A
Alexander_Smith
Guest
You gotta problem with the Gulf Coast in the summer?
(I live on the Gulf Coast edge of MS)
Immodesty and the lack of respect for women - two sides of the same coin.
- Status
(I live on the Gulf Coast edge of MS)
R
Rascalking
Guest
For what it’s worth, I try to treat people with respect no matter what they wear, how they look, smell, anything. They deserve respect becasue they are created by a Divine Maker-and in His image.
Don’t try to blame the girl nation because some men have a hard time controlling their instincts.
Don’t try to blame the girl nation because some men have a hard time controlling their instincts.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
New Orleans, baby!You gotta problem with the Gulf Coast in the summer?
(I live on the Gulf Coast edge of MS)
K
Kindness
Guest
As mentioned a long time ago on this thread the concept of modesty and what is appropriate is cultural.
What is interesting to me as someone who is not from the US is the apparent obsessiveness about this topic in some Christian circles in the US. I am married to an American, lived in the US for 14 year until recently and consider myself an orthodox Catholic in belief. However to me this topic is almost a fetish for some Catholics in the US. As an outsider I see it from a sociological point of view and find it very curious. Maybe because of the breakdown of so many social aspects in the US and the fact that people relocate around the country so much more than in other nations the fear of the lack of social controls becomes focussed on women’s (particularly women’s) clothing. It is also only the fundamentalist protestant groups and also American cults such as the Mormons that put such a focus on women’s dress to such an extent in the western world. These are usually the groups that also codify a great deal of social control over women. In the west strong Christian interest in what women wear is an almost wholly American phenomenon.
An interesting development along these topic lines is that the lower house of the French parliament has just passed a law making it illegal for a woman’s face to be covered in public. (As we know, in some nations of the world the so-called “modest” dresscode mentioned previously that still showed your calves and your forearms would be completely scandalous and considered outrageously immodest.) The French are concerned that women living among them are being oppressed with their clothing being a sign of this. There may be many women objecting and saying I cover my face with a veil through choice but the French are very concerned at what this represents. They do not wish to condone oppression when their nation is based on concepts of “equality, freedom and friendship”. In most western nations the obsession for covering women up is more clearly seen for what it is.
It may be the case that in our modern western societies media and business have used sexuality aggressively and sexual social norms have also changed. However I don’t think codifying women’s clothing is going to put the Genie of the post-modern era back into the bottle. What I do see it as is a comfort mechanism for people who are living in a lot of fear of the world around them. Maybe it is easier that instead of looking around at the complexity of the world and still seeing others as our brothers and sisters in Christ other people can be classified according to what they are wearing.
What is interesting to me as someone who is not from the US is the apparent obsessiveness about this topic in some Christian circles in the US. I am married to an American, lived in the US for 14 year until recently and consider myself an orthodox Catholic in belief. However to me this topic is almost a fetish for some Catholics in the US. As an outsider I see it from a sociological point of view and find it very curious. Maybe because of the breakdown of so many social aspects in the US and the fact that people relocate around the country so much more than in other nations the fear of the lack of social controls becomes focussed on women’s (particularly women’s) clothing. It is also only the fundamentalist protestant groups and also American cults such as the Mormons that put such a focus on women’s dress to such an extent in the western world. These are usually the groups that also codify a great deal of social control over women. In the west strong Christian interest in what women wear is an almost wholly American phenomenon.
An interesting development along these topic lines is that the lower house of the French parliament has just passed a law making it illegal for a woman’s face to be covered in public. (As we know, in some nations of the world the so-called “modest” dresscode mentioned previously that still showed your calves and your forearms would be completely scandalous and considered outrageously immodest.) The French are concerned that women living among them are being oppressed with their clothing being a sign of this. There may be many women objecting and saying I cover my face with a veil through choice but the French are very concerned at what this represents. They do not wish to condone oppression when their nation is based on concepts of “equality, freedom and friendship”. In most western nations the obsession for covering women up is more clearly seen for what it is.
It may be the case that in our modern western societies media and business have used sexuality aggressively and sexual social norms have also changed. However I don’t think codifying women’s clothing is going to put the Genie of the post-modern era back into the bottle. What I do see it as is a comfort mechanism for people who are living in a lot of fear of the world around them. Maybe it is easier that instead of looking around at the complexity of the world and still seeing others as our brothers and sisters in Christ other people can be classified according to what they are wearing.
L
LilyM
Guest
As a woman of fuller figure - I can honestly say I get MUCH more attention when I wear a skirt, be it ever so modest in length or cut - than I do in slacks. Perhaps the skirts just cling to my curves more than slacks? Perhaps skirts are rarer these days, and so have a different impact purely because they’re a bit novel - much as slacks would have done back in the day when women first started wearing them?
Either way, skirts are NOT more modest for me, nor are they less of an occasion for my own sin or anyone else’s. Reckon I just might stick with the classy, well-cut but not-so-alluring slacks. Saves money on the stockings at least!
It doesn’t apply universally to things like jeans. Not nearly.
Close your eyes and picture a woman in dark denim jeans - slim fitting but not too tight, no fading, rips, stains - with a bit of girly beading up the side seams and/or around the pockets, worn with a pair of cute heels.
Team that with, say, a black suit jacket, a white turtleneck underneath and a goodly amount of discreet bling. Immaculate grooming, hair, full makeup. Good enough for Mass, surely - in fact for just about anything short of a black tie ball, IMHO. And the opposite of slobby.
Surely everyone remembers that case a mere matter of weeks ago where Citibank fired a female employee for allegedly being ‘too sexy’. Among the things they tried to forbid her to wear? Turtlenecks. Heels that (heavens!) were all of three inches - high, sure, but hardly ridiculously so. Fitted business suits.
I saw the pictures (not the professional modelling shots, the ones of her in her business attire). Sure, maybe one or two of the skirts could’ve done with a little lengthening, apart from that any problems were entirely in the overactive imaginations of her co-workers.
Modesty, if that case is anything to judge by, is very much a matter of taste and very much in the eye of the beholder rather than something measurable and identifiable.
Either way, skirts are NOT more modest for me, nor are they less of an occasion for my own sin or anyone else’s. Reckon I just might stick with the classy, well-cut but not-so-alluring slacks. Saves money on the stockings at least!
As far as it goes, that’s true - but my experience is that ‘slobby’ means literally that - wearing clothing that is dirty, torn, badly crumpled, pyjamas at noon or sweats anywhere outside the gym.
It doesn’t apply universally to things like jeans. Not nearly.
Close your eyes and picture a woman in dark denim jeans - slim fitting but not too tight, no fading, rips, stains - with a bit of girly beading up the side seams and/or around the pockets, worn with a pair of cute heels.
Team that with, say, a black suit jacket, a white turtleneck underneath and a goodly amount of discreet bling. Immaculate grooming, hair, full makeup. Good enough for Mass, surely - in fact for just about anything short of a black tie ball, IMHO. And the opposite of slobby.
Surely everyone remembers that case a mere matter of weeks ago where Citibank fired a female employee for allegedly being ‘too sexy’. Among the things they tried to forbid her to wear? Turtlenecks. Heels that (heavens!) were all of three inches - high, sure, but hardly ridiculously so. Fitted business suits.
I saw the pictures (not the professional modelling shots, the ones of her in her business attire). Sure, maybe one or two of the skirts could’ve done with a little lengthening, apart from that any problems were entirely in the overactive imaginations of her co-workers.
Modesty, if that case is anything to judge by, is very much a matter of taste and very much in the eye of the beholder rather than something measurable and identifiable.
Mary_Gail_36
New member
For what it’s worth, I try to treat people with respect no matter what they wear, how they look, smell, anything. They deserve respect becasue they are created by a Divine Maker-and in His image.
Don’t try to blame the girl nation because some men have a hard time controlling their instincts.
I agree. ( except for the smell part, i have a sensitive sense of smell…so too much cologne is a no-no
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
I know what you are talking about.
There’s a certain perfume component that smells a bit like lilac, it was invented or became fashionable around 2005 and it’s still mainstream, that almost killed me a couple of times. :bigyikes: For example the last time, I was sitting in a small chapel when a lady came in and sat right in front of me, some two minutes after the Mass began. With nowhere to run, nowhere to hide, my tears started to come, I began convulsively coughing, and I felt my airways close up to the point of a mild choking sensation. After some ten minutes I recovered, but what I felt in the meantime - I swear it was God’s special grace, allowing me to suffer some and do some mortification for my own sins and for the holy souls in Purgatory!
If the CIA ever needed to use special interrogation techniques on me, they could just lock me in a tight box with an open bottle of that perfume (like they did with the Al Qaeda guy who was afraid of caterpillars), and I promise I would confess everything I know! :hypno: That is, if I would still be alive after a couple of minutes! :heaven: I’m not sure I would get frightened from me and the caterpillar in a box, but as soon as I would see them bringing that bottle of perfume
I would sing like a canary, I wouldn’t even wait for them to open the bottle!
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
This is the way for ladies to show up in fashion, when they have a date with someone picky like Mr. Hydrogen Fluoride!
But wait, is it modest enough?
And for us guys, doesn’t it look a bit girly?
S
stccp
Guest
R
Rascalking
Guest
Two things-
- Don’t blame other people for your desires/lack of control of them.
- Don’t be judgemental because someone doesn’t dress to your standards of modesty. Your not God.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
Thanks for this link, stccp. Here’s a quote from it:
I find it saddening how many people won’t even admit that we have a problem, when in fact there are certain parishes in my city where you cannot attend church on a Sunday safely, because as many as 50% of female visitors show up in sleeveless dresses and worse, everything from mini skirts and exposed belly buttons to strapless dresses and fully exposed backs. I’m not talking about the population at large, in the city. I’m talking about churchgoers in a Catholic Church! The other day a guy attended Mass in a A-shirt, with fully exposed bare shoulders. But hey, what’s the big deal, women of all ages have been doing this for years! Parents dress even their 5-year old daughters like this, with these spaghetti strap dresses that only desensitize poor children to showing too much skin and prepare them to dress inappropriately and think it’s OK, once they grow up.
In another thread in Family Life, a teenager posted who was caught wathing porn on the computer, by his parents. No poster said to him, “Hey, it’s okay, follow your conscience. If your conscience tells you it’s okay, than it’s okay to watch porn.” But I’m not sure we would get such a unanimous response if we asked about inappropriate dress at church. And all the while, this teenager didn’t hurt others, by watching porn on his computer, in the privacy of his room. He only hurt himself. But those who dress in a sexually provocative fashion will tempt others to sin, they will possibly generate lustful thoughts in several/many other people. Thus, I think they commit a graver sin, the sin of scandalizing other people.
I
itrytofight
Guest
What’s wrong with sleeves halfway to the elbow?
That’s not going to cause me to lust, though I understand the “two fingers before the pit of the throat” thing.
Swimwear and clothing used to work out/compete in sports must be… troubling (I could have choosen a more “appropriate” word but do not want to disrespect).
Alright, now what’s that Jewish prayer that a man said to thank God he wasn’t an women?
(I’M ONLY KIDDING!)
That’s not going to cause me to lust, though I understand the “two fingers before the pit of the throat” thing.
Swimwear and clothing used to work out/compete in sports must be… troubling (I could have choosen a more “appropriate” word but do not want to disrespect).
Alright, now what’s that Jewish prayer that a man said to thank God he wasn’t an women?
(I’M ONLY KIDDING!
)
E
EasterJoy
Guest
I think, rather, it is the way that ladies show up when they had a date with a “doesn’t understand the word NO” guy like Mr. Flourine!This is the way for ladies to show up in fashion, when they have a date with someone picky like Mr. Hydrogen Fluoride!
But wait, is it modest enough?
As for you guys, Mr. Flourine is definitely not particular. Put on the burqa and bring your bat, too!
E
EasterJoy
Guest
I know some love it, and couldn’t stand the months of gloom we get here in the Pacific Northwest, but let us say that a humid summer is an acquired taste…You gotta problem with the Gulf Coast in the summer?
(I live on the Gulf Coast edge of MS)
M
Miserys_Fence
Guest
EXACTLY!!
Like you, when I’m at Mass, my eyes are on the priest…or the readers/cantor…or closed in prayer. I couldn’t even tell you who was at Mass last Sunday, much less what they wore.
Miz
J
Julianna
Guest
When I met my husband, we went to the beach on our first date. That was many many pounds ago.
This is gonna be good! Let the heated debate begin!
btw…I was wearing skin tight pants and a skin tight halter top when my husband met me and he fell in-love with me and married me. It took him a month before he even tried to kiss me and I wore mini skirts, low waisted jeans, tight tops and heals on every date.
M
Miserys_Fence
Guest
They were designed inferior to women?
Writing out a membership check to NOW immediately; apparently, they are right.
Miz
M
Miserys_Fence
Guest
M
Miserys_Fence
Guest
Not even necessarily there. I was the one-armed pushup champion (of both genders) on the farm where I used to work.
Miz
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
At the Vatican and throughout Italy, people are expected to have their shoulders and kness covered, with everything in between (belly buttons, backs) covered as well, when they visit a Catholic Church. I assume we are expected to do the same in the USA, it’s just not being enforced. But it is enforced in Italy, and tourists with bare shoulders will receive a blouse or veil to cover their shoulders, before entering church. Also, St. Padre Pio would not allow people with skimpy clothing to enter his church, or his confessional. It’s not that he was a dirty pig who couldn’t control himself - the Cappuchine monks in his abbey all lived an austere life, with strict fasting rules and other forms of mortification, including bodily penance by using a lash. But it’s just not appropriate to break the dress code at a church, and St. Padre Pio had no problem correcting the offenders.
- Status