The Death of Pretty (an article on how many women want to be seen now)

[Debora123]

I’m going to stop trying to explain it and call on JPII

p. 190 of “Love and Responsibility” from which the quote comes. There Pope John Paul II states that man is not such a perfect being that the sight of the body especially of the opposite sex, will be a “disinterested liking” developing “innocent affection”. He states that in practice it arouses concupiscence which must be taken into account.

Here is the if though: A person must be careful not to scandalize others, intentionally, or unintentionally, so that they are not led into mortal or venial sin.

In other words wherever you are, ask yourself if what you are wearing will possibly cause scandal to others and put them in a near occasion of sin. If you are content that the possibility is low enough and you are within reason go for it. I think there is also a point where women are clothed to a point where you have to ask if the women are the ones with the problem or is it the men.

From this point I don’t think it is worth arguing about whether wearing X is immodest or not unless we specify the location we are talking about and the people commenting have actually been there, no the people well, and can attest to the experience.

Nate, that is the exact same quote** I **posted on the post I kept insisting you read - my post # 158.

Lol, no wonder we’re not getting anywhere in this discussion, good grief!

You have 0 understanding of where I even stand on this topic, and didn’t even read the post where I clearly said “perhaps I am being misunderstood or written off without being given a chance. Please read these quotes for a better understanding of where I stand.”

 

[Nate13]

Nate, that is the exact same quote** I **posted on the post I kept insisting you read - my post # 158.

Lol, no wonder we’re not getting anywhere in this discussion, good grief!

You have 0 understanding of where I even stand on this topic, and didn’t even read the post where I clearly said “perhaps I am being misunderstood or written off without being given a chance. Please read these quotes for a better understanding of where I stand.”

Haha but your forgot the rest of the quote. I missed quote #158 somehow…

 

[Debora123]

Haha but your forgot the rest of the quote. I missed quote #158 somehow…

Mmm, no.

JPII’s quote you posted is EXACTLY what I’ve been trying to say all along, and exactly what you’ve been disagreeing with me on…

I’ve been saying that nakedness itself is not sinful, it is the IMMODESTY that is sinful. It is the intent, the consequence. Which is where my argument came in about tribal women being topless and there being nothing wrong with that. Because to them, in their culture, it is not a sexual, immodest thing, and the men there don’t get aroused form seeing that everyday. There is no “negative effect.”

 

[Debora123]

Bah, this is so silly and it’s super late.

Good night guys, it’s been fun.

 

[emmaberry]

I’d also like to mention particularly that towards the end of the article, the author makes a comment about Taylor Swift, Megan Fox, Lyndsey Lohan, and Miley Cirus, to point out that Swift is the one with the more ideal look over the other 3.

I honestly think they are all beautiful in their own unique, God given way. Having used their full names like that, and judging their looks was very objectifying and disrespectful, IMHO.

He was making a distinction that Taylor Swift puts a more dignified positive image of herself out into the media…not that she is doe-eyed, blonde haired, and blue-eyed, so she triumphs the ‘dark haired trashy girls.’ But type in (or don’t) underwear Taylor Swift and you’ll get nada, type it in for the others and WHALA! Taylor Swift knows she has
Iittle girls idolzing her…the others seem to forget those little eyes all round the world watching their every move-or should I say playboy cover.

You seem to think that wearing short shorts is justified because it is a hot day and you don’t INTEND on encouraging lustful thoughts from guys who encounter you, except your husband. We are called to more than that as Christians. Your body is a temple…a tabernacle when you take the Eucharist. I would encourage you to think about wearing those short shorts again…as Chrisitians sometimes we a called to make little sacrifices for Jesus and for others. Sometimes sacrificing comfort for wearing something for modest is needed. It sounds like you are a modest and virtuous girl…but remember that sometimes you can cause people to lust regardless of your intent…your intent shouldn’t be, ''does this make me look trampy" but “Will this cause someone to stumble?” also, even married people are called to chastity as well. Being married does not make lust okay, since lust seeks oneself over the other.

BTW-sorry if any of these come off as condescending or like I am being rude. Modesty for me was a trial in the past. Recently I have felt the call to become a Catholic nun and I needed to make some major changes in how I dressed to prepare for the role of Spouse of Christ…just as I am sure you make an effort to look nice for your husband both when your with him and out in public, since you carry his name and the reputation of being his wife, I have had to reevaluate whether Jesus would be embarrassed with what I am wearing since people know I will soon be His Spouse. Just some thoughts!

#2 BTW-hot is not in itself bad when used being spouses, etc. But as far as the random guy who hits on you in public, hot isn’t extremely complementary. I know God himself would never call a girl He has made HOT, he calls her beautiful, pure of heart, merciful, etc.

 

[bmullins]

Besides, Catholics view repentance and turning away from sin so highly that its a sacrament.

We do indeed see repentance as a sacrament. Yet we also do not see it as a license to sin. It’s not free. We can’t just say "Oh well, even though it’s wrong. we believe in forgiveness so don’t worry about it.’ Wrong is wrong.

 

[Debora123]

He was making a distinction that Taylor Swift puts a more dignified positive image of herself out into the media…not that she is doe-eyed, blonde haired, and blue-eyed, so she triumphs the ‘dark haired trashy girls.’ But type in (or don’t) underwear Taylor Swift and you’ll get nada, type it in for the others and WHALA! Taylor Swift knows she has
Iittle girls idolzing her…the others seem to forget those little eyes all round the world watching their every move-or should I say playboy cover.

You seem to think that wearing short shorts is justified because it is a hot day and you don’t INTEND on encouraging lustful thoughts from guys who encounter you, except your husband. We are called to more than that as Christians. Your body is a temple…a tabernacle when you take the Eucharist. I would encourage you to think about wearing those short shorts again…as Chrisitians sometimes we a called to make little sacrifices for Jesus and for others. Sometimes sacrificing comfort for wearing something for modest is needed. It sounds like you are a modest and virtuous girl…but remember that sometimes you can cause people to lust regardless of your intent…your intent shouldn’t be, ''does this make me look trampy" but “Will this cause someone to stumble?” also, even married people are called to chastity as well. Being married does not make lust okay, since lust seeks oneself over the other.

BTW-sorry if any of these come off as condescending or like I am being rude. Modesty for me was a trial in the past. Recently I have felt the call to become a Catholic nun and I needed to make some major changes in how I dressed to prepare for the role of Spouse of Christ…just as I am sure you make an effort to look nice for your husband both when your with him and out in public, since you carry his name and the reputation of being his wife, I have had to reevaluate whether Jesus would be embarrassed with what I am wearing since people know I will soon be His Spouse. Just some thoughts!

#2 BTW-hot is not in itself bad when used being spouses, etc. But as far as the random guy who hits on you in public, hot isn’t extremely complementary. I know God himself would never call a girl He has made HOT, he calls her beautiful, pure of heart, merciful, etc.

Blah blah blah… oh these modesty threads. I’m not about to explain my stance all over again, considering everything you’ve mentioned here has already been covered in past posts. Also, if I’m going to be misunderstood no matter what I say (as has been evident numerous times), then so be it.

We agree to disagree.

 

[Baelor]

I don’t care about all the possibilities I care about the most likely ones.

I guess I cannot relate to that, because I do not care about possibilities, but rather the reality.

However you do take that piece of information add it to the rest of the information you have and allow it to make you wonder how it is she came to be wearing a $3,000 dress. You look at all possibilities and assign probabilities to each and as you learn more about the person you start narrowing in on the answer. This all happens in the blink of an eye of course and is something we all do naturally without even thinking about it. For the record I believe you would make a horrible detective

That thought process is totally foreign to me. I honestly am totally unfamiliar with this.

You seem to be saying that you start from a complete blank sheet and completely ignore the fact that they are wearing goth clothing.

Uh…yeah.

The most likely reason a person would be wearing goth clothing is because they have the attributes most closely associated with people who are goth and wish to project that to others. You can deny this piece of information if you wish.

More likely, but not definitive, and therefore has no value in my book.

For the record, my judgments of others are limited to if I like how they behave.

 

[Nate13]

Mmm, no.

JPII’s quote you posted is EXACTLY what I’ve been trying to say all along, and exactly what you’ve been disagreeing with me on…

I’ve been saying that nakedness itself is not sinful, it is the IMMODESTY that is sinful. It is the intent, the consequence. Which is where my argument came in about tribal women being topless and there being nothing wrong with that. Because to them, in their culture, it is not a sexual, immodest thing, and the men there don’t get aroused form seeing that everyday. There is no “negative effect.”

“A person must be careful not to scandalize others, intentionally, or unintentionally, so that they are not led into mortal or venial sin.”

Maybe you missed this part. If someone is on a public beach there is no way of knowing everyone who is there with you. I don’t believe it would ever be acceptable to be topless/nude in that situation regardless of the culture. That is my point, which I have yet to see you agree with.

 

[Nate13]

More likely, but not definitive, and therefore has no value in my book.

For the record, my judgments of others are limited to if I like how they behave.

Haha so when you see someone in a doctor’s coat do you ask to see their medical Id, proof that they graduated from an accredited University, and multiple forms of Id? No, you give them the benefit of the doubt until you have cause to think otherwise.

 

[Debora123]

“A person must be careful not to scandalize others, intentionally, or unintentionally, so that they are not led into mortal or venial sin.”

Maybe you missed this part. If someone is on a public beach there is no way of knowing everyone who is there with you. I don’t believe it would ever be acceptable to be topless/nude in that situation regardless of the culture. That is my point, which I have yet to see you agree with.

Of course you should always be mindful of such, but if you start getting too scrupulous about it, then you’ll start getting worried every time you wear sandals… because some person with a crazy foot fetish will walk by and get aroused from seeing your open toes. So it’s never 100%, and JPII wasn’t trying to say it was. Read his other quotes I posted for a better understanding.

You just do your best, and you take certain factors into account, like where you are and what you’re doing.

I have stated that I find my clothes to be perfectly appropriate.

I too agree that going topless to my beach would be immodest. I’ve never seen anyone topless there, so it’s not an issue anyway.

 

[Debora123]

Haha so when you see someone in a doctor’s coat do you ask to see their medical Id, proof that they graduated from an accredited University, and multiple forms of Id? No, you give them the benefit of the doubt until you have cause to think otherwise.

This is completely different, Nate, and you are an intelligent enough person to know it.

There’s a big difference between seeing someone in a Doctor’s UNIFORM and concluding that they are a doctor, and seeing someone in daisy dukes and forming an opinion on their character or morality.

By the way, here’s a picture my husband took of me flying a kite at the beach… in… daisy dukes!

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1146&pictureid=11497

Honestly, I believe that 99% of the people within my cultural boundaries would see nothing inappropriate or scandalous in the above image.

 

[fix]

Maybe you missed this part. If someone is on a public beach there is no way of knowing everyone who is there with you. I don’t believe it would ever be acceptable to be topless/nude in that situation regardless of the culture. That is my point, which I have yet to see you agree with.

Yes, you make good points. The problem seems to be some think there is only a subjective element to this issue while failing to state there is an objective element.

2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

I would add that the Pope, like God, meets people where they are at currently, but does not leave them there. He calls them to greater conformity to the Gospel imperative.

 

[Nate13]

This is completely different, Nate, and you are an intelligent enough person to know it.

There’s a big difference between seeing someone in a Doctor’s UNIFORM and concluding that they are a doctor, and seeing someone in daisy dukes and forming an opinion on their character or morality.

By the way, here’s a picture my husband took of me flying a kite at the beach… in… daisy dukes!

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1146&pictureid=11497

Honestly, I believe that 99% of the people within my cultural boundaries would see nothing inappropriate or scandalous in the above image.

Haha I would argue you are rather well dressed for the beach actually. And you are entirely right that yes 99% of people would probably find nothing scandalous or morally inappropriate in what your wearing, but that is not the question.

The question is how many people will find what you are wearing to be something that is revealing enough to inspire sexual thoughts. In my opinion though your picture here does not meet that requirement or really even gets close. I think there is a difference between wearing daisy dukes to the beach and wearing them to school haha. There is a time and place.

 

[Nate13]

Yes, you make good points. The problem seems to be some think there is only a subjective element to this issue while failing to state there is an objective element.

2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

I would add that the Pope, like God, meets people where they are at currently, but does not leave them there. He calls them to greater conformity to the Gospel imperative.

Exactly, I think that is the point of disagreement. I think there is a point where no matter what that culture is you reach an objective state of immodesty.

 

[bmullins]

This is completely different, Nate, and you are an intelligent enough person to know it.

There’s a big difference between seeing someone in a Doctor’s UNIFORM and concluding that they are a doctor, and seeing someone in daisy dukes and forming an opinion on their character or morality.

By the way, here’s a picture my husband took of me flying a kite at the beach… in… daisy dukes!

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1146&pictureid=11497

Honestly, I believe that 99% of the people within my cultural boundaries would see nothing inappropriate or scandalous in the above image.

When I hear the term daisy dukes, those are not the images that come to my mind. I find those to be fairly conservative for the term.

 

[Debora123]

Exactly, I think that is the point of disagreement. I think there is a point where no matter what that culture is you reach an objective state of immodesty.

But how are tribal women in the jungle being immodest by going topless if their toplessness is seen as normal (not sexual) and does not arouse in the tribal men any lustful thoughts or temptations whatsoever?

Remember, modesty is about purity of mind first and foremost - not necessarily about the number if inches of skin showing at any given time.

Remember JPII’s quote that you and I BOTH posted:

Nakedness itself is not immodest… Immodesty is present only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person, when its aim is to arouse concupiscence, as a result of which the person is put in the position of an object for enjoyment.

 

[Nate13]

This is completely different, Nate, and you are an intelligent enough person to know it.

There’s a big difference between seeing someone in a Doctor’s UNIFORM and concluding that they are a doctor, and seeing someone in daisy dukes and forming an opinion on their character or morality.

 

[Nate13]

But how are tribal women in the jungle being immodest by going topless if their toplessness is seen as normal (not sexual) and does not arouse in the tribal men any lustful thoughts or temptations whatsoever?

I’m answering it. How do you know it does not arouse any lustful thoughts or temptations whatsoever? Of course they are not all walking around physically excited. Being exposed to nakedness constantly will do that. Porn addicts after a point are not sexually excited just by seeing nakedness.

 

[Debora123]

Haha you don’t think those women are objectified by some? What do you think the state of women’s rights are in that part of the World?

I’m not sure, I don’t know enough about their cultures. I know that some indigenous tribes are very sexist, and I know that others view women with great respect because they are the gender that bears children. What exactly is your point? Besides, you didn’t answer my initial question on that post.

Anyway, women will always be “objectified by some,” regardless of what they are wearing or not wearing. Look at the Taliban for example. Covered from head to foot but treated as property, not a person.