned about how people in society dressed. She told Lucia “Certain fashions will soon be worn that will offend My Son very much.” Our Lady was concerned with modesty - a lost virtue in this day and age.

 

[Praline]

modestwithstyle.blogspot.com/
This is a great blog that shows cute, modern clothes that are also incredibly modest!

Now, the dresses at mikarose.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=3
and
aprilcornell.com/Landing/Ladies.aspx
are the antithesis of frumpy. Whereas…
liliesapparel.com/cover89_07.jpeg
Would be the end of me.

I looked up these sites and I thought a lot of the clothes were very nice. But, also VERY expensive for my budget. I feel I am over spending if I pay more than $20- $25 for a shirt. Most of the time I can get them for $12-$15.

 

[peary]

What modest and what’s not is so subjective though.

That’s easy to say, but the reality is, we know what modesty is and if you want me to spell it out for you in another post, I would have no problem doing so.