T
TommyWommy
Guest
Yes. Intent is important.
- Status
C
chevalier
Guest
True and that means people should be careful when handling this. However, the modern fashions abuse a woman’s other typical quality, i.e. being receptive to social pressure and fashions.
As I said, the point is not to weed out anything that a proper psychologist or medic could link with sexual behaviours in the large sense, but to deal away with the popular “sexiness”, i.e. making fashion choices into a bit of a sexual activity. Also, while an attractive person of the other gender might cause a mental link with some mating attractions, the possibility is generally low on probability - it takes a needy person on a bad day. Things we choose, rather than receive as givens, are a different matter. So it’s fine to try and be attractive, but it’s not fine to fill someone’s head with sexual promises. And the act of wearing something and looking at it shouldn’t be a sexual exchange.
True, but tolerance for a wide range of sexual behaviours between unmarried people also has something to do with it. It’s not a fitness mania, it’s a hotness mania.
Women have a difficult time resisting social pressure and also, because they are not attracted to other women, they have a difficult time weeding out some styles they’ve been told are fine, hip, mandatory and whatnot. I’m sure we guys could be told a bit about our own fashion choices if we asked. Therefore, it’s not fine to blame it on women by default. But it’s fine to be opposed to modern fashion on a couple of grounds and it’s fine to remind the ladies that all the men looking at you doesn’t always mean all the men respecting you.
Sometimes the intent seems to be lost because no one seems to have a clue sometimes. Often it looks like people sheepishly follow objectifying fashions.
T
TommyWommy
Guest
chevalier, I think we could probably keep talking about this forever 
You have many good, thoughtful points. My hunch is that we are both going to do our best to be sensitive to this issue, and that is a good thing.
Hopefully, the Holy Spirit will help us discern when to say something, what to say, how to say it, and who to say it to (as well as keep our own thoughts pure).
The world we live in is no friend to holiness. It makes sense that our sexuality, in which we share God’s creative beauty, would be something under attack by Satan. He takes God’s beauty and tries to defile it. As Christian men and women, we all need to fight against this, even though communicating about it can be a challenge.
You have many good, thoughtful points. My hunch is that we are both going to do our best to be sensitive to this issue, and that is a good thing. Hopefully, the Holy Spirit will help us discern when to say something, what to say, how to say it, and who to say it to (as well as keep our own thoughts pure).The world we live in is no friend to holiness. It makes sense that our sexuality, in which we share God’s creative beauty, would be something under attack by Satan. He takes God’s beauty and tries to defile it. As Christian men and women, we all need to fight against this, even though communicating about it can be a challenge.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
Haha, when I read the line “walking the streets of Miami”, it really made me wonder whether that poster was from Miami. I saw things here that are way beyond anything I have seen elsewhere in the USA or Europe. It could be because the fashion industry has a large presence and influence here, and they are always pushing the envelope. The other day I was in the Church before the Saturday vigil Mass, in one of the front pews. Well, a vedding ceremony just ended and the bride with the bridesmaids came back and right in front of the altar to take some pictures. The moment one of the bridesmaids bended forward, I had to close my eyes in panic because it looked like she was going to have a nipple slip at that very moment. All of the bridesmaids were wearing these extra revealing, strapless dresses. I guess the next frontier in bridesmaids’ dresses will be something like “Jeannie” from the old TV series, i.e. Eastern belly dancer.
But I just came up with a possible solution, inspired by those webcams that hide your face, replacing it with some hilarious avatar that mimicks your face expressions. So, make some high-tech computerized eye-glasses that cover up a lady’s figure with anything from short-sleeve, to long-sleeve, to burquas, in user-selectable setting increments
, for the use of us more visually challenged guys out there. Then, we will be able to face the bridesmaids, even if they were to wear belly dancer dresses 
.Oops, I shouldn’t have disclosed this publicly, before filing a provisional patent application first!
Especially for the virtual burquas, I foresee a large market! The story of St. Pelagia linked in the post is awesome. That was one Bishop who didn’t need my VDE! (VDE with TM enclosed by a small circle, as in Virtual Dress Eyewear, trademark of course
).
Z
zaramarie81
Guest
Aball -
Sounds like you have a nice girlfriend and you are trying to get some advice on what your role as a man in this relationship is, right? I’d say, a dress-code would be tough to come up with because each woman’s shape is a bit different, but my own rules are:
Wear clothes high enough so that only collar bone and above is showing.
Wear skirts and dresses no shorter than slightly above the knee.
I don’t wear shorts, lol, I wear capris. Not for modesty, but b/c I feel uncomfortable in shorts.
Your role as the boyfriend? Depends on the nature of the relationship. Us ladies can be sensitive creatures, especially about our looks, and I say you can never give too many compliments (as others have wisely pointed out). I would only say something negative if it’s truly scandalous, and I would go out of my way to say it very lovingly.
I’ve also been reading the rest of this thread… wow, some real debating! I have a thought that I didn’t see come up in my skimming. Thanks to the oversexualization of our en culture, many men (and some women) struggle with sexual addictions. I have known more than one man tormented by this disorder, and through one good friend realized how truly unfair it is to show up in church wearing skirts too far above the knee or shirts with cleavage showing. While it is not us ladies fault that a man might develop a true-blue disorder, I truly believe the loving thing to do is to seek out styles that are attractive but *not *provocative, especially for “safe havens” like church. I just can’t over-emphasize how difficult it is when a man who is battling lust or addiction feels he cannot even find relief at Mass. (And yes, I see revealing dress at Mass all the time. I realize most of us just want to look cute, and are not trying to cause torment in others, but… it’s worth thinking about).
M two cents.
C
chevalier
Guest
Erm, Zaramarie, maybe you will be able to indulge me, as a sort of reward for all this debating to no end, in a way. I’m at a loss trying to understand why cute and “hot” gets lumped together all the time, only different in degrees. I’d think that when an outfit is particularly revealing or making someone look “hot” rather than cute, the motivation would be either to be “hot” or to comply with fashions, but I generally the same motivation which drives a person picking a nice outfit (elegant dress, snazzy suit, or contrary, something with a homely charm) at work when a “hot” outfit is chosen. It looks like the two persons are each following a different standard and a different goal. But whenever I try to bring this up, I feel like I’m hitting a wall - no one gets it. Sport me?
Z
zaramarie81
Guest
Hmm, so you’re saying that you’d think that there would be different motivations in choosing a “hot” outfit vs. a “cute” outfit but then others claim the motivations are similar, just differing in degrees?
Okay…
First off, I have an ongoing debate with my boyfriend about whether the word “hot” is really any different than the word “cute.” I personally believe the word “hot” has sexual connotations and the word “cute” does not. He disagrees. But, it looks like you see a similar difference in these two words as I do.However, the confusion over the two words may point to why it seems the similar motivations go into picking both hot and cute outfits. I think “nowadays” women tend to lump even something as innocent as looking “pretty” in with looking “hot.” I think many women have been taught by our culture that there is no difference, and that a woman’s true value comes in looking sexually appealing. Perhaps they will only strive to look a “little hot” for work compared to say, a club, but it’s all the same thinking: sexual attraction is a high priority. I don’t want to accuse all women of this, but it’s definitely something I struggled with for a long time… recognizing that there really is a difference between “hot” and “cute” or “pretty.” It’s really hard to unblur the lines once they’ve been blurred. Hmm… has my answer been helpful at all? Or have I confused the question? Lol.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
Think of a small child, dressed in a “cute” or “pretty” dress. You don’t want them to do anything with “hot”, that would be perverse. Perhaps this example helps highlight how “hot” is not the same as being “cute” or “pretty”.
Below is the picture of the prettiest, most beautiful Lady on Earth (and in Heaven, too
):sancta.org/cgi/display.nor?image=imagen_pic_300w.jpg
sancta.org/cgi/display.nor?image=rostro_400_.jpg
sancta.org/cgi/display.nor?image=original_face_bw.jpg
Along with a modest, exceedingly humble man, someone who was of little worth in his own eyes, and yet he was chosen to see the Mother of God face to face (as imagined by artists, based on his story described in the Nican Mopohua):
sancta.org/cgi/display.nor?image=olg_talking_with_juandiego.jpg
sancta.org/cgi/display.nor?image=juandiego_tilma_400.jpg
It was asked a few times in the thread, what would Our Lady wear, but not back in Palestine and 2000 years ago, but in more recent times. So, here’s what she wore in 1531
.
S
Sarabande
Guest
I think you make an excellent point. The blurring of hot/cute/pretty seem to be especially true for my generation (tail end of Gen X) and later generations. I remember when I was in middle school and high school, girls and boys would use the term “hot” to mean that the the person was really cute. They were not thinking of the person being sexy and ready to be jumped on and devoured.
Then as we got older, “hot” could sometimes mean “sexy”, but then it could also mean “cute”. I have male friends who use “hot” and “cute” as meaning the same things. Or guys believing that cute girls were “hot” (sexy) because they were cute and perky - having nothing to do with how they dressed.
So, and outfit that could actually be just an innocent “cute”, would be referred to as “hot”.
It’s no wonder people are so confused.
Oh… and that blurring of the terms didn’t help when the Paris Hilton show was on and everything was “hot”.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
I just recalled an occasion when this person who was close to me dressed in a way that made me uncomfortable. It was a small party on her birthday. Her friends were present, mostly ladies. There were only 2 guys there, the husband of one of her friends (both her friend and her husband 10-15 years older than us), and myself. I don’t think she wanted to flirt with her friend’s husband, and I don’t think her dress was meant to somehow drive me insane. I think the more likely explanation is what the ladies pointed out several times already: this is not about us, guys (although we would like to think so, that we are always on the ladies’ minds
). The truth is, we are probably not on their minds when they choose what to wear. At least that’s how it works in many cases. They put on something because they enjoy wearing it, and sometimes just forget to consider that their dress will (could) affect men in a negative way.Maybe, this is a little bit like me one night, when I was driving on the interstate and leaving Alabama, just entered those fabulous roads of Florida. The road was smooth, the lanes were wide, and I was alone on the road. I greatly enjoyed the tranquil night and smooth driving, until the bliss was suddenly ended by the flashing lights of a state trooper behind me. I instantly remembered to check my speed: 92 mph
, in a 70 mph zone. Oops. Somehow the trooper found it less than blissful and tranquil, that a crazy guy was driving at 92 mph at 3 a.m. 
, and approaching a section of road construction (although that was not posted yet). I swear, I didn’t mean to cause any problem to anybody. I just forgot to check my speed…
C
chevalier
Guest
Precisely.
Yes, although I was using the word “hot” to avoid giving people ideas by always putting “sexy” in quotation marks. “Hot” has the added bonus of not always being overtly sexual and generally focussing on attractiveness - but one taken very far. I see where your boyfriend is coming from - you *can *use that word without meaning anything indecent, and “hot” and “cute” have different connotations of attractiveness. Some people even say “cute” to denote they aren’t attracted sexually. So perhaps you and your boyfriend simply use the same word to describe a slightly different concept.Okay…
That would be sad.
There’s a difference between e.g. Galadriel or Arwen, either if you compare shots from the film or the way they were cast in the book, and the outfits commonly described as “sexy”.
Generally, if something isn’t appropriate in one place on that account, it may likely be inappropriate in general. Looking for attention is either appropriate or not, but actively tempting others into sexual thoughts is never appropriate. I don’t think the “hot” club outfits necessarily cross the line, although most of them are not quite flattering on the point of dignity and generally rather immature.
Hah, no, you haven’t confused it further and yes, it’s been helpful. Hmm… Well, there’s nothing wrong with sexual attraction (as opposed to just attraction) per se, but appealing to people that way often crosses the line of mere attraction and it’s more about fantasies, hormones and adrenaline. In a way, it also moves into the realm of consumption. And consumption is not okay.
C
chevalier
Guest
I’ve heard that a couple of times, but there’s one thing to counter it: Women are not attracted to other women. Therefore, if they compete on that level, they compete in which one of them is more attractive to men. Even if it’s a competition between them rather than trying to lure men, it still ultimately comes down to men. Say, if you and I went on a hotness context, it would still be about the ladies.I think the more likely explanation is what the ladies pointed out several times already: this is not about us, guys (although we would like to think so, that we are always on the ladies’ minds
Question is what makes them enjoy wearing it. Is it really the touch of the fabric or does it make them feel confident and wanted? If the latter is true, then it can’t not have a relationship with how it affects men… In fact, it derives from being attractive and on the empirical level, noticing how men react makes a woman confident, just as we guys get a boost to our egos if we wear a snazzy suit and we think we’re alpha and conquerors of the world because this or that woman or girl turns her head after us. Same kind of thing. Except suits are generally not revealing or clingy.
Not like men don’t wear revealing or clingy outfits - they do, and it makes women fight battles in their heads.Hah, yeah. And people forget themselves in trying to be attractive to others. That’s a good explanation much of the time, I guess. Still, I don’t buy the whole thing about women being innocent no matter what they wear and the whole thing being about protecting men from their own weaknesses. Were it not for that “weakness”, half of those fashions would die out or would never have been designed in the first place. But don’t take this as bashing. The same is true if men start wearing bad things - it’s just it happens more rarely, but the principle is that same. And my point is not to bash but to show that the distribution of blame is not only not always fair, but also not always logical. Rather inconsistent at times.Maybe, this is a little bit like me one night, when I was driving on the interstate and leaving Alabama, just entered those fabulous roads of Florida. The road was smooth, the lanes were wide, and I was alone on the road. I greatly enjoyed the tranquil night and smooth driving, until the bliss was suddenly ended by the flashing lights of a state trooper behind me. I instantly remembered to check my speed: 92 mph
A different example would be shooting practice. If you go to a private shooting range that’s fenced out and protected by a host of warning signs and a thief gets hit by a ricochet, you could argue that making you responsible would put an undue burden of care on you. On the other hand, if you go to the forest, eye the clearing up to avoid *obvious *risks, lay out the targets and start shooting, you can’t complain about at least having to pay medical bills for someone who got hit when you missed. If you pepper at a tree and hit someone, you’d be reckless and you’d be lucky to escape with just a lawsuit and no criminal charge. And if you take a shot at a moving target, knowing there’s a chance of hitting your companion, who dies as a result, then you can’t complain about a manslaughter charge. The duty of care is different in each such situation. Courts occasionally get weird ideas, so you could complain about encroaching on your liberties in the case of a private shooting range, or being sentenced for homicide in the last two cases, but in all this one is sure: it’s not fair to compare people shooting trees in a forest to people shooting at their private fenced out range. You could argue this in terms of degrees of negligence, of course, from minimal (that you’d need to be superhuman to avoid) to gross (i.e. when you’re reckless), but the point is that in the latter examples people are doing what they shouldn’t be doing and they are likely to know they’re being silly. I see a similar thing in modesty threads here: whether a woman wears a modest dress and as much as her sleeve rolls up, or she wears a clingy stretchy revealing outfit in provocative colours, it’s painted as the same kind of situation, i.e. a woman failing to protect men from themselves. However, in reality the former one was not even negligent and the latter one was using to her advantage the same “weakness” of men that she complains is infringing on her freedom to wear whatever she want. It’s like wearing a t-shirt saying “I hate you all” and complaining about people saying “I hate you too” in the street.
Bottom line is that the debate about things like sleeves, come on, sleeves, needs a rest, as does wondering whether one inch above the knee crosses the “objective” standard of hem length, while *playing with fire *needs a serious cold shower. And let’s not confuse the two because they are two different things.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
I was thinking along the same lines. Why am I saddened when I hear about gay parades, where men go on the streets half naked, wearing thongs, etc. I am saddened because these children of our Father sin against their own dignity. It’s not like I have homosexual attractions and I have to be protected from my own weakness. I won’t look and I won’t check out how these men’s bodies look like, but I’m still saddened. And going half-naked on the street has a sexual connotation, in my opinion, that being half naked on the beach doesn’t have.
I feel similar when I see a woman dressed inappropriately. I feel sad because her appearance is inconsistent with her dignity as a child of God. It says, “look at the contour of my body in this tight outfit, look at my breasts partially exposed in this low-cut strapless dress, look at my bare back, look at my belly” etc, exposing her body for random strangers to see. And it’s also different, say, showing up like this in the church, than simply wearing a swimming suit on the beach. It has no other practical purpose than inviting people to look. I won’t take up this invitation and I won’t look, in fact I will look away in embarrasment and feel sorrow for this sister. Moreover, if my daughter would dress like this, I would be very worried that she attracts the wrong attention. That could lead to dating the wrong kind of people and very much heartache down the road, maybe even a wrong marriage.
I just wonder, should we brace ourselves for times when public decency laws will be struck down and deemed unconstitutional? Judges argued that limiting internet pornography would be a limitation of free speech. Why not the same argument about half naked men and men in thongs walking down the streets anytime and anywhere, not just during gay parades. Why not women fully exposing their breasts and more in public, rather than the current practice of showing their breasts half exposed with low-cut or cleavage-showing dresses? Will there come a time when some “genius” will argue in the Supreme Court that this is only free speech, and anyone offended should simply turn their heads and not look? Will someone argue sooner or later in court that men/women are innocent no matter what they wear, or even if they go down the street buck naked, and in fact it puts excessive burden on them to limit their free expression of self for the sake of other people who are too weak to handle this? Oh, and I’m sure it will be called a civil rights issue, and people who don’t want to share public space with exhibitionists will be likened to the white segregationists of the past, who didn’t want to share the same drinking fountain with colored folks.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
Actually, Canada took a step in this direction when it made it legal to show up topless at public parks and swimming pools, including those used by children for sports practice. I remember reading a story about a female activist who went topless to a public swimming pool in a Canadian city, and when the personnel asked her to cover her breasts in order not to scandalize the children present at that pool, she refused and sued the managers of the facility for harassment.
C
chevalier
Guest
We’ve had a case recently in Poland but it didn’t fly. It’s a misdemeanour that doesn’t make a convict (i.e. not a crime yet), so at the same it gets punished but doesn’t give you the same ammunition for a campaign. I’m horrified by how it’s considered normal in Western Europe. It makes totally no sense to me. The hypocrisy of dressing normally… No or little cleavage on a normal day, darned you be if you’d look etc, but on the beach… off it goes. You never know. Not like you can’t meet stupid young “women” (immature girls) from here when you go to the beach abroad. Another reason to stick only with serious Catholics for dating etc.
Another reason to stick only with serious Catholics for dating etc.
J
Joseph_L_Varga
Guest
Once I went with my sister and her children (10 y.o. boy and 9 y.o. girl at the time) to the Black Sea (Romania), and we could barely find a family-friendly stretch of the beach with no nudity. Poor children, they were spooked when they saw adults exposing themselves. It’s really horrible, if you have children in the family. It’s becoming more and more difficult to protect them and keep them in a happy state of innocence, away from various stuff that they should never see.
S
Serap
Guest
Thing is though…I live in Canada’s largest city and I have yet to see a topless woman. It’s legal, but no one does it b/c it’s not socially acceptable here.
Ok…there is one location in Toronto…Hanlan’s Point which is a nude beach that mainly homosexuals go to. I went there once and couldn’t help, but laugh at these two men playing frisbee naked - I thought it was really comical. They looked at me and told me to go home to my “mama”.
Z
zaramarie81
Guest
I would think Toronto would be a bit chilly for going without clothes? Lol.Thing is though…I live in Canada’s largest city and I have yet to see a topless woman. It’s legal, but no one does it b/c it’s not socially acceptable here.
Ok…there is one location in Toronto…Hanlan’s Point which is a nude beach that mainly homosexuals go to. I went there once and couldn’t help, but laugh at these two men playing frisbee naked - I thought it was really comical. They looked at me and told me to go home to my “mama”.
S
Serap
Guest
POLLLEEEEEZZZ!!!
Toronto hits 95 degrees in the summer on a regular basis!!!
could you imagine two naked guys on the beach if it were cold???
scary thought…
Z
zaramarie81
Guest
I agree that it is sad because these individuals are sinning against their own dignity. But I don’t know, I still think we have a responsibility to others to dress appropriately. What we wear affects others! Other post-ers have given examples of shielding children to maintain their innocence - a great example of how we need to dress with others in mind.
I think we can show respect to men by dressing modestly (and men can do the same for women - I once went on a date where, when I showed up, the man had just gotten out of the shower. He came down with no shirt on. I was very flustered and embarrassed to say the least, trying to police my thoughts and feeling awkward that I was all alone in his home and he was half-dressed!).
I think the idea that our clothing choices affect others is something we subconsciously recognize every day… I get dressed for work in clothes I know my boss will approve of (would rather wear jeans, but I don’t, out of respect!). When I teach middle school CCD, I choose clothes I know would be a good example for the kids, that won’t distract the boys or set bad examples for the girls. When I dress for a date, I choose clothes that will make me look pretty but will not be a source of unnecessary temptation! I obviously hope he is attracted to me, but I also want to show respect to both him and myself. Clothing is both an expression of who we are and a message to others of how much respect we have for them. I think as Christians, we always, on some level, have a responsibility to others. That’s why “scandal” is considered a sin in our faith - if we do things to tempt or mislead others, we have some measure of responsibility.
Of course, I do not agree with some societies that force women to wear restrictive clothing as a double standard… but I think that is a perversion of the idea of respecting others that is not true to what God intended.
- Status