# Reclaiming our Bodies--re-thinking modesty



## aribell (Dec 11, 2009)

Okay, so hear me out.  I am _not _saying that women should be able to dress provocatively or that modesty doesn't matter, but some recent events have made me think that much too much of the responsibility for men's thought lives is placed on women.

Case in point.  On a Christian blog I follow--run by Focus on the Family-the editor (male) was arguing against women athletes wearing 2-pieces at the Olympic volleyball games. Discussion went back and forth, then someone mentioned that, if men really wanted to, they could learn not to automatically view women's bodies in sexual ways, that men in other countries learn to do just that.  The editor said that yes, that was true, but that he never wanted to get to a point where he would be "desensitized" to a woman's body, so that he would always be excited to see his wife.  

My response was that that was exactly the problem.  Whether women cover up or don't cover up, men seem to feel entitled to treat a woman's body as being there for the purpose of their sexual enjoyment, even Christian men who are trying to do the "right" thing.  And so, for a godly man who's trying not to "go there" in his mind, he wants women to be covered.  He doesn't say, "Oh, I'm not going to look at her in that way," he says, "My only option is to look at her in that way, unless she covers herself (and then I'll still want to go there anyway)."  Of course, God created us to be sexually alluring, but have we tolerated our own objectification by accepting comments like the editor made and focusing on covering ourselves all the time so as to not make any man "excited"? Corinthians says that our bodies are for _God_, for _His _glory and purposes, not simply for sexual desire.

The other thing that brought it to mind is a couple of encounters at the gym.  I actually went out of my way to wear loose-fitting pants and a tee, so as to not draw any unnecessary attention to myself.  Well, as I'm working on the _glute_ machine, I look in the mirror and this man is just staring...staring.  Something similar happened with someone else when I was on the elliptical/stairclimber.  

I don't know if I was offended so much as frustrated with the attempts at modesty only to have men show that it really doesn't matter what you have on or don't have on, they are going to "go there" anyway.

IDK if this is a rant or a question or what.  But right now I think it would be really nice for women to be able to be in their bodies, exist and move freely, without there being an issue of lust raised.  And for women not to have to bear the burden of that.  

Other perspectives?


----------



## goldielocs (Dec 11, 2009)

Hi Nicola,

I understand where you are coming from and have made the decision to do what I can to prevent a man other than my husband to lust after my body.  I make a point to pray that men won't approach me in an inappropriate manner and I make sure I dress modestly. That's really all I can do.  I make a point to dress modestly, but if a man still lusts after what they see then that's his heart's condition. In the example you gave where you were in the gym, I say that was his issue.  

Men in my family share the same viewpoint as the man you referred to in your post. They don't think they should have to restrain themselves from lusting. It's sad and unfortunate they think that way.  Parents need to teach that modestly is the responsibility of both sexes. Most boys are allowed to date earlier and have later curfews. I don't even want to get into the whole "sowing wild oats" thing.  Some boys/ men have been taught that it's ok. The double standard is set early in life.


----------



## momi (Dec 11, 2009)

2 Corinthians 6:3 - "We put no stumbling block in anyone’s path, so that our ministry will not be discredited...

This is not only for our brothers sake but our own.  It assists us in living a holy lifestyle so that the word of God (His ministry through us) is not discredited.

Helping our brothers avoid lustful thoughts is not the only reason for modest dressing. What we value we cover up and protect. We are all representatives of Christ and should strive to carry ourselves in a way that He is glorified- setting us apart from the world. 

We should not only be modest in dress, but behaviour and conversation ...  so the above only deals with a small portion of it.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 12, 2009)

This reminds me of an article I read about how sexual harrassment is more frequent against women wearing the burqa in Egypt than women who were not. The men said that the covering provided something "sexually mysterious," in other words, they always thought about what was under there.

Think about it, even society tries to make "modesty" "sexy." Saying, "leave some to the imagination." What the heck are people imagining? 

If someone wants to lust after someone, it usually has nothing to do with what they are wearing. You cannot control what other people think. To place that type of burden on women is so unfair and ridiculous.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 12, 2009)

nicola.kirwan said:


> Okay, so hear me out.  I am _not _saying that women should be able to dress provocatively or that modesty doesn't matter, but some recent events have made me think that much too much of the responsibility for men's thought lives is placed on women.
> 
> Case in point.  On a Christian blog I follow--run by Focus on the Family-the editor (male) was arguing against women athletes wearing 2-pieces at the Olympic volleyball games. Discussion went back and forth, then someone mentioned that, if men really wanted to, they could learn not to automatically view women's bodies in sexual ways, that men in other countries learn to do just that.  The editor said that yes, that was true, but that he never wanted to get to a point where he would be "desensitized" to a woman's body, so that he would always be excited to see his wife.
> 
> ...



Oh my gosh, yes! The bolded has been an excuse many have used to disregard Jesus' statement concerning this.


----------



## aribell (Dec 12, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> This reminds me of an article I read about how sexual harrassment is more frequent against women wearing the burqa in Egypt than women who were not. The men said that the covering provided something "sexually mysterious," in other words, they always thought about what was under there.
> 
> Think about it, even society tries to make "modesty" "sexy." Saying, "leave some to the imagination." What the heck are people imagining?
> 
> If someone wants to lust after someone, it usually has nothing to do with what they are wearing. You cannot control what other people think. To place that type of burden on women is so unfair and ridiculous.


 
Thanks for that article reference.  I had heard something similar, and that was also a part of my thoughts in the op.  I think another poster on here said that muslim women in the US wearing the burqa have been hit on by men saying things like, "I know you got booty under there."

I get the not making my brother stumble reference, but I guess I'm questioning whether--on the whole--women are actually making men stumble, or whether men need to take responsibility themselves.

I think that women can dress in explicitly sexual ways by emphasizing cleavage, letting butts hang out of skirts, essentially wearing lingere in public--clothes that communicate a clearly sexual message.  That would be inviting a man to lust, openly tempting him.  That's what is behind a lot of outfits and designs.  But I see a difference between that and an athletic suit on the beach--two piece or not, or even a spaghetti strap dress in the summer time.  

I feel like men's comments about women in burkas is the extreme example of men making women take responsibility for their own lust.  I also read in a book about Iran the trouble women would get in for nail polish and mascara.  It's an extreme, yes, but it seems like an extreme version of the same attitude we have.

I also often think on why it is that Jesus said nothing whatsoever to women when telling men not to look on a woman with lust.



			
				momi said:
			
		

> Helping our brothers avoid lustful thoughts is not the only reason for modest dressing. *What we value we cover up and protect.*


 
This is an interesting point that I will think about more.  Please share more on that if you have any more thoughts.


----------



## delitefulmane (Dec 12, 2009)

Very interesting topic ladies! I have can only add that I totally agree. I mean men tend to let their mind wonder when nothing is 'hanging out' or being 'pushed up.' Personally, I am 'blessed' in the rear and even when I am wearing the baggiest sweat pants men still stare there. I mean God gave me this body for a reason and if I am using it to His glory, I should be able feel comfortable in even my most modest piece of clothing, but men sometimes make this impossible! 

Please continue!!


----------



## LifeafterLHCF (Dec 12, 2009)

Wow I will behave.I do believe men throw women under the bus on so many issues.They use to think and some still do that women are inheiertly evil and that women asked for the things that happen to them.I am blessed with boobs..48g's..I wear baggy shirts and pants not out choice but since I have lost weight it happens.I use to wear provocative tops bc I loved the attention I got..I once got a 20 slipped in there once..now that Im on God side I do dress as modestly as possible bc we aren't suppose to bring attention to ourselves.I feel if a man is a man then its his responsibility to bounce his eyes.. like women are to bounce their thoughts when they see a fine vanilla or cholate guy at the gym. I believe firmly men have to long have run around without any responsibility of their actions and women have helped them do this by either advocating what the men are saying or by not saying anything.

Paul Washer in his sermon about dating and courtship clearly tells these so called men that its their job as christian men to step up and lead and take responbility for their actions..Im done venting I dont want to thread jack


----------



## aribell (Dec 12, 2009)

Just Not A Pretty Face said:


> Wow I will behave.I do believe men throw women under the bus on so many issues.They use to think and some still do that women are inheiertly evil and that women asked for the things that happen to them.I am blessed with boobs..48g's..I wear baggy shirts and pants not out choice but since I have lost weight it happens.I use to wear provocative tops bc I loved the attention I got..I once got a 20 slipped in there once..now that Im on God side I do dress as modestly as possible bc we aren't suppose to bring attention to ourselves.I feel if a man is a man then its his responsibility to bounce his eyes.. like women are to bounce their thoughts when they see a fine vanilla or cholate guy at the gym. I believe firmly men have to long have run around without any responsibility of their actions and women have helped them do this by either advocating what the men are saying or by not saying anything.
> 
> Paul Washer in his sermon about dating and courtship clearly tells these so called men that its their job as christian men to step up and lead and take responbility for their actions..Im done venting I dont want to thread jack


 
No, I feel you.  I've just really been feeling lately that women are being dumped on in so many ways, and the church is either participating or just remaining silent.  The church and society feels free to mock women for their desire for marriage without calling men to step up to the plate, grow up and marry these women.  Our beautiful, natural, God-given desires to love and nurture are characterized as clinginess and desperation, when those same qualities are what have enabled children to still receive love and stability when the men have abdicated their responsibility.

We're cowed into a corner, made to feel ashamed of what God truly put in us emotionally and spiritually.  If we are intelligent or have a word of wisdom, we have to make sure that we don't step out of place and threaten a man's authority.  And physically, again men are permitted to be free in their bodies and their sexuality is affirmed, but ours is not.

I'm not trying to rant, but something has really been in me lately about the church and femininity and creating a godly feminism.  I think we have a lot more work to do here in understanding female liberation in Christ.


----------



## momi (Dec 12, 2009)

nicola.kirwan said:


> Thanks for that article reference. I had heard something similar, and that was also a part of my thoughts in the op. I think another poster on here said that muslim women in the US wearing the burqa have been hit on by men saying things like, "I know you got booty under there."
> 
> I get the not making my brother stumble reference, but I guess I'm questioning whether--on the whole--women are actually making men stumble, or whether men need to take responsibility themselves.
> 
> ...


----------



## LifeafterLHCF (Dec 12, 2009)

Thank you Momi..your awesome woman of God a rare kind in these days..I will be honest Im scared right now.I feel that my sexuality will be the only thing that will attract a man however I know the man I want has to be of God which means a man of intergrity.

I read your post about the woman in the home and it really spoke to me.I normally look down on women who say they want to be a stay at home mom with utter disregard..but I know it takes alot to run a home..please gives us tips..please..


----------



## Renewed1 (Dec 12, 2009)

I agree with you ladies 100%!!  I've always dress modestly; because even as a young girl (teenager) I didn't want boys/men to look at me in a sexual manner.   I use to wear clothes that were way too big and I never showed any boobs/booty (well I can't help the booty, I'm gifted back there).  Now that I am older I still dress modestly.  

I believe a woman can be sexy in her dress without boobs hanging out (unless she's married and drawing the attention of her husband).  

But I do dress appropriate to my size (no more big clothes) and I like to have my curves accented (well my waistline since I lost over 30 pounds).  

Log story short, I agree with you ladies.  I think women should be conscious of the messages they are sending out to men in their attitude and their dress.  The way a woman presents herself is PROJECTED and men know.  Which explains why a man know the difference between a woman that is the "marrying kind" and a woman that is "bedroom fun".


----------



## divya (Dec 12, 2009)

Excellent topic. 

God wants our minds to be holy, not just our actions. That being said, the responsibility to be modest does not only lie with women but also with men. We must keep our minds clean. 

*Matthew 5:28-29*
_But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell._

These verses tell us that the sin occurs in our mind when we look upon another with wrongful intentions. Thus, men have a responsibility not to lust after women - period. The man doesn't only have one option, regardless of what a woman wears. He has two options - to do right or do wrong. Of course, we as women should dress modestly as that is our Christian duty. However, men have the responsibility to turn away if for whatever reason they feel tempted to lust.

Again great thread. This is very important not just for us as women, but for the sons that we are raising or eventually may raise (and the other men in our lives). It is essential that they know what is right in the eyes of God.


----------



## plainj (Dec 12, 2009)

Thank You/you for this thread.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 12, 2009)

Changed said:


> I agree with you ladies 100%!!  I've always dress modestly; because even as a young girl (teenager) I didn't want boys/men to look at me in a sexual manner.   I use to wear clothes that were way too big and I never showed any boobs/booty (well I can't help the booty, I'm gifted back there).  Now that I am older I still dress modestly.
> 
> *I believe a woman can be sexy* *in her dress without boobs hanging out* (unless she's married and drawing the attention of her husband).
> 
> ...



See, this makes me a little confused. Do we want to have our cake and eat it too? I feel like sometimes we as women are convinced that we must be "sexy" in some way or another; even when we are supposedly to dress modestly. Does the Bible say to dress modesty and still be "sexy?"


----------



## SND411 (Dec 12, 2009)

And how come everyone sees modesty as "covering one's body" alone? I thought modesty also meant not wearing too much makeup/jewlery for instance.


----------



## divya (Dec 12, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> And how come everyone sees modesty as "covering one's body" alone? I thought modesty also meant not wearing too much makeup/jewlery for instance.



Agree completely.  

*1 Timothy 2:9-10* - _In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. _

*1 Peter 3:3-5* - _Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands_


----------



## LifeafterLHCF (Dec 12, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> See, this makes me a little confused. Do we want to have our cake and eat it too? I feel like sometimes we as women are convinced that we must be "sexy" in some way or another; even when we are supposedly to dress modestly. Does the Bible say to dress modesty and still be "sexy?"


 

I understand your view on the word sexy..its a hang up for some christians..I intrepret sexy as being aestrically appealing..which you want to be for your mate or even trying to found by a man.A man is a eye person or seeing is what attracks them.I wear clothing that are nice,not too tight,not too loose and not too low cute.As for the behavior a woman should be gently in her approach not loud or abrasive..she should be strong in motives and walk..there nothing wrong with being vocal but yet tactful..


----------



## aribell (Dec 12, 2009)

momi said:


> http://homeliving.blogspot.com/2009/03/protecting-our-daughters-with.html
> 
> To save me from typing... I am sleepy and should be in bed.
> 
> Nighty Night ladies~


 
Wow, momi, what a wonderful blog post.  Thank you very much for sharing.  I'm encouraged by that, and the bit about sewing was good to hear as I've had a longtime interest in fashion design.  I think that you are quite right that when women dressed in ways that covered themselves better, they were much more beautiful and elegant--and the attitude of society was much more one of protection toward women rather than exploitation of them.

I'll be reading and learning more.


----------



## Jenibo (Dec 12, 2009)

oooh good discussion ladies. At work, i'm known as "the girl who dresses conseratively with the glasses"  I was wondering why they called me that when i was wearing tees and jeans- which our store sells alot of. Then as i looked around these girls have on dresses that stop under their butt with tall boots on. Cleavage is out and skin is bare, even in disregard to the cold weather. I flat out asked a girl "are you cold?" with a hint of sarcasm in my voice because she looked like it was 102 degrees outside when it was below freezing. So nowadays the norm is getting sexier and what was normal 3 years ago (heck last year) is 'conservative' lol.


----------



## Renewed1 (Dec 12, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> See, this makes me a little confused. Do we want to have our cake and eat it too? I feel like sometimes we as women are convinced that we must be "sexy" in some way or another; even when we are supposedly to dress modestly. Does the Bible say to dress modesty and still be "sexy?"


 
Pretty Face explained it best.  Men are visual creatures and I believe woman can be modest and alluring (or sexy).  Is it a requirement in the bible, no not to my knowledge.  I'm not saying women "must" be sexy, its an individual thing, but I do believe women should always look their best. 

As for me, YES I want my cake and eat it to.  As a woman, I do like to feel sexy and yet be modest.....not feel sexy everyday.  But I have my moments.....


----------



## dicapr (Dec 12, 2009)

Modesty is more than what you wear and don't wear.  True modesty comes from the inside and is projected out.  That is why you can see two different women wearing the same outfit and one look classy and the other look overtly sexual.  It is how she carries herself and what she is projecting from the outside.  While chiristian women can do their best from inviting lust, we cannot control the minds of men.  Men need to re-examine their culture of blaming rather than praying.  If a man has a lustful heart he needs to ask the Lord to take that from him, not ask the sister to cover up more.  We need to teach young men and women that you can admire the opposite sex without it leading to lust.  For example, I saw an actor on TV shirtless.  It was obvious that he worked out and he had a nice body.  However, my mind went to the fact that he must be diciplined and keep working out while he isn't shooting.  I was wondering about the amount of self contro neccessary not to hit the potato chips and burgers when the cameras weren't rolling.  I admired but did not lust.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 12, 2009)

Changed said:


> Pretty Face explained it best.  Men are visual creatures and I believe woman can be modest and alluring (or sexy).  Is it a requirement in the bible, no not to my knowledge.  I'm not saying women "must" be sexy, its an individual thing, but I do believe women should always look their best.
> 
> As for me, YES I want my cake and eat it to.  As a woman, I do like to feel sexy and yet be modest.....not feel sexy everyday.  But I have my moments.....



I have never found a verse in the Bible where women should always "look their best." In fact Proverbs 31:30 states, _Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised_.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 12, 2009)

dicapr said:


> Modesty is more than what you wear and don't wear.  *True modesty comes from the inside and is projected out.*  That is why you can see two different women wearing the same outfit and one look classy and the other look overtly sexual.  It is how she carries herself and what she is projecting from the outside.  While chiristian women can do their best from inviting lust, we cannot control the minds of men.  Men need to re-examine their culture of blaming rather than praying.  If a man has a lustful heart he needs to ask the Lord to take that from him, not ask the sister to cover up more.  We need to teach young men and women that you can admire the opposite sex without it leading to lust.  For example, I saw an actor on TV shirtless.  It was obvious that he worked out and he had a nice body.  However, my mind went to the fact that he must be diciplined and keep working out while he isn't shooting.  I was wondering about the amount of self contro neccessary not to hit the potato chips and burgers when the cameras weren't rolling.  I admired but did not lust.



Completely agree! It's like when Jesus said to clean the inside of the cup first, then the outside would be clean. 
Personally, if you look down on someone who shows more skin than you, and you deem yourself to be holier than they are just because of style choice, you never had real modesty in the first place.


----------



## sidney (Dec 12, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> I have never found a verse in the Bible where women should always "look their best." In fact Proverbs 31:30 states, _Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised_.


 
 10Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies. 

   11The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil. 

   12She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life. 

   13She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands. 

   14She is like the merchants' ships; she bringeth her food from afar. 

   15She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens. 

   16She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard. 

   17She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms. 

   18She perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out by night. 

   19She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff. 

   20She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy. 

   21She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet. 
*
   22She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple. *

   23Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land. 

   24She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant. 

   25Strength and honour are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come. 

   26She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness. 

   27She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness. 

   28Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her. 

   29Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all. 

   30Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised. 

   31Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.




The proverbs 31 woman is the prototype for a godly woman, and I have a feeling that if she could accomplish all of this, she also took the time to present herself well and in an elegant way.  Proverbs 31:22 says that she wore silk and purple).  She doing all this work, why not throw on some wool?  I think its because she was a very elegant woman even though verse 25 says that her clothing is strength and dignity.


----------



## Renewed1 (Dec 12, 2009)

I stand corrected; a woman should look her best. 




sidney said:


> 10Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.
> 
> 11The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
> 
> ...


----------



## momi (Dec 12, 2009)

Just Not A Pretty Face said:


> Thank you Momi..your awesome woman of God a rare kind in these days..I will be honest Im scared right now.I feel that my sexuality will be the only thing that will attract a man however I know the man I want has to be of God which means a man of intergrity.
> 
> I read your post about the woman in the home and it really spoke to me.I normally look down on women who say they want to be a stay at home mom with utter disregard..but I know it takes alot to run a home..please gives us tips..please..


 

Hey Pretty Face -

Woman yes - awesome... not hardly  Thank you for the nice sentiments though...

Yes your sexuality will attract a man, but more than likely it wont be the kind that you would want to keep... 

_Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting, but a woman who fears The Lord shall be praised._

Tips for the stay at home mom?  Girl that is another thread.  I tend to stay away from that topic, there are so many varying opinions on that subject.  For me, it is the best thing for my husband and children.  When I first transitioned from the workplace to home I remember calling my mom saying" I am able to accomplish so much now, how in the world did I manage working out side of the home".  She said "its simple, those things just didnt get done".  I enjoyed my choice of career and it was a great experience for me, but after I was laid off I realized just how dispensible I was to the company.  To be honest, although I was great at what I did, it wasnt anything for them to train someone to replace me.  However there was no one who could take my place as my childrens mom and my husbands wife.


----------



## momi (Dec 12, 2009)

nicola.kirwan said:


> Wow, momi, what a wonderful blog post. Thank you very much for sharing. I'm encouraged by that, and the bit about sewing was good to hear as I've had a longtime interest in fashion design. I think that you are quite right that when women dressed in ways that covered themselves better, they were much more beautiful and elegant--and the attitude of society was much more one of protection toward women rather than exploitation of them.
> 
> I'll be reading and learning more.


 
I love the way you have summed up that article - glad you had an opportunity to read it...


----------



## aribell (Dec 13, 2009)

momi said:


> *To be honest, although I was great at what I did, it wasnt anything for them to train someone to replace me. However there was no one who could take my place as my childrens mom and my husbands wife.*


 
Now that's really something to make you go "Hmmm..." and sit and ponder for awhile.


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 13, 2009)

Loved the article. Thanks. Reading the other articles on the site and bookmarking.



momi said:


> http://homeliving.blogspot.com/2009/03/protecting-our-daughters-with.html
> 
> To save me from typing... I am sleepy and should be in bed.
> 
> Nighty Night ladies~


----------



## Ms Lala (Dec 13, 2009)

This is an interesting topic.  While I do think we definitely have a responsibility not to be a stumbling block w/inappropriate attire *a big part of the problem is not what women are wearing but the presentation of women in the media. * Women are presented as sex objects.  Everywhere you look our bodies are used to sell things and the identity of a woman is shown as being totally wrapped up in her appearance.  What is really being sold and marketed ? This message is so pervasive in our society and it is impacting both males and females; our children are especially vulnerable.  
I was at a basketball game last night and while the dancers were talented I just kept thinking, why do they need to be half naked. Their butts were hanging out of their outfits and the dancing was so sensual.  I have seen dancers wear formfitting outfits but you could tell that the intent wasn't lustful, this was different.   They wouldn't dream of sending out the male players in this type of attire.  Look at singers, how many of them start out more conservative and end up on stage in next to nothing in order to sell an album.  
Yes we need to respect ourselves and our brothers in Christ by dressing appropriately.  We also need to educate our children and challenge the images of women in the media if we really want things to change. Men have to watch what they are taking in , if that means less TV and/or movies so be it.  Even monitoring what they are listening to is important, there is a lustful spirit in alot of the music that is out.  

Ok I'm rambling now but this is an issue I have thought about before.


----------



## momi (Dec 13, 2009)

Ms Lala said:


> This is an interesting topic. While I do think we definitely have a responsibility not to be a stumbling block w/inappropriate attire *a big part of the problem is not what women are wearing but the presentation of women in the media. *Women are presented as sex objects. Everywhere you look our bodies are used to sell things and the identity of a woman is shown as being totally wrapped up in her appearance. What is really being sold and marketed ? This message is so pervasive in our society and it is impacting both males and females; our children are especially vulnerable.
> I was at a basketball game last night and while the dancers were talented I just kept thinking, why do they need to be half naked. Their butts were hanging out of their outfits and the dancing was so sensual. I have seen dancers wear formfitting outfits but you could tell that the intent wasn't lustful, this was different. They wouldn't dream of sending out the male players in this type of attire. Look at singers, how many of them start out more conservative and end up on stage in next to nothing in order to sell an album.
> Yes we need to respect ourselves and our brothers in Christ by dressing appropriately. We also need to educate our children and challenge the images of women in the media if we really want things to change. Men have to watch what they are taking in , if that means less TV and/or movies so be it. Even monitoring what they are listening to is important, there is a lustful spirit in alot of the music that is out.
> 
> Ok I'm rambling now but this is an issue I have thought about before.


 
Very true indeed 

I often wonder what the parents of those "dancers" are thinking when they allow their girls to wear those outfits... and some of the dances are just down right nasty.  It is hard to imagine the girls daddy in the audience applauding while their baby girl "drops it like it was hot".


----------



## SND411 (Dec 13, 2009)

momi said:


> Very true indeed
> 
> I often wonder what the parents of those "dancers" are thinking when they allow their girls to wear those outfits... and some of the dances are just down right nasty. * It is hard to imagine the girls daddy in the audience applauding while their baby girl "drops it like it was hot"*.



Well, could it be that her father abused/raped her? No, I do not agree with what "dancers" do but could we sometimes step back and maybe discover what she has possibly been through?


----------



## momi (Dec 13, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> Well, could it be that her father abused/raped her? No, I do not agree with what "dancers" do but could we sometimes step back and maybe discover what she has possibly been through?


 
I think you are digging a little deep with that one ... 

That type of performing has just become status quo for most high school teams... Personally, I just feel the parents lack judgement.


----------



## LifeafterLHCF (Dec 13, 2009)

This article really had me going for a second.I totally get the idea but some women who write articles like this part women back millions of years.I believe a woman can work and take care of the home.I don't believe in a man taking care of me 100% and I don't want a allowance..it wouldn't make sense for me being the type of woman I am to go to college just to be a stay at home mom..I know some do but it would be a good return on my investment money wise...Also the tone made me when the last time she has been outside.You can dress modestly and still be fashionable.If I have a shirt that a bit low your wear a camisoloe..I won't wear turtlenecks my whole life.

Women must protect themselves..my parents defintely didnt protect me per se..I turned tricks while in high school so I know there was no protecting there...women must take care of themselves in their image and men need to follow suit and be responsbile and accoutable..


----------



## SND411 (Dec 13, 2009)

momi said:


> I think you are digging a little deep with that one ...
> 
> That type of performing has just become status quo for most high school teams... Personally, I just feel the parents lack judgement.



Oh, I thought you meant a different type of "dancer" nevermind.


----------



## aribell (Dec 14, 2009)

Just Not A Pretty Face said:


> This article really had me going for a second.I totally get the idea but some women who write articles like this part women back millions of years.I believe a woman can work and take care of the home.I don't believe in a man taking care of me 100% and I don't want a allowance..*it wouldn't make sense for me being the type of woman I am to go to college just to be a stay at home mom..I know some do but it would be a good return on my investment money wise...*Also the tone made me when the last time she has been outside.You can dress modestly and still be fashionable.If I have a shirt that a bit low your wear a camisoloe..I won't wear turtlenecks my whole life.


 
Just to the bolded--If you have talents and an education, it's like why would I invest thousands of dollars just to do nothing with that degree?  I'm currently pursuing a doctor-level professional degree, so I can definitely relate.  But something that I've been thinking about lately are the different things that I can do that are enhanced by my education but do not necessarily equate to being an employee of x company from 9-5.  Not just volunteering or church work, but running a radio program as I'm currently working on, operating youth programs in the community, or doing freelance writing from home.  

Those particular things may not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're just examples of ways that women can use their education in ways that are friendlier towards and more compatible with reserving energy for their husband and children.  Like it was said upthread, a corporation really doesn't care whether any particular woman is there or not--they'll quickly find someone else.  But it does matter to the husband and children.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 14, 2009)

Ms Lala said:


> This is an interesting topic. While I do think we definitely have a responsibility not to be a stumbling block w/inappropriate attire *a big part of the problem is not what women are wearing but the presentation of women in the media. *Women are presented as sex objects. Everywhere you look our bodies are used to sell things and the identity of a woman is shown as being totally wrapped up in her appearance. What is really being sold and marketed ? This message is so pervasive in our society and it is impacting both males and females; our children are especially vulnerable.
> 
> I was at a basketball game last night and while the dancers were talented I just kept thinking, why do they need to be half naked. Their butts were hanging out of their outfits and the dancing was so sensual. I have seen dancers wear formfitting outfits but you could tell that the intent wasn't lustful, this was different. They wouldn't dream of sending out the male players in this type of attire.
> 
> ...


 
Ms. Lala, your entire post is so in order and you are speaking the Truth.   

Last night I was downloading Christmas music and when I saw this from a "Christian' Group (Trinity 5:7) ,  I could not understand 'WHY ???"

Why are they dressed like this?  Who needs this to promote a Gospel CD?  Let alone any CD.   This is not representative of a Christian woman, nor any woman of Virtue modesty.    

For "hubby' in the privacy of ones own home or vacation, this would be understandable.   To promote a Christian CD............ 

"Nila"   No.... No   

http://www.gospelmusicchannel.com/news/insider/download-week-trin-i-tee







See, this is why I have an 'issue' with Mary, Mary... they seem to think it's okay to dress this way and now a pattern has been set, in a sense where they seem to think, that is so and so group does it, it must be okay.      I just want to slap some sense into them, because they KNOW better.   And young girls who are very impressionable are following suit.

Hence, the cheerleaders...


----------



## SND411 (Dec 14, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> Ms. Lala, your entire post is so in order and you are speaking the Truth.
> 
> Last night I was downloading Christmas music and when I saw this from a "Christian' Group (Trinity 5:7) ,  I could not understand 'WHY ???"
> 
> ...



You see, modesty can mean something different to different people. I don't see what they are wearing as "immodest." It seems like any outift that may accentuate ANY part the female physique is evil 

Earlier posts mentioned how women are to "look their best." But when they do, people still complain?


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 14, 2009)

Why would you want to accentuate any part of your body for anyone other than your husband to look at? They're not dressed any different than Beyonce or Alicia Keys. What message does that send? Most people are so used to seeing women dressed that way, that it's hard to identify what's modest, myself included.  It makes it even more difficult when designers and manufacturers don't make modest clothes just as appealing.

Edit: I'm referring to how they dress overall when in the public eye.


----------



## LifeafterLHCF (Dec 14, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> You see, modesty can mean something different to different people. I don't see what they are wearing as "immodest." It seems like any outift that may accentuate ANY part the female physique is evil
> 
> Earlier posts mentioned how women are to "look their best." But when they do, people still complain?


 

I have noticed Mary Mary has been going down hill in outfits..some things have shown a bit of behind as being too tight and low cute dresses..they use to be covered..and they are both mothers and wives..their music is awesome..but we as christian have to be discerning spirt about things we here and see..I take the blessing of their singing but reject their dressing..if we as godly women do that in everything life will be much easier..


----------



## SND411 (Dec 14, 2009)

GeechyGurl said:


> W*hy would you want to accentuate any part of your body for anyone other than your husband to look at*? They're not dressed any different than Beyonce or Alicia Keys. What message does that send?



The problem is that many women cannot help the fact that almost anything they wear reveal some aspect of their shape. Anything can be interpreted as "immodest."

I honestly do not see anything wrong with at least the pink and yellow dress. I still dont understand a good percentage of this thread. First, we are told to be modest, then we are told that we as women have to "look our best" (and not just for our husbands mind you). Then we are convinced that we can be modest AND sexy. But next we turn around and say even THAT is immodest? No wonder why so many women (and men) are confused...


----------



## SND411 (Dec 14, 2009)

Just Not A Pretty Face said:


> I have noticed Mary Mary has been going down hill in outfits..some things have shown a bit of behind as being too tight and low cute dresses..they use to be covered..and they are both mothers and wives..their music is awesome..but we as christian have to be discerning spirt about things we here and see..I take the blessing of their singing but reject their dressing..if we as godly women do that in everything life will be much easier..



Life is _still _not easier for many women who dress modestly. I think it's sad when a woman's spiritual status is mostly dependent on what she is wearing externally.


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 14, 2009)

You can be modest and sexy...just not at the same time. Modest outside the home and sexy inside. You can also look your best all the time based on the quality of the clothing, the colors, the fit, etc.

_edited out the "unnecessaries"..._


AfriPrincess411 said:


> The problem is that many women cannot help the fact that almost anything they wear reveal some aspect of their shape. Anything can be interpreted as "immodest."
> 
> I honestly do not see anything wrong with at least the pink and yellow dress. I still dont understand a good percentage of this thread. F*irst, we are told to be modest, then we are told that we as women have to "look our best" (and not just for our husbands mind you). Then we are convinced that we can be modest AND sexy. But next we turn around and say even THAT is immodest? *No wonder why so many women (and men) are confused...


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 14, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> You see, modesty can mean something different to different people. I don't see what they are wearing as "immodest." It seems like any outift that may accentuate ANY part the female physique is evil
> 
> Earlier posts mentioned how women are to "look their best." But when they do, people still complain?


 
Afri... 

Afri...

Precious Afri.... 

Babygirl, they look like  *deep sigh*  

They are not dressed modestly.   

Now if your Pastor's wife came to Church like this... 


Come on... 

My babygirl would look at me and say  .... 

*MOM ----- Are you Crazy?* 

My Mom herself is not having it.  Neither my son nor my 'Friend'.  He'd rebuke me with a quickness. 

And I have the 'goods' to accentuate, no floppy moppies...   But as a Christian, a woman does not dress this way publicly.    I mean there's a place for everything.  Clothes speak a powerful language ... 

without words...

Ce Ce Winans doesn't dress like this and she sell music with a powerful annointing and that's what God wants to express.... His annointing, not showing the boobies for all the world to see.       

Anyhooo... Big hugs to you, Precious Afri and I mean it.  I truly do.  :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 14, 2009)

Just Not A Pretty Face said:


> I have noticed Mary Mary has been going down hill in outfits..some things have shown a bit of behind as being too tight and low cute dresses..they use to be covered..and they are both mothers and wives..their music is awesome..but we as christian have to be discerning spirt about things we here and see..
> 
> I take the blessing of their singing but reject their dressing..if we as godly women do that in everything life will be much easier..


 



 

 

 

 



Good post 

There was a time when women would be embarrassed if the back of their dress or skirt was 'hiked' up in the back and showed their underwear OR if they left the ladies room with a trail of bathroom tissue hanging from under their dress or skirt.     

But now.... they just let the butt hang out for all to see.   First it was 'Cher' and Madonna then Brittney Spears and the rest of em'...  

So now it's the Church, inching their way to see how much they can get away with showing.    

Good Grief, Charlie Brown !     Holy Moses has to be turning in his grave which was hidden by God.   Joseph's bones were taken from Egypt and buried in the Promised Land.... but now they must be clanking loud at the shock of this.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 14, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> *Life is still not easier for many women who dress modestly.*
> 
> I think it's sad when a woman's spiritual status is mostly dependent on what she is wearing externally.


 
At the bolded.   How so, sweetie?  I don't understand what this means?  Are you saying that a woman has an easier life when she exposes more of her 'flesh'?     This is truly not so.  Not at all, babygirl.   

My Dad told me this and I know it to be true.  The less a woman shows, the longer it holds a man's attention.   For he will wonder what's under.  

Of course a man will look  -- actually gawk  --- at a woman whose breasts are popping out of her blouse or at an overly accentuated Derrierre, but it's not what 'keeps' him... interested.   It's not.  

Baby, God doesn't lie and when He says that it's the quiet and gentle spirit of a woman that holds a man's interest, it's very, very true.  

I get more attention from men when I'm without make-up and wearing an oversized sweatshirt and baggy sweat pants.   I'll never forget that I was seranaded by a Sax musician at the local Arts Festival and I was not wearing tight apparel or makeup.   Out of all of the women who were in shorts, tight jeans, crop Tees, etc., this man came down from the stage, playing his sax and stood in front of me and dedicated his song.   

At the gym, I have everything covered and yet, the guys jump at every opportunity to assist me with the heavy weights on and off of the machines.   

So why is this?     

I take a bath each day and smell good.    

It's because I value what I'm hiding and 'they' the 'men' _know_ it.    Therefore, I don't have to over show it.  :Rose:  

Modesty is not hard, it's a joy, it really and truly is.......... a joy.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 14, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> Good post
> 
> There was a time when women would be embarrassed if the back of their dress or skirt was 'hiked' up in the back and showed their underwear OR if they left the ladies room with a trail of bathroom tissue hanging from under their dress or skirt.
> 
> ...



C'mon now. I think they would be turning over in the grave over more heinous things the "house of God" has done: child molestation, burning "witches" at the stick, justifying chattel slavery, invoking the "curse of Ham," Christian apathy, murder, increased sexual slavery around the world, racism/sexism within the church, prosperity Gospel...in other words, things worse than a woman's skirt being a little high.

I know, I'm dramatic. It's who I am.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 14, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> At the bolded.   How so, sweetie?  I don't understand what this means?  Are you saying that a woman has an easier life when she exposes more of her 'flesh'?     This is truly not so.  Not at all, babygirl.
> 
> My Dad told me this and I know it to be true.  The less a woman shows, the longer it holds a man's attention.*   For he will wonder what's under.
> *
> ...



See, the bolded is what I think is inaccurate. A woman can be dressed modestly while the man still wonders what's "underneath her clothing." Men have said that just by looking at a woman's face can drive them to lust (why do you think some countries have the veil?).

Just because a woman dresses modestly, doesn't mean everyone will respect her like you have experienced in YOUR life. Many women are treated with disregard and disrespect even when they are fully clothed. For this reason, men need to take responsibility of their own "lusts" and not burden women with the responsibility to control their own minds.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 14, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> C'mon now. I think they would be turning over in the grave over more heinous things the "house of God" has done: child molestation, burning "witches" at the stick, justifying chattel slavery, invoking the "curse of Ham," Christian apathy, murder, increased sexual slavery around the world, racism/sexism within the church, prosperity Gospel...in other words, things worse than a woman's skirt being a little high.
> 
> I know, I'm dramatic. It's who I am.


You're right :yep there are definitely worse things.  

But we need not add the wrong spices to the pot.  

And you're not dramatic, you're a sweetheart and you just see it differently.   

I'll ask you this.   If these women came to a job interview, how would they be viewed for a professional corporate office setting?   There are even some restaurants that would not allow this form of dressing among their clientele.    These dresses speak a language that's not complimentary. 

Even a royal princess such as yourself would have finer attire in your wardrobe.  :Rose:

However, let it rest...  for now.  

Blessings and sweet sleep, AfriPrincess.


----------



## LifeafterLHCF (Dec 14, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> See, the bolded is what I think is inaccurate. A woman can be dressed modestly while the man still wonders what's "underneath her clothing." Men have said that just by looking at a woman's face can drive them to lust (why do you think some countries have the veil?).
> 
> Just because a woman dresses modestly, doesn't mean everyone will respect her like you have experienced in YOUR life. Many women are treated with disregard and disrespect even when they are fully clothed. For this reason, men need to take responsibility of their own "lusts" and not burden women with the responsibility to control their own minds.


 

I know what your saying here however there will be some who are with Christ so of course they will be looking..however they wouldnt be able to deny that she is a godly woman..she would be set apart from the worldy woman.It like with anything in the christian faith not everyone is going to respect you even if your doing all you can to be right with God.Its just the facts of life..however God will honor this which is the key.

Men should be held accountable for their actions just as much as women..We as women must call their attention to their actions by letting them no you don't approve in a godly way..


----------



## Aviah (Dec 14, 2009)

Guess we just have to pray for discernment. I could wear a scoop neck tank top when its hot outside and it not cause a commotion (I don't have big boobs). Someone more well endowed however- bad idea. Its does depend on the person. This is not to say that because I'm little I can wear anything,  but again, its all about discernment. If you've done your part, the man who still lusts will be held accountable. Heck even if you don't do your part he will be, (as will you) just because something is provoked doesn't mean its acceptable.

Still, none of us it perfect. That's all I say on the matter.


----------



## momi (Dec 14, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> At the bolded. How so, sweetie? I don't understand what this means? Are you saying that a woman has an easier life when she exposes more of her 'flesh'? This is truly not so. Not at all, babygirl.
> 
> My Dad told me this and I know it to be true. The less a woman shows, the longer it holds a man's attention. For he will wonder what's under.
> 
> ...


 
 This makes so much sense...


----------



## CoilyFields (Dec 14, 2009)

It is both the men and the womens responsibility, theirs to control their lusts, and ours to do our best not to incite lust. But we can only control what WE do. 

I do believe that we have become desensitized to the sexuality that is implicit in our clothing today because it has become a norm in our society. So to a certain extent we believe we can wear what we want and its up to them to control themselves.  

I also dont think women can be compared to men in this instance because we are not as visual when it comes to sexuality so I dont think we truly know the extent of a struggle that a christian man may experience.

Ultimately we are each 100% responsible for what WE do.


----------



## aribell (Dec 16, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> I get more attention from men when I'm without make-up and wearing an oversized sweatshirt and baggy sweat pants. I'll never forget that I was seranaded by a Sax musician at the local Arts Festival and I was not wearing tight apparel or makeup. Out of all of the women who were in shorts, tight jeans, crop Tees, etc., this man came down from the stage, playing his sax and stood in front of me and dedicated his song.
> 
> At the gym, I have everything covered and yet, the guys jump at every opportunity to assist me with the heavy weights on and off of the machines.
> 
> ...


 
All of this is so true.  A lot of this discussion reminds me of Maya Angelou's "Phenomenal Woman."

Excerpt:

Men themselves have wondered
What they see in me.
They try so much
But they can't touch
My inner mystery.
When I try to show them
They say they still can't see.
I say,
It's in the arch of my back,
The sun of my smile,
The ride of my breasts,
The grace of my style.
I'm a woman

Phenomenally.
Phenomenal woman,
That's me.

Now you understand
Just why my head's not bowed.
I don't shout or jump about
Or have to talk real loud.
When you see me passing
It ought to make you proud.
I say,
It's in the click of my heels,
The bend of my hair,
the palm of my hand,
The need of my care,
'Cause I'm a woman
Phenomenally.
Phenomenal woman,
That's me.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 16, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> You see, modesty can mean something different to different people. I don't see what they are wearing as "immodest." It seems like any outift that may accentuate ANY part the female physique is evil
> 
> Earlier posts mentioned how women are to "look their best." But when they do, people still complain?


 
I totally agree!!! It's like what are they suppose to wear? A nun outfit? Oversized shirts and dresses?  Anything a woman wears is going to show their curves if they have any, whether they are wearing something fitting their shape or loose fitting.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 16, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> Ce Ce Winans doesn't dress like this and she sell music with a powerful annointing and that's what God wants to express.... His annointing, not showing the boobies for all the world to see.


CeCe Winans wearing a see-through dress:








Shimmie said:


> You're right :yep there are definitely worse things. But we need not add the wrong spices to the pot. And you're not dramatic, you're a sweetheart and you just see it differently.
> 
> I'll ask you this. If these women came to a job interview, how would they be viewed for a professional corporate office setting? There are even some restaurants that would not allow this form of dressing among their clientele. These dresses speak a language that's not complimentary.
> 
> Even a royal princess such as yourself would have finer attire in your wardrobe. :Rose: However, let it rest...  for now. Blessings and sweet sleep, AfriPrincess.


AfriPrincess wasn't saying she was against dressing modestly. She's just saying no matter how women dress, men can still lust after them, even if they are covered from their neck to their toes like a woman in a polygamus cult.

In the question you posted, what Mary Mary was wearing would not be appropriate for an interview. That picture you posted of Mary Mary, they weren't even modeling for interview attire.


----------



## dicapr (Dec 16, 2009)

GeechyGurl said:


> Why would you want to accentuate any part of your body for anyone other than your husband to look at? They're not dressed any different than Beyonce or Alicia Keys. What message does that send? Most people are so used to seeing women dressed that way, that it's hard to identify what's modest, myself included.  It makes it even more difficult when designers and manufacturers don't make modest clothes just as appealing.
> 
> Edit: I'm referring to how they dress overall when in the public eye.


 
Why would I accentuate my figure?  For ME!  There is a misconception that the only reason a woman would want to dress attractively and show her shape is to somehow attract a man.  This is not always the case-sometimes a woman is just proud she has lost weight.  Maybe she has been having a hard day, week, ect and dressing up and looking good to herself is helping her get through her day.  Sometimes women are not thinking about men. Sometimes a women gets tired of feeling as if something is wrong because she is shaped like a woman.  I believe in modesty.  However, I was made to feel ashamed at a young age because I am naturally curvy and have a womanly figure.  I have curvy legs, small waist, wide hips, and a large chest.  I cannot cover this up.  I have tried and was left looking and feeling sloppy and unkept.  I wear clothes that fit-and yes they reveal that I am a woman.  I wear my arms out because I sweat like a man and this cuts down on embarassing sweat rings.  Someone else would think that I was trying to be sexy and revealing.  You can tell by the way a woman carries herself her true intentions.


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 16, 2009)

I don't think a woman has to go to the extreme and dress in baggy/sloppy clothes. Let's forget men for now. Why do women need to have their breasts pushed out and exposed, wear pants that fit like skin, or wear clothes that accentuate your body no differently than lingerie, in public, in order feel better about themselves? That's extreme in the opposite direction. Personally, I don't need tight, revealing clothes to remind me that I'm attractive and that I'm a woman. That's what I am from the inside out, not the outside in. Of course, we'll all continue disagree about what "modest" looks like and that's okay. I'm only accountable for what I do. 

I remember hearing Joyce Meyer say "If you want to know what do, the right decision to make, follow peace." I'm at peace with how I dress. So I'll just continue to follow peace and let the Holy Spirit convict me where I need it. 



dicapr said:


> Why would I accentuate my figure?  For ME!  There is a misconception that the only reason a woman would want to dress attractively and show her shape is to somehow attract a man.  This is not always the case-sometimes a woman is just proud she has lost weight.  Maybe she has been having a hard day, week, ect and dressing up and looking good to herself is helping her get through her day.  Sometimes women are not thinking about men. Sometimes a women gets tired of feeling as if something is wrong because she is shaped like a woman.  I believe in modesty.  However, I was made to feel ashamed at a young age because I am naturally curvy and have a womanly figure.  I have curvy legs, small waist, wide hips, and a large chest.  I cannot cover this up.  I have tried and was left looking and feeling sloppy and unkept.  I wear clothes that fit-and yes they reveal that I am a woman.  I wear my arms out because I sweat like a man and this cuts down on embarassing sweat rings.  Someone else would think that I was trying to be sexy and revealing.  You can tell by the way a woman carries herself her true intentions.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 16, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> CeCe Winans wearing a see-through dress:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Exactly.


----------



## dicapr (Dec 16, 2009)

GeechyGurl said:


> I don't think a woman has to go to the extreme and dress in baggy/sloppy clothes. Let's forget men for now. Why do women need to have their breasts pushed out and exposed, wear pants that fit like skin, or wear clothes that accentuate your body no differently than lingerie, in public, in order feel better about themselves? That's extreme in the opposite direction. Personally, I don't need tight, revealing clothes to remind me that I'm attractive and that I'm a woman. That's what I am from the inside out, not the outside in. Of course, we'll all continue disagree about what "modest" looks like and that's okay. I'm only accountable for what I do.
> 
> I remember hearing Joyce Meyer say "If you want to know what do, the right decision to make, follow peace." I'm at peace with how I dress. So I'll just continue to follow peace and let the Holy Spirit convict me where I need it.


 

That's true.  Modest dress is a work in progress. I also don't do overly tight anything.  I also keep the "girls" covered, but they are pushed out on their own.  I have nothing to do with that .  All joking aside, we have to let the Holy Spirit convict us.


----------



## Ms Lala (Dec 16, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> Oh, I thought you meant a different type of "dancer" nevermind.


 
No dancers like cheerleaders at ball games.  At the professional, college, and high school levels some of what they wear and do is very inappropriate IMO.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 16, 2009)

nicola.kirwan said:


> All of this is so true. A lot of this discussion reminds me of Maya Angelou's "Phenomenal Woman."
> 
> Excerpt:
> 
> ...


This is beautiful by Maya.  Thank you for posting this; I forgot about it and it fits this subject perfectly.   :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 16, 2009)

momi said:


> This makes so much sense...


 
Thanks Momi... :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 16, 2009)

Just Not A Pretty Face said:


> I know what your saying here however there will be some who are with Christ so of course they will be looking..however they wouldnt be able to deny that she is a godly woman..she would be
> 
> *set apart* *from the worldy woman*.
> 
> ...


 
Sweet Coco, your entire post is totally on point.     

And the key words are *'Set Apart',* for this is what we are called to be,* 'Set Apart'* from the world and their low standards which fail to give glory unto God or to represent us as women of Virtue.   



.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> CeCe Winans wearing a see-through dress:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
1.  Leave Ce-Ce alone.  

2. I agree that Afri is not *against *modesty; it's the defining of such.   I've also made sure that my replies to her are 'gentle', as I find no fault in her . 

3. The picture I posted is not of Mary, Mary, but as I listed in the post along with the link, a group called 'Trin i ty 5:7.   The  "job interview' question I posted was to make a point that _even the world, not just the Church, _would not find that type of dressing appropriate.   

The apparel that they wearing in that picture does not represent modesty neither *in or out* of Christ Jesus.  Even the 'world' would agree that there is absolutely nothing 'modest' about their apparel, that would fit into a Church*  or* a corporate environment, *let alone* to sell a Gospel album which where this picture came from.     

They are dressed as if they're at the 'club' looking to get picked up and then dropped or kicked to the curb afterwards.   Even a fog brain could pick this up.     I'm just saying.   

What I find interesting is that young children 'know' more about what's appropriate to wear then many adults.  

There is a time and a place for every manner of dressing and to represent Christ in this manner is not appropriate.   Let's be real here.  As Christians, we are to set a standard of Virtue and to set ourselves as an example for other Christian women.   To have this 'album photo' on public display is *not* representative of a woman of Virtue.

It's obvious that these women are 'insecure' about who they are inside and outside; and most of them are 'competing' for attention.  No one is asking them to dress as a nun or in sloppy oversized attire, however this apparel is definitely over the top (literally ); it's out of order and it is not only a 'bad image' to represent the Body of Christ, but it also exploits women to be regarded as this is all that they are good for and nothing more.    

Dressing in this manner _publicly_ to feel 'accepted' is not the answer. What they truly need is 'inner healing'.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 17, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> *
> What I find interesting is that young children 'know' more about what's appropriate to wear then many adults.  *



This is true. I think the mainstream culture glorifies being young way too much, from erasing wrinkles to clothing. I sometimes think older people want to be "cool" and "young" again.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> This is true. I think the mainstream culture glorifies being young way too much, from erasing wrinkles to clothing.
> 
> *I sometimes think older people want to be "cool" and "young" again.*


 
  This is so true.  

*For Smiles: *

My babygirl and I were shopping and she said, "I know how to tell a woman in her forties."     My reply:  Really?  How can you do that?   Her reply:  "They wear a lot of animal print".   

I immediately put down the leopard print blouse I was admiring.   

Children.... you gotta love em'.    They don't miss a thing.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> 1. Leave Ce-Ce alone.
> 
> 2. I agree that Afri is not *against *modesty; it's the defining of such. I've also made sure that my replies to her are 'gentle', as I find no fault in her .
> 
> ...


  I couldn't help but pick on Ce-Ce there...

So that was a pic of Trin-i-ty 5:7. I've never heard of them or seen them. Thanks for letting me know. They were wearing outfits that were inappropriate for an interview or corporate attire. Their outfits were just really colorful and flashy and I thought they were nice-looking so-to-speak. I don't think the outfits were necessarily out of order, just not modest.

But I would agree that there are a lot of insecure women out there and they think flashy, sleezy clothes will make them feel better about themselves or feel attractive toward others when they may be bringing the wrong attention to themselves.


----------



## sidney (Dec 17, 2009)

I think the confusion lies in the fact we all may have different definitions of modesty. Personally, I feel that some may define modesty as the dress C pictures.  I happen to think the women in dress B look appropriate.  I think that there is a fine line between modesty and legalism.  Women should be able to look like women.  I don't think we should be legalists in regard to the way we dress.  Women don't have to look like Group C to be holy women just as christians don't have to live as poor to appear more humble and modest.   


DRESS B









DRESS C


----------



## Ramya (Dec 17, 2009)

I dress modestly according to my own definition. I think it's ridiculous that women have to hide the fact that they are women. And in my experience more often than not it's been other women have issues with my idea of modesty, not men. At my mother's church the women only wear oversized clothing and I would be amazed if anything other than their wrists were showing. So if I go in there with a knee-length A-line skirt, I'm going to be called all kinds of heathens.  At some point you just have to pray for GOD to show you what you need to do and be done with it. If modesty for you is turtlenecks and ankle length skirts then by all means wear it but don't try and make it seem like that's the only way to be modest.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

I googled images of Trin-i-tee 5:7. How would you all rate the modesty of their attire in these pictures:


























I know I went overboard with the pics, lol. But overall, I see that they do not dress very modesty. But more than anything, I do not think they are aware of it and may not even care as long as they look good to the public eye.


----------



## Ramya (Dec 17, 2009)

The only outfit that I would deem immodest is the yellow dress because her breasts are hanging out. Oh and that one black dress is a little short.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I couldn't help but pick on Ce-Ce there...
> 
> So that was a pic of Trin-i-ty 5:7. I've never heard of them or seen them. Thanks for letting me know. They were wearing outfits that were inappropriate for an interview or corporate attire. Their outfits were just really colorful and flashy and I thought they were nice-looking so-to-speak. I don't think the outfits were necessarily out of order, just not modest.
> 
> But I would agree that there are a lot of insecure women out there and they think flashy, sleezy clothes will make them feel better about themselves or feel attractive toward others when they may be bringing the wrong attention to themselves.


 
Thanks Poohbear.    :Rose:

Just don't be messin' with Ce Ce Winans.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

sidney said:


> I think the confusion lies in the fact we all may have different definitions of modesty. Personally, I feel that some may define modesty as the dress C pictures. I happen to think the women in dress B look appropriate. I think that there is a fine line between modesty and legalism. Women should be able to look like women. I don't think we should be legalists in regard to the way we dress. Women don't have to look like Group C to be holy women just as christians don't have to live as poor to appear more humble and modest.
> 
> 
> DRESS B
> ...


 I totally agree with you on your point about modesty vs. legalism. Legalism is something God wants us to avoid as well.  I would wear pictures A and B. I would not wear C even though it would be considered the most modest. Sorry. Maybe if it was a different color like a solid dark color with no flowery pattern.


----------



## Ramya (Dec 17, 2009)

sidney said:


> I think the confusion lies in the fact we all may have different definitions of modesty. Personally, I feel that some may define modesty as the dress C pictures.  I happen to think the women in dress B look appropriate.  I think that there is a fine line between modesty and legalism.  Women should be able to look like women.  I don't think we should be legalists in regard to the way we dress.  Women don't have to look like Group C to be holy women just as christians don't have to live as poor to appear more humble and modest.
> 
> 
> DRESS B
> ...



I wouldn't look twice at dress C let alone wear it. That things is "erplexed". I wear things like dresses a and b all the time.  I'm a dress/skirt girl but that doesn't mean I want to wear ill-fitted floral tents.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I googled images of Trin-i-tee 5:7. How would you all rate the modesty of their attire in these pictures:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Thanks for the pics, Poohbear.   

I have to say that they look horrible in this manner of dressing.  They truly need an 'image' consultant.     Come on!   Even the non - Gospel entertainers have better taste, and if nothing else, better taste than the clingy polyester fabric.

Their bodies are 'droopy' from the over spill of being busty.  They cannot afford to come off this way in public.   It looks cheap and ghetto, and the fake hair doesn't help at all.   It looks like a fake night at the club scene.  And this is not an opinion.  

 I follow enough fashion to know better.  They could learn quite a lot from the top of the line fashion designers.  

I'll say this.   Right here in this entire forum, I've seen many, many pictures of the ladies and none of them come off looking cheap and floosie like this.    

An 'image consultant' is badly needed here.  I'm just taking it as they just don't know any better.   

Yeah....  Okay.   

I've simply had it with the 'excuses' that Church folks keep coming up with to ease their consciences when they 'know' what their clothing looks like.      

Those last 3 pictures are just horrible.   I'll tell you what.   God's not stupid and He's not hearing it.    The excuses, that is.   

Poohbear, my response is not directed at you.  :Rose:   It's my response to the subject and the pictures.   I just wanted to make that clear.   

Personally, I don't think this clothing is attractive on anyone.    It's tacky.   Quite tacky.   

Blessings Poohbear.  :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

sidney said:


> I think the confusion lies in the fact we all may have different definitions of modesty. Personally, I feel that some may define modesty as the dress C pictures. I happen to think the women in dress B look appropriate. I think that there is a fine line between modesty and legalism. Women should be able to look like women. I don't think we should be legalists in regard to the way we dress. Women don't have to look like Group C to be holy women just as christians don't have to live as poor to appear more humble and modest.
> 
> 
> DRESS B
> ...


 
I think the B category is nice.   I'd probably have a scarf with the low V neckline in the B category; but then I wear colorful silk scarfs with almost everything, even with jeans and sweats.      I love scarfs.   

"C' is not what I'd wear.      It's okay, but  I'm more in the B category in comparison.   But I also wear tailored suits.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

Check out this...modest wedding dresses:


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

Would you ladies wear these modest outfits below?   (Sorry, I just had to laugh):


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

More modest dresses:


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> Check out this...modest wedding dresses:


 
Shame on you, Poohbear   

You stole the ruffled curtains from my babygirl's windows and her bed 
canopy.


----------



## Ramya (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> More modest dresses:



I would wear everything except the button down wrap dress. I actually dress like this 99% of the time. Now everything else you posted is just wrong.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> More modest dresses:


 
I like the red and I have a dress like the middle black one.






I don't like the border stripe on the one above though... 

My wardrobe is actually multi-cultural.    I have wall to wall Indian Sari's ,  and Indian Pants sets with the silk Sari scarfs.     

I dress like this ....

http://www.kaneesha.com/tunic_index.cfm



 

 

 Red Traditional Embellished Indian Kurti Top
$62.00  Black Polka Dot Flared Tunic
$61.00  Hot Pink Silk Polka Dot Indian Tunic Top
$63.00  

 

 
I'm still a woman, but covered and my busty girls are not popping out of my blouses.   My Derrierre is not showing either.   This is just my style of clothing.   Indian clothes are very pretty and feminine and yet they cover very nicely. 




http://www.kaneesha.com/tunic_index.cfm?cid=17&crow=7




http://www.kaneesha.com/kaneeshajewelry/store.cfm?pid=4894 http://www.kaneesha.com/kaneeshajewelry/store.cfm?pid=2194 http://www.kaneesha.com/kaneeshajewelry/store.cfm?pid=2515


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

Ramya said:


> I would wear everything except the button down wrap dress. I actually dress like this 99% of the time. Now everything else you posted is just wrong.


 I agree. I don't like dresses with all those buttons in the front. I would have those little loops between the button spaces all over the place. That button down wrap dress is for woman that do not have much curves.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> My wardrobe is actually multi-cultural. I have wall to wall Indian Sari's , and Indian Pants sets with the silk Sari scarfs.
> 
> I dress like this ....
> 
> ...


I find that Indian attire to be very elegant and unique. Those tops would be great for women who are curvy.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

*Y'all know good and well y'all would wear those modest outfits in post  #80! *


----------



## Ramya (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> *Y'all know good and well y'all would wear those modest outfits in post #80! *



Girl no! *whispers* that's what the ladies at my mother's church dress like. The dresses you posted that I liked would be considered immodest to those ladies. Because knees and calves are oh so sexy.


----------



## PinkPebbles (Dec 17, 2009)

sidney said:


> I think the confusion lies in the fact we all may have different definitions of modesty. Personally, I feel that some may define modesty as the dress C pictures. I happen to think the women in dress B look appropriate. I think that there is a fine line between modesty and legalism. Women should be able to look like women. I don't think we should be legalists in regard to the way we dress. Women don't have to look like Group C to be holy women just as christians don't have to live as poor to appear more humble and modest.
> 
> 
> DRESS B
> ...


 
I agree. I like the first dress, Dress B. This is me all the way....I can wear it to work, church, and on a date. It's classy.


----------



## Love Always (Dec 17, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> I have to say that they look horrible in this manner of dressing.  They truly need an 'image' consultant.     Come on!   Even the non - Gospel entertainers have better taste, and if nothing else, better taste than the clingy polyester fabric.
> 
> Their bodies are 'droopy' from the over spill of being busty.  They cannot afford to come off this way in public.   It looks cheap and ghetto, and the fake hair doesn't help at all.   It looks like a fake night at the club scene.  And this is not an opinion.
> 
> ...



I couldn't help but to  when I read your post.  Sadly enough Shimmie, they have been dressing like this for years .  They're just tacky IMO and they could definitely use a stylist!


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Nisha619 said:


> I couldn't help but to  when I read your post. Sadly enough Shimmie, they have been dressing like this for years . They're just tacky IMO and they could definitely use a stylist!


 
    Nisha ! ! !    

God sent you in here to 'comfort' me.      Cause tacky is just that... Tacky!    I can't handle it.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I find that Indian attire to be very elegant and unique. Those tops would be great for women who are curvy.


 
I'm definitely a 'curvy' girl.      And these styles are very flattering to my curvatiousness.... (is that even a word?  ).   And I'm still 'modest' and yet all woman without anything hanging out to drop on the pavement or parking lot.   

I actually see some women and I'm afraid for them to lean over for fear they'll pop out of their tops.   

And oh my goodness!   There was a woman on the train and her entire back was dropped to the 'crack' .       I was so scared she was going to lose her pants when she sat down.   And I was NOT going to sit in her seat when she got up.   I stood up on train the entire ride.


----------



## saved06 (Dec 17, 2009)

I just don't agree with Men putting all the responsibilty on women for their lust issues. It just makes me wonder what kind of battle are married men really going through


----------



## dicapr (Dec 17, 2009)

Ramya said:


> I dress modestly according to my own definition. I think it's ridiculous that women have to hide the fact that they are women. And in my experience more often than not it's been other women have issues with my idea of modesty, not men. At my mother's church the women only wear oversized clothing and I would be amazed if anything other than their wrists were showing. So if I go in there with a knee-length A-line skirt, I'm going to be called all kinds of heathens.  At some point you just have to pray for GOD to show you what you need to do and be done with it. If modesty for you is turtlenecks and ankle length skirts then by all means wear it but don't try and make it seem like that's the only way to be modest.


 
I took a class in college that went into the construction of modesty and what is deemed modest or immodest.  Alot of what is considered modest is a social and cultural construct.  That is why we have so much varriation on what we consider modest and a huge grey area.  Most know what immodest is, but the line between is kind of blurry. I dress modest according to my conviction and the social and cultural area I live in.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> Would you ladies wear these modest outfits below?  (Sorry, I just had to laugh):


 


This is so wroonnnnnnng.   

You couldn't GIVE these away, even if you 'cried' or paid someone to take them and WEAR them.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 17, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> This is so wroonnnnnnng.
> 
> You couldn't GIVE these away, even if you 'cried' or paid someone to take them and WEAR them.


Shame on you Shimmie!  

Those are modest women of the Lord right there! 

...and sexy! :eyebrows2


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 17, 2009)

This one's too sexy  Too much collar bone showing and she needs to lower the hem a couple of inches...



Poohbear said:


> Would you ladies wear these modest outfits below?   (Sorry, I just had to laugh):



 Honestly though, other than the print and maybe the color, it's a decent dress I'd wear.


----------



## sidney (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> Shame on you Shimmie!
> 
> *Those are modest women of the Lord right there! *
> 
> *...and sexy!* :eyebrows2


 
lol, i can't breathe....lol


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 17, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> Shame on you Shimmie!
> 
> *Those are modest women of the Lord right there!*
> 
> ...and sexy! :eyebrows2


 
Are you 'fer reul'    Naw - uh 

Pooh, even my grandmothers were 'sharrrrrrp' when they went to Church with their hats and furs and you couldn't tell them that they didn't look good for the Lord, either.     They wore their white gloves and err thang.   

AND I'm telling you this to point out that they would not be caught 'alive' or dead wearing these "little house on the Prairie -- Laura Ingalls -- outfits.    My grandmom's would put up a serious fight if these were their Church dresses.     

And my grandmom's were sharp in their Sunday suits and very modest.  They didn't dare show skin, it was covered with fur (real fox )  and they made sure I had my little lace hankie in my purse as well with my lace gloves.    

The dresses in these pictures are what my grandmom wore with an apron when she was baking bread and frying up some serious bacon and sausage for breakfast.   

Aint no way this is Church attire.


----------



## goldielocs (Dec 17, 2009)

I guess I must be the odd person because I do wear ankle length skirts and dresses most of the time.  Nothing as horrible as the prarie dresses posted, but high necklines, low hems and loose fitting pants are a norm for me.  I do wear nice suits to church, but I try not ro over do it.  No matter how I dress, I am definately feminine.  

To each his own...


----------



## Ms Lala (Dec 17, 2009)

sidney said:


> I think the confusion lies in the fact we all may have different definitions of modesty. Personally, I feel that some may define modesty as the dress C pictures. I happen to think the women in dress B look appropriate. I think that there is a fine line between modesty and legalism. Women should be able to look like women. I don't think we should be legalists in regard to the way we dress. Women don't have to look like Group C to be holy women just as christians don't have to live as poor to appear more humble and modest.
> 
> 
> DRESS B
> ...


 

I would not wear dress C, no way.  Now I knew plenty of church mothers who dressed really modest when I was growing up but they were mean as I don't know what.  They did not show the love of Christ and were too focused on the appearance of things.  Some of these "modest" women were also lustful toward preachers etc... in congregation.  My point is I believe that if we develop in the love of God the Holy Spirit will lead us in what to put on.  There have been outfits that I got rid of that I once thought were appropriate because the Spirit convicted me.


----------



## Ms Lala (Dec 17, 2009)

I actually like the skirt on the 2nd outfit.  I would wear that w/a fitted sweater and some boots.


----------



## goldielocs (Dec 18, 2009)

Ms Lala said:


> I actually like the skirt on the 2nd outfit. I would wear that w/a fitted sweater and some boots.


 
I'm with you on that. I actually have about 3 skirts like this in different colors that I wear with sweaters or cute tops. I wear shirts like ones in the pics with cute jeans and jewelry.


----------



## deesquest (Dec 22, 2009)

Modesty to me is what I understand from the word of God.  As a godly woman that is always the standard I use in anything I wear, think, act, say, etc...in all areas of my life. Modesty is to be temperate, avoiding excess, decent, not forward, not extreme, reasonable, humble in appearance, not pretentious, not flashy or garish. In defining modest I must also keep in mind the word of God says I am to be sober and shamefaced. 

How can I do this in the world we live in? Ignore what I want to do and what the world says to do, but do what God's word says. From the beginning when Adam and Eve sinned God clothed them in animal skins, fig leaves sewed into aprons was not appropriate and pleasing to God. When God constructed the Tabernacle and the priest climbed the stairs to offer the sacrifices, God told Aaron to make britches to wear under the robes that reached to their knees to cover their nakedness.  God cares about what I wear and the attitude of heart I have as I submit my will to his will.

What do I wear? Clothes that I deem attractive yet modest. Not tight, they don't reveal my butt or breast. They are always over the knee. I have quit a few long skirts similar to one pictured here. I love jackets, scrafs, and belts. I'm probably not considered fashionable by many, but my husband and I are pleased with my appearance-he compliments me all the time. I'm not trying to be sexy to others, only to my husband in private. First and far most though, I look in the mirror at home and in the dressing room of a clothing stores and ask myself will this please God. If not, it ain't going home with me.

Am I responsible for men lusting? Yes and no. As long as I dress according to God's word I am not giving him a reason with my appearance to lust. If a man looks on me with lust even if I'm complying with the word, then thats on him. I don't worry about it. 

By the way, I know quite a few women who dress in the long calico-looking dresses. They have a very sweet spirit-not all women who dress that way are mean witches. The dresses are not what I would wear, but I don't knock it if thats what you like. After all as a Christian woman I am to look on the inward heart or inner man, not on the outward.


----------



## momi (Dec 22, 2009)

deesquest said:


> Modesty to me is what I understand from the word of God. As a godly woman that is always the standard I use in anything I wear, think, act, say, etc...in all areas of my life. Modesty is to be temperate, avoiding excess, decent, not forward, not extreme, reasonable, humble in appearance, not pretentious, not flashy or garish. In defining modest I must also keep in mind the word of God says I am to be sober and shamefaced.
> 
> How can I do this in the world we live in? Ignore what I want to do and what the world says to do, but do what God's word says. From the beginning when Adam and Eve sinned God clothed them in animal skins, fig leaves sewed into aprons was not appropriate and pleasing to God. When God constructed the Tabernacle and the priest climbed the stairs to offer the sacrifices, God told Aaron to make britches to wear under the robes that reached to their knees to cover their nakedness. God cares about what I wear and the attitude of heart I have as I submit my will to his will.
> 
> ...


 
I have enjoyed reading this post. 

Welcome to the forum~


----------



## CoilyFields (Dec 22, 2009)

My husband told me...if you have to ask me if your outfit is appropirate then you already have your answer!

It is our RESPONSIBILITY to be modest.  At my church, yes, we do have some older women that are constantly correcting what the younger ones wear. But the bible does tell older women to teach the younger women. But its a delicate balance and there is usually some generational issues rather than just modesty issues. For example:

1. My mom and most older women at church believe its only right to wear slips and pantyhose when wearing dresses.  I only wear slips if the dress is thin or see-thru (like white, not sheer lol).  And I detest pantyhose and see no reason to wear them (unless Im cold) if they are flesh-toned and you cant tell if i have them on or not.

2. Leggings are not substitutes for pants. Nor can you wear shorts of any kind (though you may get away with capris in the summer).

3. No open-toes shoes in the pulpit or choir stand...not really sure how they try to justify this one.

The funny thing is...we have these same rules at my job! (except for the slip).  But we come to work in uniform, with few complaints, because those are the rules that are established. But we often find it hard to comply to the Holy spirit in matters of modest dress.

I had problems with this in my youth. I had grown up dressing modestly cause thats what I was taught. But as I graduated and went to college my hems got higher and necklines lower. I began to enjoy and crave the attention I recieved from men and tried to keep up with the worlds fashions. By the time I graduated my wardrobe was atrocious! When I joined my present church my clothes were not modest. But gradually as I began to cultivate my relationship with Christ and had a mentor (like 8 years my senior) who I saw was fashionable, up-to-date, and modest. I began to feel shame at the things I wore and began to examine why I wore them. I realized that I had gotten caught up in the worlds fashion show that said _the more skin you showed, or shape you outlined, or guys attention you drew the better. The world said I should be able to wear what I want and celebrate the body God had given me. I shouldnt be confined cuz of what other people thought of me._ I was more concerned with the outward appearance than the inside. But by the unction of the Holy Ghost I began to throw away those clothes and I still love to shop and fashion but now I choose what is flattering on me and not sexy (except for the bedroom lol), whats modest and not flashy. When I get dressed for church I make sure I can lift my hands, jump up and down, and bend over without exposing anything!

By no means is it easy, and I still struggle sometimes when something I believe is cute is not modest. I also think that certain fashions are acceptable on certain age groups, as well as certain body types that are not acceptable on others. 

Sorry for the long post lol!


----------



## SND411 (Dec 22, 2009)

How do you all feel about Designer Labels?


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 22, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> How do you all feel about Designer Labels?


Hey AfriPrincess, this is an excellent question for discussion.    

I wouldn't call it a sin, however, as far as I'm concerned, they're 'rip-offs' and I look even better in garments that aren't Designer so and so's.      I've also seen many 'Designer' lines that were absolutely horrible and had very poor workmanship and quality!   

For many people  (not targeting Christians, but society in general which may include some Christians) it's a badge of pride that they had money to buy and wear so and so's name jeans, etc.  and this is also bondage.

Some folks don't feel imporant neither well dressed unless they have a Designer label.         It's one of the disaster's of our community.  I remember when 'Jordans' and Nike's came out and if you didn't have a pair of Michael Jordan or Nike sports shoes / jacket on, you were an outcast.   The tragedy is that so many young kids lost their lives over this, being shot and robbed of their 'name' brand clothing.    An outrageous tragedy, all because of the 'status' that's been placed upon a 'name.'.      

I know way too many women (and men) who spend their last dime just to wear a name.   And they're broke !   Home bills past due; car notes late, and will never miss a hair appointment or getting their nails 'did'.     ....

Why go through all of that ? ? ?   All they are doing is making the creators of the 'designer names' richer and while they're living in 3 or 4 houses, their consumers are living on the edge of eviction and forclosures.  While these Designers have chauffers and Jags, and Benz, BMW's, their consumers are walking and getting their cars re-po'd.  or  towed with a yellow boot on it.      

God calls us to use wisdom and to be better stewarts of our finances.   I've learned that I do not have to spend a lot of money or wear a name to look good.     Thank God!   

:Rose:


----------



## SND411 (Dec 22, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> Hey AfriPrincess, this is an excellent question for discussion.
> 
> I wouldn't call it a sin, however, as far as I'm concerned, they're 'rip-offs' and I look even better in garments that aren't Designer so and so's.      I've also seen many 'Designer' lines that were absolutely horrible and had very poor workmanship and quality!
> 
> ...



Good analysis. That's exactly how I feel. 

I was also thinking about when Christians help the misfortunate. I mean, would a Christian go to a homeless shelter with Dior sunglasses, Prada shoes, a Chanel dress with Tiffany jewelery? I know that is a little extreme but I wonder sometimes....


----------



## Prudent1 (Dec 22, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> Good analysis. That's exactly how I feel.
> 
> I was also thinking about when Christians help the misfortunate. I mean, would a Christian go to a homeless shelter with Dior sunglasses, Prada shoes, a Chanel dress with Tiffany jewelery? I know that is a little extreme but I wonder sometimes....


 
Someone might. I might. I tend to not buy a lot of name brand items. As a matter of fact, I buy what I like name brand or not. So, I would not make a special effort to arrive to volunteer at the local homeless shelter wearing lots of expensive items but, I would have my nice watch on or earrings etc. The stuff that I would wear daily anyway. When I do buy designer label items, most of he time the designer's name does not appear in any obvious places. I'm not big on free advertisement. The average person might not even know what kind of shirt I am wearing. A person would really have to pay special attention to see an emblem or design on me and then I want to know why you are looking that closely. My heart would be on serving/ ministering to those in need not trying to show off. There again whenever I am out and about period I am not trying to show off. I am grateful for God allowing me to own some nice things. I will not hide them b/c that almost seems like I don't appreciate his generosity. I do try to use good judgement in regards to what I wear period though hence this modesty discussion. Good question...


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 22, 2009)

Wrong thread


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 23, 2009)

CoilyFields said:


> My husband told me...if you have to ask me if your outfit is appropirate then you already have your answer!
> 
> It is our RESPONSIBILITY to be modest. At my church, yes, we do have some older women that are constantly correcting what the younger ones wear. But the bible does tell older women to teach the younger women. But its a delicate balance and there is usually some generational issues rather than just modesty issues. For example:
> 
> ...


 
I love your 'entire' post.    

It's speaks to the heart of the matter and what women do go through.   You made a perfect analysis of this entire 'modesty' and you shared it so eloquently, with the gentleness of the Holy Spirit and without condemnation.  

This part, right here is the Number 1 reason, women (Chritian and non Christian) have a struggle in this area.



> I had problems with this in my youth. I had grown up dressing modestly cause thats what I was taught. But as I graduated and went to college my hems got higher and necklines lower.
> 
> *I began to enjoy and crave the attention I recieved from men and tried to keep up with the worlds fashions.* By the time I graduated my wardrobe was atrocious!


 
It's about the 'attention' or the fear of being 'unattractive' or looking out of date or out of style, or just plain looking.    We all want to be loved and accepted and somehow it's been attached to what we wear or how less of it.   

Thanks for your post.  It speaks volumes.   It truly does.   

God bless you  :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 23, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> Good analysis. That's exactly how I feel.
> 
> I was also thinking about when Christians help the misfortunate. I mean, would a Christian go to a homeless shelter with Dior sunglasses, Prada shoes, a Chanel dress with Tiffany jewelery? I know that is a little extreme but I wonder sometimes....


Afri, I just wanted to say that you truly have a gift for presenting soul searching topics of discussion.  

 It's good to bring these issues to the surface to keep us on our toes and to explore more of our knowledge, understanding and our life applications of chapter and verse.  So for this I thank you.  :Rose:

The question you present here is very provacative in the sense of what's more important.  Is it to be in fashion or being humble before those who are less fortunante. 

As a mother and as a teacher I've learned that the more loving way to minister to a child's heart is to _bow_ to their level.  Instead of standing over them, I come down to meet them eye to eye, heart to heart.   This way they feel less intimidated.   It's already obvious that I'm in a higher position (that I'm the grownup), but by coming down to their height or lifting them up to mine, the love flows and is easier received because we can see each other 'eye to eye'.  

When ministering to the less fortunate, the labels can stay home in my closet.   In my jeans or sweats, I'll still be clean and well dressed, but I won't be untouchable or hidden by the shadow of Iman or Guichi.  

Blessings AfriPrincess.   :Rose:   Keep the topics coming.  None of us are so well dressed, that we are unteachable nor have need of a new heart.


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 23, 2009)

I talked to my boyfriend about how women dress in general. (He said some curse words that I blocked out but I feel is relevant to how guys view women attire)...
First, he said he likes how I dress conservatively most of the time, but he mentioned one thing in particular that I wear....leggings. He feels like leggings are okay to wear around the house but not out in public where guys can see your p**** print.  Even if I wear a long shirt over the leggings, he said it will still make a man think about what's underneath because of how the leggings fit to my butt and thighs. He says tight clothing is not conservative, and he feels like the woman is trying to attract themselves to men even if she may not be consciously intending to. Back when he was single, he said he was actually turned off by women who wear clothing like Applebottom, Rocawear, Babyphat, etc. because he felt like they were trying to attract attention to their bodies with the flashy colors and labels. It makes the man forget about trying to get to know the woman as a person. However, that did not keep him from "hollerin'" at them because most guys would see them as a quick f*** and nothing more.  Also showing breast clevage and too much skin can make a man look at you the wrong way. He also mentioned jewelry and makeup can make a man think of you differently if it is not conservative. Men will not look at you as girlfriend or wife material when you do not dress or put yourself together modestly or conservatively. Yes, they might be attracted and even think you look good, but not for anything serious.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 23, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I talked to my boyfriend about how women dress in general. (He said some curse words that I blocked out but I feel is relevant to how guys view women attire)...
> 
> First, he said he likes how I dress conservatively most of the time, but he mentioned one thing in particular that I wear....leggings. He feels like leggings are okay to wear around the house but not out in public where guys can see your p**** print.
> 
> ...


 
I have to admit that 'as raw' as your boyfriend has expressed himself......






He's telling the truth.   And it's sad, because a lot of women are purposely dressing like this and excusing it with 'that's the style'.   

My question to them is, "The style of what? ! ! ! ? "   

Even when I wear my leotards in Dance class I wear a hip wrap or scarf to keep my 'cheeks'   under cover.   I have entire wardrobe of colors, styles and fabrics.    

It's called 'Modesty'.  Even in the Arts.    

Not that everyone in Dance class follows it... It's always a bunch that wanna show out and it's all due to their insecurities.  They desperately  want to be noticed; which is so, so sad.    The men aren't looking at them respectfully, but as objects and nothing more. 

So I can appreciate your post and your boyfriend's comments Poohbear because he truly speaking the truth, especially about the leggings.   

As *Coily Fields* shared in her post above, 'Leggings are not a substitute for pants."  

Both of you are totally on point with your posts in here.


----------



## dicapr (Dec 23, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I talked to my boyfriend about how women dress in general. (He said some curse words that I blocked out but I feel is relevant to how guys view women attire)...
> First, he said he likes how I dress conservatively most of the time, but he mentioned one thing in particular that I wear....leggings. He feels like leggings are okay to wear around the house but not out in public where guys can see your p**** print. Even if I wear a long shirt over the leggings, he said it will still make a man think about what's underneath because of how the leggings fit to my butt and thighs. He says tight clothing is not conservative, and he feels like the woman is trying to attract themselves to men even if she may not be consciously intending to. Back when he was single, he said he was actually turned off by women who wear clothing like Applebottom, Rocawear, Babyphat, etc. because he felt like they were trying to attract attention to their bodies with the flashy colors and labels. It makes the man forget about trying to get to know the woman as a person. However, that did not keep him from "hollerin'" at them because most guys would see them as a quick f*** and nothing more. Also showing breast clevage and too much skin can make a man look at you the wrong way. He also mentioned jewelry and makeup can make a man think of you differently if it is not conservative. Men will not look at you as girlfriend or wife material when you do not dress or put yourself together modestly or conservatively. Yes, they might be attracted and even think you look good, but not for anything serious.


 
This is the attitude that some men have.  The sad thing is that we as women continue to accept that this is o.k. and actually believe that they are in some way showing approval for those of us who are modest.  However, this is the belief of men who truly have NO respect for women.  They believe that according to how they dress they have the right to treat women as less than human.  While the woman believes that the man is genuinely interested in a relationship the man is trying to find a way to victimize them.  I'm sorry, having sex with someone just because they look easy is low and shows that you have little respect for them or yourself.  After they finish disrespecting women they deem as unworthy because they are showing cleavage or maybe their dress is too short they then move on.  The feel somehow they deserve better than the females they are treating as objects.  So they look for modest christian woman to marry.  Why would we want to marry someone like that? How is that any less offensive than what they have been doing to the "unmodest" women?  They actually think that they deserve someone who they feel has not been used and abused.  They seem to forget that they were the ones using.  So they offer us them.  How are they any different than the women that they have been dating?  A true man, a christian man, tries to help the problem rather than looking for ways to exploit someone they believe is weak.  A man once told me that if you treat a woman like a lady she will rise to the occasion.  We need more men like that.  They could show these women that they deserve to be respected regardless to how she is dressed.  By showing them a different way of being they could help the women realize that they are more than just a sex object.   Once this is accomplished, they will act and dress differenetly.  Instead, women keep telling themselves that we should accept these no good men who made it a practice of dogging women like they are some sort of prize.  It may be how men feel, but we as women need to stop validating their feelings.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 23, 2009)

dicapr said:


> This is the attitude that some men have.  The sad thing is that we as women continue to accept that this is o.k. and actually believe that they are in some way showing approval for those of us who are modest.  However, this is the belief of men who truly have NO respect for women.  They believe that according to how they dress they have the right to treat women as less than human.  While the woman believes that the man is genuinely interested in a relationship the man is trying to find a way to victimize them.  I'm sorry, having sex with someone just because they look easy is low and shows that you have little respect for them or yourself.  After they finish disrespecting women they deem as unworthy because they are showing cleavage or maybe their dress is too short they then move on.  The feel somehow they deserve better than the females they are treating as objects.  So they look for modest christian woman to marry.  Why would we want to marry someone like that? How is that any less offensive than what they have been doing to the "unmodest" women?  They actually think that they deserve someone who they feel has not been used and abused.  They seem to forget that they were the ones using.  So they offer us them.  How are they any different than the women that they have been dating?  A true man, a christian man, tries to help the problem rather than looking for ways to exploit someone they believe is weak.  A man once told me that if you treat a woman like a lady she will rise to the occasion.  We need more men like that.  They could show these women that they deserve to be respected regardless to how she is dressed.  By showing them a different way of being they could help the women realize that they are more than just a sex object.   Once this is accomplished, they will act and dress differenetly.  Instead, women keep telling themselves that we should accept these no good men who made it a practice of dogging women like they are some sort of prize.  It may be how men feel, but we as women need to stop validating their feelings.



*I ALMOST CRIED READING YOUR POST. YOU TOOK EVERY SINGLE WORD OUT OF MY MOUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## SND411 (Dec 23, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I talked to my boyfriend about how women dress in general. (He said some curse words that I blocked out but I feel is relevant to how guys view women attire)...
> First, he said he likes how I dress conservatively most of the time, but he mentioned one thing in particular that I wear....leggings. He feels like leggings are okay to wear around the house but not out in public where guys can see your p**** print.  Even if I wear a long shirt over the leggings, he said it will still make a man think about what's underneath because of how the leggings fit to my butt and thighs. He says tight clothing is not conservative, and he feels like the woman is trying to attract themselves to men even if she may not be consciously intending to. Back when he was single, he said he was actually turned off by women who wear clothing like Applebottom, Rocawear, Babyphat, etc. because he felt like they were trying to attract attention to their bodies with the flashy colors and labels. It makes the man forget about trying to get to know the woman as a person.* However, that did not keep him from "hollerin'" at them because most guys would see them as a quick f*** and nothing more.*  Also showing breast clevage and too much skin can make a man look at you the wrong way. He also mentioned jewelry and makeup can make a man think of you differently if it is not conservative. Men will not look at you as girlfriend or wife material when you do not dress or put yourself together modestly or conservatively. Yes, they might be attracted and even think you look good, but not for anything serious.



The bold really disturbed me. How can someone in one breath admit a woman is degrading herself by wearing revealing clothing, and in the next sentence admit to wanting to take advantage of that person. If dressing immorally = bad, why on earth would you be receptive to that behavior at all?

With all due respect, your boyfriend's response reminds me why the world is so depraved. It should not matter what a woman wears, a true Christian man, or any man for that matter, should never deem a person made in the image of God as an object. I believe in dressing conservatively because I would to do this for Jesus, whom I love dearly, and not to prevent some man from seeing me as a quick f***.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 23, 2009)

Poohbear said:


> I talked to my boyfriend about how women dress in general. (He said some curse words that I blocked out but I feel is relevant to how guys view women attire)...
> First, he said he likes how I dress conservatively most of the time, but he mentioned one thing in particular that I wear....leggings. He feels like leggings are okay to wear around the house but not out in public where guys can see your p**** print.  *Even if I wear a long shirt over the leggings, he said it will still make a man think about what's underneath because of how the leggings fit to my butt and thighs*. He says tight clothing is not conservative, and he feels like the woman is trying to attract themselves to men even if she may not be consciously intending to. Back when he was single, he said he was actually turned off by women who wear clothing like Applebottom, Rocawear, Babyphat, etc. because he felt like they were trying to attract attention to their bodies with the flashy colors and labels. It makes the man forget about trying to get to know the woman as a person. However, that did not keep him from "hollerin'" at them because most guys would see them as a quick f*** and nothing more.  Also showing breast clevage and too much skin can make a man look at you the wrong way. He also mentioned jewelry and makeup can make a man think of you differently if it is not conservative. Men will not look at you as girlfriend or wife material when you do not dress or put yourself together modestly or conservatively. Yes, they might be attracted and even think you look good, but not for anything serious.



LOL!!!! This RIGHT HERE is what I have been saying. Even if you wear something conservative, a man will still be tempted to see you, a woman, as a sex object. He is basically fantasizing about what is not there. Leggings? For real? For every man that is turned on by leggings, another man is not. I bet some men lust after women who wear pantyhose. Do any of yall wear pantyhose? If so, you better go home and change out of them lest you "cause" a man to lust after you. Where do you draw the line?


----------



## SND411 (Dec 23, 2009)

Let me tell all of you something as well:

In Saudi Arabia, all the women are required to wear the burqa. Look it up if you do not know what it is. Yet, Saudi Arabia is one of the highest buyers of pornography in the world. Hmmmm................tell me what is interesting about this???


----------



## aribell (Dec 23, 2009)

Thanks for the great discussion ladies. 

Dicapr's  comments below reflect a lot of what caused me to start the thread in the first place.  Modesty _is _a real virtue.  Women do have a responsibility to both dress modestly and to not _unduly_ cause their brothers to stumble.  _Buuuut_, men--even Christian men--seem to feel entitled to lust after and judge women, their sisters in Christ, without examining themselves as closely as they're examining the women in front of them.  They probably aren't challenged as deeply because the church is largely run by men.  And I think that to some extent we as women play into a less-than godly attitude on the part of men by internalizing these comments.

I think that there's real practical wisdom in understanding that right or wrong, if you dress a certain way, men are going to think certain things.  And I don't think we should do anything out of rebellion; but maybe we can just be more aware that everything that men are saying, even in the church, isn't necessarily what Jesus thinks or would say.  

We need to know that our virtue comes from being daughters of the King who _never_ has questions about our worth, regardless of what we happen to be wearing at the time.  Where a worldly masculinity says that a woman has to show herself worthy of a man or else he's at liberty to treat her as nothing, our God is the one who sent Hosea after Gomer--a prostitute--time and time again.  He's the one that sent Christ after a tarnished bride.  There aren't "good girls" and "bad girls" in God's sight.  We are prizes to Him.  We need to honor him in our bodies, clothe ourselves with humility, and still at the end of the day know that we aren't seeking the approval of men but of God.



dicapr said:


> This is the attitude that some men have. The sad thing is that we as women continue to accept that this is o.k. and actually believe that they are in some way showing approval for those of us who are modest. However, this is the belief of men who truly have NO respect for women. They believe that according to how they dress they have the right to treat women as less than human. While the woman believes that the man is genuinely interested in a relationship the man is trying to find a way to victimize them. I'm sorry, having sex with someone just because they look easy is low and shows that you have little respect for them or yourself. After they finish disrespecting women they deem as unworthy because they are showing cleavage or maybe their dress is too short they then move on. The feel somehow they deserve better than the females they are treating as objects. So they look for modest christian woman to marry. Why would we want to marry someone like that? How is that any less offensive than what they have been doing to the "unmodest" women? They actually think that they deserve someone who they feel has not been used and abused. They seem to forget that they were the ones using. So they offer us them. How are they any different than the women that they have been dating? A true man, a christian man, tries to help the problem rather than looking for ways to exploit someone they believe is weak. A man once told me that if you treat a woman like a lady she will rise to the occasion. We need more men like that. They could show these women that they deserve to be respected regardless to how she is dressed. By showing them a different way of being they could help the women realize that they are more than just a sex object. Once this is accomplished, they will act and dress differenetly. Instead, women keep telling themselves that we should accept these no good men who made it a practice of dogging women like they are some sort of prize. It may be how men feel, but we as women need to stop validating their feelings.


 


dicapr said:


> Why would I accentuate my figure? For ME! There is a misconception that the only reason a woman would want to dress attractively and show her shape is to somehow attract a man. This is not always the case-sometimes a woman is just proud she has lost weight. Maybe she has been having a hard day, week, ect and dressing up and looking good to herself is helping her get through her day. Sometimes women are not thinking about men. Sometimes a women gets tired of feeling as if something is wrong because she is shaped like a woman. I believe in modesty. However, I was made to feel ashamed at a young age because I am naturally curvy and have a womanly figure. I have curvy legs, small waist, wide hips, and a large chest. I cannot cover this up. I have tried and was left looking and feeling sloppy and unkept. I wear clothes that fit-and yes they reveal that I am a woman. I wear my arms out because I sweat like a man and this cuts down on embarassing sweat rings. Someone else would think that I was trying to be sexy and revealing. You can tell by the way a woman carries herself her true intentions.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 23, 2009)

nicola.kirwan said:


> Thanks for the great discussion ladies.
> 
> Dicapr's  comments below reflect a lot of what caused me to start the thread in the first place.  Modesty _is _a real virtue.  Women do have a responsibility to both dress modestly and to not _unduly_ cause their brothers to stumble.  _Buuuut_, men--even Christian men--seem to feel entitled to lust after and judge women, their sisters in Christ, without examining themselves as closely as they're examining the women in front of them.  They probably aren't challenged as deeply because the church is largely run by men.  And I think that to some extent we as women play into a less-than godly attitude on the part of men by internalizing these comments.
> 
> ...



Couldn't have said it better myself. 

Another question: Is it right for me to ask a Christian brother to NOT take off his shirt/go shirtless since it could be tempting for me?


----------



## aribell (Dec 24, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> Couldn't have said it better myself.
> 
> Another question: Is it right for me to ask a Christian brother to NOT take off his shirt/go shirtless since it could be tempting for me?


 
^^^^Personally, I find it quite distracting...


----------



## Poohbear (Dec 24, 2009)

dicapr said:


> This is the attitude that some men have. The sad thing is that we as women continue to accept that this is o.k. and actually believe that they are in some way showing approval for those of us who are modest. However, this is the belief of men who truly have NO respect for women. They believe that according to how they dress they have the right to treat women as less than human. While the woman believes that the man is genuinely interested in a relationship the man is trying to find a way to victimize them. I'm sorry, having sex with someone just because they look easy is low and shows that you have little respect for them or yourself. After they finish disrespecting women they deem as unworthy because they are showing cleavage or maybe their dress is too short they then move on. The feel somehow they deserve better than the females they are treating as objects. So they look for modest christian woman to marry. Why would we want to marry someone like that? How is that any less offensive than what they have been doing to the "unmodest" women? They actually think that they deserve someone who they feel has not been used and abused. They seem to forget that they were the ones using. So they offer us them. How are they any different than the women that they have been dating? A true man, a christian man, tries to help the problem rather than looking for ways to exploit someone they believe is weak. A man once told me that if you treat a woman like a lady she will rise to the occasion. We need more men like that. They could show these women that they deserve to be respected regardless to how she is dressed. By showing them a different way of being they could help the women realize that they are more than just a sex object. Once this is accomplished, they will act and dress differenetly. Instead, women keep telling themselves that we should accept these no good men who made it a practice of dogging women like they are some sort of prize. It may be how men feel, but we as women need to stop validating their feelings.


 


AfriPrincess411 said:


> The bold really disturbed me. How can someone in one breath admit a woman is degrading herself by wearing revealing clothing, and in the next sentence admit to wanting to take advantage of that person. If dressing immorally = bad, why on earth would you be receptive to that behavior at all?
> 
> With all due respect, your boyfriend's response reminds me why the world is so depraved. It should not matter what a woman wears, a true Christian man, or any man for that matter, should never deem a person made in the image of God as an object. I believe in dressing conservatively because I would to do this for Jesus, whom I love dearly, and not to prevent some man from seeing me as a quick f***.


I definitely feel where you both are coming from. It was quite disturbing to me to hear him say that with him being my boyfriend. He used to be very promiscuous and that's just how he explained some mens' view on how a woman dresses herself. Yeah, it is wrong for a man to degrade a woman or treat her wrong because of the way she looks, but that's why God has these standards that we ought to follow, both men and women.


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 24, 2009)

Poohbear, I agree with the highlighted.  

I feel that even if others (men) aren't following the standards, aren't living or thinking the way they *should*, we still have a responsibility to live, dress and think the way we should. The standards God has laid out for us are still the standards and do not change or hold exceptions if/because Jack, Johnnie and Pookie Ray aren't doing it too. 

Also, to a previous post, if you're living by God's Word, you won't have to worry about getting used/abused/hurt because He'll only allow good, holy men to interest you.



Poohbear said:


> I definitely feel where you both are coming from. It was quite disturbing to me to hear him say that with him being my boyfriend. He used to be very promiscuous and that's just how he explained some mens' view on how a woman dresses herself. *Yeah, it is wrong for a man to degrade a woman or treat her wrong because of the way she looks, but that's why God has these standards that we ought to follow, both men and women.*


----------



## divya (Dec 24, 2009)

dicapr said:


> This is the attitude that some men have.  The sad thing is that we as women continue to accept that this is o.k. and actually believe that they are in some way showing approval for those of us who are modest.  However, this is the belief of men who truly have NO respect for women.  They believe that according to how they dress they have the right to treat women as less than human.  While the woman believes that the man is genuinely interested in a relationship the man is trying to find a way to victimize them.  I'm sorry, having sex with someone just because they look easy is low and shows that you have little respect for them or yourself.  After they finish disrespecting women they deem as unworthy because they are showing cleavage or maybe their dress is too short they then move on.  The feel somehow they deserve better than the females they are treating as objects.  So they look for modest christian woman to marry.  Why would we want to marry someone like that? How is that any less offensive than what they have been doing to the "unmodest" women?  They actually think that they deserve someone who they feel has not been used and abused.  They seem to forget that they were the ones using.  So they offer us them.  How are they any different than the women that they have been dating?  A true man, a christian man, tries to help the problem rather than looking for ways to exploit someone they believe is weak.  A man once told me that if you treat a woman like a lady she will rise to the occasion.  We need more men like that.  They could show these women that they deserve to be respected regardless to how she is dressed.  By showing them a different way of being they could help the women realize that they are more than just a sex object.   Once this is accomplished, they will act and dress differenetly.  Instead, women keep telling themselves that we should accept these no good men who made it a practice of dogging women like they are some sort of prize.  It may be how men feel, but we as women need to stop validating their feelings.



*THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*  Just had to quote this again!


----------



## SND411 (Dec 24, 2009)

GeechyGurl said:


> Poohbear, I agree with the highlighted.
> 
> *I feel that even if others (men) aren't following the standards, aren't living or thinking the way they should, we still have a responsibility to live, dress and think the way we should. *The standards God has laid out for us are still the standards and do not change or hold exceptions if/because Jack, Johnnie and Pookie Ray aren't doing it too. If you're living by God's Word, you won't have to worry about getting used/abused/hurt because He'll only allow good, holy men to interest you.



Same could be said for Christian men:

Even if others (women) aren't following the standards of dressing modestly or behaving the way they should, men still have the responsibility to RESPECT a woman the way they should.


----------



## KnottyGurl (Dec 24, 2009)

I agree. But the point I was making is that regardless of your gender, you are responsible for the things you do. Using "Well so and so isn't doing it" as a reason why you aren't doing what you're supposed to do does not cut it. If you are, then why are you so surprised at attracting/choosing destructive men?

Let's be realistic. People *should* be following the bible to a "T", but that's not happening and probably never will.  That's why we're all sinners. That's life. Find, be around and focus on people who think like you or are where you want to be, and don't let the actions of the unjust dictate yours.


AfriPrincess411 said:


> Same could be said for Christian men:
> 
> Even if others (women) aren't following the standards of dressing modestly or behaving the way they should, men still have the responsibility to RESPECT a woman the way they should.


----------



## Laela (Dec 26, 2009)

Well said...







momi said:


> 2 Corinthians 6:3 - "We put no stumbling block in anyone’s path, so that our ministry will not be discredited...
> 
> This is not only for our brothers sake but our own.  It assists us in living a holy lifestyle so that the word of God (His ministry through us) is not discredited.
> 
> ...


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 26, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> Let me tell all of you something as well:
> 
> In Saudi Arabia, all the women are required to wear the burqa. Look it up if you do not know what it is. Yet, Saudi Arabia is one of the highest buyers of pornography in the world. Hmmmm................tell me what is interesting about this???


 
Again, you raise some excellent points to reflect upon.  

As for the Middle Eastern men and pornography... 

It's just that.   A naked woman (or half naked or immodestly dressed) is considered pornographic.  Men will 'Always' have their sex drive.  A modestly dressed woman is considered one who respects her 'virtue', and those who dress 'less' are the ones considered without virtue and are giving men 'permission' to look upon them as such. 

In Egypt a woman can be arrested (and they are) for performing Middle Eastern Dance (Belly Dance) OR if they dance without a 'Belly Cover'.   

What's sad is that here in the US, women are actually wearing Belly Dance Costumes (of the Bare Designs) out to Dinner.   No joke!  And they think it's cute.   What's really happening is that women are simply THAT Desperate for attention.   

My brother in law used to be a 'Trucker' (he drove the big 18 wheelers) all over the country for his step fathers company.   He shared a lot of stories with us about his trips and many were wonderful adventures.    

However, he also shared the horrors / the not so nice scenes of his travels... the prostitutes who frequented the truck stops or the delivery 'drop off' stops for "business' .    Anyhoo, New York was among the worst, for the women became so competitive that skimpy clothing wasn't enough.   There were street corners where many of them would 'bare all'... they were naked.   Yeah... naked!   He wasn't lying about it.  The women were literally naked, because they were desperate for 'takers'.   

You know..........   Common sense, just plain ole common sense tells us that what we value, we guard and protect.   If if value my body, then I am not going to parade it half naked (or naked) before anyone except my husband.    What on earth would I display myself to all to see?   

It has nothing to do with what anyone thinks, more than it has to do with what I value of myself as a woman.   And the same goes for men.   They need to guard the gift that God has given them as well.   

I don't need to see their 'imprints' because they are wearing their pants too tight.   You're gonna look; how can you help but not notice if something down there is bulging out.   It's right there staring at you, even in your periphreal view.  And indeed you will look away and avoid looking, however the imprint of the image is still there in your brain.  

The point I'm trying to make is that we should not make it hard for men to focus on virtue, neither should they make it hard for us as women.   We all have imprints that only our husband or in a man's case, his wife should see.   

Now I'm laughing at what I just posted....  

But I hope someone gets my point.   We need to be mindful of imprints.


----------



## CoilyFields (Dec 28, 2009)

Perhaps so much attention/responsibility is placed on women because we have lots of parts that it has become acceptable to display?

Cuz I don't know about anyone else but men in these parts dont wear tight pants that would outline their "packages" and I have never caught myself checking for that anyways lol. Im much more likely to wonder about their comforatbility and avoid looking if a man had on pants that tight. Also men rarely go shirtless. So their clothing is not revealing "sexual" body parts the way ours do.

Thats probebely why the focus is on us.

But like I said before: Its BOTH of our responsibilities to check our clothing and our lustful thoughts and looks! (just more often its women who need to check their clothes and men who need to check their looks...both need to check our hearts because from it flows the issues of life)


----------



## SND411 (Dec 28, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> Again, you raise some excellent points to reflect upon.
> 
> As for the Middle Eastern men and pornography...
> 
> ...



I don't think you understood the main point of my post....


----------



## SND411 (Dec 28, 2009)

Basically, the main point of my "Saudi Arabia" example is to demonstrate that modesty does not make men value women anymore than immodesty causes men to degrade women, whom are also made in the image of God, to mere objects. Women in Saudi Arabian society are constantly expected to dress in such a way that protects their image and their body. Yet many of the men purposefully go out of their way to seek immoral images of women on the internet. It goes to show that even in a society where modesty is the norm, people will still lust after that which is wrong. Lust does NOT stem from what someone is wearing. Like Jesus said, it comes from the heart. If you have a lustful heart, it does not matter if all the women in your life dress modestly. You will go out and SEEK material/prostitutes/whatever to satisfy your heart's desires.

This is why I feel it is NEVER the responsiblity of a woman to make sure a "brother" does not lust. If it is in his heart, he will do it anyway, even to the point of "undressing you with his eyes" or imagining you naked in his bed.


----------



## SND411 (Dec 28, 2009)

One more thing:

From reading the Bible, I have deduced that the main reason women are to dress modestly is to be a constant reminder that their worth and "beauty" come from their HEART alone. Instead of people judging you by your clothes, make-up, jewelery, etc, they will have no choice but to focus on your conduct, love for your enemies, love for the strangers, and good works in general. This way, you would be a "soldier for Christ" without needing to carry a literal shield or sword. A simple outfit would suffice.

Unfortunately, men in the church have made this about THEM primarily. They think we dress modestly to help them out, when in fact, it's suppose to help OUR soul first and foremost.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 28, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> *I don't think you understood the main point of my post*....






AfriPrincess411 said:


> *Basically, the main point of my "Saudi Arabia" example is to demonstrate that modesty does not make men value women anymore than immodesty causes men to degrade women, whom are also made in the image of God, to mere objects. *
> 
> Women in Saudi Arabian society are constantly expected to dress in such a way that protects their image and their body.
> 
> ...


 


AfriPrincess411 said:


> One more thing:
> 
> *From reading the Bible, I have deduced that the main reason women are to dress modestly is to be a constant reminder that their worth and "beauty" come from their HEART alone. *
> 
> ...


 
I understood your post quite clearly.   

Let's understand something, no matter what's in a man's heart, there are still visuals and verbals which can and WILL stimulate his sexual desires.

With the Middle Eastern example you've shared, these men are not looking at the modestly dressed women as pornographic beings, they are searching outside of them.   A naked man or woman is just that 'naked' and it brings on sexual arousal.   That's how God designed us.  

As for the men in Church who primarily place the responsibility upon woman and their attire:   

You stated that lust does not stem from what someone is wearing.  

Men are visually stimulated; that's their make-up.  It's not going to change.   The outward appearance of a woman and her anatomy will stimulate a man sexually.    There are relentless Women in Church and out of Church who KNOW this and they use it quite effectively to get attention from men.   

Sex is one of the most used strategies to get 'attention' and attention it gets.  *AND WOMEN KNOW IT !* 

We are not going to get away with _*'what difference does it make'*_ _for no matter what a woman wears, men are still 'men', they will still lust._ 

Please!  Hang that theory on a feather and see how long it holds up.  

They may not 'lust', but they can still be sexually stimulated by what a woman is wearing or 'not' or accentuates.  

What we wear speaks volumes and it does speak what is in our hearts.  Clothing speaks a language, be it a suit to the office, or thong in the bedroom.   When someone wears something see through, it brings full attention to what's in view.  It's a fact of life.  

Women know exactly what they are doing when they wear certain garments (be it in Church, at work, or wherever) and nobody's stupid, she's exposed... both her accentuated body part(s) AND her heart... meaning her objective.   She is looking for attention.   Women who are insecure about who they are inwardly fall upon their external features to be noticed.  

How we dress DOES matter.  

The men in Saudi Arabia are proving just that.   They look to the less clad or nil in clothing and virtue for sexual disfunctions.  

Overhere in the US, I wouldn't be suprised if porn went out of business, it's already a 'free enterprise' freely given by women here who refuse to cover themselves in descent attire.   It's a free for all.  The vast diseases, sexual calamities, gender dysfunctions, and God knows what else is porn culture all in itself.   And the manner of clothing is book, chapter and verse that expresses it all. 

Total disregard for what God intended for our hearts to speak.


----------



## CoilyFields (Dec 28, 2009)

So do you ladies disagree with any of the following comments:

1. We are able to be stumbling blocks for others.
2. Therefore it is our repsonsibility to do our utmost within reasonable boundaries to prevent this.
3. Men are visually stimulated much moreso than women
4. We know that our society relies on sex in almost every medium to communicate messeges to us. 
To women : be beautiful and sexy, invest money in your outter appearance to feel good about yourself. When men fall all over you and women want to be you, you are IT!!!! 
To men:  There is nothing wrong with lusting after a woman...its your duty as a heterosexual man.  Shes showing it because she wants you to look. 

5.  the lines of modesty have been blurred by fashion and that we see so many images on tv and in real life of immodest dress that it has become the norm. 
6. ONce again, it is the responsibility of both parties to ensure that the sin of lust (doing and inciting) cannot be laid at their feet.
7. If you truly have a heart to not incite lust and yield yourself to the guidance of the Holy Spirit you can be blameless in this area (without wearing a burka lol).


OT: but am I the only one who has noticed tons of sitcoms where the husband/guy is average looking or downright big but the wives/women are always slender and very pretty? Dogone double standard! I have yet to see the opposite (even the show ugly betty...shes not ugly, just has an unfortunate fashion sense)


----------



## aribell (Dec 28, 2009)

AfriPrincess411 said:


> One more thing:
> 
> From reading the Bible, I have deduced that the main reason women are to dress modestly is to be a constant reminder that their worth and "beauty" come from their HEART alone. Instead of people judging you by your clothes, make-up, jewelery, etc, they will have no choice but to focus on your conduct, love for your enemies, love for the strangers, and good works in general. This way, you would be a "soldier for Christ" without needing to carry a literal shield or sword. A simple outfit would suffice.
> 
> Unfortunately, men in the church have made this about THEM primarily. They think we dress modestly to help them out, when in fact, it's suppose to help OUR soul first and foremost.


 


AfriPrincess411 said:


> Basically, the main point of my "Saudi Arabia" example is to demonstrate that modesty does not make men value women anymore than immodesty causes men to degrade women, whom are also made in the image of God, to mere objects. Women in Saudi Arabian society are constantly expected to dress in such a way that protects their image and their body. Yet many of the men purposefully go out of their way to seek immoral images of women on the internet. It goes to show that even in a society where modesty is the norm, people will still lust after that which is wrong. Lust does NOT stem from what someone is wearing. Like Jesus said, it comes from the heart. If you have a lustful heart, it does not matter if all the women in your life dress modestly. You will go out and SEEK material/prostitutes/whatever to satisfy your heart's desires.
> 
> This is why I feel it is NEVER the responsiblity of a woman to make sure a "brother" does not lust. If it is in his heart, he will do it anyway, even to the point of "undressing you with his eyes" or imagining you naked in his bed.


 


I think that also, where women are constantly being told to cover themselves so that men are not tempted, the message is clearly sent to men that it's only perfectly natural and unavoidable for them to lust after a woman's body.  Regardless of how men are wired, _this is not okay_.  I believe the high incidence of pornography usage in Saudi Arabia implies that the men generally have less respect for women and that women have essentially remained objects of their gratification, despite the _outward_ appearance of respect by covering.  Given the social context, that isn't surprising.  It's not about whether they are lusting after any particular woman based on what she is or isn't wearing, but how they have learned to view women overall.  A high level of respect for all women will translate to respect for particular women, even if they aren't respecting themselves at the time.  (but more on that in the next post!)  Sometimes I think that we forget that someone disrespecting themselves does not mean that we then are excused to disrespect them too.


----------



## dicapr (Dec 28, 2009)

CoilyFields said:


> So do you ladies disagree with any of the following comments:
> 
> 1. We are able to be stumbling blocks for others.*  We can be a stumbling block for others, however, they must already be struggling with the sin.  I don't like caramel.  So there is nothing anyone can do to entice me or cause me to want caramel.  If a man or woman does not have a lustful heart you cannot entice them to lust.*
> 2. Therefore it is our repsonsibility to do our utmost within reasonable boundaries to prevent this.*  What is reasonable to one person/culture is not reasonable to another.  I dress modestly to please God, not to prevent men from lusting.  My modesty may serve a dual purpose, but my objective is to please the Lord.*
> ...


 

My answers are in bold!


----------



## SND411 (Dec 28, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> With the Middle Eastern example you've shared, these men are not looking at the modestly dressed women as pornographic beings, they are searching outside of them.   A naked man or woman is just that 'naked' and it brings on sexual arousal.   That's how God designed us.
> 
> ...



Responses in bold blue.


----------



## Shimmie (Dec 28, 2009)

CoilyFields said:


> So do you ladies disagree with any of the following comments:
> 
> 1. We are able to be stumbling blocks for others.
> 
> ...


 
*Regarding the sitcom theory: *

There are very, very, VERY few actresses who would be caught on worldwide TV looking anything but slender and pretty. Films live forever and their image is a matter of life and death to them. It is.  

I totally agree that it a doggone double standard. It is. Women have been so conditioned about their outter appearence being the 'key' to love and acceptance that it's taken on the face of a monster. 

Women have become so competitive that they have literally gone to extremes to outdo the other. 

Cher began with her bare bottom costumes on stage. She was outrageous. Madonna was no virgin in her attire. I remember a 'flyaway' see through dress that Jennifer Lopez wore a few years back at an awards show and it brought forth national attention. After that, other female celebities were following suit. Toni Braxton wore a dress that was made of fabric bands barely covering her bare minierals. Then Halle Berry wore a gown which gave way to the see through. The gown was indeed beautiful, but it was way too sheer for public display. 

In the Dance Community, the costumes that I see the Dancers perform in are just plain ridiculous ! And they're all competing to be seen. Just Dance for Heaven's sake. Let the gift of Dance be displayed, not their nasty body parts. Nobody wants to see that mess onstage. 

Sex in it's truest form is Beautiful; absolutely beautiful and it doesn't have to be sold nor used for selling. It's a beautiful gift from God that is between a man and his wife to be cherished and enjoyed and honoured. 

Yet it's been so cheapened by those who lack beauty within themselves and love for themselves. It's a shame, too. For they are missing one of the most beautiful gifts of life. 

Tis All... :Rose:

:thatsall:


----------



## SND411 (Dec 28, 2009)

Does anyone find it curious that Jesus NEVER mentioned a woman's attire when He told the men not to lust after a woman in his heart?....


----------



## SND411 (Dec 28, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> Overhere in the US, I wouldn't be suprised if porn went out of business, it's already a 'free enterprise' freely given by women here who refuse to cover themselves in descent attire.   It's a free for all.  The vast diseases, sexual calamities, gender dysfunctions, and God knows what else is porn culture all in itself.   And the manner of clothing is book, chapter and verse that expresses it all.
> 
> Total disregard for what God intended for our hearts to speak.



I do not always see these women as the sole culprits. Have you ever thought that maybe some of these women are victims of our society?


----------



## aribell (Dec 28, 2009)

(head's up--long post)

My question is what would happen if men, starting from a young age, were taught that women's bodies were not for their sexual enjoyment?  What if boys and teenagers were told that while there are a lot of sexually attractive women that they will encounter, there is only _one_ woman--his future wife--for whom those feelings can be legitimately entertained or expressed?  And so his job is simply to find that _one _woman (prov. 18:22--he who finds a wife finds a good thing) and to enjoy that _one _woman (prov. 5:19--let her breasts satisfy you _at all times_; and be you _ravished always with her love_) to the exclusion of any other?  IMO, this is what should be taught.

I believe that girls are taught this--implicitly or explicitly--about their future husband.  But I do believe that more often than not men societally are told that women's bodies on the whole, are objects of their sexual gratification.  While I accept that men are visual creatures, I don't think that really gets to the heart of the matter.  I believe the issue is more _how_ men are taught to see the women around them, and how they are _not_ challenged to be Christ-like in this arena.

As a woman I by no means seek to criticize men; but again, the question is whether, when a woman is in front of a man and he begins to lust, is this about the physical image that is in front of him or is it also about somehow he being unable to see past what pleasure her body means for _him_ to see her as an individual, as a sister in Christ, as a person worthy of being honored and cherished?  

Somehow I don't think Jesus would ever have _lusted _after any woman.  
Lust isn't just sexual attraction, it's _objectification _of the other person.  Paul tells the young men to treat the young women as sisters.  Besides being without sin, I think Christ did more than "bounce His eyes," I think He loved everyone around Him perfectly.  I think that He saw all women He encountered as precious daughters of God who He loved as sisters; and as sisters sought only their good, only to protect.

Do we think this is too much to ask of men in the church?

Paul instructed Timothy to treat the older women as mothers, and the young women "with all purity, as sisters."  Think about a sibling relationship--a good one!  I really value my siblings.  My perspective may be very much colored by being hte oldest, but when I think about what it means to have a sister or brother, I primarily think of having a duty to protect them.  I think of how quickly I would come to their defense if I sensed that anyone was trying to harm them.  I think of my responsibility to set a good example for them and to hold them accountable to being and becoming the best that they can be. 

Even if not everyone else is the oldest or has siblings at all, or a good relationship with them, I really think this is what Paul meant when he instructed men to treat the young women as sisters, and then the older women as mothers.  Of course, women are to treat the young men as brothers and the older men as fathers.  And in those relationships, _a question of untoward attraction isn’t even a question._  Why?  Because the nature of the relationship itself precludes it.  This is what we are to strive toward.  We are always in progress, but that is the goal.  Also, I’m not saying that it’s not difficult, nor that men aren’t visually stimulated.  I’m just saying that neither of those things change what is required.   It doesn’t change the ultimate goal of how we are to view one another.

I think that we in the church could make a lot more progress with this issue if we replaced the "just look away" and "cover up" instruction with something that actually addresses how we view one another, how our relationship with Christ has radically changed our relationship with one another.  I think that men (along with women) have to hear that the attractive women around them are their mothers and their sisters, and that there is only _one_ woman, their wife, present or future, who should be seen sexually.  People might think that's unrealistic, but I think we're having issues with this perpetually (i.e., vast pornography use among young Christian men) because the challenge hasn't gone deep enough.


----------



## Ramya (Dec 28, 2009)

Shimmie said:


> In the Dance Community, the costumes that I see the Dancers perform in are just plain ridiculous !   And they're all competing to be seen.   Just Dance for Heaven's sake.  Let the gift of Dance be displayed, *not their nasty body parts.*    Nobody wants to see that mess onstage.



Interesting word choice with the bold. What parts are considered 'nasty'?


----------



## Laela (Dec 28, 2009)

@the bolded, a caveat to this is that both young men *and *women should be taught *WHY *respect and modesty are important to their spiritual progression. There's nothing worse than telling a child don't do something and refusing to (or not being able to)  explain to them why- so they truly understand. "Because I said so" isn't enough.
Prov 4:7 urges us to strive for understanding.

I believe modesty is VERY important in the Kingdom of God and we can't overlook this because God is a God of order. So yes, if more churches would teach the young men to respect the women and teach the young women to respect themselves, more of us will rise to the challenge. The responsibility can't fall on either sex.  
I also believe modesty in attire is also subjective. I can wear designer clothes and be modest. I can wear any of those outfits in this thread, no matter how 'gaudy' they appear to others and be modest. So, taste in clothing is subjective.  If I came across a loud-mouth, obnoxious woman dressed 'modestly', I'll likely remember how she acted than what she was wearing.
There has to be balance in one's spiritual walk, not just a semblance of balance.

I'm glad you're looking beyond the surface.

I believe a man with a lustful heart will look at a woman in a burqa no differently than one in shorts baring cleavage. Having or developing a discerning spirit (with help from the Holy Spirit), from picking the right clothes, to how to behave or treat others, will iron out any spiritual inequities. This is something the older men/women are charged to teach the younger ones.





nicola.kirwan said:


> (head's up--long post)
> 
> My question is what would happen if men, starting from a young age, were taught that women's bodies were not for their sexual enjoyment?  What if boys and teenagers were told that while there are a lot of sexually attractive women that they will encounter, there is only _one_ woman--his future wife--for whom those feelings can be legitimately entertained or expressed?  And so his job is simply to find that _one _woman (prov. 18:22--he who finds a wife finds a good thing) and to enjoy that _one _woman (prov. 5:19--let her breasts satisfy you _at all times_; and be you _ravished always with her love_) to the exclusion of any other?  IMO, this is what should be taught.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ms Lala (Dec 29, 2009)

CoilyFields said:


> 2. *Leggings are not substitutes for pants. Nor can you wear shorts of any kind (though you may get away with capris in the summer).*
> 
> I was more concerned with the outward appearance than the inside. *But by the unction of the Holy Ghost I began to throw away those clothes* and I still love to shop and fashion but now I choose what is flattering on me and not sexy (except for the bedroom lol), whats modest and not flashy. When I get dressed for church I make sure I can lift my hands, jump up and down, and bend over without exposing anything!
> 
> ...


 
I so agree with this.  I see nothing wrong with leggings under a dress or very long top, it's no different than wearing tights or stockings but they were not meant to be pants IMO and aren't appropriate.   I also agree that it is the Spirit that will correct us in our dress IF we are walking in the Spirit. 



nicola.kirwan said:


> (head's up--long post)
> 
> My question is what would happen if men, starting from a young age, were taught that women's bodies were not for their sexual enjoyment? What if boys and teenagers were told that while there are a lot of sexually attractive women that they will encounter, there is only _one_ woman--his future wife--for whom those feelings can be legitimately entertained or expressed? And so his job is simply to find that _one _woman (prov. 18:22--he who finds a wife finds a good thing) and to enjoy that _one _woman (prov. 5:19--let her breasts satisfy you _at all times_; and be you _ravished always with her love_) to the exclusion of any other? IMO, this is what should be taught.
> 
> ...


 
I just totally appreciate your entire post.  We have to teach and train our young people about their bodies and sexuality from a Godly perspective.  Jesus hung around prositutes and I don't think he was lusting after them but seeing them the way the FAther created them.  I dont' think what you have posted is unrealistic.  God would not give us a standard to live by if we could not do it.  Not only did He give us the standard but He gives us the power of the HOly Spirit to get it done.


----------

