Mom pleads with Notre Dame female students to stop wearing leggings, sparks

[Lea101]

The church recognizes that it is good when channeled to your marriage partner
and that the desire causes sin when allowed to lead one to adultery or just personal satisfaction.

Sexual desire is good when channeled to your marriage partner. The desire cause sin (lust) when allowed to…

Your statement does suggest that sexual desire is not lust, but it does lead to lust. Which is my point.

 

[phil19034]

No, that’s the secular definition of lust.

Lust is the objectiviation of another for one’s selfish desires.

It’s not the same as sexual desire (which is morally neutral).

 

[phil19034]

I’m not denying the differences, but your first statement is an oversimplification of human sexuality. It also implies that it’s all biological, when sexuality is also influenced by the things around us as well.

I wouldn’t say it’s an oversimplification, but rather a generalization. And never implied it’s all biological, though biology does play a part.

Biologically speaking, males are instinctually simply driven to procreate. While females (biologically speaking) are instinctually driven to select the best male to procreate with. In other words, biologically speaking, women are more picky than men (and rightfully so).

As porn (both visual, audio, and text) become increasingly accessible, more and more women’s souls are in danger. Men are also becoming more increasingly objectified as well. Porn (visual) being catered to women are being made more as well.

It really shocks me that people don’t believe that young women out there are really…experiencing things when they see a fit young man topless or doing suggestive stuff out there.

I bring this up because I was talking about male modesty, which catholics/religious people in general downplay a lot. Nobody is denying what men experience, I was bringing up the female experience which people don’t really enjoy talking about.

Fact is, lust is a very, very common sin amongst women that they themselves don’t enjoy talking about because apparently we are seen as the fairer sex.

Believe me, I know it’s more common place in women than the numbers show. The researchers suspect that the female numbers are actually lower than they should be because they believe women might not totally honest in the surveys.

However, even with that in mind, researches indicate that women typically need fantasize more than men do. Especially, now that the porn industry is trying to make a lot of their filth with the female viewer in mind (knowing that man can simply fast forward).

I also 100% agree that as more men become “metrosexually” obsesed with their looks & dress more unchastely, more women will fall to lust.

All research shows that porn and lust are a growing problem with women. However, what women still have going for them is it statistically takes more to make them truly aroused than men (but the porn industry and the players out there are learning what it takes).

I hope I’m making sense… point is, I do agree with you.

God Bless

 

[Theo520]

Your statement does suggest that sexual desire is not lust, but it does lead to lust. Which is my point.

I repeat, by the english language definition, lust is strong sexual desire.

Stop trying to pretend they are completely separate things.
I’m not here to debate sins and when attraction crosses the line.

 

[prayerrider]

I didn’t see any leggings at Mass on Sunday.
But then, I wasn’t looking all that hard. I did see lots of t shirts. I fit right in, with my Catholic HS football t.

 

[Lea101]

And I’ve already said I’m using the catechism’s definition of lust, which is disordered sexual desire.

 

[Theo520]

disordered sexual desire

Yup, when the sexual desire is not directed at your spouse, it’s disordered.
That’s what I said many posts ago.

Lust is sexual desire at it’s foundation

 

[Theo520]

No, that’s the secular definition of lust.

Lust is the objectiviation of another for one’s selfish desires.

It’s not the same as sexual desire (which is morally neutral).

Well when we are talking about society at large and the impact of visual stimulation on man, it seems reasonable to reference the standard definition. Not all the students are practicing Catholics.

I find it strange people trying to define “sexual desire” out of the definition of “Lust”

 

[Lea101]

Nobody is saying that they’re unrelated. We’re saying that these words are not interchangeable. Lust is always sinful, while sexual desire is not.

 

[Theo520]

I have a problem when we rigidly use definitions unique to the catholic faith when discussing a secular problem.

Defining Lust to apply only outside the marriage union is not how the rest of the world draws a distinction between lust and sexual desire.

That said, I apologize if I was the one digging this rat hole, which really doesn’t help with the OP topic of whether wearing just leggings is appropriate public attire. I think we agree that such clothing stokes the fires of lust.

 

[Lea101]

No, I’m not. I’m basically just referring to the Church and its language on this, since this is a Catholic forum and it was fitting to the point I was trying to make.

 

[Theo520]

Here is a good discussion explaining Lust, from the Catholic perspective.

What is lust?​

I still maintain that Lust is natural, as are all the seven deadly sins,
They are driven by natural desires that we must actively work to quell and redirect. The article calls it a disordered desire because it is sinful, this doesn’t mean it’s not natural, unless the definition of natural only includes non sinful desires.

I stand corrected though in misrepresenting Catholic teaching on Lust vs sexual desire

 

[TheLittleLady]

Thinking about this more, if someone visiting a College/University has a problem with the way students dress, the proper place to address this is with the Uni administration. Request that they put a dress code in place for the campus. Work the proper channels.

 

[phil19034]

Defining Lust to apply only outside the marriage union is not how the rest of the world draws a distinction between lust and sexual desire.

Lust does not apply to only outside marriage. A married man can lust after his wife, which is sinful.

Lust is always wrong. Even inside marriage.

Lust is treating the other person as a sexual object. Not as a person.

 

[Theo520]

Lust does not apply to only outside marriage. A married man can lust after his wife, which is sinful.

Only a Catholic would view that as sinful,

Secularists will say it’s fantastic that two spouses still lust after each other after 20 yrs of marriage. All because the Catholic definition does not match the secular definition.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

Lust does not apply to only outside marriage. A married man can lust after his wife, which is sinful.

Only a Catholic would view that as sinful,

Secularists will say it’s fantastic that two spouses still lust after each other after 20 yrs of marriage. All because the Catholic definition does not match the secular definition.

That’s because they don’t know what lust means. If you have real lust for your wife, then you are not in love with her.

He is what dictionary.com says.
American definitions:
2) uncontrolled or illicit sexual desire or appetite; lecherousness

British definition:

1. a strong desire for sexual gratification

Here are the rest of the definitions from dictionary.com: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/lust

Point is, lust is greedy and objectifying. Most wives would be offended if their husband said "I lust after you.” That’s what one would say to their mistress, hooker, or stripper.

Love is selfless and pure.

 

[Theo520]

You don’t need to defend the Catholic definition to me. It’ makes perfect sense in context.

It’s still different than the secular definition, depending on context most secularist would be more likely to think of the first or 4th definition when applying it with a spouse, without your qualifier that it excludes love or is greedy:

1. intense sexual desire or appetite.
2. ardent enthusiasm; zest; relish: