The Beach / La Playa / La Plage / La Spiagga / Der Strand

  • Thread starter Thread starter tvdxer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tvdxer

Guest
A “traditionalist” Catholic website condemns mixed-company swimming (a.k.a. virtually all that occurs on any beach or in any swimming pool today), insinuating that no good Christian would do it because of the temptations involved. It draws a parallel between walking down the street in one’s underwear and being at the beach. It also claims that bishops and priests who truly care for their flock forbid mixed swimming.

I, a 20 year-old male, personally have never found the beach to be a place of near occasion of lust, impure thoughts, or mortal sin in general. Perhaps it is because I am less “sexual” than most males my age, but there’s more to it. To me there is a complete difference between wearing a swimsuit on the beach and wearing clothing of similar coverage on the street, in terms of what temptations and reactions they pose. It’s simply that when you go to the beach you expect to see people scantily clad; there’s no surprise there, and most of them are laying on towels or in water anyway. Walking down the street you have complete exposure and you are showing far more than anyone would expect to see.

I am wondering if women here find a average-looking or pudgy shirtless male wearing decent-length swim trunks (as most Americans do), who mostly stays in the water, an occasion of sin. I seriously doubt it.
 
tvdxer said:
A “traditionalist” Catholic website condemns mixed-company swimming (a.k.a. virtually all that occurs on any beach or in any swimming pool today), insinuating that no good Christian would do it because of the temptations involved. It draws a parallel between walking down the street in one’s underwear and being at the beach. It also claims that bishops and priests who truly care for their flock forbid mixed swimming.

I, a 20 year-old male, personally have never found the beach to be a place of near occasion of lust, impure thoughts, or mortal sin in general. Perhaps it is because I am less “sexual” than most males my age, but there’s more to it. To me there is a complete difference between wearing a swimsuit on the beach and wearing clothing of similar coverage on the street, in terms of what temptations and reactions they pose. It’s simply that when you go to the beach you expect to see people scantily clad; there’s no surprise there, and most of them are laying on towels or in water anyway. Walking down the street you have complete exposure and you are showing far more than anyone would expect to see.

I am wondering if women here find a average-looking or pudgy shirtless male wearing decent-length swim trunks (as most Americans do), who mostly stays in the water, an occasion of sin. I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...
It depends on how “average looking or pudgy”- if they have a six pack or not!😉 But seriously - no. I’ve never thought of the beach or the swimming pool that way. And to forbid mixed swimming seems a bit extreme. The next thing women won’t be able to walk down the road on their own for fear of causing impure thoughts in men!:confused:
 
I doubt most women find a day at the beach to be an occasion of sin regardless of the physical condition or bathing suit choices of the men around them. I guess I can’t speak for all women, but it’s just not a problem to be around random men in bathing suits. I think we need more to go on than just visuals. So, enjoy your day at the beach, no worries.
 
If there are priests and bishops who forbid mixed swimming and you go to the beach, how are they going to know you are there? I have never heard of this. I did hear it from a cousin of mine who attended the Pentacostal church…but I thought that was typical for their faith…not mine. I can dance, I can listen to rock and roll, I can drink and I can go to a wedding reception and have a good time. I can also go to the beach, or the pool in mixed company. Geez louise…some people are just over zealous when it comes to sex…and it sounds like the “women” are getting most of the blame. Avert your eyes if you don’t want to look.
 
Dear Julianna,

It seems to me (I could be wrong) but reading the OP’s original post again, makes me wonder if the website in question is run by a group not in communion with Rome.

Just a hunch.🤷
 
Hmmmm…

The website’s title (what is displayed on the top bar of the browser window) is “Homepage - Traditional Catholic Website” and carries an article “Vatican II Exposed by a Participant”.

I don’t know if I even want to post a link.
 
I found this also, at a similar but separate site:
Further to this, public bathing is a violation of modesty as it becomes a diabolical feast for the eyes, fueling concupiscence brazenly, as any attire, no matter how modest becomes immodestly clingy and physically exposing when wet. In the Catholic ideal however, private family swimming is acceptable, if undertaken in a loose fitting shirt and bermudas or similar garb. There is nothing objectionable about private family recreation, as opposed to the worldly public exhibitionism so widespread today.
Click to expand...
I could see this being the case 80 years ago, but today?

When I go to the beach I do not lust over women, and although I’m sure there are many men who try to find what woman is wearing the most revealing swimsuit when at the beach, I don’t think most are that way. In fact, a kid raised in the above fashion might sneak off to the beach with his friends or go there after leaving home and end up hypersensitive, tempted by anything.
 
I do not find it in the least sinful to go to the beach or a public pool and swim or sunbathe. Of course I don’t know how to swim and I would burn in five minutes so I don’t go that often.😃
 
tvdxer said:
I, a 20 year-old male, personally have never found the beach to be a place of near occasion of lust, impure thoughts, or mortal sin in general. Perhaps it is because I am less “sexual” than most males my age, but there’s more to it. To me there is a complete difference between wearing a swimsuit on the beach and wearing clothing of similar coverage on the street, in terms of what temptations and reactions they pose. It’s simply that when you go to the beach you expect to see people scantily clad; there’s no surprise there, and most of them are laying on towels or in water anyway. Walking down the street you have complete exposure and you are showing far more than anyone would expect to see.

I am wondering if women here find a average-looking or pudgy shirtless male wearing decent-length swim trunks (as most Americans do), who mostly stays in the water, an occasion of sin. I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...
I think you’re right on target here- context matters. I think most mature men can discipline their reactions based on the circumstances.

I have seen traditionalists who want to place a lot of responsibility on women for protecting our more sensitive brothers from the occasion of sin, by covering every feminine curve that a man might find enticing. No necklines below the collarbone, no form fitting clothing, no skirts above the knee.

But I recall reading literature from previous centuries expressing shock over a flashed ankle, or erotic raptures over a shamelessly exposed collarbone - so it just makes me believe that making women cover up more simply shifts the zone of what the hyper-sensitive men will find enticing, rather than eliminates the temptation.

I’m not saying that women should have license to let it all hang out, but I am wary of putting so much of the burden on women to “not entice” men. What men find enticing will vary according to what they are accustomed to seeing, and some men will always be on the more “enticable” extreme of the bell curve.

To answer the other question - a pudgy man in trunks who stays mostly in the water is definitely not an occasion of sin! Neither would he be if he were out of the water, actually. Now, a really fit guy in Speedos…hmmm… naw, he might provoke some serious admiration, but it would still not be lust. And a pudgy guy in Speedos might be on occasion of sin, but it would be a sin of uncharitable thoughts rather than lust!
 
tvdxer said:
A “traditionalist” Catholic website condemns mixed-company swimming (a.k.a. virtually all that occurs on any beach or in any swimming pool today), insinuating that no good Christian would do it because of the temptations involved. It draws a parallel between walking down the street in one’s underwear and being at the beach. It also claims that bishops and priests who truly care for their flock forbid mixed swimming.

I, a 20 year-old male, personally have never found the beach to be a place of near occasion of lust, impure thoughts, or mortal sin in general. Perhaps it is because I am less “sexual” than most males my age, but there’s more to it. To me there is a complete difference between wearing a swimsuit on the beach and wearing clothing of similar coverage on the street, in terms of what temptations and reactions they pose. It’s simply that when you go to the beach you expect to see people scantily clad; there’s no surprise there, and most of them are laying on towels or in water anyway. Walking down the street you have complete exposure and you are showing far more than anyone would expect to see.

I am wondering if women here find a average-looking or pudgy shirtless male wearing decent-length swim trunks (as most Americans do), who mostly stays in the water, an occasion of sin. I seriously doubt it.
Click to expand...
These traditionalist sites are often frequented by people who are so out of touch with reality it’s not even funny. You can’t just expect everyone else to cover themselves from head to toe, because you can’t keep your eyes off of them if you see their knees.
 
I’m a female who has participated in triathlons. Anyone who’s ever participated/watched one of those knows that there are people who will wear next to nothing for the entire race. And these are not, generally speaking, pudgy people. These are fit people. These are fit people wearing, in some cases, little more than Speedos, moving their bodies in a physical manner.

In all that time, surrounded by all these people, I have never once been tempted to consider them in a lustful manner. One, because I was in the middle of a pretty physically taxing endeavor, and was occupied, two, because it was so far out of context as render sexual thoughts plain silly.

Most of us can choose to demonstrate a little thing called self-control. Most of us can go to a beach where there is (gasp) mixed bathing going on and not have to run, run, RUN to the confessional afterward.

I suspect that those of us who can’t would also have issues going to a movie in mixed company (all that darkness!), drinking from public water fountains (who knows whose lips have touched this?) and the like.

And right on to the previous poster who brought up the Pentecostals. I have never run into the mixed bathing prohibition outside of that denomination- which also forbids eating in a restaurant that sells alcohol. I wonder if the OP’s website has problems with that, too?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top