I hate fuddy duddy homeschooler rules

[FaithManor]

Most of the homeschool groups that hold a "prom" around here allow no dancing and the dress codes are ridiculously strict. They offer buffet style, greasy food and a speaker/presentation afteward the meal. The amount of legalism involved, both with the dress code and the boy/girl thing is ridiculous (i.e. you can sit across from your date but not next to your date, all the boys on one side of the table, all the girls on the other, etc.) I always wanted to shout (WOW! IF YOU'VE DONE THAT POOR OF A JOB RAISING THEM, MAYBE YOU SHOULD PUT THEM UNDER LOCK AND KEY!) Seriously, that many chaperones and they can't sit together?????

 

So, since we are a modest and fairly conservative family that absolutely hates legalism, we did not have dd attend these events. Instead, we did our own thing and were very pleased with it.

 

We planned a night out to the ballet and dinner at a four-star restaurant in Detroit. The restaurant was of the type that evening gowns and tuxes would not be unusual and there was ballroom dancing as well. It was exepensive but we felt that dd was worth it! Her very debonairre cousin (26 at the time and not married) accompanied her as well as my sister and her fiance. The four of them had a fabulous time. She still raves about that night. The interesting thing is that her publically schooled friends all hated their proms and wished they hadn't gone. Her homeschooled friends were envious as their "proms" were duds.

 

DD's dress was made by my mom and was exquisite. It was made from a 1940's vintage Vogue pattern. It was sleeveless, not spaghetti strapped but rather wide-strapped and had a V- neckline but not low enough for any cleavage to show. It would not have met the standards of any of the local homeschool "proms"

 

So, for those of you following this thread and wishing to provide your daughters with the opportunity to "gown up" and feel special, I can highly recommend this alternative if you can afford it. We had to save about $350.00, eke! Its possible that it might be less in your area. The opera and ballet companies in Detroit are rather outrageously priced for nose-bleed seats.

 

Faith

[melissel]

I will not raise my girls to believe they are responsible for the inappropriate actions of boys/men.

 

I love this! I think I'm going to have it engraved on a plaque. Well said, Heather!

[TravelingChris]

On another note, did anyone note that one of the Iranian mullahs this week blamed the Icelandic volcano on western women's breasts? See the volcano erupted since we don't wear burkas.

[Jean in Newcastle]

On another note, did anyone note that one of the Iranian mullahs this week blamed the Icelandic volcano on western women's breasts? See the volcano erupted since we don't wear burkas.

 

Well, it is sort of breast shaped. . .:D

[Miss Marple]

Well, it is sort of breast shaped. . .

 

:p LOL! My boys are still talking about the exploding breast implants that are the new weapon(s) for female suicide bombers (they saw the story on the internet news a couple of months ago).

[Ailaena]

On another note, did anyone note that one of the Iranian mullahs this week blamed the Icelandic volcano on western women's breasts? See the volcano erupted since we don't wear burkas.

 

Yes, and some college girl organized Boobquake, where everyone is supposed to show some cleavage tomorrow so that when there is no earthquake, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi will be proven wrong. I don't know if it is the same person that is organizing the event in DC, though.

 

ETA the quote:

"Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes," Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi was quoted as saying by Iranian media.

 

 

Incidentally, "I will not raise my girls to believe they are responsible for the inappropriate actions of boys/men" is my new favorite quote.

[jld]

I love your last sentence, Ailaena!

 

FaithManor, that ballet evening sounds great! How fun! Thanks for sharing this idea!:)

[tonya in sc]

for the home school formal, and both are strapless. The only rule the girls were given was, "Nothing plunging." I think that is reasonable.

[1bassoon]

On another note, did anyone note that one of the Iranian mullahs this week blamed the Icelandic volcano on western women's breasts? See the volcano erupted since we don't wear burkas.

 

That's fabulous.

 

I've got a burkha in my closet - really- the long blue jobbie. My brother lived in Kabulm(NGO, not military), and brought me back one.

 

You don't know HOW tempted I am to wear that thing to Wal-Mart one day.

 

Here.

 

In Alabama.

 

Think of the fun!!!

[kitten18]

it has a Bible quotation and says that Young Christian women should not be a stumbling block to young men.

Vomit :ack2:

[EthiopianFood]

That's fabulous.

 

I've got a burkha in my closet - really- the long blue jobbie. My brother lived in Kabulm(NGO, not military), and brought me back one.

 

You don't know HOW tempted I am to wear that thing to Wal-Mart one day.

 

Here.

 

In Alabama.

 

Think of the fun!!!

 

DO IT!!!!! Post about it afterward!!! :lol:

[FriedClams]

Sorry for any confusion.

Edited April 27, 2010 by Kayaking Mom
Interesting discussion that I feel convicted that I should not have entered.

[fivetails]

it has a Bible quotation and says that Young Christian women should not be a stumbling block to young men.

 

Vomit :ack2:

 

I don't think that was really called for, eh?

 

You can disagree with the beliefs of another person in a classier way than that.

[AuntPol]

Well, I'm one of the moms of boys who can't believe what some mothers let their daughters wear. The girls are just reflecting society and their peers, but I expect the mothers (and fathers) to hold the line.

 

The amount of voluptuous cleavage, exposed thong underwear, and short/tight clothes worn by the teen girls at our church while wearing *cute* outfits is appalling! Let alone in society by women of all ages. I. am. sick. of. it. My sons and husband are bombarded with way more than they want to see.

 

 

I understand the OP's dilemna. I do think you can look modest in spaghetti straps if the dress is cut right. I am only slightly top heavy (C Cup). I can turn heads in a tight turtleneck and pencil thin yet to the mid-calf skirt worn with boots, scarf, and hat. In fact, my husband swears that turtle necks and sweater tops emphasize my breasts more than hide it.

 

However, I do go to a church that is "non-believer friendly" and thus, no dress code. This means that MOST girls show up wearing low riders with thongs showing, daisy dukes, tight tank tops, bra straps showing everywhere, dog collars, words on the butt, etc. I was a stripper for 6 years and these girls wear things I considered costumes. Then they sit through the Bible Study texting under the table and discussing who is sexier in Twilight. And this is the 5th/6th graders. Obviously, you can't just assume all Christian parents train their kids to be modest. Heck, I have seen an overweight, 40+ mom wear jogging pants with the name of a CHRISTIAN all-girls college written on the butt to Sunday Service. We are by no means a prairie skirt type of family but I know that if you don't draw the line out, it will be crossed. Heck, if you only draw the line in "don't come naked" then SOMEONE will complain that you are infringing on your rights, trying to push your values, etc.

[justamouse]

Incidentally, "I will not raise my girls to believe they are responsible for the inappropriate actions of boys/men" is my new favorite quote.

 

Mine, too.

[LittleHouseHomeschool]

I've watched this thread with interest. There always seems to be such extreme opinions in these matters, and not many want to understand both sides of the issue.

 

The fact is that the way that girls dress does influence men. It can influence them for the good or for the bad. The other fact is that boys and men have personal responsibility. Both statements are entirely true and right.

 

It all comes down to respect.

 

Girls, the question is, "Will I respect men by dressing in a way that is a blessing to them rather than being a temptation?" (Because men are visual)

 

AND

 

Young men, the question is, "Will I respect women by avoiding looking at them in a sexual manner?" (Because even looking at a woman in a lustful manner is adultery)

 

+++++++

 

I recommend the following resources:

 

For girls and their parents:

 

Nancy Leigh DeMoss's booklet entitled, "The Look: Does God Really Care What I Wear?"

 

Preparing Your Daughter for Every Woman's Battle by Shannon Ethridge

(sexual integrity in a fallen world)

 

For boys and their parents:

 

Preparing Your Son for Every Man's Battle by Stephen Arterburn and Fred Stoeker (This book is all about sexual integrity in a fallen world.)

 

When it comes down to it, a young woman can dress fashionably without showing too much. And young men can be personally responsible.

 

Respect, respect, respect.

[elegantlion]

I've read through this entire thread. I am a christian and the mother of a son, not a daughter. I believe it is our responsibility (my dh and I) as parents to teach ds to be respectful of a young lady, regardless of how she is dressed.

 

I read all of this about men being visual creatures and I would ask, what about women? Please don't tell me hormonal young women always think chaste thoughts just because they're female.

 

IMO it's a one-sided argument. If you apply the argument to the males then they should be required to wear a hat and sunglasses to their prom, because you know those guys with a cool hair and dreamy eyes are really asking for it. :tongue_smilie:

Edited April 26, 2010 by elegantlion
grammar

[Paisley Hedgehog]

..

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

I've read through this entire thread. I am a christian and the mother of a son, not a daughter. I believe it is our responsibility (my dh and I) as parents to teach ds to be respectful of a young lady, regardless of how she is dressed.

 

I read all of this about men being visual creatures and I would ask, what about women? Please don't tell me hormonal young women always think chaste thoughts just because they're female.

 

 

 

:iagree: Anyone remember Tiger Beat magazine?

 

IMO it's a one-sided argument. If you apply the argument to the males then they should be required to wear a hat and sunglasses to their prom, because you know those guys with a cool hair and dreamy eyes are really asking for it. :tongue_smilie:

 

I recently witnessed a group of modestly-dressed teenage girls surround my friend's teenage son. One had her hands on his back giving him a massage, the others took turns brushing his hair. Poor fellow.;)

 

His mom thought it was "cute" -- I'm not sure what I think.

[novagirl]

I've read through this entire thread. I am a christian and the mother of a son, not a daughter. I believe it is our responsibility (my dh and I) as parents to teach ds to be respectful of a young lady, regardless of how she is dressed.

 

I read all of this about men being visual creatures and I would ask, what about women? Please don't tell me hormonal young women always think chaste thoughts just because they're female.

 

IMO it's a one-sided argument. If you apply the argument to the males then they should be required to wear a hat and sunglasses to their prom, because you know those guys with a cool hair and dreamy eyes are really asking for it. :tongue_smilie:

 

Preach it Sister!!:iagree:

[Jenny in GA]

IMO it's a one-sided argument. If you apply the argument to the males then they should be required to wear a hat and sunglasses to their prom, because you know those guys with a cool hair and dreamy eyes are really asking for it. :tongue_smilie:

 

Except for the fact that sunglasses and hats make guys look that much more awesome! :001_smile:

 

Jenny

[novagirl]

Oh and wait...we forgot about backsides--they'll have to wear really baggy pants---I mean...I was a good christian girl so I never looked "THERE"!!! Ya right!!

[Smithie]

"Easier to set the bar high on the modesty scale than to have the fashion police picking over everyone's wardrobe."

 

But easier yet is to set your OWN standards for YOURSELF, and refrain from gossiping, sneering, leering, and other such crass and ungodly behavior, regardless of the outfits you may encounter on other people, or whether or not you are a "visual" person.

 

When we make the outfits and/or the batted eyelashes the problem, we send young (and old!) men with conservative sexual mores a message that 1) we think they are weak and untrustworthy 2) we do not truly accept the internal logic of our ideology and 3) how a female dresses or acts is a relevant consideration in determining whether or not she shall be accorded the respect that ALL men owe to ALL women under a conservative social model.

 

Women can't make men break faith with their own sincerely held beliefs. It may be easier to blame sultry teenage Jezebels when our sons are unchaste, but it's probably more accurate to accept that our son's path might not be our own. It probably also makes sense to hold out hope that the apex of his spiritual development has not been reached in the teen years. ;)

 

When a guy is gonna, he's gonna.

[elegantlion]

Except for the fact that sunglasses and hats make guys look that much more awesome! :001_smile:

 

Jenny

 

There is that. Don't forget men in uniform, add that too. ;)

[novagirl]

"Easier to set the bar high on the modesty scale than to have the fashion police picking over everyone's wardrobe."

 

But easier yet is to set your OWN standards for YOURSELF, and refrain from gossiping, sneering, leering, and other such crass and ungodly behavior, regardless of the outfits you may encounter on other people, or whether or not you are a "visual" person.

 

When we make the outfits and/or the batted eyelashes the problem, we send young (and old!) men with conservative sexual mores a message that 1) we think they are weak and untrustworthy 2) we do not truly accept the internal logic of our ideology and 3) how a female dresses or acts is a relevant consideration in determining whether or not she shall be accorded the respect that ALL men owe to ALL women under a conservative social model.

 

Women can't make men break faith with their own sincerely held beliefs. It may be easier to blame sultry teenage Jezebels when our sons are unchaste, but it's probably more accurate to accept that our son's path might not be our own. It probably also makes sense to hold out hope that the apex of his spiritual development has not been reached in the teen years. ;)

 

When a guy is gonna, he's gonna.

 

 

:001_smile:This is so cool! Right on!

[elegantlion]

But easier yet is to set your OWN standards for YOURSELF, and refrain from gossiping, sneering, leering, and other such crass and ungodly behavior, regardless of the outfits you may encounter on other people, or whether or not you are a "visual" person.

 

When we make the outfits and/or the batted eyelashes the problem, we send young (and old!) men with conservative sexual mores a message that 1) we think they are weak and untrustworthy 2) we do not truly accept the internal logic of our ideology and 3) how a female dresses or acts is a relevant consideration in determining whether or not she shall be accorded the respect that ALL men owe to ALL women under a conservative social model.

 

 

 

:iagree:

[Gretchen in NJ]

that I'm a conservative and a Christian but not a conservative Christian.

 

The fixation on preventing sin in boys and men by forcing dress codes on young women is just creepy, imo.

:iagree: It is also a very dangerous lesson to teach to boys and men. I thought we were beyond blaming the girl or the woman.

[Cheryl in NM]

This whole thread has been bothering me. Of course, boys and men are responsible for their own thoughts and actions, but the girls do have a part to play. By displaying their body they are asking the men to look at them and lust after them. There are tasteful ways for all body types to dress, male and female. A woman walking around in tight clothing or a mini skirt with cleavage showing is like walking past a dog with a piece of raw meat in your hand and expecting that dog to ignore you. Before you all crucify me...I was one of those girls casually displaying my body. Eventually, I realized that while I got the attention of the hot boys, I also got attention from men that creeped me out. It was still years, and a creepy boss, before I realized that the way I dressed was an advertisement to these men. I wasn't dressing obsecenly, just tight form fitting clothes or short skirts with cleavage showing. I looked good...like I was on display...I remember the very last time I dressed this way. I behaved as though I was a piece of meat. I remember vividly, even though it's been years, and am still ashamed. Because I put myself on display and encouraged men to interact with me based solely on my looks I began to view myself as just a good looking package. It has taken years for me to be able to value my brain over my body and I still sometimes struggle.

 

I think it send the wrong idea to young women to tell them that they can dress anyway they want and a man should look past that and value their brains. I places too much burden on men and is unfair to both genders.

[AuntieM]

Yes, she has a bolero she bought to go with one of the dresses so that she could wear it to church.

 

Frankly, I always thought that well fitting jeans which go all the way to the ankle are usually considered a sexy thing for a curvy girl to wear.

 

DD had the same issue this spring, solved with a lacy crochet shrug over the shoulders.

 

I do appreciate that there have to be some guidelines, because there are those that will push the limits in a trashy way. But I am always perplexed by this: the girls are held responsible for the sin of the guys.....? I believe our girls should not be deliberately "sexy" and encouraging, but the guys are going to have to learn to deal with seeing some skin or they will crash and burn in the real world. Think of the church around the world. The authentic, believing church in many third world countries have cultural dress codes that would never pass our western "moral" standards. But these believers stand joyfully before the LORD. I think we have our Puritan history to thank for this more than anything else.

 

And I agree with you about the slick-fitting pants being more sensual than many other things. When my kids were in a co-op that had a uniform requirement, I saw many teen girls adhering to the letter of the law while dashing the spirit of it. They would wear the required polo shirt and khaki pants, but all was so tight you could see every curve and many accented with lacy undergarments sticking out here and there.

[Jean in Newcastle]

. What she didn't realize is that when she sat in the second row of the church - she looked positively naked from the back. Naked. The dress back fell below the top of the pew so all you could see was bare shoulders and bare back. It was not an intentional thing - but it was a problem. I felt horribly for the men, young and old, who had to struggle with focus throughout the entire service. And I felt for the girl who didn't realize what she'd done.

 

 

 

What no one has mentioned so far in this thread is the kind of reaction my dh would have to this sort of situation. He wouldn't have been turned on. He would have laughed. He has a very healthy view of sex within marriage, but outside of marriage, he doesn't let his mind "go there".

 

Oh - he notices the Victoria Secret ads - but he rolls his eyes at them because he realizes that that sort of "provocative" stance isn't really alluring but is cheap and even ugly. Now he doesn't go out and park himself in front of the VS store, or buy magazines of women in slinky clothes or in nothing at all, but he also isn't tempted to do so. The reason is because he's been steeped in learning God's way of thinking about sex and beauty. And the end result is that this cheap substitute that we see around us becomes ho-hum and meaningless.

 

That is what we want to teach our son - to see things in God's way. But we also realize that our son is immature, is in an esp. hormonal time, and has a lot of learning to do. So we do shelter him a bit from this sort of stuff and spend even more time redirecting him to healthier stuff to think about and do. (Frankly, as a teen, I wouldn't bother with dances etc. because I don't see the point for that age group. I don't want them thinking about even godly romance at that point and isn't romance part of the point of a dance of this sort? I doubt it is for the exercise.)

 

And before someone jumps all over me - yes I realize that many people have different teachings on what is God's way to think. I'm not advocating teaching a formula based on one pastor's interpretation etc. but just spending time reading God's word so that the attitudes etc. soak into your very pores.

[novagirl]

What no one has mentioned so far in this thread is the kind of reaction my dh would have to this sort of situation. He wouldn't have been turned on. He would have laughed. He has a very healthy view of sex within marriage, but outside of marriage, he doesn't let his mind "go there".

 

Oh - he notices the Victoria Secret ads - but he rolls his eyes at them because he realizes that that sort of "provocative" stance isn't really alluring but is cheap and even ugly. Now he doesn't go out and park himself in front of the VS store, or buy magazines of women in slinky clothes or in nothing at all, but he also isn't tempted to do so. The reason is because he's been steeped in learning God's way of thinking about sex and beauty. And the end result is that this cheap substitute that we see around us becomes ho-hum and meaningless.

 

That is what we want to teach our son - to see things in God's way. But we also realize that our son is immature, is in an esp. hormonal time, and has a lot of learning to do. So we do shelter him a bit from this sort of stuff and spend even more time redirecting him to healthier stuff to think about and do. (Frankly, as a teen, I wouldn't bother with dances etc. because I don't see the point for that age group. I don't want them thinking about even godly romance at that point and isn't romance part of the point of a dance of this sort? I doubt it is for the exercise.)

 

And before someone jumps all over me - yes I realize that many people have different teachings on what is God's way to think. I'm not advocating teaching a formula based on one pastor's interpretation etc. but just spending time reading God's word so that the attitudes etc. soak into your very pores.

 

Oh I agree with you Jean. I just figured what I was going to say was going to get taken out of context. I don't get why some think that mens minds are always in the gutter like they only are lusting blubbering idiots who cannot control themselves. You know, I am a very visual person. I can look at someone who is handsome and just move on. The thoughts don't have to happen and if they did it would be my fault and mine to deal with.

 

I agree with you on the VS adds. My DH will say they are sleazy or roll his eyes at them.

 

Women shouldn't be made to feel that they should be worried all the time that what they are wearing MIGHT cause someone to lust. We answer to God for ourselves, not what others may or may not be thinkin'.

 

Oh and the girl sitting in the church pew, I wouldn't have thought she was/looked naked. She was at church, of course she's wearing clothes!!

 

Eh' maybe that's just me?

[Caitilin]

Not that this is conclusive by any means, but there is certainly evidence to suggest that men are not wired any more heavily for s*xual visual stimuli than women. I am not comfortable, personally, with the "women are responsible for men's reactions" school of thought. I don't believe that the onus for men's behaviors should EVER rest on how women are dressed or behaved.

[Laurie4b]

This whole thread has been bothering me. Of course, boys and men are responsible for their own thoughts and actions, but the girls do have a part to play. By displaying their body they are asking the men to look at them and lust after them. There are tasteful ways for all body types to dress, male and female. A woman walking around in tight clothing or a mini skirt with cleavage showing is like walking past a dog with a piece of raw meat in your hand and expecting that dog to ignore you. Before you all crucify me...I was one of those girls casually displaying my body. Eventually, I realized that while I got the attention of the hot boys, I also got attention from men that creeped me out. It was still years, and a creepy boss, before I realized that the way I dressed was an advertisement to these men. I wasn't dressing obsecenly, just tight form fitting clothes or short skirts with cleavage showing. I looked good...like I was on display...I remember the very last time I dressed this way. I behaved as though I was a piece of meat. I remember vividly, even though it's been years, and am still ashamed. Because I put myself on display and encouraged men to interact with me based solely on my looks I began to view myself as just a good looking package. It has taken years for me to be able to value my brain over my body and I still sometimes struggle.

 

I think it send the wrong idea to young women to tell them that they can dress anyway they want and a man should look past that and value their brains. I places too much burden on men and is unfair to both genders.

 

Excellent post. I totally agree with the last paragraph. Provocative dressing has more effect on the woman doing it than on the men seeing it.

[Laurie4b]

I agree that there are some girls who play with fire. In fact, I know some adult women who play with fire in this manner. However, in my experience that has everything to do with their *behavior* and *nothing* to do with how they dress. You can behave in a chaste manner in a strapless dress. You can behave in a non-chaste manner in a denim jumper.

 

I have often observed a correlation in behavior and dress.

[asta]

I have observed a remarkable similarity between the ultra conservative standards for dressing I see in some Christian Sects with those I see in conservative Muslim sects.

 

Eh.

 

 

asta

[KnitWit]

I have observed a remarkable similarity between the ultra conservative standards for dressing I see in some Christian Sects with those I see in conservative Muslim sects.

 

Eh.

 

 

asta

 

Yep...and sometimes an equal bearing on *holiness*. :(

[novagirl]

Yep...and sometimes an equal bearing on *holiness*. :(

 

Yes, I have heard others in our homeschool group talk like this. One lady told the group of ladies that she saw another woman in walmart with a long skirt on and many children. She said she went up to the lady and thanked her for her wonderful "Christian witness" and example for others. 'Scuse me??? The skirt and many children make her holy?? Because really, that's all the lady knew of the other shopper. Please!:glare:

[Smithie]

"A woman walking around in tight clothing or a mini skirt with cleavage showing is like walking past a dog with a piece of raw meat in your hand and expecting that dog to ignore you."

 

Yeah, if men were domesticated animals instead of beings fashioned in the image of God, possessing the gift of free will.

 

I've heard similar arguments made by people in my own faith tradition who think that a woman's HAIR constitutes a provocative public display. You might say, "refusing to wear a wig and refusing to wear loose, long clothing are two totally different things!" But it doesn't feel that way to me.

[Brindee]

What no one has mentioned so far in this thread is the kind of reaction my dh would have to this sort of situation. He wouldn't have been turned on. He would have laughed. He has a very healthy view of sex within marriage, but outside of marriage, he doesn't let his mind "go there".

 

Oh - he notices the Victoria Secret ads - but he rolls his eyes at them because he realizes that that sort of "provocative" stance isn't really alluring but is cheap and even ugly. Now he doesn't go out and park himself in front of the VS store, or buy magazines of women in slinky clothes or in nothing at all, but he also isn't tempted to do so. The reason is because he's been steeped in learning God's way of thinking about sex and beauty. And the end result is that this cheap substitute that we see around us becomes ho-hum and meaningless.

 

That is what we want to teach our son - to see things in God's way. But we also realize that our son is immature, is in an esp. hormonal time, and has a lot of learning to do. So we do shelter him a bit from this sort of stuff and spend even more time redirecting him to healthier stuff to think about and do. (Frankly, as a teen, I wouldn't bother with dances etc. because I don't see the point for that age group. I don't want them thinking about even godly romance at that point and isn't romance part of the point of a dance of this sort? I doubt it is for the exercise.)

 

And before someone jumps all over me - yes I realize that many people have different teachings on what is God's way to think. I'm not advocating teaching a formula based on one pastor's interpretation etc. but just spending time reading God's word so that the attitudes etc. soak into your very pores.

 

Oh I agree with you Jean. I just figured what I was going to say was going to get taken out of context. I don't get why some think that mens minds are always in the gutter like they only are lusting blubbering idiots who cannot control themselves. You know, I am a very visual person. I can look at someone who is handsome and just move on. The thoughts don't have to happen and if they did it would be my fault and mine to deal with.

 

I agree with you on the VS adds. My DH will say they are sleazy or roll his eyes at them.

 

Women shouldn't be made to feel that they should be worried all the time that what they are wearing MIGHT cause someone to lust. We answer to God for ourselves, not what others may or may not be thinkin'.

 

 

"A woman walking around in tight clothing or a mini skirt with cleavage showing is like walking past a dog with a piece of raw meat in your hand and expecting that dog to ignore you."

 

Yeah, if men were domesticated animals instead of beings fashioned in the image of God, possessing the gift of free will.

:iagree: My husband is the same way!

 

 

I've heard of cases where a girl is raped, then is blamed because she was wearing shorts and a tank top that probably showed some cleavage. So the VICTIM is blamed???

 

Come on, when it's hot out, guys go around in shorts and no shirt, but a woman can't stay cool like that, plus wearing a shirt, because it might "provoke" the man to lust?

 

I also agree with Elegant Lion's posts! :001_smile:

[Stacy in NJ]

I think it send the wrong idea to young women to tell them that they can dress anyway they want and a man should look past that and value their brains. I places too much burden on men and is unfair to both genders.

 

 

Have you ever noticed that in societies where people dress rather skimpily, there are fewer issues with "provocative dress". We teach our young people shame and guilt. We teach both sexes to be ashamed of both their bodies and their physical reaction to members of the opposite sex; we also teach them to feel guilt about how they make others feel.

 

I think discussions about spaghetti straps and skirt length are just a way to NOT deal with or have conversations about developing sexuality in teen. It's a kind of shame/guilt reflex. So sad.

Edited April 27, 2010 by Stacy in NJ
sp

[Gretchen in NJ]

I have observed a remarkable similarity between the ultra conservative standards for dressing I see in some Christian Sects with those I see in conservative Muslim sects.

 

Eh.

 

 

asta

:iagree: Most posters are talking about strapless dresses and their length. What if males found our hands sexy? Are we going to have to start wearing gloves in public?

[Gretchen in NJ]

I agree. I live in college town and the outfits that are worn to church is sometimes shocking. I am NOT saying this is the case of anyone's DD's here. BUT - it is out there and I can understand the need for a standard. A clear standard.

 

As an example - a young lady wore a "modest" appropriately fitting strapless dress to church a couple of years ago.[Meaning nothing hanging out, no yanking on the dress all the time adjusting, etc.] She looked very pretty when I saw her in the lobby. What she didn't realize is that when she sat in the second row of the church - she looked positively naked from the back. Naked. The dress back fell below the top of the pew so all you could see was bare shoulders and bare back. It was not an intentional thing - but it was a problem. I felt horribly for the men, young and old, who had to struggle with focus throughout the entire service. And I felt for the girl who didn't realize what she'd done.

 

And this isn't one case - it's every week when the girls are trying so hard to be fashionable and it goes awry. Distractingly awry. So I see the rules. I appreciate them. If you don't want to follow them, then skip the event.

My girls or I would not wear a strapless dress to Mass. We do have a family dress code for church, but it has nothing to do with the male population.

 

My dh would have had no trouble focusing on the Lord at Mass. He doesn't go to Mass to concern himself with what other women or girls are wearing. He is there to celebrate the Mass. If anyone in your male population at church lost focus on the Lord, it wasn't her fault. It was their own fault. They are incharge of their own personhood.

[Cheryl in NM]

Have you ever noticed that in societies where people dress rather skimpily, there are fewer issues with "provocative dress". We teach our young people shame and guilt. We teach both sexes to be ashamed of both their bodies and their physical reaction to members of the opposite sex; we also teach them to feel guilt about how they make others feel.

 

I think discussions about spaghetti straps and skirt length are just a way to NOT deal with or have conversations about developing sexuality in teen. It's a kind of shame/guilt reflex. So sad.

 

I think it's sad to deny that men have instinctual sexual feelings. Of course they can exercise free will, but where is the female's responsibility in all this? And let's be honest, most of the men running around in the summer without their shirts in public are usually not the good looking ones!:001_rolleyes:

 

The indigenous people you speak of who dress skimpily have totally different thought processes and different ways of life. Some of them live communally and it's nothing for the children to be in the same room when the parents have s*x (they may not see, but they hear). It is also common for these people to marry and begin having sex at what Americans would consider a young age. Their society and culture is so different from America that they cannot be equitably compared.

 

I don't see it as a shame/guilt reflex to remind young people of their instincts and natural, hormonal tendency toward temptation. I think we need to both teach modesty AND teach our teens how to deal with those feelings.

 

BTW, rape is not about s*x, it's about power.

[Holly IN]

The straps make no difference to my dh. It is the cleavage. We are more concerned with the cleavage exposure than what kind of straps a girl/woman has or if any at all.

 

Stuff like this really burns me. For ex: the homeschool prom here in my area....

 

No straps or strapless dresses. It has to have sleeves. No chest exposure (meaning your whole chest have to be covered.) So on....it is very ridiculous!! I rather have my children go to a public school prom than to suffer through legalistic ideals. I do agree to a certain point that chest needs to be covered but not all the way to the neck. I have no problem with chest exposure as long as cleavage is not showing.

 

It is frustrating because I really want our kids to go to homeschool prom however the rules are ridiculous and not worth the hassle!!

Holly

Edited April 27, 2010 by Holly IN

[Mrs Mungo]

BTW, rape is not about s*x, it's about power.

 

I agree. So, why all the posts claiming women have to "be responsible" in how they dress lest they send the wrong message about their intentions?

Edited April 27, 2010 by Mrs Mungo

[KnitWit]

I agree. So, why all the posts claiming women have to "be responsible" in how they dress lest they send the wrong message about their intentions?

 

Something weird happened...I didn't say what you quoted me as saying....but I agree also.

 

:)

[Mrs Mungo]

Something weird happened...I didn't say what you quoted me as saying....but I agree also.

 

:)

 

I fixed it. I think when I'm posting on my phone (meetings and dentist today!) I mess up when I'm multiquoting and then decide to reply to the only one. Sorry!

[Stacy in NJ]

I think it's sad to deny that men have instinctual sexual feelings. Of course they can exercise free will, but where is the female's responsibility in all this? And let's be honest, most of the men running around in the summer without their shirts in public are usually not the good looking ones!:001_rolleyes:

 

The indigenous people you speak of who dress skimpily have totally different thought processes and different ways of life. Some of them live communally and it's nothing for the children to be in the same room when the parents have s*x (they may not see, but they hear). It is also common for these people to marry and begin having sex at what Americans would consider a young age. Their society and culture is so different from America that they cannot be equitably compared.

 

I don't see it as a shame/guilt reflex to remind young people of their instincts and natural, hormonal tendency toward temptation. I think we need to both teach modesty AND teach our teens how to deal with those feelings.

 

BTW, rape is not about s*x, it's about power.

 

I think it's sad to deny that women have sexual feelings and that their dress is in some part an expression of those instincts. To tell a girl that she needs to dress modestly to prevent sin in men is to deny and shame the girl about her own feelings. I'm very much in favor of women dressing modestly. I do so myself. But, creating "rules" with out context is just stupid imo.

 

When I was talking about cultures where both women and men are more comfortable with more skin, I wasn't refering to tribes in the amazon. I was reflecting on time spent in parts of Europe. :tongue_smilie: IMO it is rational to compare ourselves to Europeans.

 

I'm not sure why you brought up rape. I assume it's refering to another post, not mine.

[Orthodox6]

I have observed a remarkable similarity between the ultra conservative standards for dressing I see in some Christian Sects with those I see in conservative Muslim sects./QUOTE]

 

Which means. . . nothing. Merely that even markedly different religions can overlap in their understanding of modesty.

[Heather in VA]

Yes, I have heard others in our homeschool group talk like this. One lady told the group of ladies that she saw another woman in walmart with a long skirt on and many children. She said she went up to the lady and thanked her for her wonderful "Christian witness" and example for others. 'Scuse me??? The skirt and many children make her holy?? Because really, that's all the lady knew of the other shopper. Please!:glare:

 

That is just frightening. Of course maybe she meant that she was a good Christian witness because she shops at Walmart :lol:

 

Heather