Immodesty and the lack of respect for women - two sides of the same coin.

[LittleSoldier]

OK, folks, for those of you who had been annoyed by my posts - Good Bye.

I’m outta here, because someone started a separate thread on how to dress when visiting churches in Italy. Just don’t forget - what applies to Rome and to Italy, also applies to the USA. Because we belong to the Roman Catholic Church, which uses the Roman rite, is Universal (Katholikos = universal), and when in doubt, we always look to the Pope for instructions, the Pope who is of course the Bishop of Rome. Thus, we can’t go wrong by imitating what’s being practiced in the Pope’s (Bishop of Rome’s) diocese of Rome.

Now, if you visit an Eastern Catholic Church, e.g. an Ukrainian or Russian Catholic Church, the rules may be stricter and include mandatory head covering for ladies, and bare heads (no baseball caps, hats, etc) for gentlemen.

Don’t cry for me, please.

Just visit the other thread entitled “What should I wear to visit churches”, if you miss me.

I know you’re probably gone and won’t read this, but I disagree that “what applies to Rome and to Italy, also applies to the USA.” First of all, it is not really the “Roman Catholic Church” - it is more proper to call it “Catholic Church-Latin Rite.” And yes, “catholic” does mean “universal” and the Church is called that because when Jesus started His Church it was universal. All early Christians were Catholic.

Also, I believe that any decisions regarding dress for the U.S. would be made by the USCCB. Of course if the Pope stated something I would take notice although I really doubt he would get deeply involved in dress codes as there are far more pressing issues such as abortion, justice, hunger, and poverty.

I could be wrong and if I am I hope I am corrected by someone who can provide binding Church teaching.

 

[Mommyjessica]

First of all, it is not really the “Roman Catholic Church” - it is more proper to call it “Catholic Church-Latin Rite.” And yes, “catholic” does mean “universal” and the Church is called that because when Jesus started His Church it was universal. All early Christians were Catholic.

I always thought the Latin Rite was the Tridentine Mass. Is that not right?

 

[Prayerfully]

I always thought the Latin Rite was the Tridentine Mass. Is that not right?

The Latin Mass is the Mass in Latin.

The “Latin Rite” refers to the Catholicism you are likely familiar with…whether the Mass is in Latin or the vernacular. The priests do not get married and the celebration of the Eucharist is referred to as “Mass”. The Eastern Rite’s celebration of the Eucharist in called the “Divine Liturgy” and those priest can be married. They are often called “Byzantine Catholics” .

In his encyclical “Lumen Orientale” , Pope John Paul ll referred to those Eastern Rite Churches that are in union with Rome as the “other lung of the Church”.

Here’s a link that provides more info about the ancient "Liturgy of St John Chrysostom…much older than the Latin Mass that we have today:

catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0601fea4sb.asp

 

[Serap]

:yawn:

 

[Prayerfully]

I want to thank you for providing that example. I agree - I don’t think St.Gianna’s wardrobe was a mistake. And I deeply appreciate knowing that there is a modern role model who can help lead us to understand what modesty is and that wearing short-sleeves is not immodest.

I’m sorry you received the response you did. So I wanted to tell you that I appreciate your post. I’m going to learn more about this saint.

God bless!!

Thank you! I’m sure that those who don’t think St Gianna is a good role model for women are the ones who don’t care too much for the Pontiff that canonized her and take issue with a women having an education beyond high school (let alone a Doctorate in Medicine).

 

[Serap]

Thank you! I’m sure that those who don’t think St Gianna is a good role model for women are the ones who don’t care too much for the Pontiff that canonized her and take issue with a women having an education beyond high school (let alone a Doctorate in Medicine).

There’s nothing wrong with a woman wearing fitted clothes that show her curves. What’s the big deal people???

I agree with most that it’s revealing clothes that show too much skin is the issue for women’s clothes.

St. Gianna rocks!!!

 

[Shin]

I’m sure if there were photos of St. Augustine before his reformation there’d be poor ones of him too.

Some saints are martyrs, some saints are holy from the beginning of their lives, every one is different.

But the moral principles behind modesty remain the same.

And there absolute norms that cross all cultures that must be taken into consideration.

Our Lady appears in one way, not any others. There are not fashions in Heaven.

 

[Shin]

I’ll add that people are far more capable of doing many things in long dresses than has been put forth.

Clothing… is not just a manner of convenience. It is meant for covering – if it does not cover sufficiently, and a person doesn’t cover sufficiently because it’s inconvenient for some sport or activity…

It can hardly be called clothing at all. It’s meant to conceal, and protect from the weather, not reveal, and not always be perfect for every activity.

 

[BlueShadow123]

It doesn’t matter what you wear, people can always lust after you.

If you wear a skirt or shorts, somebody is going to say that they will lust after your legs. If you wear jeans, somebody will say they lust after denim or the way it fits your body. If you wear flipflops or sandals, somebody will say that others are lusting after your feet.
Anything you wear can be taking lustfully. Even clothes that cover your whole body. There are people out there attracted to long dresses or robes. Any little thing you wear, somebody has a fetish for.

… just saying.
And before anybody freaks out, no im not trying to justify wearing skimpy clothes. Just saying that no matter what you’re wearing, somebody can always lust after you.

 

[Shin]

Yes. That’s why the rules regarding modesty in regular life as to how it affects impurity are aimed at what a normal man who is either innocent or trying to practice restraint – what such a person would have difficulty with, not abnormal folks.

The bodily reactions related to concupiscence are not something that can be entirely prevented without supernatural grace.

Concupiscence is a consequence of original sin. It means our bodies are no longer under our complete control, amongst other things. Before original sin – they were.

For example, one young man who is a martyr, from the early days of Christianity, was tied up and sent a prostitute to break his purity, and rape him. If he had not done what he had done, there was no natural way for him to resist reacting to her. He bit off his tongue.

So, the bodily side of it is not entirely under control. I notice there is next to no realization of this – it is true men can restrain themselves, but it puts a man in a bad position to have to fight off the reaction. Especially younger men, teens, are in very great danger in regard to these matters.

And one voluntarily committed sin of lust is a mortal sin. Period. So, one single look, can send a man’s soul to Hell forever. True, he gave in. But the person who makes it difficult for him bears some responsibility too.

Now most men women encounter nowadays are not truly Christian in their approach to matters of purity. They may for example, want to marry forever, but they still want to look at other women and they see nothing wrong with this, when in fact it is committing the mortal sin of adultery in the heart.

So it’s not a surprise to see a reaction against putting on more clothing, because most men aren’t going to be in favor of it, and some of those that are, will be hypocritical about it.

But the bad behavior of these men, just like the bad behavior of many women, is not the standard we go by for modesty.

 

[Shin]

.

I appreciate that very much!!

God bless!!

And I appreciate your calm approach to it all too!

 

[lil_flower_luv]

I get very tired in threads like this, . Ladies, I am sorry for those of you who have been hurt because of the judgment being cast upon you by fellow Christians. They are wrong to judge you.

Recognize Mary, the Mother of God as your model of modesty. She will help you understand what lines are to be drawn if you are confused.

“What’s wrong with what I’m wearing? It doesn’t bother me. Evil to him who thinks evil. He must have a dirty mind. To the pure, all things are pure.”

Please do not have this attitude. This is very dangerous. You will never understand the workings of a man’s mind if you are a woman.

It doesn’t matter where you live. A woman living in Alaska can be as much at fault for immodesty as a woman living in the Bahamas.

 

[Prayerfully]

I’m sure if there were photos of St. Augustine before his reformation there’d be poor ones of him too.

Some saints are martyrs, some saints are holy from the beginning of their lives, every one is different.

But the moral principles behind modesty remain the same.

And there absolute norms that cross all cultures that must be taken into consideration.

Our Lady appears in one way, not any others. There are not fashions in Heaven.

St Augustine was known to be a great sinner…of course there would be some poor ones of him PRIOR to his conversion. Are their poor ones of St Therese? Her family was wealthy enough to have pictures of her from toddlerhood into her short adult life and I don’t recall seeing any “bad” ones of her.
Those who knew St Gianna (and many are still alive today) can attest to her modest appearance and behavior.

Okay, then if women are to follow Our Lady’s lead in fashion based on her appearance in apparitions, then ALL men that want to be modest should follow what Our Lord wears in apparitions…full robe!!! There is no way you can expect to use the “women dress like Our Lady” without using “men dress like Our Lord” and consider it to be appropriate advice. I’m not talking about “equality”, I’m talking about using your examples for both sexes. If women can do many things in long skirts and dresses, than there should be no problem with men wearing a robe and doing their activities of daily life, as well. They did it for centuries in the O.T.

Shin, I’m not trying to “attack your suggestions”, but I want everyone one this thread to see that it needs to go both ways, if we are to follow those suggestions, okay?

 

[Prayerfully]

I, too, am done with this thread. We have seen teenage boys admonishing adult women for wearing modest pants. We have seen women stating they will dress like “hoochies” because they have a “hot body” and will do what they please. We have had men and women that think nothing short of a burka is modest.

If my first encounter with “Catholics” had been the things on this thread…I’d run as far as I could in the opposite direction.

 

[CountrySinger]

If my first encounter with “Catholics” had been the things on this thread…I’d run as far as I could in the opposite direction.

Welcome to CAF!

Didn’t you know as a Catholic you have to throw Catechisms at random people, yell “you are all going to burn”, and walk around with your nose in the air? Forget loving, harassing people is so much more fun!

 

[LittleSoldier]

I, too, am done with this thread. We have seen teenage boys admonishing adult women for wearing modest pants. We have seen women stating they will dress like “hoochies” because they have a “hot body” and will do what they please. We have had men and women that think nothing short of a burka is modest.

If my first encounter with “Catholics” had been the things on this thread…I’d run as far as I could in the opposite direction.

Welcome to CAF!

Didn’t you know as a Catholic you have to throw Catechisms at random people, yell “you are all going to burn”, and walk around with your nose in the air? Forget loving, harassing people is so much more fun!

I have to agree. It seems that a lot of Catholics are very holier-than-thou, self-righteous people who for some reason believe that they are the ones who get to decide the morality of an action and/or clothes.

I did leave the Church for many years and if this forum had been my first encounter when I was thinking about coming back I honestly would have run away. Fast.

 

[LilyM]

I’m sure if there were photos of St. Augustine before his reformation there’d be poor ones of him too.

Some saints are martyrs, some saints are holy from the beginning of their lives, every one is different.

But the moral principles behind modesty remain the same.

And there absolute norms that cross all cultures that must be taken into consideration.

Our Lady appears in one way, not any others. There are not fashions in Heaven.

The fact that Our Lady always appears in one way simply has to do with the facst that

a) she is one person - in other words each of us would appear in roughly the same way at all times, doesn’t mean that everyone is bound by that to appear as we do, and

b) people wouldn’t recognise her if she appeared in a modern skirt-suit, however modest it was. They expect the Blessed Virgin to look a certain way. Just as they expect Jesus to look a certain way, and wouldn’t recognise Him if He appeared in a three-piece suit. Does that mean that we all need wear the long flowing robes that He normally appears in? Of course not.

 

[John21652]

Women are less blatantly visual creatures because they have a tendency towards hypergamy, as opposed to men who have a tendency towards polygamy. I say this from a purely biological and evolutionary standpoint; women must find the best possible mate because to ensure they have the strongest children. Men must simply find a lot of women they find attractive so as to have as many children as possible. When the two tendencies are combined, it makes for a very strong reproductive system… the advantage of sexual reproduction as opposed to asexual.

So then women would need more than just looks to be fully attracted, they need to know a man’s personality, his intellect and even yes, his skills and ability to make money (or kill wild animals and build shelters as the case may be). Men don’t. But if you think women don’t need the looks to be there, you’re out of your mind. Women aren’t giving ugly guys a second look because they assume bad genes in looks, bad genes in everything else.

And please, again, this is purely from a subconscious and evolutionary perspective. But the argument is, of course, that men can’t move past that. That the “split second” determines their attitude towards a woman.** Why can’t men move beyond their primitive reactions **but women can?

It’s the Testosterone. Hasn’t changed much in a few thousand years.

 

[Serap]

We’re all going to burn…run for the hills.

We either sin like the Pharisees thinking we are better b/c we know the way or we sin b/c we lust after women or dress like hoochies…

 

[C_S_P_B]

Amazing how often women believe that the workings of a man’s mind automatically lead him to lust when he sees skin. It is about her intent and even a man can determine intent of a woman.

Men notice women but that doesn’t mean it is lust, even if the woman is wearing less than some other women may think is appropriate or modest. Most men are not THAT shallow. Men avoid being controlled and manipulated by attempts to either repress or exploit sexuality. Men are drawn to the feminine and for those of you that wear skirts, keep in mind that we men notice the way your hips move and the skirt sways. No, we may not see every aspect of your shape, but men like seeing the feminine. It is just an appreciation of beauty and not merely physical.

Men notice the shape of women and then men look to her face to see her eyes and a smile to consider what kind of personality she might have. It is rare that a man would go thru the mental effort to undress her in his mind. Just because men notice a tastefully femininely dressed woman and pays her attention is not scandalous. How rare is it that men actually have the opportunity to see this! Men appreciate a feminine good woman, so men are drawn to this and sometimes this may cause such a woman to feel uncomfortable. This does not mean that the men are ogling her. Whatever her feelings, those feelings are not the final arbiter of truth or reality.

It is possible to see and observe the beauty of a woman without lust. Maybe a review of JPII’s definition of lust would be helpful. It can be found in Love & Responsibility. Also Fr. Thomas Loya has some great talks on this subject.

Many confuse modest dress with respectful dress, when it comes to Mass. Often in life men see a women dressed inappropriately showing a lot of skin, then silently laugh because it is too over-the-top. Also no one has mentioned the correlation between use of Birth Control and the prevalence of women to dressing to attract. There are physiological and societal factors due to unintended consequences that are not commonly understood.

Certainly modern air conditioning and the invention of rubber (bottle nipples) has reduced normal historical breastfeeding which has affected the manner of dress. Breasts used to be considered more utilitarian, but now are considered more ornamental. This makes breasts more sexual. Of course respectful dress is a good thing, but historically it was not immodest for a woman to feed her hungry crying child, which would not have been draped because of heat. So what! OH MY, I MUST AVERT MY EYES. Big deal, if this was common!

I remember when I interviewed a young beautiful woman half my age for a professional job. She had a low cut blouse and she sat right across from me. I was distracted the whole time because I thought that she had dressed inappropriately for the interview. There was no lust. It greatly affected how I perceived her. Her manner of dress drew my eyes to where her cleavage was. I had to resist looking there not out of lust but just out of distraction. She did not get hired and I had no desire to “jump her,.”

No one mentioned the definition of lust. Lust is not attraction, desire, or mere appreciation of beauty. Men notice women but that doesn’t mean it is lust. (I have not defined lust either as I expect any woman accusing men of lust to know the meaning.)

The projections that women make about what goes on it the mind of a man are often twisted and the characterization of decent Catholic women as dressing like “hoochies” is misguided. Now I challenge any of you highly moral women that would take issue with my statements on a man’s mind to reflect on 1Tim2:11-15, and of course consult Love & Responsibility.

On this thread many women show quite a lack of respect for men by projecting men as being cads or lewd. This is mostly based of the perceived experiences of women and how women feel. I have little time for sanctimonious women because they seem to be too concerned with the potential thoughts of others and interpret most interactions based on their own projections.