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

[savagewind]

And nice suits?

Some men should cover their face.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some men should cover their face.

I found veils too uncomfortable in warm weather.
So I found an alternative.
If I wear a loud enuf shirt, it distracts'm from me mug.

 

[Sunstone]

I agree that it would be immoral to stare at someone & make them uncomfortable....unless the victim is a lawyer.

For once, we actually agree on something.

But the issue of calling the police made it about the law.
I addressed that.

My bad. I was actually imagining a situation in which the restaurant management asked the guy to leave and he wouldn't. I should have either not mentioned the cops or have spelled out what I was thinking.

 

[Thanda]

I think you are cleverly avoiding the point. I'll take that as a concession that you've run out of legitimate arguments to make.

I'm neither avoiding nor conceding anything, unfortunately. I am looking for the consistency in your argument and I cannot find it. You feel a woman should be allowed to dress however she feels (within the law) without regard to how uncomfortable others might feel and yet she should be protected from those who would stare at her if it makes her feel uncomfortable. Or rather you feel it is morally right (or at least okay) for a woman to dress in a way that makes others feel uncomfortable but that it is morally wrong for someone (especially a man) to stare at her in a way that makes her feel uncomfortable.

The issue here is that there is no guarantee that someone who is stared at will feel uncomfortable just as there is no guarantee that someone who sees a scantily clad young woman will feel uncomfortable.

The other issue is that, in the end, this all boils down to respect and common decency. Yes I would say it is indecent to stare at people but then I would also say it is indecent for a woman to show too much flesh - because both make people uncomfortable (albeit for different reasons). This is the consistency I am talking about.

 

[savagewind]

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.

I am sure it is your idea of women's skin that takes your mind off God. It isn't women' s skin that does it.
1 Thessalonians 4:11

 

[RRex]

That seems awfully unfair to Muslims.

I wish women wore healthier & more comfortable shoes.
There....I said it....I'm a misogynist.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm neither avoiding nor conceding anything, unfortunately. I am looking for the consistency in your argument and I cannot find it. You feel a woman should be allowed to dress however she feels (within the law) without regard to how uncomfortable others might feel and yet she should be protected from those who would stare at her if it makes her feel uncomfortable. Or rather you feel it is morally right (or at least okay) for a woman to dress in a way that makes others feel uncomfortable but that it is morally wrong for someone (especially a man) to stare at her in a way that makes her feel uncomfortable.
The issue here is that there is no guarantee that someone who is stared at will feel uncomfortable just as there is no guarantee that someone who sees a scantily clad young woman will feel uncomfortable.
The other issue is that, in the end, this all boils down to respect and common decency. Yes I would say it is indecent to stare at people but then I would also say it is indecent for a woman to show too much flesh - because both make people uncomfortable (albeit for different reasons). This is the consistency I am talking about.

The golden rule is look, but don't touch.
It also helps to look all one wants, but being mindful of the other's comfort.

I once had some gal stare at me, walk up to me, & ask me a question about my tits (pectorals, actually).
Women can be quite forward to, eh.

 

[savagewind]

Sorry if it sounded like to you I was asking should things be banned or should women be forced to dress a certain way. I'm careful about links so I didn't click on your link but I was not saying that force should be applied to women in any kind of way.

I was asking women's opinions on what would help men, assuming of course that they want to help.

I think that modest dress might help the woman. The men should mind their own business.

 

[Revoltingest]

I can imagine problems in some cultures, but I wouldn't attribute them to Muslims in general.
That just isn't the culture here in this heavily Muslim area.....nor in many others.

 

[Thanda]

It also helps to look all one wants, but being mindful of the other's comfort.

I agree. But I think we should be worried about everyone's comfort - not just the scantily clad woman's.

I once had some gal stare at me, walk up to me, & ask me a question about my tits (pectorals, actually).
Women can be quite forward to, eh.

You've had a very charmed life

 

[Revoltingest]

I agree. But I think we should be worried about everyone's comfort - not just the scantily clad woman's.

Of course.
I didn't limit it to scantily clad women.
Even fully clothed men deserve consideration.

You've had a very charmed life

I didn't tell you the best part.
I was being paid the whole time by the gym where I worked.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm neither avoiding nor conceding anything, unfortunately. I am looking for the consistency in your argument and I cannot find it. You feel a woman should be allowed to dress however she feels (within the law) without regard to how uncomfortable others might feel and yet she should be protected from those who would stare at her if it makes her feel uncomfortable. Or rather you feel it is morally right (or at least okay) for a woman to dress in a way that makes others feel uncomfortable but that it is morally wrong for someone (especially a man) to stare at her in a way that makes her feel uncomfortable.

The issue here is that there is no guarantee that someone who is stared at will feel uncomfortable just as there is no guarantee that someone who sees a scantily clad young woman will feel uncomfortable.

The other issue is that, in the end, this all boils down to respect and common decency. Yes I would say it is indecent to stare at people but then I would also say it is indecent for a woman to show too much flesh - because both make people uncomfortable (albeit for different reasons). This is the consistency I am talking about.

Again, your argument rests on what I consider a false analogy between someone being made merely uncomfortable by a woman's manner of dress, and someone actually feeling threatened by a person staring at them. I can see how, if you equate the two, you would believe you have a consistent argument. But I do not believe the two can be so perfectly equated.

Unless one or the other budges on that issue, I don't see this argument going much further, do you?

 

[crossfire]

I agree. But I think we should be worried about everyone's comfort - not just the scantily clad woman's.



You've had a very charmed life

Actually, oftentimes it really doesn't matter how much clothing you wear. It's the woman that the men are distracted by, not the clothes. Blaming the clothes won't solve anything, except make the problem worse. It only skirts around (pardon the pun) the issue instead of addressing it.

 

[Skwim]

Just came across the thread here, and not wanting to wade through all the previous 173 posts I'm going to assume this point hasn't been brought up yet and offer the following observation:

What we find appealing is often relative.

At one time a two piece swim suit was considered very alluring, (note the covered belly button)

Spoiler: click for image

before that women were attracting us guys with form-fitting swimming suits and bare legs

Spoiler: click for image

These were preceded by suits that dared to show knees and a bit of bare thigh. WOW!

Spoiler: click for image

And before these, guys were all salivating over women who showed a little ankle and bare feet.

Spoiler: click for image

Point is: In their time each of these had men lusting for staring at women, but after that they lost their appeal. Even today the traditional bikini

Spoiler: click for image

has lost its allure to more revealing variations.

Spoiler: click for image

and more (it's a mannequin folks).

Spoiler: click for image

Where does it go from here? But I'm pretty sure the allure will fade and eventually become ho hum.


It's all relative. So, face it, we won't be going back to

Spoiler: click for image

or even

Spoiler: click for image

 

[savagewind]

Cover the women's breasts. Hide her behind behind a skirt (no pants). Cover her neck and her hands. The skirt must reach the floor because some women have beautiful calfs. Her hair should be modest too. Yes? Some women's hands are pretty nice. Gloves for that. In the summer too? Hell yes!

I wanted to know if pajama type clothes (real baggy which cover it all but the neck and the head) are modest or immodest.

Are men type clothes on women modest or immodest?

 

[crossfire]

Cover the women's breasts. Hide her behind behind a skirt (no pants). Cover her neck and her hands. The skirt must reach the floor because some women have beautiful calfs. Her hair should be modest too. Yes? Some women's hands are pretty nice. Gloves for that. In the summer too? Hell yes!

[satire] Better yet, they shouldn't go out in public at all! No one could possibly be expected to act civilized around them![/satire]

 

[savagewind]

Are red clothes on women modest or immodest? How about on men?

When will handsome men learn to cover their face?

Everyone should be ordered to wear dark glasses. Men and women. OK?

 

[Thana]

...didn't show so much of their bodies?

Thanx for all answers.

Bro. Adam

(*Edited after seeing how words could be misunderstood.)

I live in Australia, and it gets hot. Like, crazy hot. And when it gets hot, things that are considered skimpy are the only things most women wear because like I said, it's friggin hot.
Or sometimes if you've been stupid and are running late (As I always am) and do a dry shave of your legs, even wearing loose pants burns and stings so you have to wear something really short. Or it's wash day, and all you've got left in your closet are the trendy things you bought as a teenager that are tight and more skimpy than trendy now that you're an adult. Or maybe you have a date tonight with your girlfriend and you want to wear something sexy for her.

Honestly there are dozens of reasons why women show more of their bodies, and very few of them actually have anything to do with men or getting their attention.

So as a Christian woman, If you're expecting me to cover up, then you'd best be willing to do the same. Heaven forbid I lose myself staring at your naked, manly chest and run you down like an animal. I mean, what do you expect? Me to actually control my desire? Puh-lease, Nobody is capable of that.

 

[crossfire]

[satire] Better yet, they shouldn't go out in public at all! No one could possibly be expected to act civilized around them![/satire]

Even if you put them in a Burkha, you can still smell them! So, do we put nose plugs on all the men so they can't smell the women, and put sunglasses smeared with vaseline on them so they can't see the women?

 

[savagewind]

Even if you put them in a Burkha, you can still smell them! So, do we put nose plugs on all the men so they can't smell the women, and put sunglasses smeared with vaseline on them so they can't see the women?

Two planets is what is needed.