Women and Dress

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ransri
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for the snort. šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ˜†šŸ˜†šŸ˜†šŸ˜†

Do they come in pink or a soft blue? Even a nice deep burgundy. These are far more flattering for me than burlap brown.

Or are they dyeable? I’m not adverse to a bit of DIY.
 
Last edited:
Only liturgical colors I’m afraid. So, there will be Rose.

Your bishop can offer dispensations for non liturgical colors. Not sure Archbishop Sample will dispense you. He’s pretty traditional.

We are thinking about offering a special ensemble in virginal white with a blue sash, but some people are concerned that accenting the waist might make the ensemble immodest. :roll_eyes:
 
Only liturgical colors I’m afraid. So, there will be Rose.

Your bishop can offer dispensations for non liturgical colors. Not sure Archbishop Sample will dispense you. He’s pretty traditional.

We are thinking about offering a special ensemble in virginal white with a blue sash, but some people are concerned that accenting the waist might make the ensemble immodest. :roll_eyes:
Le sigh. 😐😐
 
Well, one reason is that men have a bigger problem with lust than women do. I realize that in these times, women are lobbied to be just as if not more so, [fill in the blank here] , than men are (fill in the blank with any characteristic typical of men at all, including ā€œlustfulā€). Following the culture, women are flaunting lustfulness openly and being proud of it - but I assert it is NOT in their souls to be so. It is in their souls to be the woman God created them to be - NOT an ā€œanything a man can do I can do betterā€, ā€œliberatedā€ woman of this dark world. Women are made to be nurturers - ā€œmothersā€ - in families and in humanity/society generally, not objects of lust, not themselves reduced to lustfulness and debased as if it were a badge of victory.

John Paul II saw into this mystery beautifully in the ā€œTheology of the Bodyā€ - woman and man differ in their bodies, and in specific ways, for (divinely designed) reasons. And souls and bodies are intimately connected and interrelated - so ā€œdo the mathā€ as they say. There is a ā€œfeminine soulā€ so to speak, that differs from a ā€œmasculine soul,ā€ in characteristic ways, which the modern darkened world has become blind to and unwilling to look for or look at. And one horrible result is the plague of dysfunctional ā€œfamiliesā€ that populate the country and the culture.

You might be interested in pursuing the subject, by reading JPII’s work in this area, in his Theology of the Body.
Men are not more effected by lust than women. That is a modern idea and in centuries past it was believed that women were more prone to lust, less able to control it. You are just as capable as a woman is at controlling lust and it’s degrading to men to claim otherwise; you are no more lustful or lacking the ability to control yourself than a woman is.

I have read it 😊
 
Someone mentioned that this revival of Puritanism seems to be a reaction to the excess of immodesty in our culture and I’m thinking that’s more and more true.

Belts around the waist immodest because they draw the eye to the waist that everybody knows exists? sigh
 
My long experience in being a man, for many years now, has taught me two things on this subject:
  1. women have no idea how men think,
  2. men have no idea how women think.
I seriously doubt that we mean anything even close to being the same thing, about the word ā€œlustā€.
In the same post where you admit to not knowing how women think you tell women what they think. Impressive.
 
40.png
Pup7:
I know… šŸ˜”

We are trying, but at every turn someone tells us the ensemble still is not modest enough. :cry:
I hear the Taliban have the same issues with the burqua. There’s always something, isn’t there?
 
It’s a Simplicity pattern. And it did come in an ankle length variation. You can probably still find one or a seamstress who can make a good approximation. Ask around.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
How do you explain the attention from Jesus concerning lust in men for women, and no mention of the modern view, of ā€œwe’re all equal in lustā€?
 
The wisdom in JPII’s theology is, I believe, from God. The Holy Spirit was sent by Jesus to lead the Church into all truth. I believe that the Holy Spirit does that very thing, and did so on this very issue through Pope St, John Paul II.
 
Maybe we need those sunglasses with those extra dark lenses so you won’t be able to see or everyone puts another potato sack over their heads.
 
Last edited:
Isn’t the neck area too immodest? I mean, the neck is showing.
 
Well, Jesus didn’t mention a lot of things, doesn’t mean they aren’t relevant or problems. By stating women experience less lust you’re both diminishing women who are able to resist their desires and live celibate but you’re also giving an excuse to men who attempt to place the blame for their lust on women.

I’m not to blame for your lustful thoughts. That’s on you bud. I could wear a burka and my toe peeking out could cause you to lust and that wouldn’t be on me. I could wear a swimsuit and if you looked at me with lust, again, that’s on you. I mean, do you lust after your sister when she wears a swimsuit? If not, then why can’t you control those feelings with other women?

I’m using the royal you. It’s not aimed at you directly but at men who seem to think women are responsible for preventing men from lusting.
 
How do you explain the attention from Jesus concerning lust in men for women, and no mention of the modern view, of ā€œwe’re all equal in lustā€?
He knows that we’ve been told elsewhere that lust is bad. Unless you mean to say women are incapable of adultery? Or it’s okay for us to do?
 
40.png
fide:
How do you explain the attention from Jesus concerning lust in men for women, and no mention of the modern view, of ā€œwe’re all equal in lustā€?
He knows that we’ve been told elsewhere that lust is bad. Unless you mean to say women are incapable of adultery? Or it’s okay for us to do?
It’s a very curious argument to make. If it’s true there are any number of sins women are suddenly not culpable for. That can’t be.
 
Isn’t the neck area too immodest? I mean, the neck is showing.
Do you really need to ruin it for everyone? Mere technicalities, my friend.

šŸ˜†šŸ˜†šŸ˜†šŸ˜†šŸ˜†

(PLEEEEAAAZZZZEEEE know I’m kidding, Ann!!!)
 
Last edited:
It’s not about being equal in Lust but being equally susceptible to Lust. Individual mileage may vary.

Women on average may Lust differently than men.

Take for example bullying. Bullying by men, on average, is more physical and therefore readily identifiable. But does that make men more prone to be bullies? I don’t think so. Female bullies bully by social isolation so they bully differently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top