Question about modesty

[kayla_veronica]

Also, husbands are supposed to be examples of virtue to their wives and children. If they blame others for their lack of control over their eyes and minds, what kind of example does that give?

Also the argument that men are weak and can’t help it leads to disrespect of men as a whole. If women thought that men were really these poor, pathetic creatures ruled by instinct alone, there would be no women who could whole-heartedly respect and obey her husband. Men are not dogs. Sure I agree they they are more disposed to certain kinds of sin but its far from impossible for men to be virtuous even around temptation. Men should have a higher respect for themselves than that.

[Jenn]

Now some ways that men could lust based on immodest dress. These are all options on board for a lustful man. (I won't take the obvious example we probably agree on: super short skirts, bare midriffs, etc) For the mature crowd here:

- low cut top : look at cleavage (which also draws the eye to the breast), look down women's shirts, sometimes see the bra edging when it is lace, the color of the bra
- sleeveless : most men find the upper arm tender/soft (much more so than the forearm), look the arm pit, you can look into the arm hole to look at bra, maybe see the side of her breast
- backless : also men find the back of a woman to be tender. also if we see that there isn't bra strap, then we going imagine about her not wearing a bra, and we will then try to view her front to determine this (again, just for lustful pleasure, but it was sparked by a backless dress)
- short skirt : the back of the knee some men find tender, if we going to the thigh then there is a lot of trouble coming, when women sit, we try to look up their skirts -- shorter the easier, sometimes a short skirt rides up and you see her thighs, you try to look at her underwear
- tight fitting : look at the figure of a woman, each man likes a different kind of figure, but when it is unduly revealed, it is an occasion of sin, we also try to look at nipples protruding, sometimes the outline of a bra and underwear will be enticing (especially if it is a cut which is meant to entice), tight fitting clothing also helps lustful men imagine the sexual act more clearly, i.e., how would it be to hold her in my arms, open her legs .... (you get the point). Tight clothing leaves little to the active imagination. Bathing suits are also a big problem here. It is not very hard to clearly get a sense of a woman's nipples and areola and vagina area (also maybe some pubic hair) when she is in a tight bathing suit, especially when wet.
- transparent frabric : the problem with semi-transparent is it leaves enough mystery that them is more activity to imagine what the full deal is, transparent fabric are a no-brainer to me, but the most common would probably be thing that reveal the arm, or back, and also in certain circumstances, the chest. These fabrics also enhance the "tenderness" of a woman in a way that is very sexually attractive.


I can go on and on. You get the point. This is all based on normal male sexual desire. We are cued to react to sexual stimuli. If the Marylike standards were employed, very very few of these stimuli come up. In my own case, when a woman is modestly dressed, I immediately have respect for her, and generally note mentally beauty without reference to sexuality. Once the modesty starts to be compromised, that is when sexuality begins to be referenced (lust). If other men aren't willing to admit that they are challenged by these or similar things, (and that is most men, since most men sin through the eyes), then I commend you on overcoming this. Don't kill the discussion for others who do, and for women who want not be an occasion of sin.

Some of the above is sickening and indecent. It reads like something out of Playboy. For all your talk about modesty, you seem to have forgotten another aspect: modesty of speech. How on earth can you rail on about modesty in dress for women and how tempting it is for men and then go on to describe in excrutiating detail, in a public forum with male members, the most intimate parts of the female form? You're going on and on about how indecently dressed women provoke thoughts of lust in men, and then you type out a diatribe that will provoke thoughts of lust in men.

Calgon, take me away.....

[Someone1776]

I think Scriptorium is going to need to go to confession for that creepy, way-too-in-depth rundown he just gave us. I'm truly shocked he just typed all that out-- I actually didn't finish it because it was so inappropriate.

To be honest, I didn't read all that either.

yup

Wow, I missed that post (or skimmed it too quickly).  Reads like something from a soft-core adult novel...

[Scriptorium]

I think you could also make a little more effort to not be rude or suggest that I am stupid (“duh”) or overlooking things (“wake up”). I find it very condescending.

Sorry if I was condescending, but you answered back rather quickly on something I thought was rather obvious.

As for looking up skirts (which I mean when a woman is seated), that is very common. People are not just willing to talk about it or face it. That's fine, but the point was clarified for the forum, not be lurid. Women cross their legs for this purpose, and the Church and the saints give their directions on skirts below the knees for this purpose. It isn't arbitrary.

As for when it stops, the regulations given seem to be a reasonable norm, and are backed by Church authority.

As for people who don't have problems with lust. I commend you. Some others may be lying.

And as for others who seem to think what I wrote was weird or creepy. I was writting with honesty for the sake of the discussion, and if you aren't mature enough to handle that, then you could not read it. I warned you. I don't commit those sins. I used to, and I can abstractly tell you about them. Men play aloof, as though they never think these thing. Funny, though, some of the same almost spilled their coffee when they viewed the Bavarian woman's picture -- that was followed by a good string of immature statements. I assure those who are concerned that I was and are well shriven, and no longer commit those sins. But those who doubt that the vast majority of men, and Catholic men, enagage in sins similar to these, if not more (masturbation, pornography, promescuity, etc.), then read the book Porn Nation, by Michael Leahy, or talk to a priest who hears confession. If you are a saint, I commend you. [Note the majority of people with lust problems are normal people. The pervs are the vast minority. Most of these normal people will never talk to you about it.] If you're lying or playing aloof, then don't try to hang your baggage on me because I willing to discuss the topic like an adult. And lastly I think the Marylike standards are not only sane, but a supreme form of chairty in our time. + PAX

[Gorgondie]

sorry script but most men aren't like that, where everytime they see a pretty lass they try to see up their skirts.

[Scriptorium]

sorry script but most men aren't like that, where everytime they see a pretty lass they try to see up their skirts.

Okay, folks, where common sense doesn't rule, something has to be stated. I didn't say that. Read the post if you're going to comment. Pertinent point: "Now some ways that men could lust based on immodest dress." Capisce?!

[The_Harlequin_King]

I appreciated the candidness, at least. This is a forum for adults, after all.

I'm a red blooded male who likes boobies. I just don't see how arms or even cleavage can send one into a masturbatory frenzy, unless there are many other repressive factors at work.

[ErinIsNice]

Read the post if you're going to comment.

It was too inappropriate for FE, so everyone had to skim over it. I wonder if anyone is around who can delete it?

[Anastasia]

But then some men could lust if a woman was dressed in anything at all. If we are limiting the scope of your discussion only to what is possible, then why exclude the case of those who could lust if a woman was dressed modestly?
And in regards to the long previous post, you have glossed over the real objections to the content by saying that those who object just can't handle it, and "aren't mature". Not so. If your premise in modesty is that we should charitably refrain from things which might cause others to have thoughts of a lustful nature, then your rather explicit accounts are also condemned. Worded accounts of these things can cause men to sin. Hence the written segments in pornographic magazines. But if "honesty" or some other abstract trumps charity, why is this not also true for dress?

[Scriptorium]

I appreciated the candidness, at least. This is a forum for adults, after all.

I'm a red blooded male who likes boobies. I just don't see how arms or even cleavage can send one into a masturbatory frenzy, unless there are many other repressive factors at work.

Straw man. I didn't say that. I said it is part of the miasma, and that is the primary factor guiding sins of the flesh these days.