Christian women, would it help men to be less lustful if women's clothing didn't show so much of...

[The Ardent Atheist]

Is it only fit women who show some skin that arouse men or is it skin showing which does it?

As a guy, I'm turned on by that image. I feel guilty because I have a girlfriend, but it's not an intentional reaction. It's just biology, I suppose.

 

[leibowde84]

Lol trust me as a man trying to keep my mind on God, the less of a woman's body that I see, the easier it is to keep my mind on God so helping me would be to make less work by helping me to keep my mind on God.

Making extra work does not help anything. The saying is WORK SMARTER, NOT HARDER.

It is your job, and anyone else's who has trouble "keeping their mind in God", to control their focus. You are merely deflecting your own obligations, falling down to the temptation you speak of saying "unless women don't change their dress, I can't be held fully responsible". I'm sorry, but freedom means that you MUST be OK with others expressing their freedom. Your hypotheses on how you might be doing them a favor, and/or least of all their responsibility to make your life easier, are nothing more than excuses.

 

[SomeRandom]

Anyone remember Kindergarten or Preschool? At an age of roughly 3 - 5 children start learning how to socialize with other humans. It is at this level in schooling that we typically start teaching the age old rule of "keep your hands and feet to yourself."
It is one thing to let off a young child for not minding this rule. It is also reasonable to absolve someone of breaking this rule if done so out of self defense.
But why then must we let off a full grown adult male? Because a woman walks in front of him?
As for modesty, that doesn't do a whole lot for "helping men" when many men are honestly turned on by modesty. Some men find a woman dressed professionally or in a business like suit to be incredibly sexy. So really, even if a woman was dressing modestly, who's to say she's helping any male?

I live near a number of unofficial Nudist beaches. Hell even some "regular" beaches turn a blind eye to nudity. I have not known any hapless Christian male who happened to wander past any said beaches to be so consumed with lust that they turned into a rabid animal and start humping anything in sight.
In addition to the "social contract" we have as humans, self discipline is part of the Christian ethical code, is it not? Then why should anyone else be responsible for said self discipline other than, well, the self trying to do the disciplining?

 

[leibowde84]

Anyone remember Kindergarten or Preschool? At an age of roughly 3 - 5 children start learning how to socialize with other humans. It is at this level in schooling that we typically start teaching the age old rule of "keep your hands and feet to yourself."
It is one thing to let off a young child for not minding this rule. It is also reasonable to absolve someone of breaking this rule if done so out of self defense.
But why then must we let off a full grown adult male? Because a woman walks in front of him?
As for modesty, that doesn't do a whole lot for "helping men" when many men are honestly turned on by modesty. Some men find a woman dressed professionally or in a business like suit to be incredibly sexy. So really, even if a woman was dressing modestly, who's to say she's helping any male?

I live near a number of unofficial Nudist beaches. Hell even some "regular" beaches turn a blind eye to nudity. I have not known any hapless Christian male who happened to wander past any said beaches to be so consumed with lust that they turned into a rabid animal and start humping anything in sight.
In addition to the "social contract" we have as humans, self discipline is part of the Christian ethical code, is it not? Then why should anyone else be responsible for said self discipline other than, well, the self trying to do the disciplining?

Well-put.

 

[SomeRandom]

Well-put.

Thank you

 

[Revoltingest]

Anyone remember Kindergarten or Preschool? At an age of roughly 3 - 5 children start learning how to socialize with other humans. It is at this level in schooling that we typically start teaching the age old rule of "keep your hands and feet to yourself."
It is one thing to let off a young child for not minding this rule. It is also reasonable to absolve someone of breaking this rule if done so out of self defense.
But why then must we let off a full grown adult male? Because a woman walks in front of him?

Is anyone proposing that men be able to touch women who walk in front of them?

 

[SomeRandom]

Is anyone proposing that men be able to touch women who walk in front of them?

Not to my knowledge. But considering that the idea of lust in one's mind is often equated to adultery in one's heart I figured a more literal approach was warranted. The idea being that since lust of the heart is already adultery, the leap from that to "entitled" touching even exclusively in the mind would not be that large of a leap.

But if that particular use of hyperbole is misrepresenting the OP, fair enough. I shall rephrase.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some men would not look twice at a skimpily dressed lady and instead find their lust aroused by a woman dressed rather modestly. This can be highly influenced by culture. For example my friends consider many Bollywood movies to be quite "risqué" but I find the clothing (though vibrant and pretty) tame.
So with that subjectivity in mind how would any standard of modesty from women even be viable or effective?

 

[Revoltingest]

Not to my knowledge. But considering that the idea of lust in one's mind is often equated to adultery in one's heart I figured a more literal approach was warranted. The idea being that since lust of the heart is already adultery, the leap from that to "entitled" touching even exclusively in the mind would not be that large of a leap.

It looks like a huge gulf between lusting in one's heart, & touching.

But if that particular use of hyperbole is misrepresenting the OP, fair enough. I shall rephrase.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some men would not look twice at a skimpily dressed lady and instead find their lust aroused by a woman dressed rather modestly. This can be highly influenced by culture. For example my friends consider many Bollywood movies to be quite "risqué" but I find the clothing (though vibrant and pretty) tame.
So with that subjectivity in mind how would any standard of modesty from women even be viable or effective?

As I see it, modesty standards aren't objectively or even purposefully arrived at.
They're an emergent property of a complex social system.
They will exist.
Lust will exist.
But we can set ethical & legal standards for what behavior is an appropriate response to lust.

 

[SomeRandom]

It looks like a huge gulf between lusting in one's heart, & touching.

Not the way my Catholic RE teachers talked about it, it wasn't. Not to them, at least. Granted they might have been on the more.......erm strict interpretation side of things.

As I see it, modesty standards aren't objectively or even purposefully arrived at.
They're an emergent property of a complex social system.
They will exist.
Lust will exist.
But we can set ethical & legal standards for what behavior is an appropriate response to lust.

True. But does one of those ethical standards have to depend upon the behavior or choice of clothing another human being (man or woman) has?

 

[Revoltingest]

Not the way my Catholic RE teachers talked about it, it wasn't. Not to them, at least. Granted they might have been on the more.......erm strict interpretation side of things.

There certainly are some people who will ignore aspects of reality for a religious agenda.
I'm glad I can see the difference between thoughts & actions.

True. But does one of those ethical standards have to depend upon the behavior or choice of clothing another human being (man or woman) has?

That's a big question.
I can't say what might "have to depend".
But I see some things which are widely practiced, & would be difficult to resist.
When we go to court, judges can impose a dress code upon us.
When we go out in public, cops can arrest us for not meeting local standards.
When I hire an employee, I expect their appearance to not interfere with work.

Example:
A maintenance guy had a naked gal tattooed on his arm. I required him to wear a long sleeve shirt while on the job.
I believe this was both wise & fair.

 

[Draka]

What you wear on your own time for yourself is no one else's business, but what you wear while on someone else's dime and/or representing them is quite another. You don't show up for work at a library or county clerk's office wearing a crop top, spandex shorts and fishnet stockings, but if someone wants to wear that when they go to a bar at night, then fine. Employers have the right to dictate proper dress codes they want reflecting their business. I don't think anyone has argued that. But what people wear on their off time is their business. Now, if they are parading around a look and attitude that is contrary to their employment on social media that has their name attached to their workplace, that is just a bad decision on their part. I do think an employer may have reason to fire in cases like that. Like, if I'm a lawyer and you're my paralegal and you have my business office listed as your workplace on your social media account and show pictures of yourself doing half naked Jello shots at bars, I may not want you working for me anymore as you have portrayed yourself to be a representative of my business and I don't want my business looked at a certain way. Wear what you want, just don't complain if you're not smart about things.

 

[Draka]

BTW, same goes for men as well. Just as @Revoltingest mentioned the tats on the guy's arm, what you wear and how you present yourself has a bearing on the business you are representing. You don't show up for work shirtless with dirty torn up jeans hanging off your butt and your baggy underwear showing, but hey, if you want to sport that look away from work fine, just don't go advertising where you work at the same time. Your employer at Abercrombie & Fitch may not like you as much anymore.

 

[Revoltingest]

A maintenance guy had a naked gal tattooed on his arm. I required him to wear a long sleeve shirt while on the job.
I believe this was both wise & fair.

A fairness question....
If it's wrong to expect women to dress modestly because of how it would affect men,
is it also wrong to expect men to eschew a tattoo because of how it would affect women?

 

[Ouroboros]

As a guy, I'm turned on by that image. I feel guilty because I have a girlfriend, but it's not an intentional reaction. It's just biology, I suppose.

I find glasses (like the geek/librarian style) can be very sexy and a turnon.

So to help me not being enticed by women with spectacles, you all women have to stop wearing those sexy glasses! Right now! Do it now, because according to some Holy Book somewhere I have the right as a guy to tell you things like this. I can allow monocles if eyesight is a problem. M'kay...

 

[Akivah]

As a guy, I'm turned on by that image. I feel guilty because I have a girlfriend, but it's not an intentional reaction. It's just biology, I suppose.

I'm happily married and that picture is still hot!

 

[Draka]

I find glasses (like the geek/librarian style) can be very sexy and a turnon.

So to help me not being enticed by women with spectacles, you all women have to stop wearing those sexy glasses! Right now! Do it now, because according to some Holy Book somewhere I have the right as a guy to tell you things like this. I can allow monocles if eyesight is a problem. M'kay...

I tried to obey, take my glasses off when you said to, but then couldn't read the rest of your post without them. I'm so sorry.

 

[Revoltingest]

I tried to obey, take my glasses off when you said to, but then couldn't read the rest of your post without them. I'm so sorry.

I'm purposely keeping my glasses on just to enthrall him.