Q About Modest Swimwear

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='19 July 2010 - 01:02 PM' timestamp='1279558959' post='2144885']
are you posting this to be inflammatory?
[/quote]
No. However, I foresaw what this thread would turn into, and I was mocking the inevitable debate which has entered the eternal downward spiral until HSMom shuts it down, saving everyone's sanity.

[quote name='Terra Firma' date='19 July 2010 - 01:06 PM' timestamp='1279559191' post='2144888']
Have you ever met notardillacid?


[/quote]
Are you posting this to be inflammatory?

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Hilde' date='19 July 2010 - 04:55 PM' timestamp='1279572926' post='2145081']
lol @ this thread
[/quote]
please tell me you're clothed atm.

jk. although ziggy is starting to freak me out.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' date='19 July 2010 - 01:28 PM' timestamp='1279567734' post='2145020']
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.
[/quote]
I agree that over-sexualization has crept into our Western culture in the past 50 years. There are a number of reasons for that, sociologically, and there is no quick fix for it. I believe that God's grace can have a redemptive effect on any society, even ours ... but we must be open to receiving it. Until that time, we who are aware of the dissonance must protect ourselves from sin as best we can. In my opinion, that means being aware of how people could wrongfully view my body, and being modest in all situations.

I understand you don't share that opinion, and that's fine. If you do decide that you want to go skinny-dipping with your buddies after a long hot day in the fields to wash off the sweat, I'll know that it is in no way sexual.

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='19 July 2010 - 02:35 PM' timestamp='1279571753' post='2145069']
I don't know. We know that there is a lot of nudity in Catholic art, but is any of the nudity from actual models? I have thought about this a bit because we have a art studio near by that now does nude art.
[/quote]
We've talked about nude art on the phorum before, I know. I don't believe it's possible to accurately portray a nude body without a subject. Working from memory or creating a fictional body is unworkable, my artist friends have told me. Unless, of course, you're doing some sort of abstraction.

There is a way the naked human body can be portrayed that is respectful, and is clearly not intended to arouse passion. Pope John Paul II addresses this in the Theology of the Body, 63:5 (Waldstein translation, emphasis his, mistakes mine):
"In the course of the various epochs from antiquity down -- and especially in the great period of classical Greek art -- there are works of art whose subject is the human body in its nakedness, the contemplation of which allows one to concentrate in some way on the whole truth of man, on the dignity and beauty -- even "suprasensual" beauty -- of his masculinity and femininity. These works [i]bear within themselves in a hidden way, as it were, an element of sublimation[/i] that leads the viewer through the body to the whole personal mystery of man. IN contact with such works, we do not feel pushed by their content toward "looking to desire," as the Sermon on the Mount puts it; in some way we learn the spousal meaning of the body, which corresponds to and provides the measure for "purity of heart." But there are also works of art, and perhaps still more often reproductions, that stir up objections in the sphere of man's personal sensibility -- not because of their object, because in itself the human body always has its own inalienable dignity -- but because of the quality or the way of its artistic reproduction, depiction, and representation. Decisive for this mode and for this quality can be the various coefficients of the work or reproduction, as well as many circumstances often of a more technical than artistic nature.
"Through all of these elements, as we know, [i]the same fundamental intentionality[/i] of the work of art or the product of the technologies involved becomes in some way accessible to the viewer, the reader, or the listener. If our personal sensibility reacts with objection and disapproval, the reason is that in this fundamental intentionality, together with the objectification of man and his body, we discover, as something inseparable from the work of art or its reproduction, the simultaneous reduction [of the human person] to the rank [i]of an object, of an object of "enjoyment" intended for the satisfaction of mere concupiscence.[/i] And this is opposed to man's dignity also in the intentional order of art and reproduction. By analogy, one should apply the same point to the various fields of artistic activity -- in each case according to its specific character -- and likewise to the various audiovisual technologies."

[Lil Red]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='19 July 2010 - 01:59 PM' timestamp='1279573197' post='2145087']
No. However, I foresaw what this thread would turn into, and I was mocking the inevitable debate which has entered the eternal downward spiral until HSMom shuts it down, saving everyone's sanity.
[/quote]
she is a wise, wise woman.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 July 2010 - 05:01 PM' timestamp='1279573277' post='2145088']
please tell me you're clothed atm.

jk. although ziggy is starting to freak me out.
[/quote]

You started it, dude! You and your crazy stories about what sounded like good Catholics being all "who cares" in co-ed showers! Now I'm curious if European Catholics try to justify it.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 05:06 PM' timestamp='1279573581' post='2145094']
You started it, dude! You and your crazy stories about what sounded like good Catholics being all "who cares" in co-ed showers! Now I'm curious if European Catholics try to justify it.
[/quote]
Touché. I am also curious about that btw. The fact that they seem to justify speedos is bad enough. hehehe.

[Hilde]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='19 July 2010 - 11:58 PM' timestamp='1279573127' post='2145086']
Don't you live in Europe? What are the opinions of practicing Catholics over there regarding co-ed showers and non-sexual nudity in general?
[/quote]
You know I've never asked. And I've never really heard of co-ed showers before.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 July 2010 - 05:07 PM' timestamp='1279573661' post='2145096']
Touché. I am also curious about that btw. The fact that they seem to justify speedos is bad enough. hehehe.
[/quote]

If the Devil's greatest trick was convincing the world he doesn't exist, then his greatest annoyance is when someone sees a fat man in a speedo and reevaluates the data.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 July 2010 - 04:07 PM' timestamp='1279573661' post='2145096']
Touché. I am also curious about that btw. The fact that they seem to justify speedos is bad enough. hehehe.
[/quote]
They also seem to have nothing against topless sunbathing at public beaches.

[button16]

It might be worth mentioning a tshirt would need to be worn over cut out one pieces, as some one pieces can be worse than a bikini.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 July 2010 - 04:52 PM' timestamp='1279572774' post='2145079']
I think it is interesting that Dietrich von Hildebrand grew up around art, his dad being a celebrated sculptor for one thing, and he must have seen and appreciated a great deal of art which featured nude forms. And yet, when he was a teenager, his father one day called him to the studio where he said there was a nude woman of absolutely flawless beauty. He eagerly urged his son to come and enjoy this singular opportunity to look upon absolutely pristine and sublime feminine beauty (his father had no doubt seen hundreds of nude models so this was no joke). Dietrich's response was to firmly decline his father's invitation. Being dumbfounded he asked why it was that his son would forsake such an extraordinary vision, to which Dietrich explained that it was his resolution to gaze upon the nakedness of no woman other than his bride, that it was his future bride who would be his most sublime vision of feminine beauty.
[/quote]
Awesome. Just magnificent.


Also, WYD stories!

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='19 July 2010 - 03:02 PM' timestamp='1279569772' post='2145046']
Co-ed showers (like co-ed bathrooms and floors) are of course a violation of chastity - a misuse of our sexuality. Huxley's point is how sex is no longer a Sacramental reality, a gift or self-donation of being, but a commodity to be controlled and used in a utilitarian fashion.
[/quote]

I'd disagree that co-ed bathrooms and floors are, in and of themselves, a violation of chastity and a misuse of our sexuality. But, I also can see your point of view, too. I think it is the effect on the individual, and how it affects their faith that is ultimately important. But, I don't feel it is my place to decide what is the "right" answer for someone else. My own children, perhaps (if I had any). But, learning to live with people of different backgrounds and values is an important part of college, IMO.

The main reason I brought up coed bathrooms and floors was because I was surprised at how "unsexual" they were. Despite that, I think I personally would be uncomfortable with coed floors and coed bathrooms, but that is me. (Actually, my preference would be for a bathroom of my own.) And, as I said, at my niece's university, there are so many dorms that there is a very wide range of living arrangements--many more options than I had when I went to college--so no one has to live somewhere where they are uncomfortable. In fact, most of the dorms do NOT have coed bathrooms.

And, although I may have this wrong, although the university requires freshman to live in the dorms, a student can apply for a waiver, for example, if they live with their parents, or are married, or if the range of dorm options still doesn't meet the requirements of their religion. But, for example, some dorms have all single rooms, with single-sex floors, and private bathrooms, so the range of options is very large.

A clarification: The coed bathrooms do NOT have co-ed showers in the sense that anyone sees anyone else without clothes. The showers are single showers with walls (and I think, relatively high walls). I have never heard from my niece of any incidents of anyone violating someone else's privacy--that could be grounds for suspension or expulsion. The older dorms that were intended for men still have urinals in the bathroom, but the urinals are not out in the open for anyone to see, and have a curtain covering the opening. The newest dorms have some floors with coed bathrooms (although I have no idea why, since the dorm was coed from the beginning, it would have been just as easy to build two, smaller, single-sex bathrooms). But, the co-ed bathrooms in the new new dorm have no urinals at all.

Also, I should have clarified that, for the bathroom to be coed, the entire floor must agree. Although most floors have been fine with a coed bathroom, in some cases, floors have voted that while the bathroom is coed, the showers are not coed, and one gender has to go to the floor above or below to shower.

And, of course, no one is required to attend a secular school. Whatever my own values, I try to keep in mind that other people do not share the same values. The decision of where to live is between a student and his or her parents. Personally, I have seen no negative impact on my niece from living on a coed floor, with a coed bathroom. And, she doesn't see it as an issue at all. I have been very impressed when I've visited my niece that there is very much a friend/brother/sister relationship between the sexes. My niece feels much more comfortable around guys than I did at her age.

Added note: When I say coed floors, shared rooms have two people of the same gender. My niece's university, like many others, now offers the option, for sophomores and up, of two people of the opposite gender sharing a room. However, there are a number of checks and balances in place so that no one is ever asked to share a room with a person of the opposite gender unless that is their specific choice. And, if I remember correctly, when students chose dorm rooms for next year something like 2% of students chose this option. And, in most cases it was just two friends who happened to be of the opposite gender--not people in relationships. So, although this is an option, it is rarely chosen.

Some people say that it is impossible for two people of the opposite gender to be friends without it becoming sexual. I say balderdash. In grad school, one of my male friends from Berkeley also came to UCLA. We spent lots of time together, and there was never a thought of it becoming sexual. I was not attracted to him, and he was not attracted to me. Plus, he was the boyfriend of the woman who had been my roommate all through college. It would have felt like incest. Perhaps it is unusual or difficult for two people of opposite genders to be close friends, but it IS possible.

Again, I don't expect you to agree with all (or anything) I've written. But, it is another point of view.

Edited July 19, 2010 by IgnatiusofLoyola

[IgnatiusofLoyola]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 July 2010 - 03:17 PM' timestamp='1279570628' post='2145055']
I somehow ended up in a coed locker room type of thing twice while in Italy for WYD one time. Very, very bizarre experience. During that same trip I somehow ended up as the lone male on a bus full of young South American ladies which turned into the Castle Anthrax.

But yeah, coed showers, bathrooms, locker rooms, any of that, is just wrong. I must leave it at that. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif[/img]

Btw, in all of these instances the people involved were WYD2000 pilgrims, which makes it even weirder. I've actually got a lot of scandalous stories from that particular WYD but I must spare the poor people of phatmass. Europe can be... different. lol.
[/quote]

L-D, I love you, but you are cruel. You taunt us hints of what happened at WYD2000 in Europe, and then don't tell the stories.

For the first time, I wish we had the Back Alley. I have lived too long to be scandalized by very much--very little could be worse than what went on in San Francisco in the "60's and 70's. And, I doubt that any stories are going to change my view of the Catholic church or cause me to go out and engage in ungodly acts. (Not that anyone would have me.)

The medication I have to take has removed virtually all feelings of lust for me. And, since I am not married, I am very pleased about that--one less sin to worry about. If I ever get married again (about as likely as Cardinal Arinze becoming a Presbyterian) I will change my medication.

[Sarah147]

On the topic of swimwear, a few years ago I really began to think about chastity and modesty in all areas of my life, including clothing. The swimwear and all clothing was so much more modest, say in the 50s, and earlier.

On that real-life TV series with the Christian family of like 18 children, I saw an episode where the young newly married daughter was at the beach with her husband, and I saw such wonderful, modest beach wear on her! It was with a skirt-like thing that went to her knees and everything was pretty loose and covered well, not slim fitting. The tight, skin fit on most outfits is lacking modesty, but her outfit was just right.

It looked sort of like the muslim site photo:
http://www.muslim-swimwear.com/images/modest_fit_pandora.jpg
Without headwear nor leggings.

[CatherineM]

I got out to lunch, and come back to mayhem. I do use a co-ed shower room at our local swimming pool. There are family change rooms that also double as the handicap accessible shower area. It's a strange mix of little squealing kids trying to wiggle out of their swimsuits, and elderly ladies with walkers. At least for me, it is as far from anything sexual that I can imagine.