There is a difference between beautiful and sexy...

[justamouse]

It puts rules on other women, and hurts them. It hurts your daughters who now think that men are supposed to act that way and be that way. It tells them they are less, because God Said So.

[mommaduck]

No complaint. I'm just posting about my convictions.That's a good question. I suspect that over 99% of the posts in this forum are made by women. I do not recall seeing a single post by anyone complaining of immodest dress by men.

 

Aside from this forum, you still see all the sermons directed at women and none directed at men.

 

Let's hear your convictions on men. Leave convictions on my clothing to the head of my household. I'm so sick and tired of other men thinking they have a say in what another man's wife wears! One reason I left Protestantism. "Your wife shouldn't wear pants!" "Your wife should wear skirts or a headcovering!" "Your wife shouldn't wear makeup!" "Your wife should paint the barn once in awhile!" Yep, I've heard it all. Heaven's I used to write diatribes on the subject (promoting one side over the other)...so, yes, guilty as well (but I did it in an appropriate place and form). But on a board where you acknowledge that the majority are wives of other men...I'm not certain what YOUR specific point is in writing a post that lectures the wives of other men, particular women that you have never met and are unlikely to meet to even know if there is cause for such lecturing.

[micandme]

It puts rules on other women, and hurts them. It hurts your daughters who now think that men are supposed to act that way and be that way. It tells them they are less, because God Said So.

 

Um... God doesn't say so. Men are supposed to follow God's Word too.

[Spy Car]

Yes. It's better than "'cause Bill said so!" ;)

 

 

It's pretty convenient that whenever men want to oppress women they can always claim "God told me to do it".

 

I don't see how your attitude is one bit different that those of the Ayatollahs in Iran, or those of the Taliban. Maybe you'd allow a little more flesh? Why not burkas Reg?

 

Bill

[mommaduck]

Never heard of it, but.......

 

As my Dad likes to say....

 

When I stand before God and He says, "Why did you do/believe that?" I will be able to say "BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID". If I err on the too-literal side, what is He going to say back? That I should have understood what He "really" meant?

 

Personally, if I (personally, remember... I'm not writing a rule book) believe/follow God's word literally, what am I going to hurt?

 

So I (personally) don't speak up in church because that's what I think the Bible says? That hurts... what? So I dress more modestly than I needed to dress.... that's damaging how? So I believe sex is only for marriage... that's going to hurt me how?

 

MOST of these things we fight over seem so silly to me. So if we follow God's Word too literally, is he going to look at me in eternity and say, "You silly girl, I didn't REALLY mean that!"? I'd rather risk that than, "But I said (this)... why didn't you believe me?" Do we really believe that we will stand before God and give an account for what we've done or not? I do.

There is nothing wrong with any of that. It's when another man comes on and starts lecturing a group of women that he doesn't know, most of whom he has never seen, dictating this and that. All the lectures and sermons are directed at...women! It's when there is no balance and the scales are disproportionately tipped that we have issues with legalism and legalistic liberalism.

[justamouse]

Um... God doesn't say so. Men are supposed to follow God's Word too.

 

That's not realistic. Not all people are Christian, not all believers believe one way (hence over 33,000 denominations). It's nice to think that way, but when the rubber hits the road, Christian men do things wrong, too.

Edited April 27, 2010 by justamouse
clarity, not spelling Whee!

[micandme]

It's pretty convenient that whenever men want to oppress women they can always claim "God told me to do it".

 

I don't see how your attitude is one bit different that those of the Ayatollahs in Iran, or those of the Taliban. Maybe you'd allow a little more flesh? Why not burkas Reg?

 

Bill

 

Yikes... hot topic.... maybe check with Reg's wife (who commented a while back) and see what she thinks. Doesn't sound like she's feeling too oppressed from what I can tell.

 

Don't assume that every man who has a strong opinion on this topic is a Taliban-type. My husband is very protective of his two daughters and would (try to) beat any creep to a bloody pulp who tried anything with either of them. THAT'S why he requires for now (and hopes for later) that they dress appropriately/modestly. Not because he's an over-controlling jerk.

[mommaduck]

Yikes... hot topic.... maybe check with Reg's wife (who commented a while back) and see what she thinks. Doesn't sound like she's feeling too oppressed from what I can tell.

 

Don't assume that every man who has a strong opinion on this topic is a Taliban-type. My husband is very protective of his two daughters and would (try to) beat any creep to a bloody pulp who tried anything with either of them. THAT'S why he requires for now (and hopes for later) that they dress appropriately/modestly. Not because he's an over-controlling jerk.

Very true. Modesty does not equal oppression. I've seen women oppressed by men to wear just the opposite and not permitted to wear "modest" clothing all the times (even in the church, I've been harassed by someone who felt I shouldn't dress SOOOOOO modestly). However, the issue is that he stepped into forum full of women and crassly started spouting off.

[justamouse]

Yes. It's better than "'cause Bill said so!" ;) Seriously, that IS at the heart of this discussion, is it not? I might take you up on that suggestion. If you have the book, is there a section that covers I Cor 7:4 that you can quote here?

 

Go read the book.

 

And get this one, too.

 

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/A-New-Kind-of-Christianity/Brian-D-McLaren/e/9780061853982/?itm=1&USRI=Brian+mcLaren

 

A NEW KIND OF CHRISTIANITY by Brian McLaren

 

In this much anticipated book, McLaren examines ten questions facing today's church—questions about how to articulate the faith itself, the nature of its authority, who God is, whether we have to understand Jesus through only an ancient Greco-Roman lens, what exactly the good news is that the gospel proclaims, how we understand the church and all its varieties, why we are so preoccupied with sex, how we should think of the future and people from other faiths, and the most intimidating question of all: what do we do next? Here you will find a provocative and enticing introduction to the Christian faith of tomorrow.

[micandme]

That's not realistic. Not all people are Christian, not all believers believe one way (hence over 33,000 denominations). It's nice to think that way, but when the rubber hits the road, Christian men do things wrong, too.

 

 

Oh, I completely agree... but a Christian generally acknowledges that the Bible is God's (our Creator's) Word, and as such, believes that God knows what He's talking about. One wonderful thing is that we are individually accountable before God. For what we say here as well as for how we dress, how we talk about our co-worker, or how we view men/women.

 

Of course Christian men do things wrong.... so do I (a Christian woman). Just because I'm "supposed" to do something doesn't mean I do 100% of the time...

[RegGuheert]

Aside from this forum, you still see all the sermons directed at women and none directed at men.

...and IN this forum.

Let's hear your convictions on men.

I already did. It is in the same verse.

Leave convictions on my clothing to the head of my household. I'm so sick and tired of other men thinking they have a say in what another man's wife wears! One reason I left Protestantism. "Your wife shouldn't wear pants!" "Your wife should wear skirts or a headcovering!" "Your wife shouldn't wear makeup!"

Note that I did not say ANYTHING like this.

"Your wife should paint the barn once in awhile!" Yep, I've heard it all. Heaven's I used to write diatribes on the subject (promoting one side over the other)...so, yes, guilty as well (but I did it in an appropriate place and form). But on a board where you acknowledge that the majority are wives of other men...I'm not certain what YOUR specific point is in writing a post that lectures the wives of other men, particular women that you have never met and are unlikely to meet to even know if there is cause for such lecturing.

Here it is:

I would prefer my wife and my daughters to reserve these last two ways of dressing and acting for their spouse.

 

Unfortunately, I think that many girls and women have been taught and believe that being beautiful and being sexy are the same thing and that the only way to be beautiful is to dress and act in a sexy manner.

Several like-minded people on these boards have posted that they appreciated this post. Perhaps this is not your cup of tea.

[OnTheBrink]

A few thoughts from reading the comments posted since my last one:

 

1) Not even God expects non-Christians to behave as Christians. If someone doesn't believe in God or the Bible, holding them to Biblical standards is like nailing jello to a tree. Besides, Christians are not called to judge non-Christians. Period. So, I'm going to agree with Micnme that if I live my life taking the NT instructions on how to live as a Christian, what is it hurting?

 

2) Regarding MamaDuck's comment on "all" sermons being geared toward women--that's just not true in my church, at all. Men's specific behaviors are addressed just as often as women's specific behaviors. Reading threads like this makes me thankful for my church. I think if I had to experience churches where "it all falls on the women", I'd be walking out of churches, a lot.

[mommaduck]

...and IN this forum.I already did. It is in the same verse.Note that I did not say ANYTHING like this.Here it is:Several like-minded people on these boards have posted that they appreciated this post. Perhaps this is not your cup of tea.

 

Obviously you know nothing about myself and presume too much. My point in posting has apparently been missed by your insistence that you are correct and must be heard. Having a few enjoy your post does not mean that you don't come off as crass towards others. You leave out much of life circumstances and just narrow it down to "dressing neither beautifully nor sexy is the best deterrent to drawing the attention of other men"...which is a fallacy ;) There are plenty of men that are drawn regardless how "unbeautiful" a woman dresses. You have just set a woman up to believe she caused something that she may have even gone out of her way to avoid, and thus the cycle of abuse continues. I teach my daughter to dress modestly, yet I would never tell her that she should not try to look nice when she goes somewhere as the "solution" to not attracting the wrong kind of attention. Again, that is a fallacy and "frump girl" is not the solution.

[RegGuheert]

 

Maybe you'd allow a little more flesh? Why not burkas Reg?

I never said MomsintheGarden and DDs don't wear burkas...but they don't. As others have said, the answer is based in cultural expectations. We look at the dress and behavior of others we are exposed to and make a judgment whether such dress and behavior is appropriate or not based on what we observe going on in their lives.

[mommaduck]

A few thoughts from reading the comments posted since my last one:

 

1) Not even God expects non-Christians to behave as Christians. If someone doesn't believe in God or the Bible, holding them to Biblical standards is like nailing jello to a tree. Besides, Christians are not called to judge non-Christians. Period. So, I'm going to agree with Micnme that if I live my life taking the NT instructions on how to live as a Christian, what is it hurting?

 

2) Regarding MamaDuck's comment on "all" sermons being geared toward women--that's just not true in my church, at all. Men's specific behaviors are addressed just as often as women's specific behaviors. Reading threads like this makes me thankful for my church. I think if I had to experience churches where "it all falls on the women", I'd be walking out of churches, a lot.

I'm glad to hear that about your church, Michelle. Unfortunately, the only churches in my experience that were like that were ones that were far too liberal for my taste in other ways.

 

At the same time, I do not believe that I should sit around and judge my fellow Christian on their attire either. God does not work on us each at the same place and at the same time. There are bigger fish that I would fry before frying another woman's clothing. Be an example, certainly.

 

(the only sermons I've heard directed towards men, insisted that Christian men all kept their hair in a crew cut, wore suits and ties, and never had an earring or tattoo...I'm personally against a tattoo, but goodness, some of this is very much oriented to men of a certain ethnicity, social status, etc.)

[micandme]

Actually, I've never had my clothing personally addressed in any way at church (other than the typical "is that new?" or "what a pretty sweater" or whatever).

 

We've lived in TN, WI, GA, NC, and MI and have visited more churches than I can count. I don't think I've ever heard a sermon about what is modest specifically (length, skirts only, necklines, etc.). But I've heard MANY on the attitudes of the heart. I've heard quite a few on a man's responsibility in the home.

 

But a lot of the really hard-hitting men's topics are, thankfully, reserved for men's groups, workshops, etc. Which is nice, because I don't want to be tempted to elbow my husband when certain areas of weakness are addressed. I'd rather have a man my husband respects challenge him to be a better husband and father than try to do that on my own. :D

 

Mostly I hear sermons on how we can incorporate all areas of God's Word into our lives. I'm blessed, I guess.... :001_smile:

[mommaduck]

Actually, I've never had my clothing personally addressed in any way at church (other than the typical "is that new?" or "what a pretty sweater" or whatever).

 

We've lived in TN, WI, GA, NC, and MI and have visited more churches than I can count. I don't think I've ever heard a sermon about what is modest specifically (length, skirts only, necklines, etc.). But I've heard MANY on the attitudes of the heart. I've heard quite a few on a man's responsibility in the home.

 

But a lot of the really hard-hitting men's topics are, thankfully, reserved for men's groups, workshops, etc. Which is nice, because I don't want to be tempted to elbow my husband when certain areas of weakness are addressed. I'd rather have a man my husband respects challenge him to be a better husband and father than try to do that on my own. :D

 

Mostly I hear sermons on how we can incorporate all areas of God's Word into our lives. I'm blessed, I guess.... :001_smile:

You are :)

 

Interestingly, in churches that make dress a "big topic issue" there tends to be more issues of spiritual abuse of authority, sexual abuse, pornography, etc than in churches that don't make it a main issue. Trying to fix everyone else's outside is often a sign of trying to cover up things going on on the inside. Now if a woman CHOOSES to dress a certain way, or the choice is made for their own family with no judgment against others, that is a different attitude towards it (just like there are women of all faiths that want to be free to wear pants or shorts, there are also women of all faiths that want to be free to wear coverings or salwar kameez style clothing...the question is, do we have the freedom to or are we being dictated to...both choices receive harassment, believe it or not).

Edited April 27, 2010 by mommaduck

[RegGuheert]

 

Obviously you know nothing about myself and presume too much. My point in posting has apparently been missed by your insistence that you are correct and must be heard. Having a few enjoy your post does not mean that you don't come off as crass towards others.

I didn't expect everyone to agree with me.

You leave out much of life circumstances and just narrow it down to "dressing neither beautifully nor sexy is the best deterrent to drawing the attention of other men"...which is a fallacy ;)

That is a slight misquote. I wrote "A woman can dress and act in neither a beautiful nor sexy manner if they choose. This is the best chance they have to avoid the attention and advances of men." Note that I include how you act as well. Point taken. It's probably much more important to avoid going to particular areas at night alone, etc.

There are plenty of men that are drawn regardless how "unbeautiful" a woman dresses. You have just set a woman up to believe she caused something that she may have even gone out of her way to avoid, and thus the cycle of abuse continues. I teach my daughter to dress modestly, yet I would never tell her that she should not try to look nice when she goes somewhere as the "solution" to not attracting the wrong kind of attention. Again, that is a fallacy and "frump girl" is not the solution.

Really, I think we are in "violent agreement" on this point.

[Spy Car]

I never said MomsintheGarden and DDs don't wear burkas...but they don't. As others have said, the answer is based in cultural expectations. We look at the dress and behavior of others we are exposed to and make a judgment whether such dress and behavior is appropriate or not based on what we observe going on in their lives.

 

And what? You think the rest of us can't make the same decisions about what we feel is appropriate?

 

Because no matter what *we* might feel (that includes you) there will always be others ready to tell us God feels otherwise, and that women better cover up more than what you find reasonable under your "cultural expectations."

 

The tone of the thread sounds like you want to impose your cultural expectations (which are God's expectations, with you speaking for God) on the rest of us . Bloody dangerous game my man!

 

Otherwise I don;t understand the purpose of the thread. If you're happy with the way your wife and daughters dress why not leave it at that? And cut the patriarchal chauvinism. Who needs it?

 

Not me.

 

Bill

Edited April 27, 2010 by Spy Car

[mommaduck]

I didn't expect everyone to agree with me.That is a slight misquote. I wrote "A woman can dress and act in neither a beautiful nor sexy manner if they choose. This is the best chance they have to avoid the attention and advances of men." Note that I include how you act as well. Point taken. It's probably much more important to avoid going to particular areas at night alone, etc.

 

It was not intended to be a direct quote; you knew that which I was referring to. Still it is a fallacy. A woman can be 60, dress AND act neither beautifully nor sexy, go out to the grocery in broad daylight in a "good" part of town where the "right" people live and STILL have men hit on her.

 

Really, I think we are in "violent agreement" on this point.

 

Not exactly. You still are missing the point. My point is that you seem unbalanced and judgmental in your presentation.

[mommaduck]

And what? You think the rest of us can't make the same decisions about what we feel is appropriate?

 

Because no matter what *we* might feel (that includes you) there will always be others ready to tell us God feels otherwise, and that women better cover up more than what you find reasonable under your "cultural expectations."

 

The tone of the thread sounds like you want to impose you cultural expectations (which are God's expectations, with you speaking for God) on the rest of us . Bloody dangerous game my man!

 

Otherwise I don;t understand the purpose of the thread. If you're happy with the way your wife and daughters dress why not leave it at that? And cut the patriarchal chauvinism. Who needs it?

 

Not me.

 

Bill

:iagree:

[RegGuheert]

 

It was not intended to be a direct quote; you knew that which I was referring to. Still it is a fallacy. A woman can be 60, dress AND act neither beautifully nor sexy, go out to the grocery in broad daylight in a "good" part of town where the "right" people live and STILL have men hit on her.

And no one ever said that wouldn't happen. Not in this thread, anyway.

[HRAAB]

It's pretty convenient that whenever men want to oppress women they can always claim "God told me to do it".

 

I don't see how your attitude is one bit different that those of the Ayatollahs in Iran, or those of the Taliban. Maybe you'd allow a little more flesh? Why not burkas Reg?

 

Bill

 

Thank you. It's nice to have another man speak up on this issue.

[RegGuheert]

Otherwise I don;t understand the purpose of the thread.

Here it is again:

Unfortunately, I think that many girls and women have been taught and believe that being beautiful and being sexy are the same thing and that the only way to be beautiful is to dress and act in a sexy manner.

IMO, this mistaken belief leads many young women to make unwise choices which lead to a lot of unnecessary hardship in their lives and the lives of others.

 

It's a discussion forum. It's helpful to talk through thoughts.

[Jen500]

- A woman can dress and act in a sexy, but not beautiful, manner if they choose. In this case, the woman sends the clear message that she wants to have sex. Most men who are not looking for sex will "get" this message and will move along. Men who are looking for sex may pursue this woman.

 

- A woman can dress and act in a beautiful and sexy manner if they choose. In this case, the woman will be attractive to many men, but they will be sending out mixed messages. While the attention received may be flattering to this woman, they may be inviting advances which were unintentional.

 

I

 

I think the OP is just referring to himself and how HE reacts to and interprets women in various forms of dress. :D

[RegGuheert]

 

I think the OP is just referring to himself and how HE reacts to and interprets women in various forms of dress. :D

I think that's a fair enough statement. (I'm not sure how else I would decide what to write here!)

[Spy Car]

I think the OP is just referring to himself and how HE reacts to and interprets women in various forms of dress. :D

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

Spot on!

 

Bill

[Guest Amy in MS]

Here it is again:IMO, this mistaken belief leads " many young women to make unwise choices which lead to a lot of unnecessary hardship in their lives and the lives of others.

 

It's a discussion forum. It's helpful to talk through thoughts.

 

Would you say this is a fair example? A girl dresses in a spaghetti strap top (unwise choice?) and a boy grabs her breast because he is so taken with her bareness (unnecessary hardship?).

 

What about this? A Mennonite girl in long dress and headcovering is knocked out and raped in a mall bathroom. (Happened to a young woman I know, she gave birth last year, at 17 years of age).

 

Is one more responsible for what happened to her based on an "unwise choice" If not, what is your point? Still sounds like, "women make bad choices about their dress and this causes bad things to happen to them." If they dressed "right" these these unnecessary hardships wouldn't befall them (and others. . .? They're not only causing themselves unnecessary hardships, but hardships on others now.)

 

I sort of wish I'd participated in yesterday's "boobquake," but I don't have a single shirt that comes close to revealing clevage.

[RegGuheert]

Would you say this is a fair example? A girl dresses in a spaghetti strap top (unwise choice?) and a boy grabs her breast because he is so taken with her bareness (unnecessary hardship?).

 

What about this? A Mennonite girl in long dress and headcovering is knocked out and raped in a mall bathroom. (Happened to a young woman I know, she gave birth last year, at 17 years of age).

 

Is one more responsible for what happened to her based on an "unwise choice" If not, what is your point? Still sounds like, "women make bad choices about their dress and this causes bad things to happen to them." If they dressed "right" these these unnecessary hardships wouldn't befall them (and others. . .? They're not only causing themselves unnecessary hardships, but hardships on others now.)

 

I sort of wish I'd participated in yesterday's "boobquake," but I don't have a single shirt that comes close to revealing clevage.

Not really. I'm more thinking of a couple of young girls from churches which we have attended who got pregnant out of wedlock and are now raising children without a husband and father to help. IMO, raising children is a challenge and having a mother and a father is a big help. (And no, I am not, in any way, excusing the behavior of the young men involved. Unfortunately, the mother takes the brunt of the responsibility for the actions of the couple in this case.)

[Mejane]

...versus the writings inspired by the creator of the universe.

 

Well, your interpretation of them anyway.

[RegGuheert]

 

Well, your interpretation of them anyway.

Actually, I was referring to I Cor 7:4, which is what Spy Car quoted. Perhaps there are other interpretations, but the text seems quite plain to me. In any case, no one has offered up another interpretation of that verse.

[Guest Amy in MS]

Not really. I'm more thinking of a couple of young girls from churches which we have attended who got pregnant out of wedlock and are now raising children without a husband and father to help. IMO, raising children is a challenge and having a mother and a father is a big help. (And no, I am not, in any way, excusing the behavior of the young men involved. Unfortunately, the mother takes the brunt of the responsibility for the actions of the couple in this case.)

 

Hmm, I don't see that this has anything to do with a woman dressing immodestly!

 

But, I'm just a simple woman who needs her husband, or someone else's husband, to tell her how to dress. :)

[Laurie]

...

- A woman can dress and act in neither a beautiful nor sexy manner if they choose. This is the best chance they have to avoid the attention and advances of men.

 

These first two ways of dressing and acting are how I would prefer my wife and my daughters to go out into public.

 

.

Could you please give some specific examples of what this second way of dressing/acting looks like?

Does this mean having a special "ugly" wardrobe to wear out in public? Does it mean nosepicking, burping, and spitting? Or just poor hygiene?

 

What is the opposite of acting beautiful? Or did you mean acting/dressing in a masculine or "unisex" style?

[Rosie_0801]

Still sounds like, "women make bad choices about their dress and this causes bad things to happen to them." If they dressed "right" these these unnecessary hardships wouldn't befall them.

 

Funny, I thought the OP was saying "if women dress 'right' then these things are less likely to happen.

 

Rosie

[OnTheBrink]

I'm glad to hear that about your church, Michelle. Unfortunately, the only churches in my experience that were like that were ones that were far too liberal for my taste in other ways.

 

At the same time, I do not believe that I should sit around and judge my fellow Christian on their attire either. God does not work on us each at the same place and at the same time. There are bigger fish that I would fry before frying another woman's clothing. Be an example, certainly.

 

(the only sermons I've heard directed towards men, insisted that Christian men all kept their hair in a crew cut, wore suits and ties, and never had an earring or tattoo...I'm personally against a tattoo, but goodness, some of this is very much oriented to men of a certain ethnicity, social status, etc.)

 

Oh, I never meant Christians are supposed to sit around and judge each other's clothing. Good heavens, what an opportunity for gossip THAT would create! We are supposed to exhort each other to live by the faith we claim to have. If I claim that I believe I'm to wear long skirts and never cut my hair, then show up in short shorts with a pixie hair cut, I'd expect people to question it. It goes against what I claim to believe.

 

As far as men go, I've never heard a sermon preached that directed their specific clothing and hair style. Like I said before, if I did, I'd walk out. Men at my church have all sorts of hair. My own son had an afro he'd not gotten cut in 5 years. We have men with crew cuts, men with long hair (mostly young men), women with short cuts, women with hair so long they sit on it. Specifics on dress and appearance just aren't really talked about.

 

I think Paul was speaking to a specific culture when he talked about not adorning your hair or wearing gold, etc. BUT, I think those principles are applicable to today. Braiding of the hair wasn't the point and neither was wearing jewels. I believe his point was, don't dress in such a way that detracts from your true beauty, which should come from the heart, from the joy of your salvation. I think that applies to everyone, not just women. Some will probably disagree, saying that he did indeed mean that, and that's ok. It's not a theological issue, AFAIC, it's an issue of personal conviction.

 

All that said, I do believe we've created a culture that objectifies women and I do believe dress plays a part in that. But I also believe it's a complex issue and there's an amalgam of components that contribute to it.

[RegGuheert]

Could you please give some specific examples of what this second way of dressing/acting looks like?

Does this mean having a special "ugly" wardrobe to wear out in public? Does it mean nosepicking, burping, and spitting? Or just poor hygiene?

 

What is the opposite of acting beautiful? Or did you mean acting/dressing in a masculine or "unisex" style?

A good example would be how one might dress to go to the dump. Most people would put on ratty clothes for such a task. The choice then is whether they would wear something immodest or not.

[Cheryl in NM]

That's not realistic. Not all people are Christian, not all believers believe one way (hence over 33,000 denominations). It's nice to think that way, but when the rubber hits the road, Christian men do things wrong, too.

 

I don't think anyone has said that Christian men are perfect. In fact, some Christian men are asking the women in their churches to dress more modestly to help them (the men) not lust in their minds and hearts.

 

That's true, not all people are Christian, but God is real and he loves everyone. He has given everyone a chance, whether you believe in him or not. Your disbelief does not negate his existence.

[HRAAB]

Is it any wonder so many women have issues with their body image with the unreasonable amount of pressure we put on them. On the one hand we have marketers trying to make our 10 to 12 yr. old girls in little sex objects. Just try shopping for a bra for your 12 yr. old that is a padded, push up, bra with suggestive comments on it. Then, at the other end of the spectrum, if my dd wears a dress with spaghetti straps or a strapless gown, she's going to cause some young man to commit sin. And it must be her shoulders that are causing that young man to sin since she does not have any cleavage.

 

Is there a middle ground?

[Mejane]

That's true, not all people are Christian, but God is real and he loves everyone. He has given everyone a chance, whether you believe in him or not. Your disbelief does not negate his existence.

 

Nor does your belief prove his existence. Not that this has anything to do with the discussion at hand. ;)

[Crimson Wife]

It puts rules on other women, and hurts them. It hurts your daughters who now think that men are supposed to act that way and be that way. It tells them they are less, because God Said So.

 

Why would a woman covering her body make her lower status? Seems to me that objectifying oneself by dressing like a streetwalker is pretty demeaning to a woman. It's reducing her entire worth as a person to her physical appearance. :(

[Cheryl in NM]

Why would a woman covering her body make her lower status? Seems to me that objectifying oneself by dressing like a streetwalker is pretty demeaning to a woman. It's reducing her entire worth as a person to her physical appearance. :(

:iagree:

[Laurie4b]

Hmm. I read the OP and didn't see any of the oppressive stuff that some others have responded to. I didn't think he was telling anyone else what to do. Are people reading between the lines somehow?

 

I think clothes are an art form--and art is intended to communicate. Sometimes we might communicate something we didn't intend and if others consistently misunderstand a phrase we use, we have the option to change it or not to care. I think the same goes for clothing. When you go to an art gallery, the artist has deliberately constructed the painting so that a viewer's eye is kept in the painting as long as possible--rather than following some line straight off the painting. Fashion designers are artists, also placing line in a way that directs the eye where they would like it to go. If you agree with where the designer wants people's eyes to go, you put it on. If you don't, you pass on it.

 

I also do not think that when people refer to causing men to sin that they are thinking of anything other than being a prompt for certain thoughts to pop up in someone's mind. Many Christian men consider this a temptation to sin---not sin via touching but rather sin in their thoughts if they continue to think about it. I do think that there are double standards in terms of not considering that women are also tempted in that way. A ripped guy playing beach volleyball shirtless can provoke the same kinds of thoughts in women.

 

I think our society frequently substitutes sexy (attractive for my body parts) for beautiful (attractive for who I am). This goes beyond clothing but causes a lot of heartache.

 

I didn't read the OP to mean that all sexual harrassment was induced by what the woman was wearing, but rather that a message about openness to sex is more likely to be perceived as being sent by sexy dressing. I used to work at a restaurant in which the waitresses wore black polyester pants, white shirts, and black polyester vests. Fit the "neither beautiful nor sexy" category for sure, but hid a lot of stains! Still got sexual harrassment. A whole lot of men figure waitresses may be willing to do other kinds of work for tips. (Parents--if you've never worked in restaurants, consider this before letting dd do it. I got it everywhere I worked as a waitress.)

 

That was what I took the OP's post to mean and to me, there is a good bit to think about in it. I understand why people would attack some of the things that were being attacked--I just don't see those things in the OP.

Edited April 28, 2010 by Laurie4b

[forevergrace]

Originally Posted by justamouse

The other day I was in a house with two other women, all of my children and a man in his 50s. (I'm higher 30s) I was dressed plainly, no makeup, hair nice but not done. Jeans (not low cut), scoop necked long (length wise) t shirt.

 

He took an opportune moment to run his hand up my waist to my bra strap.

 

It wasn't MY fault, which your post would make it. I in NO WAY encouraged him in either or dress or manner.

I didn't even read the other posts after this one, I hope the heck you slapped him hard. No man has any right to lay a hand on a woman, no matter what, no matter if she is or isn't giving off vibes of needing attention. Clearly, you were not. Now, I will continue reading on.

Forevergrace

[jillian]

Why would a woman covering her body make her lower status? Seems to me that objectifying oneself by dressing like a streetwalker is pretty demeaning to a woman. It's reducing her entire worth as a person to her physical appearance. :(

i think a big part of this is because dressing "sexy" is code for "being empowered and being take charge". i disagree but it seems to be a prevailing sentiment in society

[forevergrace]

Justamouse,

Really, I should of continued reading on, not knowing your situation. I do know what is right for me, is not right for everyone. I am sorry to hear about your situation. I did like what Bill had to say and I applaud him!!!!

 

It's pretty convenient that whenever men want to oppress women they can always claim "God told me to do it".

 

I don't see how your attitude is one bit different that those of the Ayatollahs in Iran, or those of the Taliban. Maybe you'd allow a little more flesh? Why not burkas Reg?

[Cheryl in NM]

Hmm. I read the OP and didn't see any of the oppressive stuff that some others have responded to. I didn't think he was telling anyone else what to do. Are people reading between the lines somehow?

 

I think clothes are an art form--and art is intended to communicate. Sometimes we might communicate something we didn't intend and if others consistently misunderstand a phrase we use, we have the option to change it or not to care. I think the same goes for clothing. When you go to an art gallery, the artist has deliberately constructed the painting so that a viewer's eye is kept in the painting as long as possible--rather than following some line straight off the painting. Fashion designers are artists, also placing line in a way that directs the eye where they would like it to go. If you agree with where the designer wants people's eyes to go, you put it on. If you don't, you pass on it.

 

I also do not think that when people refer to causing men to sin that they are thinking of anything other than being a prompt for certain thoughts to pop up in someone's mind. Many Christian men consider this a temptation to sin---not sin via touching but rather sin in their thoughts if they continue to think about it. I do think that there are double standards in terms of not considering that women are also tempted in that way. A ripped guy playing beach volleyball shirtless can provoke the same kinds of thoughts in women.

 

I think our society frequently substitutes sexy (attractive for my body parts) for beautiful (attractive for who I am). This goes beyond clothing but causes a lot of heartache.

 

I didn't read the OP to mean that all sexual harrassment was induced by what the woman was wearing, but rather that a message about openness to sex is more likely to be perceived as being sent by sexy dressing. I used to work at a restaurant in which the waitresses wore black polyester pants, white shirts, and black polyester vests. Fit the "neither beautiful nor sexy" category for sure, but hid a lot of stains! Still got sexual harrassment. A whole lot of men figure waitresses may be willing to do other kinds of work for tips. (Parents--if you've never worked in restaurants, consider this before letting dd do it. I got it everywhere I worked as a waitress.)

 

That was what I took the OP's post to mean and to me, there is a good bit to think about in it. I understand why people would attack some of the things that were being attacked--I just don't see those things in the OP.

 

:iagree: This is a good post. I think it lays out the issue at hand very well. Kudos!

[Peela]

I am not split into little pieces, so that you can separate my sexuality from my inner or outer beauty or any other parts of me. I am a whole being and not made up of parts, except conceptually.

 

And, just because I wear a pretty skirt and a singlet top that happen to make me look sexy (well, once upon a time), doesn't actually mean I want to have sex with you, I can assure you. Come on. Have you never loved the feeling of being pretty and having the sun on your bare skin and being unencumbered by excessive clothing? It is a beautiful and free feeling. But then, I don't have a problem with nudity, either.

 

I don't subscribe to the belief systems that fuel much of the discussion. They are not "fact" to me, they are beliefs, and you can't argue with a belief.

 

I think one can only speak for how one feels, and one's beliefs are going to shape one's responses.

I have been through a very sexually libeated period of my life, amongst a community who feel the same, and honestly, you grow out of it and all this stuff just isn't a big deal any more. Not much charge around it. For men or women. Sexual repression leads to sexual obsession, not anything outside oneself. You can't change other peope- you can feel morally superior or righteous, but that really doesn't serve anyone.

 

So much of it is cultural, whether its a whole country or your religious beliefs, or a subculture. Theres no absolute truths here. I honestly dont think God is going to reward me for hiding my body and its inherent sexuality- or punish me for flaunting myself. I don't think God is so petty.

[cstitches]

Speaking as a female of emerging adulthood age, I can assure you that men are not the only ones guilty of lusting, and that modest dress has little to do with it; collared, button-up shirts and nice jeans can be very attractive. Women have just as much biological need to find a mate as men, but perhaps just don't jump [solely] on looks as easily.

 

Bottom line though is that every person, regardless their gender, is responsible for their actions and controlling their impulses. I think it's considerate and polite to not dress in a way that will make others uncomfortable (sexually and otherwise), but you also can't please everyone, as interpretation of dress is largely subjective. There are also times and places where certain dress is appropriate, or not.

 

 

To add an entirely different dynamic here, I think the appeal of caring about moderate dress has more to do with feeling faithful than the issue itself. I was raised Christian and am now a nonbeliever, but I understand the appeal of a religious community and faith: everything feels purposeful, like you know what to do and can feel confident that you're doing the right thing because it's written out for you, and you're supported by a group of people who sort of hold you liable, who you have to prove yourself to in a way. I think moderate dress is one more control, or stabilizing factor that makes believers feel secure and righteous.

 

This is just an idea I've been considering for a while, may or may not ring true with others, but it's nonetheless important that everyone give consideration to the motivation for their dispositions. (And I'm not bringing up this particular point to challenge or argue, just to share the perspective.)