Women's Fashion

[mitzicross]

---

There is no evidence that our Lady of Fatima said “there will be fashions that are offensive to God etc.” You will find no such words from our Lady–at the Vatican site.

Um, see above. Thanks.

 

[mitzicross]

The whole body of human is sexual, because human is a sexual being. Even if a woman covers her whole body, there is always something about her that will still attract men, simply because she is a woman. To dress modestly do not guarantee men of lust will not think of “body parts”. Thus in order to subdue impure thought is not by asking women to dress modestly. Instead, men must learn to be responsible of his own choices. Both man and woman are called to chastity.

Society and puritan culture think that women are in charge when it is regarding men’s sexual thoughts. This is the opposite of what the bible say. The bible say that woman is taken from man. If men wants women to be transformed into new creation, men must be transformed first. Not the other way round. All sexual immorality in this world are initiated by men, not women. Take away those immoral men who spend their money for prostitutes, and there will be no brothels to operate. You see that men-- when it’s regarding sex-- they are in charge.

If we women allow men to think of ourselves as immodest based only on our outfit, then we are not subject of our own self. We are not in charge even of our own clothes. And men will not be in charge of their own thoughts. So we shall blame it all to ANY exposed body parts for ANY impure thoughts.

The occasion of temptation as you put it is everywhere. The source of the temptation is not woman’s body on its own. The source of the temptation is, first of all, one’s own mind. And to subdue such mind is by rejecting the way of thinking (the way of thinking that say “impure thought is the result of immodest clothes of others”). To blame it to immodesty is to agree with such thinking (that impure thought is a result of immodest clothes of others). To agree with such thinking is to succumb under its power.

There has been examples of many cultures where men and women wear minimal clothes or even none, and the men there have no problem with such “nakedness”. There is no immodest thoughts to their minds: for their community, the women are modest the way they are.

God bless you

I see what you are saying. I am fine with that answer, and hope you are right. I still want to take this into prayer as there are so many differing opinions. I have no personal problem with slacks. Of course, low riders that appear painted on with a nice thong and very lovely tattoo, are not what I think of as modest, and I am certain no one else here does either.

But, I am still wondering if men are sexually stimulated more by slacks than a dress. I just want to hear what they have to say about it, but it seems they have gotten very quiet on the matter all the sudden. Curious.

I think slacks may be fine outside mass, as long as they are loose fitting and not sheer. White slacks with black undies are common in more ways than one. I think a dress, though, seems to be more appropriate for mass. I feel God is calling me to wear them for mass, but can’t help but wonder what would happen if all women of Christian morality switched to wearing them? Would there be a change in fashion all around? Supply and demand would certainly be affected. Young people would see how nice a woman can look when she is dressed to please God. We could model modesty in a very dramatic way, without preaching. I would think if we all joined together, it would have some affect on society. Not certain if God is calling for this, but I don’t think He would be offended by it. Just a thought.

Oh, and by the way, I have read a lot about primitive cultures where little clothing is worn, not because of that…but, there is often a lot of promiscuity in those cultures. I don’t know if I can say all of them, but the ones I have read about seem to be that way. One of the primary places I read about was on the Amazon in South America where members of various tribes don’t attach themselves to any one individual in the tribe and those who behave jealously are out cast. Interesting to know how often that is the case as opposed to the opposite being true.

 

[severus68]

The whole body of human is sexual, because human is a sexual being. Even if a woman covers her whole body, there is always something about her that will still attract men, simply because she is a woman. To dress modestly do not guarantee men of lust will not think of “body parts”. Thus in order to subdue impure thought is not by asking women to dress modestly. Instead, men must learn to be responsible of his own choices. Both man and woman are called to chastity.

Society and puritan culture think that women are in charge when it is regarding men’s sexual thoughts. This is the opposite of what the bible say. The bible say that woman is taken from man. If men wants women to be transformed into new creation, men must be transformed first. Not the other way round. All sexual immorality in this world are initiated by men, not women. Take away those immoral men who spend their money for prostitutes, and there will be no brothels to operate. You see that men-- when it’s regarding sex-- they are in charge.

If we women allow men to think of ourselves as immodest based only on our outfit, then we are not subject of our own self. We are not in charge even of our own clothes. And men will not be in charge of their own thoughts. So we shall blame it all to ANY exposed body parts for ANY impure thoughts.

The occasion of temptation as you put it is everywhere. The source of the temptation is not woman’s body on its own. The source of the temptation is, first of all, one’s own mind. And to subdue such mind is by rejecting the way of thinking (the way of thinking that say “impure thought is the result of immodest clothes of others”). To blame it to immodesty is to agree with such thinking (that impure thought is a result of immodest clothes of others). To agree with such thinking is to succumb under its power.

There has been examples of many cultures where men and women wear minimal clothes or even none, and the men there have no problem with such “nakedness”. There is no immodest thoughts to their minds: for their community, the women are modest the way they are.

God bless you

Thank you. Well said. This excuse of women’s dress causing men to sin is also given as a reason and even an excuse for rape which is actually about power. Its also demeaning for men to be thought to be unable to control themselves.

 

[severus68]

I see what you are saying. I am fine with that answer, and hope you are right. I still want to take this into prayer as there are so many differing opinions. I have no personal problem with slacks. Of course, low riders that appear painted on with a nice thong and very lovely tattoo, are not what I think of as modest, and I am certain no one else here does either.

But, I am still wondering if men are sexually stimulated more by slacks than a dress. I just want to hear what they have to say about it, but it seems they have gotten very quiet on the matter all the sudden. Curious.

I think slacks may be fine outside mass, as long as they are loose fitting and not sheer. White slacks with black undies are common in more ways than one. I think a dress, though, seems to be more appropriate for mass. I feel God is calling me to wear them for mass, but can’t help but wonder what would happen if all women of Christian morality switched to wearing them? Would there be a change in fashion all around? Supply and demand would certainly be affected. Young people would see how nice a woman can look when she is dressed to please God. We could model modesty in a very dramatic way, without preaching. I would think if we all joined together, it would have some affect on society. Not certain if God is calling for this, but I don’t think He would be offended by it. Just a thought.

Oh, and by the way, I have read a lot about primitive cultures where little clothing is worn, not because of that…but, there is often a lot of promiscuity in those cultures. I don’t know if I can say all of them, but the ones I have read about seem to be that way. One of the primary places I read about was on the Amazon in South America where members of various tribes don’t attach themselves to any one individual in the tribe and those who behave jealously are out cast. Interesting to know how often that is the case as opposed to the opposite being true.

Its fine if you feel called to dress in a certain way but not everyone agrees with you. Its also your opinion.

I do think you are being prejudiced, uncharitable and being unChristian about making comments about people in other parts of the world. What do you really know about them. You may call them primitive because they do not live in nice houses like you with a washer, dryer but are you right to do so when we are supposed to be more enlightened today?

 

[francisca]

Thank you. Well said. This excuse of women’s dress causing men to sin is also given as a reason and even an excuse for rape which is actually about power. Its also demeaning for men to be thought to be unable to control themselves.

Yes.

 

[francisca]

Oh, and by the way, I have read a lot about primitive cultures where little clothing is worn, not because of that…but, there is often a lot of promiscuity in those cultures.

And so a lot of promiscuity in our culture and puritan culture both modern and in the past as well.

 

[catholicmamajoy]

I see what you are saying. I am fine with that answer, and hope you are right. I still want to take this into prayer as there are so many differing opinions. I have no personal problem with slacks. Of course, low riders that appear painted on with a nice thong and very lovely tattoo, are not what I think of as modest, and I am certain no one else here does either.

But, I am still wondering if men are sexually stimulated more by slacks than a dress. I just want to hear what they have to say about it, but it seems they have gotten very quiet on the matter all the sudden. Curious.

I think slacks may be fine outside mass, as long as they are loose fitting and not sheer. White slacks with black undies are common in more ways than one. I think a dress, though, seems to be more appropriate for mass. I feel God is calling me to wear them for mass, but can’t help but wonder what would happen if all women of Christian morality switched to wearing them? Would there be a change in fashion all around? Supply and demand would certainly be affected. Young people would see how nice a woman can look when she is dressed to please God. We could model modesty in a very dramatic way, without preaching. I would think if we all joined together, it would have some affect on society. Not certain if God is calling for this, but I don’t think He would be offended by it. Just a thought.

Oh, and by the way, I have read a lot about primitive cultures where little clothing is worn, not because of that…but, there is often a lot of promiscuity in those cultures. I don’t know if I can say all of them, but the ones I have read about seem to be that way. One of the primary places I read about was on the Amazon in South America where members of various tribes don’t attach themselves to any one individual in the tribe and those who behave jealously are out cast. Interesting to know how often that is the case as opposed to the opposite being true.

Oh Mitzi… Two things here.

First: You cannot stew around whether men are more stimulated by a woman wearing modest pants over a modest skirt…It would be like pondering over if men are more stimulated by a blonde women so you then go and dye your natural blonde hair to brown as not to tempt men, or if men are more stimulated by a women with pale skin, so you do all you can to get tan so you won’t “stimulate” a man, or get blue contacts because you read that men like green eyes… ALL MEN are different! Some like tall women, some like short, some like thin women, some like voluptuous ones. There is too much over-thinking (and some scrupulosity in play) when we start worrying about our own modest appearance stimulating a man. That’s when we need to turn it over to God and realize that men are responsible for their own actions when it comes to this!!!

Second: You mentioned “dressed to please God” if we all wore skirts…do you honestly think a women in loose-fitting women’s trousers is “unpleasing” to God? Do you think God is less pleased with all the devout women that wear pants? Do you think he favors women in dresses and skirts over His daughters in pants? In all charity, I want to give you time to reply before I comment any more about that since I found your comment a wee bit offensive and with the sincerity of your other posts, I think there is a chance that was not what you meant or perhaps I misread your post…

 

[Jane11]

Modesty does not change over time as God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
However, the problem is FINDING things to wear that are decent!

Does ANYONE have a store or website that offers modest ready-to-wear clothes? This is the heart of the matter. If you can’t find it, you can’t wear it.

 

[catholicmamajoy]

Modesty does not change over time as God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
However, the problem is FINDING things to wear that are decent!

Does ANYONE have a store or website that offers modest ready-to-wear clothes? This is the heart of the matter. If you can’t find it, you can’t wear it.

www.jjill.com

www.softsurroundings.com

 

[catholicmamajoy]

Modesty does not change over time as God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
However, the problem is FINDING things to wear that are decent!

Does ANYONE have a store or website that offers modest ready-to-wear clothes? This is the heart of the matter. If you can’t find it, you can’t wear it.

These sites tend to be mentioned here on CAF a lot:

jjill.com/jjillonline/index.aspx

softsurroundings.com/

coldwatercreek.com/?bpid=125

shabbyapple.com/ (tends to be geared towards younger women)

Obviously not all of their items are going to meet each woman’s definition of modest, or her personal style preference, or budget, but the clothes there tend to be much more classic and provide more coverage than what you can find at the mall. Oh, make sure you check if they have an “outlet” or “clearance” site, too. I get my clothes from the jjill outlet (regular jjill can be pricey if it’s not on sale). Also, if you find you like the company, type in their brand name and your size on eBay…I’ve found several jjill things there for a fraction of the cost (and although Soft Surroundings is out of my budget, you can find those things on eBay, too).

 

[DAAVEED1590]

I didn’t feel your post used harsh language at all. What I was getting at was that there are certain sites out there that mesh quite a bit of personal opinion in with authentic Church teaching and thus have good folks thinking the website’s owner or author’s opinion is actual Church teaching. As far as Catholic Apologetics …as long as one realizes a fair amount of their site is personal opionion, that’s fine…Marian Therese Horvat has wrote a nice little article on what she** feels is appropriate wear for women. Along the lines of her post (which similar topics have been discussed ad nauseum here on CAF since the forum started years ago), the whole “women shouldn’t dress in men’s clothes” verse from the OT is not a call for women to refrain from wearing pants, (and as any Biblical historian will affirm, men in Biblical times, in the Middle East, did not wear pants; they wore robes and tunics), it is a call for each gender to avoid wearing the other’s clothes (as in “cross-dressing”). It’s a call against dressing to attract those with homosexual tendencies. Since there are pants and trousers specifically made for women, as long as a women wears a pair of pants made for her, not her husband, there is not a problem. Even if she did throw on her hubby’s sweatpants, if she’s not out trying to attract other women in them (by pretending to be a male and “pick them up”), it’s a non-issue. Besides, both men and women have been wearing “pants” in other cultures since the beginning of time. While the wearing of two-legged lower appendage coverings for women may be “new” to Europeans (new as in the last 2 hundred years), it’s nothing new to those in the Far East, the Native Americans, and other cultures. While it’s not as “frilly” to see a women in appropriately fitting trousers, it’s certainly not immodest.

Having read Catholic Apoligetics, I can concur that most of the imformation is not personal opinion. The imformation on the site is teachings from the chatechism, and the writings of the Saints, Church fathers, and Popes. Just because it is not in the chatechism, dosent mean it isnt a teaching of the church (or a personal opinion). The Chatechism is just a very basic overview of the teachings of the church, not a compleat, infaliable document. Using other sources (saints, Popes, Church fathers) is perfectly exceptable when formulation church teaching.

On another note, pants in their origin (they originate as a germanic mens fashion in the 1st centuary BC) are a mens fashion. Now-a-days, they make them for women as well, but in their orign they are an invention for men. However, as long as they are not tight (or even remotely so) it would not be immodest to wear them as you have said. In gereral, though, finding womens trousers that are not thight is hard, as that is the fashion (one of the immodest fashions that angers God, as Our Lady of Fatima warrned about.

 

[catholicmamajoy]

Having read Catholic Apoligetics, I can concur that most of the imformation is not personal opinion. The imformation on the site is teachings from the chatechism, and the writings of the Saints, Church fathers, and Popes. Just because it is not in the chatechism, dosent mean it isnt a teaching of the church (or a personal opinion). The Chatechism is just a very basic overview of the teachings of the church, not a compleat, infaliable document. Using other sources (saints, Popes, Church fathers) is perfectly exceptable when formulation church teaching.

On another note, pants in their origin (they originate as a germanic mens fashion in the 1st centuary BC) are a mens fashion. Now-a-days, they make them for women as well, but in their orign they are an invention for men. However, as long as they are not tight (or even remotely so) it would not be immodest to wear them as you have said. In gereral, though, finding womens trousers that are not thight is hard, as that is the fashion (one of the immodest fashions that angers God, as Our Lady of Fatima warrned about.

In the first century BC, people of all cultures were wearing skins in all forms (even the guys were wearing what we’d call skirts

the following is “cut and pasted” from Wikipedia (yep, I know it’s not always the most reliable source, but it’s a quick look ): Trousers first enter recorded history in the 6th century BCE, with the appearance of horse-riding Iranian peoples in Greek ethnography. At this time, not only the Persians, but also allied Central Asian peoples such as the Bactrians, Armenians, and the Tigraxauda Scythians are known to have worn them.[4][5] Trousers are believed to have been worn by both sexes among these early users.[6]

…and I won’t even get into the evidence showing what appears to be pants on a women in the paleolithic era…too much ruckus about the age of earth and humans. (from the same wikipedia site).

But, thanks for voicing your opinion about modest women’s trousers!

 

[cathlicconvert]

This has been a very interesting thread. Men are definately responsible for their thoughts. But to deny the impact a womens dress/behaviour has on a mens sexual desire is rather ignorant in my opinion. I know for myself personally I came from a sinful past where I engaged and propogated many sins of the flesh. Womens dress most definately makes it harder to control my lusftul tendencies now. I pray, go to confession when it causes me to fall, and do my best to have pure and holy thoughts. But if I see a women in tight fitting clothing, scantily clad, revealing clothing, etc. then it is a true challenge… still my responsibility to control. But I do think the OP is correct in her desire to help others like myself control this.

My wife also points out (as it has been touched on in this thread) that men need to be modest too. And that while traditionally women may not have been visually stimulated as much, our culture has sexualized everything to the point that women are prone to the same temptation. So as a man I don’t go shirtless anywhere (even at the beach or pool I wear a swim shirt), I don’t wear tight fitting pants (as skinny jeans are popular now among some men), and I refrain from wearing sleeveless shirts on most occasions.

As to the OPs question about what men find stimulating sexually (from a visual standpoint). I can’t answer for others… but for myself the things that tempt me the most when seeing either the skin or outline through tight or see through cloting are:

-breasts
-butt
-thigh (above knee)
-genitals
-stomach
-back (lower and upper if the individual is healthy and in good shape)
-arm pits (I think this is something weird and unique to me though)

 

[francisca]

Modesty does not change over time as God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
However, the problem is FINDING things to wear that are decent!

Does ANYONE have a store or website that offers modest ready-to-wear clothes? This is the heart of the matter. If you can’t find it, you can’t wear it.

You’ve said it loud and clear

We women spend quite some of our free time to walk in between shop shelves looking for “our modest selves” and most of the time we can’t find ANY!

 

[francisca]

My wife also points out (as it has been touched on in this thread) that men need to be modest too. And that while traditionally women may not have been visually stimulated as much, our culture has sexualized everything to the point that women are prone to the same temptation.

Despite women are sexual being and maybe stimulated by visual as well, not many women complain about man’s modesty. Why? Because our society do not allow women to have impure thoughts. Women learn since young to behave according to what society expect “how a lady should behave”. However, our society is more “understanding” (read: permissive) towards men when it’s regarding sex. Our society (especially our modern society) do “understand” that men always have impure thoughts about women, and it’s OK to behave that way, because he is a man. But if a woman do that, wait a minute… is she trying to seduce every men with that outfit? Hmm…

 

[mitzicross]

Oh Mitzi… Two things here.

First: You cannot stew around whether men are more stimulated by a woman wearing modest pants over a modest skirt…It would be like pondering over if men are more stimulated by a blonde women so you then go and dye your natural blonde hair to brown as not to tempt men, or if men are more stimulated by a women with pale skin, so you do all you can to get tan so you won’t “stimulate” a man, or get blue contacts because you read that men like green eyes… ALL MEN are different! Some like tall women, some like short, some like thin women, some like voluptuous ones. There is too much over-thinking (and some scrupulosity in play) when we start worrying about our own modest appearance stimulating a man. That’s when we need to turn it over to God and realize that men are responsible for their own actions when it comes to this!!!

Second: You mentioned “dressed to please God” if we all wore skirts…do you honestly think a women in loose-fitting women’s trousers is “unpleasing” to God? Do you think God is less pleased with all the devout women that wear pants? Do you think he favors women in dresses and skirts over His daughters in pants? In all charity, I want to give you time to reply before I comment any more about that since I found your comment a wee bit offensive and with the sincerity of your other posts, I think there is a chance that was not what you meant or perhaps I misread your post…

No, you are right, I did not mean that I am leaving my wardrobe up to the preferences of all men. I do, however, feel that an honest and sincere male who loves God and has an honest opinion is a valuable resource since neither you, nor I, knows what stimulates him. I can’t help but be interested in hearing what they have to say on the subject. Neither will I run out and tan, or change my hair/eye color to please anyone. I do want to please God, and I am saying what I believe to be true, that He is please when I wear feminine clothing that is also modest. I just feel this, I can’t say He spoke to me and told me so. And, I can’t say what it is He is calling for you. You are pleasing Him when you are doing what you believe He is calling you to do. I am not even saying dresses are more pleasing to God over all…just that modest feminine dress worn by women of God in order to set an example seems like an intriguing way to begin to turn the tide from the immoral dress we see every day including Sunday at mass. I am not certain God is calling for that, but what if He is? I think it would be the same as the entire Christian community resolving to tell only the truth, no matter how difficult in an effort to combat the deception that has our world in it’s grip. I believe we should not lie, and that if we really committed to the truth, God would bless that, and like the loaves an fishes, would perpetuate that among our non Christian brothers and sisters. I didn’t mean to offend you, but I am really surprised at how offended some women get when talking about this subject. Are we afraid of not being in control of what we wear? Maybe so, I feel kind of weird about it myself. But, I am more interested in doing God’s will for me, than I am about fashion, trends, freedom to choose, etc. That is just my opinion at this moment as I begin to explore this issue. And, I want to make something clear that I think I made misleading in an earlier post. I do not dress that way every day. I wear loose fitting slacks and capri’s with modest tops for everyday wear. I dress in the dresses mentioned above for mass. I am wondering if God may be calling me to do more, but I have not decided yet. Thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut. Peace to you.

 

[mitzicross]

You’ve said it loud and clear

We women spend quite some of our free time to walk in between shop shelves looking for “our modest selves” and most of the time we can’t find ANY!

I have begun to pray about it and two friends have just lost weight, so they gave me their dresses which are exactly what I wanted. I am loosing weight, too, otherwise they wouldn’t have fit me strangely enough. However, I see skirts everywhere that fit the bill. Blouses are hard to find because they are all so low cut it is hard to avoid exposing cleavage. But, they are out there. The internet has everything. And, if we really wanted this, God would bless us and we would find what we needed. Then, with the law of supply and demand, manufacturers would have to supply what we were demanding. IMHO. Peace to you both.

 

[mitzicross]

Despite women are sexual being and maybe stimulated by visual as well, not many women complain about man’s modesty. Why? Because our society do not allow women to have impure thoughts. Women learn since young to behave according to what society expect “how a lady should behave”. However, our society is more “understanding” (read: permissive) towards men when it’s regarding sex. Our society (especially our modern society) do “understand” that men always have impure thoughts about women, and it’s OK to behave that way, because he is a man. But if a woman do that, wait a minute… is she trying to seduce every men with that outfit? Hmm…

Have you seen Girls Gone Wild, have you watched any kind of reality teen show? Have you seen the abs these boys are sporting now a days because they have heard loud and clear from our young girls, yes…and old as well, that men’s chests and boodies are very much sexually stimulating to females? I have 3 teens and a 9 year old who have all expressed this understanding. Girls are chasing the guys for sex just as the guys used to be known for doing. Yes, society has corrupted God’s gift of purity to women…it’s over folks, believe it. The question is, what are we doing about it? If the answer is we are pointing fingers at those who have bad thoughts and it is just their problem, well…you see how that is working. I can’t force any man to pull up his pants and put a shirt on, but I can dress myself. That is where I have to start. Peace to you.

 

[JoArtist]

Have you seen Girls Gone Wild, have you watched any kind of reality teen show? Have you seen the abs these boys are sporting now a days because they have heard loud and clear from our young girls, yes…and old as well, that men’s chests and boodies are very much sexually stimulating to females? I have 3 teens and a 9 year old who have all expressed this understanding. Girls are chasing the guys for sex just as the guys used to be known for doing. Yes, society has corrupted God’s gift of purity to women…it’s over folks, believe it. The question is, what are we doing about it? If the answer is we are pointing fingers at those who have bad thoughts and it is just their problem, well…you see how that is working. I can’t force any man to pull up his pants and put a shirt on, but I can dress myself. That is where I have to start. Peace to you.

Well I know women are visual as well. I am more visual than my husband. I have had countless people though tell me that that is a man’s struggle and not a woman’s (especially those in the church). I read a NFP book that said women should dress modest as to not to cause men to lust and men should dress modest as to not cause gay men to lust! What about women? The way people dress affects us too. Stereotypes.

Also men put all the responsibility on women and expect them to wear clothing that is not practical for the weather, getting jobs, ect. to prevent them from lusting. People need to take responsibility of their sins instead of just blaming others. We need to dress to a reasonable standard of modesty and practicality.

How do these men expect to live in the real world? Even if all the Catholic women dressed in a way that covered everything, others still would dress less covered than they did and you would just lust after them instead. Also like in the Victorian era when men lusted over ankles, we would have a similar effect. What men and women need to do is to work on themselves and STOP putting the blame on others.

 

[Jane11]

The point is not what men think, it’s what God thinks. Whoever said that men are responsible is correct. From what I can tell it’s a question of dressing to please God, not to
discourage men.

Again, does anyone know of anyplace that offers decent clothing?