Q About Modest Swimwear

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 July 2010 - 11:58 AM' timestamp='1279565929' post='2144990']
http://www.modbeclothing.com/

P.S. I guess the company has changed hands or something.

[i]"DownEast plans to expand the Modbe line throughout the 2010-2011 calendar years with a commitment to the original Modbe traditions of high quality and modest styles at attractive pricepoints."[/i]

Maybe they have a different idea of what is modest because what I'm seeing is different from what I remember. Like, what happened to the swimming skirt things?
[/quote]
downeast has some good stuff (if it's the same company i'm thinking of), but not always necessarily modest.

[Ziggamafu]

1. Shirts for swimming is literally ridiculous and will make the kids feel like being Christian means looking like a goob.

2. Young people, say 11-22 (and especially the puberty years) are hormonally in an almost constant sex-drive, even unknowingly. No matter what precautions are taken, their brains / bodies will find some way to turn it into yet another means of lust. (I'm being facetious here, but just a tiny bit).

3. You gotta do what you can. I would say that girls should wear one pieces and if they only have a bikini then they have to wear shirts. Don't subject the guys to that kind of lunacy, though. A man's chest has traditionally (other than in a small, puritanical period of [i]American [/i]history) not been considered a private part.

4. I would also teach the kids that it is okay to notice and appreciate the beauty of a body - all of its parts - and that sin only occurs in objectifying the body, reducing it to a thing for your own selfish pleasure, as if it were not irrevocably tied to a spirit deliberately created by God; a sacred temple, and more, a person. Modesty is a means to helping us not shift from an appreciation and enjoyment of beauty / attractiveness to objectification. Telling a kid not to look at the pretty parts covered by a tee-shirt is like telling a kid not to think about a pink elephant. Maybe more like (laughably) covering an elephant with a blanket and tell a kid not to imagine what's underneath.

Conclusion: I don't know. My fourth point wrestles with my third a bit. There's gotta be some balance.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='MIkolbe' date='19 July 2010 - 03:09 PM' timestamp='1279566578' post='2144998']
I try to stay away from the ocean or other open water...even though they have outlawed whaling, i still feel uncomfortable.
[/quote]
i don't know how to swim, but i decided to go into the ocean last week. I didn't wear a swim suit. I went in with all my clothes on. My friends laughed at me, but they stopped when the waves forced me into razor sharp barnacles. Blood flowed everywhere. I didn't see any sharks, so that was a good thing. Didn't see any whales either, for that matter.

I wouldn't go to Alaska if I were you...

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 03:15 PM' timestamp='1279566942' post='2145006']
1. Shirts for swimming is literally ridiculous and will make the kids feel like being Christian means looking like a goob.

2. Young people, say 11-22 (and especially the puberty years) are hormonally in an almost constant sex-drive, even unknowingly. No matter what precautions are taken, their brains / bodies will find some way to turn it into yet another means of lust. (I'm being facetious here, but just a tiny bit).

3. You gotta do what you can. I would say that girls should wear one pieces and if they only have a bikini then they have to wear shirts. Don't subject the guys to that kind of lunacy, though. A man's chest has traditionally (other than in a small, puritanical period of [i]American [/i]history) not been considered a private part.

4. I would also teach the kids that it is okay to notice and appreciate the beauty of a body - all of its parts - and that sin only occurs in objectifying the body, reducing it to a thing for your own selfish pleasure, as if it were not irrevocably tied to a spirit deliberately created by God; a sacred temple, and more, a person. Modesty is a means to helping us not shift from an appreciation and enjoyment of beauty / attractiveness to objectification. Telling a kid not to look at the pretty parts covered by a tee-shirt is like telling a kid not to think about a pink elephant. Maybe more like (laughably) covering an elephant with a blanket and tell a kid not to imagine what's underneath.

Conclusion: I don't know. My fourth point wrestles with my third a bit. There's gotta be some balance.
[/quote]
Ziggy, you're a riot I agree with the guys and shirts thing. But on the other hand, underarmour wouldn't hurt (maybe for the practicality of sunblock).

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 03:15 PM' timestamp='1279566942' post='2145006']
3. You gotta do what you can. I would say that girls should wear one pieces and if they only have a bikini then they have to wear shirts. Don't subject the guys to that kind of lunacy, though. A man's chest has traditionally (other than in a small, puritanical period of [i]American [/i]history) not been considered a private part.
[/quote]

I will remember this when I am on the beach next week and subject to fabulously tanned lifeguards with ripped abs.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='19 July 2010 - 02:35 PM' timestamp='1279564540' post='2144978']
It's a fallacy to think that homosexuality wasn't around in your grandparents' day. It just wasn't talked about as openly.

Human beings have been sinful since Adam (except the one who was also Divine). There's a reason that there are verses about homosexuality in the Bible, and it isn't because our Christian forefathers lived in idyllic times when there was no sexual sin or immorality and they were just being proactive.
[/quote]


[quote name='Terra Firma' date='19 July 2010 - 02:53 PM' timestamp='1279565629' post='2144985']
Perhaps not, but Socrates wasn't talking about public affirmation of homosexual behavior.

He'd like to swim naked with a bunch of his male friends without there being anything sexual to it, just like apparently his grandparents did. My point is that there's no guarantee there wasn't something sexual to it back in his grandparents' day ... it just may not have been voiced.

IMO lust is no less disturbing if it's not openly acknowledged, and it can be just as damaging to the individual who lusts even if it is never expressed. The level of social acceptance of a particular practice has no bearing on this particular issue, imo.
[/quote]
Again, completely missing the point. I didn't say I had a desire to swim naked with male buddies - my point was simply how everything's become over-sexualized in a way it wasn't 70 years ago. I never claimed homosexual sin did not exist back then, or any other time. But I certainly feel safe in saying it was much less prevalent, and less accepted, than it is today.

My point is that there has always in society been a difference between what level of dress and whatnot is acceptable with the same sex and what is acceptable in mixed company. It's been that way in every sane society.
This is the reason that to this day public bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms are segregated by sex (though "progressives" are working to change that in places like California). We don't make exceptions to the rule for people with "SSA." I see no need to change these norms.
That was my only point, and it looks like you're reading way too much into it.

Lust is an act of the will, and there will be some people who lust in any situation. It's simply impossible to prevent that.
I just don't think public same-sex showers and locker rooms really present a serious occasion of sin in most cases. The circumstances generally make it quite awkward to engage in such behavior, or even do something that would give the appearance of it. It's generally a bad idea for a man to stare at another's genitals in a public setting, and people generally move quickly and keep eyes to themselves.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Socrates

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Socrates' date='19 July 2010 - 03:28 PM' timestamp='1279567734' post='2145020']
I didn't say I had a desire to swim naked with male buddies
[/quote]

I'm glad you cleared that up...

[Resurrexi]

Modesty is always important, but one should also keep in mind that kids will be turned off by excessively strict rules in regard to what they can wear.

[Ziggamafu]

I just got a good lol from your post, Socrates. This is all stuff you shouldn't have to say out loud. Ever. Especially the bit about men not pausing to gaze upon each other in the shower. How absurd.

It would be fun if you, Winchester, me, and St. Olaf could all hang out some time. I'm betting that it would be an awesomely masculine adventure.

Anyway, HCF: Maybe men should wear fancy tents like the women in extremist Muslim societies. Personally, I discovered a few years ago that averting my eyes from pretty bodies merely triggers a "pink elephant" reaction in my brain. We are not wired to ignore or suppress beauty. We are wired to admire it and elevate it, especially when it is the human body. Merely appreciate the beauty and move on.

Appreciating the beauty and moving on was my nearly 100% effective method of NOT objectifying the man in the shower next to me.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Ziggamafu

[Lil Red]

i guess i have a different opinion if it is communal showers. i don't want to have others look at me

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 03:38 PM' timestamp='1279568314' post='2145026']
Anyway, HCF: Maybe men should wear fancy tents like the women in extremist Muslim societies. Personally, I discovered a few years ago that averting my eyes from pretty bodies merely triggers a "pink elephant" reaction in my brain. We are not wired to ignore or suppress beauty. We are wired to admire it and elevate it, especially when it is the human body. Merely appreciate the beauty and move on.
[/quote]

I apologize for having created such a dramatic reaction. I simply wanted to make you aware that women are also visually stimulated. Since women do not have to worry as much as men about this on a daily basis (at the mall, at the movies, etc.) when a woman goes to the beach and sees attractive, fit, "half-naked" men, it is a bit of a "shock" and can quickly lead to lust.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 03:38 PM' timestamp='1279568314' post='2145026']
I just got a good lol from your post, Socrates. This is all stuff you shouldn't have to say out loud. Ever. Especially the bit about men not pausing to gaze upon each other in the shower. How absurd.[/quote]
Sorry, maybe that was a bit much. I was just trying to explain to these ladies who think we need to cover up in showers to prevent homosexual lust.

[quote]
It would be fun if you, Winchester, me, and St. Olaf could all hang out some time. I'm betting that it would be an awesomely masculine adventure.[/quote]That would be cool. We'd all be fully clothed, of course.

[quote]
Appreciating the beauty and moving on was my nearly 100% effective method of NOT objectifying the man in the shower next to me.[/quote]LOL

[Brother Adam]

There is nothing wrong with nakedness in segregated communal showers, but some people just prefer to cover during those times in life, which is also fine. This is why we are called to practice temperance and fortitude. Each person should take steps to practice a certain level of modesty for their own bodies - it is not "manly" to be immodest, and each person needs to give a certain level of protection to their own minds so as to not lust. As I said when we went to Cedar Point, not everyone dresses appropriately so you are going to be presented with choices, let's make the right ones.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Brother Adam

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 02:15 PM' timestamp='1279566942' post='2145006']
1. Shirts for swimming is literally ridiculous and will make the kids feel like being Christian means looking like a goob.

2. Young people, say 11-22 (and especially the puberty years) are hormonally in an almost constant sex-drive, even unknowingly. No matter what precautions are taken, their brains / bodies will find some way to turn it into yet another means of lust. (I'm being facetious here, but just a tiny bit).

3. You gotta do what you can. I would say that girls should wear one pieces and if they only have a bikini then they have to wear shirts. Don't subject the guys to that kind of lunacy, though. A man's chest has traditionally (other than in a small, puritanical period of [i]American [/i]history) not been considered a private part.

4. I would also teach the kids that it is okay to notice and appreciate the beauty of a body - all of its parts - and that sin only occurs in objectifying the body, reducing it to a thing for your own selfish pleasure, as if it were not irrevocably tied to a spirit deliberately created by God; a sacred temple, and more, a person. Modesty is a means to helping us not shift from an appreciation and enjoyment of beauty / attractiveness to objectification. Telling a kid not to look at the pretty parts covered by a tee-shirt is like telling a kid not to think about a pink elephant. Maybe more like (laughably) covering an elephant with a blanket and tell a kid not to imagine what's underneath.

Conclusion: I don't know. My fourth point wrestles with my third a bit. There's gotta be some balance.
[/quote]

I think your post is very wise. God made us so that we are attracted to the opposite sex, so that the human race will not die out.

Although we can do our best not to make things worse, we know that even completely separating young men and women (such as sending them to different schools) doesn't stop young men and women from thinking of each other.

On one hand, we have the responsibility not to add to others' sexual feelings. But, in our society, that does not mean covering from head to toe.

On the other hand, it is our own responsibility to learn how to handle our own thoughts and feelings (with the help of God). It is not the other person's responsibility to keep me from feeling lust (beyond general bounds of good taste in dress and behavior that make things worse).

I don't work with teenagers, so I have no idea what are the best guidelines for dress. But I think you've made an excellent point, Zigg, that the real goal is not to stop us from thinking and enjoying members of the opposite sex (not that we could stop it anyway), but to work on not objectifying members of the opposite sex. Also, I fear sometimes that we could go too far, and end up giving teenagers the idea that their bodies are evil, or that sex, in the context of marriage, is anything but a beautiful thing and a gift from God.

And, I know others will feel differently, but when I was in my teens, I found that the more time I spent with guys, the less I saw them as objects, and the more I saw them as real people and friends. From my niece's accounts of what it is like to live in a dorm with coed floors and a coed bathroom, it doesn't sound like there is any more sex going on than went on in my all-female dorm in college. If anything, the guys in the coed dorms become friends, and like brothers. And, at least for women, seeing guys' messy dorm rooms, with their smelly socks on the floor, etc. seems to have the positive effect of dampening young women's romantic (and unrealistic) fantasies of what it would be like to be married. That is not to say that sex and romance don't happen. But, they happen in any secular dorm. (In college, I lived in a very secular dorm, and still managed to live my very strong Christian values.) My view is that, in the end, it is the individual who is responsible for living their values, whatever the environment. My niece's dorm is anything but a constant orgy--except perhaps an orgy of studying.

I know posters will disagree with my last paragraph, and that's fine. I certainly have no "perfect answer" for college living that works for everyone. BTW--My niece's university offers the option of living in dorms where the floors are all women or all men, and no coed bathrooms. In fact many dorm rooms have their own bathroom. So, students can pick the living environment that best fits their values and where they feel most comfortable, and no one is forced to live in where they are uncomfortable.

Edited July 19, 2010 by IgnatiusofLoyola

[Ziggamafu]

I remember the shower scene from [unnamed sci-fi movie], which hypothesized co-ed showers in the distant future. And then there's the public school scene in Huxley's [i]Brave New World[/i]. I can't imagine the acceptance of co-ed nudity; I wonder how moral theologians reconcile modesty with nude art? Obviously it is acceptable, but does nude art (and the process of making it, often by means of nude models) shine light on modesty issues in other areas of society (e.g., public swimming and public bathing)?

Weird to think about. Anyway, I do think that excessive prudishness actually increases the struggle to be chaste.

Edit: Meh. Some people might go searching for what could be a scandalous movie scene for them. Apologies; I've removed the name of the movie.

Edited July 19, 2010 by Ziggamafu