Skirts at work

[miss_fluffy]

 that I am insinuating that single women with careers somehow dont belong in a traditional Catholic group, that is not necessarily the case.  In my opinion, the matter boils down to one of Intent.  What does the individual intend to do?

Another thought here... I think most individuals who consider themselves traditional Catholics intend to live life as God leads them, day by day.  Oftentimes this does not lead to marriage and kids, or the religious life.  The ideal is simply to intend to dedicate one's life to God's will. 

 

I certainly haven't done this in the past, but I've been doing my best for the past couple of years, and it hasn't gotten me married with kids yet.  If I were to focus on the ideal of marriage on a daily basis, I may become quite complacent on my real duties as a Catholic.

[DominusTecum]

There's one demonstrable reason not to wear some skirts: they're immodest.

 

On the other hand, there are two demonstrable reasons not to wear pants. For some pants (I'd say all but somebody will bring up culottes) they are immodest. For all pants, their being worn by women is a sign of our decadent and godless culture, and an innovation of the cultural/sexual revolution, which should be rejected both on those grounds, and on the grounds of undermining the traditional differences between men's clothing and women's clothing. (Think you that there wasn't a reason that women didn't wear trousers for hundreds of years, even when men were doing so, and trousers were demonstrably easier to move and do work in?) Isn't it a little presumptious in our society to presume that our "practical" fashions are so much better than the fashions of those hundreds and hundreds of years of Catholic peasant women? (And look at the spirit of our times which has motivated all of these new fashions!)

 

Therefore, pants should be avoided, because even if they're "modest," they fail in the other categories. We need to restore Catholic culture, and we're not gonna get it done by making "practical concessions" to the modern anti-Christ culture of today's world.

 

What option does that leave ladies? Some skirts. Obviously, skirts which are slit all the way up the thigh are out, and skirts which are very tight and really emphasize the hips and buttocks are out, as are mini-skirts. But that is common sense.

 

I respect the fact that it's very hard for women to find modest clothing today, but it's certainly possible, given the fact that I've seen many many women in skirts at the various chapels I've attended, and they all managed to look very elegant, and not "all the same." Skirts can be found, to make them a viable alternative to pants for daily wear. Given all the reasons why they're preferrable (last but not least, as a proud banner of Catholic Culture and rejection of the modern world and fashions) it stands to reason that all traditional ladies should seriously consider embracing the skirt, and eschewing pants.

[DominusTecum]

(Not to mention the question of immodest emphasis on the groin area when said trousers are worn by women.)

As discussed on the thread about men's "pants", surely that's more of an issue for men. Perhaps that's why men wore tunics over their trousers for so long...

 

Clare.

I don't concede that it's more of an issue, given, as I demonstrated in that thread, that the looking is more (or used to be, anyway) a problem of men than of women. However, be that as it may, as you will see in that thread, I also said that I don't think men should wear pants where this is an issue -they shouldn't wear jeans which have a tendency to bulge when they're in public, and all that. (Chances are, the situations in which they'd need to wear jeans for work are all going to be "family" situations, where it won't matter too much -it's not like the wife is going to be scandalized.) However, even if men may have a more prominent bulging issue in some cases, that does not mean that women are without one. I have seen women's pants that were very loose, but showed off enough that it left virtually nothing to the imagination, we'll leave it at that. Tightness is not the only issue -in some cases, it's better for it to be tighter, because then the underlying stuff is forced to more-or-less conform to the shape of the overlying garment -not so with the very loose, and presumably more modest trousers.

[liliaagri]

Think you that there wasn't a reason that women didn't wear trousers for hundreds of years, even when men were doing so, and trousers were demonstrably easier to move and do work in?

 

There were also hundreds, if not thousands, of years when men didn't wear pants.

 

So where are our men in togas who are brave enough to go against modern fashions? Where are our leaders?

 

 

[Clare]

(Think you that there wasn't a reason that women didn't wear trousers for hundreds of years, even when men were doing so, and trousers were demonstrably easier to move and do work in?)

Men didn't for ages either. And then there was the tunics over them business.

 

Clare.

[Spooky7272]

 
 
 

[Clare]

I don't concede that it's more of an issue, given, as I demonstrated in that thread, that the looking is more (or used to be, anyway) a problem of men than of women.

And since men have a problem with "looking", and can be (as I hinted on the other thread) visibly aroused, wouldn't it be wise for them to wear tunics over their trousers, to save them incriminating themselves?

 

Women do not have that problem.

 

 

Clare.

[DominusTecum]

LOL! If the men didn't have women in pants all around them to cause this, then they ought to be able to keep good enough control over themselves not to become *ahem* physically interested.

 

Besides, even if the bloke was weak, today he ought to have a sport coat obscuring things! All the more reason to wear one

[Clare]

Besides, even if the bloke was weak, today he ought to have a sport coat obscuring things! All the more reason to wear one  

I look forward to Bishop Williamson's letter on the subject!

 

Clare.

[MagisterMusicae]

And women started wearing trousers, and that became acceptable too!

Fashions change.

Catholics traditionally fit in with their society. While maintaining modesty. Women's trousers are not immodest per se. Cardinal Siri said so!

Clare.

Like I suggested, Claire, you should re-read the whole Cardinal Siri's letter. He does say that trousers are not immodest, per se, as they can sometimes cover more of the woman's body than skirts.

His main objection, which you've ignored:

However, it is a different aspect of women's wearing of men's trousers which seems to us the gravest.

The wearing of men's dress by women affects firstly the woman herself, by changing the feminine psychology proper to women; secondly it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate relationships between the sexes; thirdly it affects the woman as mother of her children by harming her dignity in her children's eyes ... This changing of the feminine psychology does fundamental, and, in the long run, irreparable damage to the family, to conjugal fidelity, to human affections and to human society.

Indeed. Fashions do change:

• Our Lady at Fatima to Jacinta : "Certain styles and fashions are being introduced which gravely offend my Divine Son!"
  
  
• Ven. Pope Pius XII (Allocution, July 17, 1954) : "How many young girls there are who do not see any wrongdoing in following certain shameless styles like so many sheep. They certainly would blush if they could guess the impression they make and the feeling they evoke in those who see them. Do they not see the harm resulting from excess in certain gymnastic exercises and sports not suitable for virtuous girls? What sins are committed or provoked by conversations which are too free, by immodest shows, by dangerous reading. How lax have consciences become, how pagan morals!"
  
  
• Pietro Cardinal Ciriaci, Congregation of the Council (Aug 21, 1954): "Everyone knows that during the summer months particularly, things are seen here and there, which are certain to prove offensive to anyone who has retained some respect and regard for Christian modesty. On the beaches, in country resorts, almost everywhere, on the streets of cities and towns, in public and private places, and, indeed, often even in buildings dedicated to God, an unworthy and indecent mode of dress has prevailed.
  "Because of this, the young particularly, whose minds are easily bent towards vice, are exposed to the extreme danger of losing their innocence, which is, by far, the most beautiful adornment of mind and body. Feminine adornment, if it can be called adornment, feminine clothing, if that can be called clothing which contains nothing to protect either the body or modesty, are at times of such a nature, that they seem to serve lewdness rather than modesty . . . Well did the ancient poet say of this matter, 'Vice necessarily follows upon public nudity.'"
  
  
• Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer : "Unfortunately, we are living in times that have lost the sense of sin and, as a result, we see around us an eruption of styles of dress which are, in every way, contrary to Christian modesty.  Christian people must not allow themselves to be carried along by the spirit of the world but must firmly resist such deviations...  Jacinta Marto, one of the little seers of Fatima, although she was only eleven years old at the time, had a wisdom taught her by the Mother of God.
  "She merits, therefore, our attention.  Here is what she said with regard to styles of dress:  "Fashions will arise which will greatly offend God."  When we consider the fashions of our day, we are led to conclude that the times foretold by the little seer have arrived.  Indeed, the styles of dress of the women and girls of today such as:  very tight clothing; dressing like men, including slacks and tights; low necklines; skirts with hemlines or slits which do not cover the leg below the knee – are absolutely contrary to the norms of Christian modesty."
  
  
• Decree of the Congregation of the Council (Jan 12, 1930): "We recall that a dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat, which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows, and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knee.  Furthermore, dresses of transparent material are improper.
  "Let parents keep their daughters away from public gymnastic games and contests; but, if their daughters are compelled to attend such exhibitions, let them see to it that they are fully and modestly dressed.  Let them never permit their daughters to don immodest garb."
  
  
• Rufino Cardinal Santos, Pastoral Letter (Dec 6, 1959): "O Christian mothers, if only you knew the future distress, peril and ill-restrained shame that you prepare for your sons and daughters by imprudently accustoming them to live barely clothed, and permitting them to lose the sense of modesty, you would be ashamed of yourselves, and of the harm done to the little ones entrusted to you by Heaven to be reared in a Christian dignity and culture."
  
  
• Ven. Pope Pius XII, Allocution (May 22, 1941): "Numbers of believing and pious women...in accepting to follow certain bold fashions, break down, by their example, the resistance of many other women to such fashions, which may become for them the cause of spiritual ruin.  As long as these provocative styles remain identified with women of doubtful virtue, good women do not dare to follow them; but once these styles have been accepted by women of good reputation, decent women soon follow their example, and are carried along by the tide into possible disaster.
  
  
• Dom Bernard Marcheaux : "The evil of our day is this:  that the line of demarcation between Christian and non-Christian, between Christian and heretic, between Christian and idolater, is gradually fading away.  The cancer of Liberalism attacks everyone and we must be careful not to be infected ourselves.  Those who still call themselves Catholic live, too often, like those who have renounced this title.  Women who go to church dress just the way women who do not go to church dress; they read the same books and magazines as these women; they go to the same – often immoral – shows as these women; they no longer pray or do penance.  It is a confusion of license and worldliness.  As a result of these customs, the Church is beginning to disappear in the world. Christianity is being lost.  Only rarely does one find Catholics to whom the following words of Saint Paul can apply:  "...be blameless and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world".  (Phil.2:15).  The early Christians stood out among the pagans like shining torches in the dark, and the example of their courage and their virtue attracted the pagans strongly to the Faith.  This is something which we do not see today, except in rare cases.  Everything is a mish-mash of unrestraint."
  
  
• Pope Benedict XV, Encyclical Letter Sacra Propediem (Jan 6, 1921) : "One can not sufficiently deplore the blindness of so many women of every age and station. Made foolish by a desire to please, they do not see to what degree the indecency of their clothing shocks every honest man and offends God. Most of them would formerly have blushed for such apparel as for a grave fault against Christian modesty. Now it does not suffice to exhibit themselves on public thoroughfares; they do not fear to cross the threshold of churches, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and even to bear the seducing food of shameful passions to the Eucharistic Table, where one receives the Heavenly Author of Purity."
  
  
• Ven. Pope Pius XII, Allocution on Fashion (Nov. 8, 1957) :  "One cannot minimize the importance of style's influence for good or for evil. The language of clothing, as we have already said, is the more effective when it is more ordinary and is understood by everyone. It might be said that society speaks through the clothing it wears. Through its clothing it reveals its secret aspirations and uses it, at least in part, to build or destroy its future."
• Ven. Pope Pius XII, Allocution on Fashion (Nov. 8, 1957) :  "There always exists an absolute norm to be preserved, no matter how broad and changeable the relative morals of styles may be."

Every one of these quotations comes from before 1960, and before the "Sexual Revolution".

Indeed. Fashions do change. That is undeniable. What is in question is whether that is a good thing: