Question for DWs about SI swimsuit issue

  • Thread starter Thread starter CuriousInIL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
“So all men are drooling dolts that have no self control?” - Wifeandmomof2

No. As a woman, I realize that you may have extreme difficulty grasping this concept, but men are VISUALLY stimulated. That is the way GOD designed us, so if you have a problem with that, then you have a problem with God.

Avoiding lust is probably the single most difficult spiritual battle that Christian men have to face in our lives. Part of the reason that it is so difficult is that women are often very clueless as to the struggle that we have to go through, and therefore merciless in trying to help us. It is NOT that women are being cold-hearted, but that since women don’t experience the same visual component of receiving sexual gratification to the same degree than men do, many just don’t understand. Some women view our natural and normal mode of acquiring sexual stimulation as being twisted and perverted, since women are not sexually charged to the same degree by the same mode(visually.)

The fact that you would post a picture of a woman in a bikini on a Catholic message board, just shows how extreme your lack of understanding of men’s struggles is.

Women will sometimes dress in a sexually provocative manner, realizing that it will get looks and attention from men, but failing to realize that they(the women) are being used by the devil as tools to wage spiritual war against the souls of these men. Sadly enough, even Catholic Mass is not always a safe haven against these attacks, as many good-hearted well intentioned Catholic women just flat out don’t get it. They don’t understand how the way that they dress can lead a man into extreme levels of sexual sin, and for whatever reason feel that 1 Timothy 2:9 doesn’t apply to them.

When women pose for pictures in bikinis, the devil is intending to use those pictures to sexually entice men away from God. It is demonic warfare going on here, and part of the devil’s success lies in the fact that his tools(these women) are clueless that they are being used by the devil to attack the very souls of men.

When men try to explain this concept to women, some women will radically change their views, and if necessary, their behaviors as well. Good Christian women care about protecting their brothers in Christ, and do not want to be stumbling blocks(Romans 14:13) to them.

Other Christian women, however, when told of men’s struggles, rather than listening, absorbing, and digesting what they heard, will instead snap back with topic-diverting tactics such as name-calling, trying to bring genuine art into the discussion, or implying that we are suggesting that women totally cover themselves, like women in other cultures are forced to do. THAT attitude is NOT productive. That is taking a prideful, “I’m right and you don’t know what you are talking about” attitude, when in reality, you are totally wrong and we know EXACTLY what we are talking about, because we(men) are the ones who are experiencing the damaging effects of your(women’s) cluelessness in this spiritual battle that the devil has been waging on us, arguably, since the days of Adam and Eve. Some women often take the egocentric attitude of, “if it doesn’t bother me, then anyone who is bothered by it has problems, and it is therefore not my concern.” Well, chapter 14 of Romans would say otherwise, as would the message of 1 Corinthians 8:7-13, and 1 Corinthians 10:23-33.

I would STRONGLY recommend to you, wifeandmomof2 that you read the book “Every Man’s Battle,” by Fred Stoecker, and Steve Arterburn. It is a book designed for (primarily married) men in terms of overcoming lust. It has also shown, however, to be a real eye opener to women, who were previously totally clueless as to what men had to go through, and how damaging they, as women, were being to men’s battles in this area.

Ephesians 5:3 shows how extreme our call to sexual purity is. Women who pose for the SI Swimsuit issue are not thinking about protecting men’s sexual purity. They are instead selfishly thinking about the attention and money they will be getting. They have no clue that the devil is using them to ruin marriages, wreck homes, inspire men to rape other women, and spiritually speaking, launch attacks on the souls of genuine good Christian men who struggle in this area.

If after reading this, wifeandmomof2, you still fail to see my point, then I leave all further arguments to the intelligent women of this community. Perhaps, if one of the women here, like ShannyK, could explain to wifeandmomof 2 how you first came to understand what men have to go through, it could be very helpful, because as a man, I may not fully know how to effectively communicate this message to women. I do, KNOW, however, that I am right.
 
So where do we stop? Sears is out, as are many other dept. store catalogues…so should we paint clothes on nudes in paintings? restore the fig leafs to naked statues?
If as you say everything is an occasion for sin then are men even allowed out of the house? Shouldn’t we keep them under lock and key for their own salvation (excluding holy days of obligation and Mass)?
Again, I guess I’d ask what is the purpose of bringing in the swimsuit issue, or Maxim, or whatever?

You can argue utilitarian pruposes for Sears catalogue, fine art, etc., but what is the purpose of the SI swimsuit edition?

I am sort of playing devil’s advocate since I am single (but engaged), but I do know the SI swimsuit issue was used as self-indulgent sexual fodder for many a teen boy I knew back in the day.
 
While you and I can see the difference between art and porn, some men cant!
So where do we draw the line
??? Do we throw out the JCPenney catalog because it has woman in bras and undies? Do we get rid of art that depicts naked/or 1/2 dressed men and woman??
See you and I may not have an issue with “art” some men might & do and shouldnt we take away all temptation for them?? Isnt that what you are advocating for here in regards to the SI issue??
Lingerie in the Sears/JC Penney Catalogue, as well as men’s underwear, for that matter, are modeled non-provocatively. Women smile, as do the men, but their poses are ‘normal’ - straight, sitting upright perhaps. They aren’t contorted into sexual poses, legs spread wide, head tilted back, chests popped forward with the women using those ‘come hither’ looks with her eyes. Nor do you see the men giving the ‘check this out’ look while tugging down on the waistband to expose more skin. A catalogue’s purpose is to sell merchandise, and that’s why the lingerie is there - in one section - not scattered in the middle of housewares or bath towels. If you want to see the lingerie, one goes to that section. Don’t want to see it? skip over those pages or tear them out.

The SI swimsuit issue is optional. One has to request it as part of their subscription or they need to go to a store to purchase that particular issue. The poses of the women are without question sexual, they certainly aren’t ‘natural’ in that I’ve never been to a beach where any person lounged in those positions while chatting with their husbands/dates or had the children running around the beach towel.

Victoria’s Secret and Frederick’s of Hollywood catalogues are all about lingerie and the marketing campaign for it is sex. Like SI’s swimsuit issue one has to request the catalogues to be mailed to the home or go out of their way to pick one up. Not something I would advocate if the men in the house are around puberty or trying to overcome a pornography addiction.

I’m not advocating wives throwing out their husbands’ issue of SI, especially without the men knowing about it. I am advocating wives sit down with their husbands to ask why they opted for that particular issue, and to explain to them that having it in the house belittles them and shows disrespect to the marriage. I agree with the other poster that wives are called to help their husbands reach heaven but we don’t do it by being their moms. It’s a matter of teamwork, two behaving as one, communication.

If a husband is struggling with pornography then yes, the wife should not have shopping catalogues which carry lingerie in the home. Nor should she have art coffee-table books depicting nudes. She can have other art books in the house. Not because the catalogue or the art is porn but because her husband has issues with nudity and is trying to work them out. Her obligation is to help him. If that includes keeping certain materials out of the house while he works on those issues then she’s obliged to do so.

The OP asked how wives feel about the SI swimsuit issue with regard to their husbands. People here are sharing their opinions based on their own marriages. To have you respond with blanket accusations that those women are trying to censor all media is insensitive to the plights of these women. You have a healthy marriage, more power to you, we aren’t telling you to throw out your husband’s SI or to toss out any art books in your house with nudity in them. We are trying to explain why it is some of us take issue with the SI spread.

If you’ve read any of the threads in Moral Theology or Family Life about the effects of pornography on families and marriages I would think you’d be more sensitive about what women are sharing here in this thread, and the men, too. Perhaps you don’t realize how blessed you truly are to have a husband who does not have this problem. Yes, we realize there are many men out there who can view VS, SI and other such magazines/catalogues without developing an addiction to it, but the church speaks very clearly about the negative effect constant exposure to such images has on a society’s view of women in general - it objectifies them and strips them of the dignity and reverence due them.
 
Actually no. This is what I was responding to:
The emphasis is yours.

So a man is a pig if he is aroused by images intended to provoke sexual arousal? I would say that is wrong. I would say a man is normal. I would be concerned about a man who is not aroused by images intended to arouse.
Allow me to step up on this one. The ‘pig’ statement originated from something I posted about a male friend of mine (see post #72). Because he is a long-time friend I called him out for his ogling of scantily clothed women when the subject came up one time. Wifeandmomoftwo’s husband read this thread, my post, and rightfully stated that not all men are pigs. I never suggested they were, or that other men struggling with porn addictions were either, only that my friend was certainly behaving like one toward his wife and I knew she was uncomfortable with it. So, for the record, the pig comment in this thread was specifically about one person, not a general statement.
 
Perhaps this should be posted in a new thread, but I just ran across this article. It goes to show how pornography is leading to an increase in sex crimes (and I wonder what the correlation is with more violent crimes) being committed by women.

It goes to show that this stuff starts in a small inconspicuous way. Now, it is so easy for it to enter our homes. Thankfully, my DH does not have an addiction. He has told me about how women do not realize that it doesn’t take much to arouse a man, even by a woman that he has no attraction to whatsoever.

It is a woman’s duty to help her husband in his struggle for purity. Just as it is a husband’s duty to help his wife in her struggle for purity. This will lead to us all having pure homes and pure children. I am still finding the lack to my question earlier disturbing. So, I will ask it again: **If a child were to see such a thing laying around the house, how would you explain that daddy likes to look at other women who happen to be more than half-naked?

**The issue here goes much further than just our husbands. It affects our children, too! We’ve all heard the saying that the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Well, if we find it acceptable for our husbands to “read” this material, how will we feel when our sons start looking at it too? It teaches our children that it is OK to treat women as objects. It teaches our daughters that it is OK to pose in a degrading way if it will help her pay the bills and bring her fame.

The question has been asked of where do we draw the line? My line is drawn at the point of entry into my home and family. If I were to let this sort of harm come to my children’s souls, I dread the millstone tied around my neck!
 
My gosh! Then I guess none of you would go to the shore, beach or swimming pool either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top