To be Sexy or not to be Sexy?

[Liberanosamalo]

Ahh… my answer. Where did it go?

I"m trying to raise my daughters to understand that their actions affect others. And that men are wired differently. That a man’s eyes and imagination can’t be toyed with. If a man is not a good person, even a burqa will not keep him from being a perv. But for many honorable guys out there they would have an easier time being virtuous if women dressed with virtue. It’s about treating men and their psychological makeup with respect.

No, they’re not responsible for all a guy’s thoughts. But if they’re dressed skimpily and cause a guy’s attention to wander to what else is being shown, they are responsible for putting themselves in that position. Does any of us really want to be the direct cause of someone else’s sin?

I will not buy mini skirts, spaghetti strap or strapless shirts, backless dresses, midriff-baring or tight or low-cut shirts for my daughters. No low-slung overly tight jeans. I try to tell my daughters that if a guy isn’t looking at their face when they’re around them, they have failed in their wardrobe.

It’s common sense. If you dress skimpily, you invite problems. I dont’ want them to be “teases”. I sub a lot at their high school. I feel sorry for the guys who are trying to concentrate on school with some of those outfits. And in my hot southern state, I can’t imagine the poor men at church facing bare shoulders, low blouses, midriffs, mini skirts, and the occasional woman who shows the world down the back of her pants when she’s sitting in the pew. How do the poor guys pray? That’s mean to do that!

Sorry. I won’t back off this. When the girls come into class with cleavage hanging out, I quietly tell them to cover up. And I smile and tell them their face is so pretty they don’t need to show anything else. Some of them even “get it.”

Timothy, I’m interested. Yes, it’s nice to meet a woman at the beach in a bikini. Good for you! But how do you feel about her now showing the world all her womanly glory? Do you still want her dressing to attract men? Do you still want her to make it easy for men to visualize her undressed? Do you still encourage her to dress sexy for work or going out?

I’m trying to protect the virtue of three VERY beautiful teenage girls. Their father is no help. He’s busy leering at their peers himself. Don’t be so hard on me!

 

[Pixie_Dust]

A mother with teenage boys simply wishes the girls would leave SOMETHING to her sons’ imaginations.

 

[Timothy_486]

Timothy, I’m interested. Yes, it’s nice to meet a woman at the beach in a bikini. Good for you! But how do you feel about her now showing the world all her womanly glory? Do you still want her dressing to attract men? Do you still want her to make it easy for men to visualize her undressed? Do you still encourage her to dress sexy for work or going out?

All I am saying is that it requires a balance and an understanding of the situation you are in. I think we could all agree that a hot summer beach vs going to church require different clothing, no question about it. And i see no problem with a single girl dressing somewhat sexy as a way of attracting a man if she is looking for a commitment. But as I said, you don’t want some girl to go around dressing so trashy that you swear she is the neighborhood bicycle.

 

[Cari]

If people aren’t responsible for HAVING lustful thoughts, but rather for ENTERTAINING them, then I’m still not buying that one person is responsible for another’s thoughts.

I think that this:

Their father is no help. He’s busy leering at their peers himself. Don’t be so hard on me!

sheds more light on your stance than anything else. My heart goes out to you in this situation. However, apply your reasoning to the situation at hand. Are these teenage peers really responsible for your husband’s lust, or is it the grown man who needs to pray for spiritual strength?

God bless,
Cari

 

[Liberanosamalo]

Oh, no… that’s not what I meant to say at all. He’s now my ex husband. And I don’t think anyone is responsible for his thoughts. I’m just looking at NORMAL NICE men who are going about their daily business trying to be good, and then out of nowhere they get an eye full of voluptuousness and skin and body parts hanging out of flimsy cloth. I think that is a disrespect to them and a disservice to the men (who are wired differently than women and react much more strongly to visual cues than teenage girls may realize.)

I long ago gave up trying to be the guardian of any kind of virtue for the father of my children…

 

[Smber2c]

If people aren’t responsible for HAVING lustful thoughts, but rather for ENTERTAINING them, then I’m still not buying that one person is responsible for another’s thoughts.

I’d say that there is a bit of misunderstanding going on here that leads to a second false conclusion.

It is correct that people are not responsible for having lustful thoughts…usually. If a man goes into a strip club then sits there ‘trying to resist’, he is still sinning. He has placed himself in “the near occasion of sin” - so even if sitting in there he struggles mightly against impure thought for every second that he’s in the room, he still sins by agreeing to enter that position of temptation.

If the above is true, then it would seemingly follow that people placing others in a similar (if lesser) situation through a desire for their own self-gratification or just by not caring for others state of temptation…could also sinning (likely venially though possibly mortaly at times).

 

[Liberanosamalo]

Thank you. That’s exactly what I mean! I wouldn’t want to be the near occasion of sin for someone else.

 

[chevalier]

Is it right for people to try and look sexy for people they aren’t meant to have sex with?

I believe it’s wrong to attempt any level of compulsion in anything sexual and that also includes people inducing other people into involuntary sexual reactions with the kind of clothing they wear. This may even actually include spouses, depending on the situation.

So, as I start into this I know that a good number of people would just dismiss the whole thing by saying dressing sexy just means #2, making oneself appealing. But you can’t remove the erotic association (def. #1) from a sexy appearance.

Correct, you cannot. In fact, I believe people will be inclined to intend #1 while hiding behind #2. Hinting at sexual matters and/or sexual capabilities is a risky thing. I believe the sexually suggestive is wrong on the grounds that it’s wrong to be sexually available outside marriage and it’s wrong to suggest such sexual availability as is not actually true, as well. Therefore it’s wrong to indicate sexual availability outside marriage.

As for attractiveness, I would say it depends on the power of the impression, i.e. how compelling it is and also on the kind and depth of the association. It’s not wrong to be pretty. It’s not wrong to have great legs. It’s not wrong to have great legs and show them. It’s wrong to present one’s body as sexually gratifying, tempting to illicit acts or thoughts, so essentially the problem of indicating sexual availability.

I don’t want to enter into any debate about how short is too short or how tight is too tight. I will also avoid the word “stimulation” because of its ambiguity. Similarly, I don’t want to make generalisations like it’s always wrong to appeal to the biological drive. Strictly speaking, putting on a nice suit for a date might be appealing to a girl’s biological drive, now how doest that feel? So, basically, one is not supposed to induce others to fantasise, to lead them to orgasm etc. One is not supposed to incite lust in others or to accept such a possibility as a good thing.

I’ve recently started to think about “sexiness” as one of the main female failings of emotional development. Men want some physical satisfaction as mentioned above. Women want some mental/emotional satisfaction of being desired.

Yes, it’s a distortion. In some cases, it’s a certain kind of exchange of services. An exchange of services of a sexual nature outside marriage is wrong. This is not to say wearing mini skirts to fish for compliments is wrong, but if it’s something that will lead a normal man (or some expected spectator) to erection if he keeps looking, then I guess it’s wrong to wear that on purpose.

except sexual dress in concealed in a different way - denial. It is concealed in the second definition of sexy (appealing), pretending that that first (erotic) doesn’t exist

If sexy weren’t about sex, it wouldn’t need sex in the root. I suppose the word is so common these days that it doesn’t always inevitably stand for something sinful, but generally, if people insist on sexiness, that’s some kind of playing around with other people’s sex drives.

or wasn’t what they were trying to attain so it doesn’t matter if is is such feeling are being aroused in others.

Oh yeah, they basically intend it without intending it, if you catch my drift.

Every magazine flashes cleavage.

Yup, strikes me as wrong. Curiously, however, cleavage itself doesn’t always. Sometimes it just doesn’t have a sexual feel, even if the girl is pretty and the cleavage not that small. It’s difficult to tell. Note that in the past times, acceptable cleavage sizes used to be greater than the current norm of decency.

So, I’m just wondering, when is it correct for people to try looking sexy? Society of course says whenever. Feel good. Be a free spirit.

It’s always wrong to attempt to compell someone against his will. It’s wrong to offer or seek or enjoy sexual gratification outside its proper context (procreative and unitive consensual act in marriage). I will not translate this into inches, however.

My opinion is that these is only one place that this intention is appropriate: behind closed doors with our spouse (the only person we’re meant to have sex with).

Can still be objectifying and objectification is always wrong. Whatever is degrading or objectifying is wrong and being married doesn’t remove the problem. I don’t think hooker accessories belong in a marital bedroom.

 

[valient_Lucy]

There’s a difference between looking attractive and seductive.

 

[chevalier]

Well, yes, but seductive is vague. Wearing a nice, flattering dress around a prospective fiance with the intent of catching his eye could be interpreted as seductive and I don’t see it on the same level as, let’s say, the kind of stuff so many highschoolers wear.

 

[Cari]

It is correct that people are not responsible for having lustful thoughts…usually. If a man goes into a strip club then sits there ‘trying to resist’, he is still sinning. He has placed himself in “the near occasion of sin” - so even if sitting in there he struggles mightly against impure thought for every second that he’s in the room, he still sins by agreeing to enter that position of temptation.

If the above is true, then it would seemingly follow that people placing others in a similar (if lesser) situation through a desire for their own self-gratification or just by not caring for others state of temptation…could also sinning (likely venially though possibly mortaly at times).

I’ve thought a lot about this post before I responded to it, and I have to say that making the connection between strippers at an “adult club” and teenaged girls is appalling.

The whole point I was making was that it was my personal opinion that a mother telling her teenaged girls that THEY were responsible for lustful thoughts men might have about them is imprudent and false.

To say that teenagers put men into a similar situation as strippers do because they are looking for their own self-gratification or just don’t care about others is both misleading and false. A man finding “near occasion to sin” by entering a strip joint is not the same as a man finding it by going to a mall where teenagers hang out.

While I understand and agree with setting modest standards of dress for one’s children, I go about it by explaining to my children that their bodies are presents for their future spouses (if they are called to marriage). As such, these “gifts” are to be protected, cared for, and not put on display for others. I would never tell my daughter that she is responsible for the lustful thoughts of men- because she isn’t. As has been pointed out by others, there are some men who would find a burqua the launching pad for lustful thoughts.

“If a man wants to have sex with you because he is attracted to the way you’re dressed it’s your fault” is one degree removed from “You asked to be raped because you were wearing that skirt”.

 

[Cat]

There’s a really thought-provoking Benny Hill skit.

A gaggle of men are standing around on the beach, and all these beautiful, half-nekkid women parade by, and the men utterly ignore them. They yawn, they read the paper, they simply don’t notice the beauties.

And then a plain woman in a modest dress and eyeglasses walks by, and all the men go wild! They drop their newspapers and start chasing her.

I don’t think that modest dress will necessarily stop lustful thoughts. There is a huge cult of those who find the “Catholic school look” arousing. Plaid skirts to the knee, white blouses, loafers–these drive some men (and women) wild.

In the Victorian times, women completely covered their bodies, but men still found them arousing. Same for pioneer times in the U.S. Long dresses do not stop a man from having sexual thoughts about a woman. In fact, sometimes the man will fantasize even more, as he wonders what’s UNDER the long dress. (This is the point of the Benny Hill skit above.)

I think it’s just the way God made us–male and female. I think that no matter what a woman wears and no matter what her size is, there will always be men who will be aroused by her.

I think that what men find most arousing is a woman who is comfortable with herself and others. This has nothing to do with dress.

To me the answer is that men (and women) need to seek the grace of God to have self-control. The thoughts will enter the mind, but what will we DO with those thoughts?

 

[Zooey]

just because they sell shorts with “hottie” written on the rear end in size 3x doesn’t mean you should wear them.

Speaking as a 3X sized, woman::bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes:

 

[Smber2c]

I think that what men find most arousing is a woman who is comfortable with herself and others. This has nothing to do with dress.
To me the answer is that men (and women) need to seek the grace of God to have self-control. The thoughts will enter the mind, but what will we DO with those thoughts?

Cat, I appreciate you thoughts on this, but completely disagree. We are a fallen people, and your brothers in Christ need your help. Men as you suggest will always struggle with lust, but why add to the problem?

I would suggest that the Benny Hill skit, while amusing is just not true. Yes, men want to be seen with women of character, with all the morals and convictions of Mother Mary. But men want to leer at women with their chests falling out.

I grew up in New Orleans and know all about Catholic school uniforms. They aren’t sexy in the least. People make them sexy by wearing a shirt 2X too small and tying a knot in the bottom after school. After squeezing into this shirt for 2 months when they finally get used to it, they will then defend it saying that it’s what is comfortable and other shirts feel baggy. They are in a way being truthful, but they conditioned themselves to prefer that state, and if needed could condition themselves to comfort in respectable clothes also.

But the idea that Pioneer dresses, Catholic School uniforms, librarians, or any of that stuff as sexy is only because as some sad lowest level people like the power behind the idea of pulling down someone who is pure. These conservative types represent purity, and there is some thrill in being so mocho that even a virgin can’t resist me.

And you are right, women can’t prevent that. But don’t think that men look at a long dress and think “oh all that long dress with all of its fabric, so sexy… if I could get her to come back in my room and stand around for 2 hours wearing that long dress I’d be so lucky”.

Decent clothes don’t ‘arouse men’. Indecent clothes may excite men. And once excited then most men will mentally degrade any woman they see no matter the clothing worn.

 

[LittleDeb]

This is an interesting discussion and thankfully hasn’t gone down the path of some similar ones. Thanks for addressing it! This topic is one I struggle to balance. I had sexiness issues as a teen. I am a professional costume designer and seamstress in my spare time. And I am a mother.

I was surprised to find a T.V. show “What not to Wear,” that actually addresses some of these topics. My best friend and my 6 year old niece, both very modest, love it and got me watching. The common theme there is to dress in ways that are attractive, yet appropriate.

They tend to use the word ‘sexy’ in a way that means more, “with respect to one’s sex,” than a “flaunt it” attitude. I like that. They steer people away from many things discussed here for the sheer fact that they look wrong in it. I discovered from watching the show that the mini-skirts I wore in high school were a bad idea because they drew the eye away from my pretty face toward my skinny legs. As a designer myself it helped me look at things a little differently.

It is nearly impossible for me not to show cleavage. Only if something touches my throat can I avoid it. This show reaffirmed what I had learned about it from design. If every thing is being carried where it belongs and covered correctly it is possible to be modest without being strangled.

Yes there are a few outfits that are still a little too over the top, but on the whole I have been impressed with many of their ideas. I was actually pleasantly surprised that their tendencies lean towards more coverage rather than less. In the end all of the people do look more attractive without necessarily looking more “sexy.”

I certainly agree, true ‘sexy’ belongs privately with one’s spouse. ‘Attractive’ is more of a general term whose opposite word is ‘repulsive.’

 

[marybee]

ok People hold your fire! I think SEXY is ok, SEXUAL is different. I think you can be completely modest and SEXY. SEXUAL attire is skanky. Think of an evening gown, they go to the floor, and come up higher to the neck. That is SEXY! It shows off the hour glass figure, but it also covers up. A person who dresses sexy does not have to be a “SKANK”.

I think SEXY can cause a man to say, “AH she is beautiful” Sexual causes a man to say, “Ah, she’d be good in bed, I can tell”

 

[Eliza10]

To be sexy - - “sexy” says, “good for sex”. If that is a person’s identity, or what they want the world to know about who they are and what they have to offer, then dressing sexy would suit.

 

[ltbpoe43]

Isn’t it up to the mind and eye of the beholder?

One cannot control what others think of how we dress.

One can only control the manner and intent of how we dress.

 

[Smber2c]

Isn’t it up to the mind and eye of the beholder?
One cannot control what others think of how we dress.
One can only control the manner and intent of how we dress.

Well, actully that’s just avoiding the whole issue of what was asked in the beginning. The question is, “Is it moral for people to choose to dress in what they think of as sexy clothes?”

So saying, “One cannot control what others think” doesn’t mean anything. The question is can:
Pamela Anderson morally choose to wear what Pamela Anderson thinks is sexy?
Can Laura Bush morally choose to wear what Laura Bush thinks is sexy?
Can Pope Benedict morally choose to wear what Pope Benidict thinks is sexy?
Can ______ morally choose to wear w…I’d imagine we’ve got the idea by now.