Would not wearing a bra be immodest?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holly3278
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Holly3278

Guest
Hey everyone. If a woman is being modest otherwise but is not wearing a bra, would that be immodest? Sorry if this is a silly question but I am scrupulous.
 
If someone looked at you and could clearly notice you were not wearing a bra…then yes…I would say that was immodest.
Otherwise no.
 
If someone looked at you and could clearly notice you were not wearing a bra…then yes…I would say that was immodest.
Otherwise no.
This is important, especially if nipples can be noticed. Modesty is about protecting chastity and avoiding being a near occasion of sin to others, and since bras are common, one must be careful not to send the wrong message (i.e. to cause thoughts like “she’s deliberately not wearing one – is she looking for sex?!”) …

But as has been said, if a bra is not needed or one is not looking to replicate that certain artificial womanly shape (there’s nothing saying a woman’s chest must assume a certain shape), there’s no need for one if the message being sent is clear and wholesome.
 
You say your dress is modest. So why scruple? The answer really lies in your intentions. One knows when a woman is immodest and so wear no bra. It also applies to all parts of the body really. So even men are included here.
 
I think it only really matters on where you are,
It would be wrong if you where a school teacher , but fine around most other places,
It’s up to you wheather if you feel. Comfortable about it,
 
If you’re scrupulous and know it, you already know that you shouldn’t be asking this kind of question here. 🤷

In general, I think it depends on the person and the circumstance - just like anything with clothes.
 
If it gives lustful thoughts to men…it’s immodest.

P.S. men don’t need much to spark the imagination!
 
If we go by this, we’d all be swathed and hidden in Burkas in the middle of a July heatwave…and men would *still *have lustful thoughts.

How, exactly, is she supposed to know “if it gives lustful thoughts to men”?
Should she do a trial run and go out without a bra and then ask every man she talks to if they are feeling lust because she’s not wearing a bra?

Decent guys aren’t supposed to stare at your chest, anyway.
And we can’t control everyone else’s impulses and thoughts.
If a guy is going to look at your chest and have “lustful” thoughts, he’s going to do it whether you wear a bra or not.

You are already dressing immodestly…the rest is up to the guys. The woman cannot take all the responsibility for a man’s thoughts.

That reminds me of when people say a woman in a sexy outfit asked to be raped.
So not right.

.
A woman knows what clothes will tempt a man…she doesn’t need a practice run.

A decent guy will not gawk at a modestly dressed girl to get lustful thoughts. A dirt bag guy will get them at any opportunity.

But women shouldn’t exaggerate their sexuality…which can even tempt a, priest! :eek:
 
I’m a nursing mom and wearing any kind of bra usually leads to plugged ducts or mastitis (breast infection). I am very prone to this.

Do I look immodest? Maybe. I try to wear scarves or shapeless T-shirts, and I am not well endowed, but I know that other people can probably figure it out if they watch me closely enough. Sometimes I catch someone doing a little double-take or a sideways glance… but this just is the way it is; I feel that my health and my baby’s health come first. Sometimes there is a very good reason for going braless.
 
It depends. If you are wearing loose clothes possibly no one would even know, so not immodest. If it’s summer and you have on a sleeveless summer top and it’s obvious you have no bra on, then it may be immodest.
 
Hey everyone. If a woman is being modest otherwise but is not wearing a bra, would that be immodest? Sorry if this is a silly question but I am scrupulous.
It’s definitely immodest. There is no reason not to wear one. And you are not being scrupulous but mindful of your body. That is a good thing.

Ed
 
It’s definitely immodest. There is no reason not to wear one. And you are not being scrupulous but mindful of your body. That is a good thing.

Ed
This is absolutely untrue … how can you know there is never a reason not to wear a bra - really … that sounds like hubristic to me…

Bra’s are really a fairly recent invention … and I know many reasons for women not to wear one …

Whether one wears a bra or not is a personal decision …

As for covering nipples - many bras do not make “nipple” invisible … unless they have padding sufficient to mask that - not all do …

There are men whose nipples protrude through their shirts - should they wear bras?

What is really sad is the objectification of the breasts … they are natural - used for feeding children …and yes - like other body features and /or parts can cause arousal …

What you are really advocating is the binding of breasts - wrapping them flat and that is absurd really …

Modesty does not mean you have to disfigure your body [even if that disfigurement is done with clothing] nor even cover it completely …

You do realize that there are many cultures where people - male and female - coexist with less coverings then is normal for Anglo-European sensibilities and norms … and their men are not running around in perpetual states of arousal …
 
It’s definitely immodest. There is no reason not to wear one. And you are not being scrupulous but mindful of your body. That is a good thing.

Ed
Sorry Ed, but if it’s the middle of a blizzard and a woman is out in multiple layers of tops topped with one of those padded parkas she definitely is not going to be immodest if there’s no bra underneath all that.

And one of the posters just gave a perfectly good reason not to wear one - it can cause painful medical issues for women who are breastfeeding.
 
It really depends on how ample a woman is. The more she has the more obvious it will be if she doesn’t wear some kind of undergarment. Bras aren’t necessary for that–a simple tee shirt under other clothing can substitute for a bra. The usual test for whether or not a woman needs a bra (or other undergarment) is if she is big enough to hold a cotton ball in place–you ladies know what I mean. I think most women pass that test, but again, there are ways to be modest without wearing bras. It simply takes a little bit of creativity.
 
This is absolutely untrue … how can you know there is never a reason not to wear a bra - really … that sounds like hubristic to me…

Bra’s are really a fairly recent invention … and I know many reasons for women not to wear one …

Whether one wears a bra or not is a personal decision …

As for covering nipples - many bras do not make “nipple” invisible … unless they have padding sufficient to mask that - not all do …

There are men whose nipples protrude through their shirts - should they wear bras?

What is really sad is the objectification of the breasts … they are natural - used for feeding children …and yes - like other body features and /or parts can cause arousal …

What you are really advocating is the binding of breasts - wrapping them flat and that is absurd really …

Modesty does not mean you have to disfigure your body [even if that disfigurement is done with clothing] nor even cover it completely …

You do realize that there are many cultures where people - male and female - coexist with less coverings then is normal for Anglo-European sensibilities and norms … and their men are not running around in perpetual states of arousal …
You’re right bras are a recent invention…1893… :rolleyes:
 
Hey everyone. If a woman is being modest otherwise but is not wearing a bra, would that be immodest? Sorry if this is a silly question but I am scrupulous.
It depends what is meant by being modest.
A woman knows what clothes will tempt a man…she doesn’t need a practice run.

A decent guy will not gawk at a modestly dressed girl to get lustful thoughts. A dirt bag guy will get them at any opportunity.

But women shouldn’t exaggerate their sexuality…which can even tempt a, priest! :eek:
Not necessarily.

Modestly dressed girls can be very alluring to men.

Men seem to find almost any excuse to blame immorality on women, and I say this as a woman whose taste in clothing is quite similar to what Hasidic Jewish women wear.
It’s definitely immodest. There is no reason not to wear one. And you are not being scrupulous but mindful of your body. That is a good thing.

Ed
Incorrect, brassieres can cause health issues and thus in at least some cases can be eschewed while remaining morally correct.
It really depends on how ample a woman is. The more she has the more obvious it will be if she doesn’t wear some kind of undergarment. Bras aren’t necessary for that–a simple tee shirt under other clothing can substitute for a bra. The usual test for whether or not a woman needs a bra (or other undergarment) is if she is big enough to hold a cotton ball in place–you ladies know what I mean. I think most women pass that test, but again, there are ways to be modest without wearing bras. It simply takes a little bit of creativity.
I don’t actually know what you mean.
 
If we go by this, we’d all be swathed and hidden in Burkas in the middle of a July heatwave…and men would *still *have lustful thoughts.

How, exactly, is she supposed to know “if it gives lustful thoughts to men”?
Should she do a trial run and go out without a bra and then ask every man she talks to if they are feeling lust because she’s not wearing a bra?

Decent guys aren’t supposed to stare at your chest, anyway.
And we can’t control everyone else’s impulses and thoughts.
If a guy is going to look at your chest and have “lustful” thoughts, he’s going to do it whether you wear a bra or not.

You are already dressing immodestly…the rest is up to the guys. The woman cannot take all the responsibility for a man’s thoughts.

That reminds me of when people say a woman in a sexy outfit asked to be raped.
So not right.

.
When I read your post I thought to myself "this person doesn’t seem to hold to Christian values (such as “bearing one another’s burdens”) … then I saw you’re a “reasoning humanist.”

'Nuff said.
 
I hold to very moral and ethical values, and also believe that a person has to take responsibility for their own actions and thoughts and not blame other people or make other people scapegoats.

I don’t know if that thinking is similar to “Christian values”…you can tell me if so.
But I also think many Christians are reasoning humanists, don’t you?
Someone who thinks reasonably–as many posters on this thread do–and with heart for humans. That’s what I and many people on this forum do.

As many here like to reiterate, God gives FREE WILL.
It’s up to a man to think healthy thoughts or not, we cannot control the minds of every man. He has to take some responsibility to bear his own burdens, too.

If a man is going to blame a woman for his own lustful thoughts when she–as the poster has pointed out–has made a specific point and effort to dress modestly, then he is not taking responsibility for himself.
Again, then we should all be wearing burkas. And yet, that same man will still have his lustful thoughts imagining what is under our burkas.

I don’t know if you are male or female, but…

'Nuff said.

.
Thats the issue - Christianity is not about this sort of egalitarian “ethics”.
 
You’re right bras are a recent invention…1893… :rolleyes:
Reminds me of a missionary story.
Our Parish has been involved in a mission in a remote area of PNG since the 1940s or so.

Our old-timers tell an old story (I heard it in the 1970s) about how the nearby Anglican mission (but maybe it was really the Catholics) decided it was time for the native women to be more “modest” (according to European standards at least). At that time breasts swung (the young mothers) and flapped (the elders) in the breeze most of the time au naturale. Noone batted an eye-lid except European visitors.

A box containing 100s of bras duly arrived from overseas and a village talk for the women was given and they retired for the night to their huts with a dazzling white bra each.

Next morning the men came out of their huts in all manner of new dress. Some cut them in half and used them as pointy hats, others as codpieces.

I have no idea what the moral of the story is…other than fate is far stranger than fiction!
 
If a bra is a problem, try a dirndl maybe. Or a shawl. All these issues predate the invention of the bra, and women solved them SOMEHOW. You may have to try different things until you find something you are happy with. There is a lot of info on the internet on historical clothing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top