Modest Swimwear, Middle Ages, Tribal clothing

[loko]

I have three questions about modesty. I would like to know what traditional Catholics think about this, because I find that Catholics who are not ‘traditional’ are more relaxed even if they are faithful to the Church, but I’d like to see a justification of this by a conservative.

Swimwear: What is appropriate? I have read TraditioninAction.org articles, and it seems like they are very very conservative. I don’t mind their stance, but are they against people swimming for competition, for example? I mean, in competitive swimming, you cannot have loose fitting attire, you must have skin-tight swimwear to reduce the drag. So is it ok to wear skintight swimwear as long as you do so for practicality, not in order to be more seductive?

Middle ages: Apparently during the middle ages, a woman exposing her ankles was more risque then if she exposed her breasts, and cleavage was common among nobles. Was this condemned by priests (the cleavage) and was it allowed in Church? If not and it was acceptable, doesnt that mean fashion is relative to the culture? So if pants or short skirts become acceptable in modern society, isn’t that the same relativism which happened when society went from Middle Ages society (where cleavage was acceptable) to conservative 1950s (where cleavage was unacceptable)?

**Tribes: and that brings me to the last question - if missionaries come to a foreign land and the natives are dressed ‘immodestly’ (like African tribe which only cover the genitals of a man and women with exposed breasts), are these tribes being immodest or is it acceptable since that is their culture? **

I personally think it is wrong that miniskirts and exposing cleavage and midriffs has become acceptable in modern society, but I don’t know how to refute people who say that cleavage was acceptable in the middle ages, and that there are native tribes which have women completely exposed - should they change their culture or not? I just need help refuting. And if you do argue for conservative swimwear/clothing, could you please provide an example? Don’t just say ‘be more modest’, but maybe provide a picture - swmwear like this is ok…
Thanks

My mum comes from the Pacific Islands (dad is aussie) and with those Pacific cultures the people were completely unaware that bare breasts was ‘sexually stimulating’. Women wore grass skirts and that was about it. Breasts had a single function and that was to feed babies.
When white people turned up on the scene all of a sudden they were telling the local women to cover up, so it was the due to the ‘white peoples’ discomfort more than anything else that made the women cover up.

Christian missionaries came later.

Most women in my mums culture will NOT wear swimwear, exposing the areas between your belly button and your thighs is not on. Today, enough exposing your breasts is okay when you are wearing the Traditional Dress or breastfeeding. Once a woman has a baby, she is a mother and off limits and she can discipline any child in the village, including children who are not hers. I remember when I misbehaved as a child in the village, ladies would smack, sometimes I had no idea who they were, they would then tell my mum what they had done and she would thank them for disciplining me.

Even today, these mothers in the village setting will wear only a skirt and nothing else. No missionary in his right mind will dare tell her that she needs to cover up, once they have had children they are off limits.

**BELOW IS THE TRADITIONAL DRESS OF MY MUM, AND UNDER THAT IS MY DAD’S TRADITIONAL DRESS
**

http://www.expeditions.com/images/Daily/der_99/der_143699_1.jpg

cosmosmagazine.com/files/imagecache/news/files/news/20100803_Aussie.jpg

 

[Megan7]

I have three questions about modesty. I would like to know what traditional Catholics think about this, because I find that Catholics who are not ‘traditional’ are more relaxed even if they are faithful to the Church, but I’d like to see a justification of this by a conservative.

Swimwear: What is appropriate? I have read TraditioninAction.org articles, and it seems like they are very very conservative. I don’t mind their stance, but are they against people swimming for competition, for example? I mean, in competitive swimming, you cannot have loose fitting attire, you must have skin-tight swimwear to reduce the drag. So is it ok to wear skintight swimwear as long as you do so for practicality, not in order to be more seductive?

Middle ages: Apparently during the middle ages, a woman exposing her ankles was more risque then if she exposed her breasts, and cleavage was common among nobles. Was this condemned by priests (the cleavage) and was it allowed in Church? If not and it was acceptable, doesnt that mean fashion is relative to the culture? So if pants or short skirts become acceptable in modern society, isn’t that the same relativism which happened when society went from Middle Ages society (where cleavage was acceptable) to conservative 1950s (where cleavage was unacceptable)?

Tribes: and that brings me to the last question - if missionaries come to a foreign land and the natives are dressed ‘immodestly’ (like African tribe which only cover the genitals of a man and women with exposed breasts), are these tribes being immodest or is it acceptable since that is their culture?

I personally think it is wrong that miniskirts and exposing cleavage and midriffs has become acceptable in modern society, but I don’t know how to refute people who say that cleavage was acceptable in the middle ages, and that there are native tribes which have women completely exposed - should they change their culture or not? I just need help refuting. And if you do argue for conservative swimwear/clothing, could you please provide an example? Don’t just say ‘be more modest’, but maybe provide a picture - swmwear like this is ok…
Thanks

Thanks for the thread

 

[Megan7]

See the last link below.

Covers about everything you inquired about I’d say to some degree.

I read once that the modesty of Catholic women for the first thirteen centuries pretty much imitated Our Lady’s dress completely from head to toe. Fashion catered to modesty, not vice versa. But the Renaissance began the corruption.

Which reminds of how Christendom had its golden ages… and then decline…

If a recreation or sport or job requires you to wear immodest clothing it is your duty to give up the recreation, sport, or job. You are not permitted to sin to gain or keep your employment, sport, or recreation.

It doesn’t matter that you do not intend to be provocative, if what you wear is provocative, it’s a problem and you’re held accountable for it before God to some degree. It’s always a bad sign spiritually if you’re committing mortal sins, with ‘good’ intentions. Certainly there is mitigation, but, that you’re doing it objectively, means there are very severe problems between God and you, because objectively you’re offending and not listening to the message to stop which is definitely being sent. God’s grace -does not- help you to sin. Quite the opposite. And then there’s more, but that aside…

Modesty has absolute standards that cultures cannot override, and when ‘bad’ cultural customs are formed, they are morally required to be changed. This tends to not happen however.

Just like with all other sins, sometimes the Church hierarchy does better or worse at dealing with them than others. The Council of Trent took note of problems in religious art – some people think if it’s in a stained glass window, or old art, or famous it’s OK – it isn’t. The standards all are held to do not change. Various ages and locales live up to those standards more greatly or less.

We’ve been in a modesty decline for a long time now.

It’s time for people to rediscover that it’s a virtue. And that as it is a virtue we are called not to view it as something to practice the minimum of, but to excel in, to do more of, to in fact, aim for heroic virtue in.

Wearing very modest clothing is not so hard.

“Where,” says St. Gregory, “Christ is, there modesty is found.”

Thanks Shin!

 

[Megan7]

My mum comes from the Pacific Islands (dad is aussie) and with those Pacific cultures the people were completely unaware that bare breasts was ‘sexually stimulating’. Women wore grass skirts and that was about it. Breasts had a single function and that was to feed babies.
When white people turned up on the scene all of a sudden they were telling the local women to cover up, so it was the due to the ‘white peoples’ discomfort more than anything else that made the women cover up.

Christian missionaries came later.

Most women in my mums culture will NOT wear swimwear, exposing the areas between your belly button and your thighs is not on. Today, enough exposing your breasts is okay when you are wearing the Traditional Dress or breastfeeding. Once a woman has a baby, she is a mother and off limits and she can discipline any child in the village, including children who are not hers. I remember when I misbehaved as a child in the village, ladies would smack, sometimes I had no idea who they were, they would then tell my mum what they had done and she would thank them for disciplining me.

Even today, these mothers in the village setting will wear only a skirt and nothing else. No missionary in his right mind will dare tell her that she needs to cover up, once they have had children they are off limits.

**BELOW IS THE TRADITIONAL DRESS OF MY MUM, AND UNDER THAT IS MY DAD’S TRADITIONAL DRESS
**

http://www.expeditions.com/images/Daily/der_99/der_143699_1.jpg

cosmosmagazine.com/files/imagecache/news/files/news/20100803_Aussie.jpg

Thanks for the post & links.

 

[TrueLight]

Why is it okay to post pictures of topless women here?

I think I can imagine on my own what topless women, or in this case, young girls in skirts look like, or I can even google it if I like.

Everyone on CAF is not from these cultures where breasts are not sexualized.

 

[thewanderer]

Why is it okay to post pictures of topless women here?

I think I can imagine on my own what topless women, or in this case, young girls in skirts look like, or I can even google it if I like.

Everyone on CAF is not from these cultures where breasts are not sexualized.

He did warn people what the links were pictures of. Meaning that no one is going to accidentally click on them without realizing what they are. If they are going to cause you to lust, you can avoid looking at them.

Although I must admit I did wonder whether or not this was pushing the forums rules on posting links…

 

[TrueLight]

He did warn people what the links were pictures of. Meaning that no one is going to accidentally click on them without realizing what they are. If they are going to cause you to lust, you can avoid looking at them.

Although I must admit I did wonder whether or not this was pushing the forums rules on posting links…

I didn’t have to click. They show up right in the thread.

 

[AthenaC]

Why is it okay to post pictures of topless women here?

I think I can imagine on my own what topless women, or in this case, young girls in skirts look like, or I can even google it if I like.

Everyone on CAF is not from these cultures where breasts are not sexualized.

But those women are being perfectly modest for their culture.

The thing about showing the picture is that it undeniably demonstrates that this is the norm for these women. On other modesty threads, people have long asserted that modesty is relative to time and place, only to have the argument ignored or brushed aside by certain people. The picture forces consideration of this assertion.

 

[thewanderer]

I didn’t have to click. They show up right in the thread.

Really? I wonder why… they don’t do that on my computer…

Do they still automatically show up on the thread for you?

 

[TrueLight]

But those women are being perfectly modest for their culture.

The thing about showing the picture is that it undeniably demonstrates that this is the norm for these women. On other modesty threads, people have long asserted that modesty is relative to time and place, only to have the argument ignored or brushed aside by certain people. The picture forces consideration of this assertion.

I think we’ve all seen pictures of naked or half naked villagers before. It is still inappropriate to post pictures of topless young girls on a forum that has primarily western members and where there are men who struggle daily with lust.

Just because it is their culture doesn’t automatically change how people see things.

This is a Catholic forum!

I don’t know how these links are appearing for everyone else, but for me, the pictures show up within the thread. So there is no choice to click or not. That is unacceptable.

Attachment with what I see. I will delete it shortly.

 

[clem456]

But those women are being perfectly modest for their culture.

The thing about showing the picture is that it undeniably demonstrates that this is the norm for these women. On other modesty threads, people have long asserted that modesty is relative to time and place, only to have the argument ignored or brushed aside by certain people. The picture forces consideration of this assertion.

Everybody gets the cultural context. In our culture it is not acceptable.
Romans 14 addresses this issue.

 

[AthenaC]

This is a Catholic forum!

And nothing in the picture precludes those women from being Catholics themselves.

 

[TrueLight]

And nothing in the picture precludes those women from being Catholics themselves.

Yes, pick at things you can argue with.

It is still inappropriate to post HALF NAKED women on this forum.

I suppose if I want to start discussing nudists, I can post pictures of nudists at nudist beaches too.

The point is, there are people who struggle with lust and it is uncharitable and inappropriate to post pictures of naked young girls on a Catholic forum. Or are men not attracted to “native” breasts?

I’m not saying the poster meant any harm, but there should be boundaries.

Is this the culmination of all these modesty threads? The ability to start posting naked pictures?

I give up. Really.

 

[thewanderer]

Athena, if these pictures are automatically showing up on the thread for other people than I can understand the opposition. They are only showing up as links for me, and I don’t really see a problem with that, but if people who wish to avoid such pictures because they are a near occasion of sin are being shown them against their wishes it really does seem innapropriate.

I just don’t understand how they are showing up as pictures for others but as links for me. Anybody any ideas?

 

[clem456]

The pictures pop right up.
Athena…Romans 14

 

[fix]

But those women are being perfectly modest for their culture.

The thing about showing the picture is that it undeniably demonstrates that this is the norm for these women. On other modesty threads, people have long asserted that modesty is relative to time and place, only to have the argument ignored or brushed aside by certain people. The picture forces consideration of this assertion.

This is from JPII:

If culture shows an explicit tendency to cover the nakedness of the human body, it certainly does so not only for climatic reasons, but also in relation to the process of growth of man’s personal sensitivity. The anonymous nakedness of the man-object contrasts with the progress of the truly human culture of morals. It is probably possible to confirm this also in the life of so-called primitive populations. The process of refining personal human sensitivity is certainly a factor and fruit of culture.

 

[loko]

Sorry if people are offended, I thought it was just a link which is why I put a warning. Some are saying the picture shows up straight away.

Just a reminder that many Catholics wear their traditional dress whether in the Pacific or Africa and they still consider themselves Catholic.

I find it offensive that someone would not see them as Catholics when 98% of my mothers country is Catholic and hardcore Catholics at that, even more so than the West which is tainted to some extent.

When Pope JPII visited my mothers country on several occasions, at each of those occasions Catholic women dressed similar to this sang for him and he didn’t have a problem with it.

This perfectly illustrates my point.

For my mothers people they were like Adam and Eve before the fall, they never viewed breasts or near nakedness as being associated with sex.

They were only taught to be ashamed of and cover their bodies after it was instilled and in some cases forced upon them by white missionaries and yes those missionaries were Catholic.

My people were totally innocent to the way Western white people view the body, they were only aware of it after missionaries pointed it out to them and indoctrinated them…similarly Adam and Eve became aware of their nakedness after the fall. I find that ironic.

Most of the explorers didn’t care much as they were quite adventurous people by nature, once the Christians turned up it was a different matter altogether as they were back then and I suppose now quite strait-laced and uptight.

 

[TrueLight]

Sorry if people are offended, I thought it was just a link which is why I put a warning. Some are saying the picture shows up straight away.

Just a reminder that many Catholics wear their traditional dress whether in the Pacific or Africa and they still consider themselves Catholic.

I find it offensive that someone would not see them as Catholics when 98% of my mothers country is Catholic and hardcore Catholics at that, even more so than the West which is tainted to some extent.

When Pope JPII visited my mothers country on several occasions, at each of those occasions Catholic women dressed similar to this sang for him and he didn’t have a problem with it.

This perfectly illustrates my point.

For my mothers people they were like Adam and Eve before the fall, they never viewed breasts or near nakedness as being associated with sex.

They were only taught to be ashamed of and cover their bodies after it was instilled and in some cases forced upon them by white missionaries and yes those missionaries were Catholic.

My people were totally innocent to the way Western white people view the body, they were only aware of it after missionaries pointed it out to them and indoctrinated them…similarly Adam and Eve became aware of their nakedness after the fall. I find that ironic.

Most of the explorers didn’t care much as they were quite adventurous people by nature, once the Christians turned up it was a different matter altogether as they were back then and I suppose now quite strait-laced and uptight.

I have no idea if they are Catholic or not and I am not debating whether it is correct for them to be naked or not in their cultural context, so let’s not get things mixed up.

That is their cultural context.

The majority of people on CAF do not live in that cultural context.

I still don’t understand why there are still pictures of half naked girls on this site.

 

[clem456]

Sorry if people are offended, I thought it was just a link which is why I put a warning. Some are saying the picture shows up straight away.

Just a reminder that many Catholics wear their traditional dress whether in the Pacific or Africa and they still consider themselves Catholic.

I find it offensive that someone would not see them as Catholics when 98% of my mothers country is Catholic and hardcore Catholics at that, even more so than the West which is tainted to some extent.

When Pope JPII visited my mothers country on several occasions, at each of those occasions Catholic women dressed similar to this sang for him and he didn’t have a problem with it.

.

Ok I can’t disagree with you that for a small minority, Catholic means only pipe organs, tradiional hymns and conservative European dress. That being said:

Romans 14 vs 13 etc
…make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way.14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died…
19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

BTW, this verse cuts both ways in this discussion, as it should.

 

[Walking_Home]

Ok I can’t disagree with you that for a small minority, Catholic means only pipe organs, tradiional hymns and conservative European dress. That being said:

Romans 14 vs 13 etc
…make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way.14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died…
19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble.21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

BTW, this verse cuts both ways in this discussion, as it should.

---

That would apply to the ones responsible for wiping out the innocence the natives had – and replacing it with darkness of heart/mind toward the body.