I don’t think it has to do with legalism, but more, as PaulinVA points out, taste.My point exactly. I think they look very elegant and formal… and not provocative in the least. So I’m not sure what the fuss is about. Is it just legalism maybe? Just because some skin is showing?
agreed
Yes. I do weddings almost every weekend and practically all of the bridal gowns are strapless. When I got married, it was very difficult to find gowns with straps or sleeves. I found one with these wide triangular-shaped “straps”. Don’t know how else to describe them except they might also be considered like cap sleeves. Some of the parishes where I’ve freelanced (now, keep in mind, I’ve cantored at over 100 different parishes for weddings in 8 different states in the last 10+ years, so I think I’ve pretty much seen it all when it comes to fashion and rules at different parishes. I realize that most people don’t have as much experience with weddings.) will insist that the bride and bridesmaids have their shoulders covered. Some will make allowances for the bride if she is wearing a veil which will cover the shoulders. Many don’t have much of a say at all what the bride and bridesmaids wear.
It’s like when some churches insist that you can only use the veils provided by the school for FHC so that all the girls will look the same up top and not have veils that look like bridal veils (like my school did). You just do it and not have a fit about it.That is priceless! The problem, too, is a woman who spends a good deal of time outdoors isn’t in the habit of wearing strapless garments will have some variation on what is known in my circle as a “farmer’s tan” or a “jogger’s tan”. It’s not very becoming with a strapless gown!
Usually the bridal party of strapless dresses just spend their day/evening hiking the dresses up.
Thefunny thing is when you sit behind someone wearing a strapless (or even some haltar dresses) dress, she looks like she’s not wearing anything because all you see is bare skin! Just a weird look if you ask me!haha! Isn’t that the way of participating in a thread?That is priceless! The problem, too, is a woman who spends a good deal of time outdoors isn’t in the habit of wearing strapless garments will have some variation on what is known in my circle as a “farmer’s tan” or a “jogger’s tan”. It’s not very becoming with a strapless gown!
Let’s not even get started with the current generation’s infatuation with tattoos!
But this is about First Communicants, and so we digress…
That is a cute, “little girly” dress. Not that the first posting was bad, but this is just “cuter”.I like this dress much better than the first one posted.
dhgate.com/new-flower-girl-dress-ivory-organza-scoop/p-ff8080813a738860013a9ffea9c77d74.html#gp-1-1
It seems more “little girly” to me - and it looks more like what I wore for my first communion!
Who else had lace trim on their ankle socks??? And white Mary Janes???
At least others from the same generation have countered this infatuation with the rather (IMO appropriately) judgemental label of “tramp stamp”. Unfortunately, there’s no equivalent derogatory term for men who get inked…other than “inmate” (for some of them anyway).Let’s not even get started with the current generation’s infatuation with tattoos!
Yes, but even tasteful tattoos look a bit off in a wedding party dressed in tuxes and gowns. Likewise, I think our First Communicants would look off in overly “individualized” colors and designs in their nail polish. It is sort of like when altar servers (boy or girl) wear loud-colored shoes with their albs. The shoes might look just fine as a matching part of an outfit–neon tennis shoes look fine with a matching neon polo shirt!–but use them to bottom off a white linen-look robe, and it just looks silly.
I have to agree with what you say. From my perspective, I don’t think a shoulder alone is enough to be a distraction to my generation anymore. And I don’t necessarily think it’s a BAD thing for society to gain the ability to ignore bare shoulders. Just like how we all eventually learned to ignore bare necks, knees, and ankles. For my sisters and I the modesty bar is set more at how high the dress comes up to hide the cleavage and avoiding any plunging necklines. What’s done with the shoulders is negligible.
I’m pretty sure a “tramp stamp” is a specific type of tattoo found on the lower back. It’s not a general term for tattooed women or tattoos found on women.
So now you have a secret code for communicating recipes? What is the Back Fence?
Back Fence is a forum section lol. Like right now we are on the “Family Life” forum. Go to the back fence forum if you wanna see Mary Gail’s secret recipe.So now you have a secret code for communicating recipes? What is the Back Fence?
I still think spaghetti sauce is a much more interesting topic than the present one.
How can there be so much to say over the issue of spaghetti straps? Let the priest decide. Or if he doesn’t, my little girl is not going to her first Holy Communion with a bare shoulder dress. End of story.
Ti ringrazio!
Thankfully, we neither beat nor waterboard live horses here. Yes, beating a dead horse makes it very tender, but not so tasty, I’m afraid. I think you would be better off with one of the recipes for Italian meatballs in the Back Fence forum. forums.catholic-questions.org/forumdisplay.php?f=77
If you beat around a few bushes, you may be able to find one.
That’s it! Blame the bushes!
If you can’t find it, its not my fault. She made two posts to me. READ both. Not just the first one.
Ok listen, you want me to make a judgement about your community. You make the following claims