Modesty Vs. Morality

[Azriel]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Apr 21 2004, 09:35 AM'] Several thoughts:

Lust is a choice. It begins when you objectify the person you are looking at. This can occur anywhere, no matter what the person is wearing, and can happen in marriage as well.

Clothing choices of men and women can use improvement. We know this.But few women are willing to cover every inch of their body just in case a man can't control his mind( unless you are islamic)

Young girls do not really understand the physical effect they can have on the teenage male, because we don't respond quite the same way. Girls do bear a responsibility to cover all parts up. Boys have the responsibility to say to a girl, your clothing or lack of it, makes me uncomtfortable. Boys have a hard time saying this,.unless the girl happens to be [u]their[/u] sister or girlfriend.

And some girls, you could them in a burka, and still have a male respond in lust.

We are Temples of the Holy Spirit, not display cases. Every culture has a different view to what constitutes a display case. [/quote]
Thank you Mom.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Jake Huether' date='Apr 21 2004, 11:46 AM'] WWMD.

What would Mary do?

If it was culturally acceptable - do you think she'd wear a bikini?  HIGHLY unlikely.  Short sleave shirt and shorts are different.  There is absolutly NO need for a string Bikini?  What for?  What good is it other than to show off "your stuff".  If the Bikini was the very last swim article on the face of the earth, then maybe the argument is justified.  But if a girl goes out to buy a bikini, I see no justification.  It is a stumbling block for men (me in particular).  I'm not passing the sin off on others - I try my hardest as it is! Guys like me need all the help they can get.  There are indeed modest 2 piece swimmsuits.  The midsection of a young lady is not quite as offensive as the whole breast save for a little stip of clothe over the center.

If you ask me, yes, bikini wearing IS a sin.  There is no justification for it other than 1.) lustful intentions, 2.) prideful intentions, 3.) vanity.

In the event that the bikini is used by a person who is by themselves with their husband (or by themselves) MAYBE there is justification - but if that is the case, why not just go nude?? [/quote]
Jake if you lived on a beach in California or Brazil or Hawaii and saw bikinis all day long, every day, would it still be an occasion of sin?
If you lived in a place like that, then a woman would come walking out in an full length evening gown, woiuldn't that male response kick in?


Its not just exposure, but habituation and novelty at work here as well.

Edited April 21, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[Sojourner]

Amen, Cmom.

[Dave]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Apr 21 2004, 11:54 AM'] Its not just exposure, but habituation and novelty at work here as well. [/quote]
Yep, I'd have to agree with that. Like I said earlier, if I'm in an area where all the women will be dressed like that, subconsciously my defenses go up.

It's when I'm not expecting to see girls like that that my defenses are down.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Apr 21 2004, 10:04 AM'] I have to say that I’m disturbed by the sentiment I see displayed here that a woman wearing a bikini [i]causes [/i]a man to lust. Yes, we need to be respectful of our brothers in the way we dress. Yes, we need to be respectful of our bodies in the way we dress.

But when a person lusts, it is [i]his or her choice [/i]to do so. Take some responsibility for your own sin. Don’t pin it all on your sisters. The whole point of the cross is that we can get past “the woman made me do it. We're given a way to untwist the sin within our own hearts.

I’m not saying that we shouldn’t confront one another in love, and keep one another accountable for our actions … but there’s a line we need to walk that I’m not sure we’re on here.

Just some observations.

Abby [/quote]
A couple comments here:


By your logic a person could walk around naked becasue after all it would be other peoples chioce to look at them and lust after them.

No, we are accountable for the sins we help others commit. And this goes for both mn and women. If a guy is wearing some skimpy little swimsuit that leaves very little to the imagination (a thought that makes me sick to my stomach) he is equally in the wrong as if a woman was doing it. This is not a male vs. female thing, but rather, a universal appeal to modesty.

It must be admitted that our actions can have spiritual ramifications for other people. If I engage in some activity that causes scandal, that leads my neighbor to sin (acknowledging that he or she freely chooses) I am guilty of having done so. I would be providing a near occasion of sin for my neighbor. That is a sinful action. Lk 17:1 states "Temptations to sin are sure to come, but woe to him by whom they come." The CCC states (2284) that scandal is "an attitude otr behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor's tempter." It goes on to say that a person who gives scandal is "responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged."

Any immodesty falls within that, certainly wearing a bikini.

Women must also acknowledge that for better or worse, men are more easily attracted by mere visual images. So in some sense this does place a heavier burden on women who have to be more attentive to that fact. But that in no way removes the responsibility men must have to execise custody of their eyes. The fact of the matter is that we are all in this together. We are not individual wandering beings looking for our own way, but members of the Mystical Body of Christ, morally bound to assist our neighbor in achieving salvation. That is not done by selfishly placing stumbling blocks there for him/her. We will be held accountable for those stumbling blocks that we have placed before our neighbor. One of the worst stunbling blocks for modern man (and this was alluded to by the Blessed Virgin at Lourdes) is immodest dress. There is simply no way in hell that anyone can claim that a bikini (just as an example) is modest. To do so is to lose all intellectual credibility. A bikini is a very tiny step (some smaller than others) from outright nudity.

[Azriel]

popestpius - Can you remark on what Cmom has stated, please?

[Jake Huether]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Apr 21 2004, 08:54 AM'] Jake if you lived on a beach in California or Brazil or Hawaii and saw bikinis all day long, every day, would it still be an occasion of sin?
If you lived in a place like that, then a woman would come walking out in an full length evening gown, woiuldn't that male response kick in?


Its not just exposure, but habituation and novelty at work here as well. [/quote]
Okay, then I wouldn't sin if I was used to it. Right...

Now, please explain to me the necessity of the Bikini. I still can't get that??


If I had the porn channel on all day long, so much so that I was immune to it, would I be sinning by having it on? I might not be sinning... Are they? And if I'm accepting the sin, am I too responsible for a sin.


If wearing a bikini is sinnful based on one of the three reasons I mentioned (which don't include my resultant sin of lust) then even if I didn't lust, wouldn't I be condoning those sins by accepting it as "culturally acceptable".

I know what goes on in the beaches of Brazil, etc.

But the question stands. What use is the bikini besides for self exposure?

Explain to me how a girl chooses to wear a bikini, and show that that choice isn't a sinful choice?

If she does it "because everyone else does it" does that make it right?

Edited April 21, 2004 by Jake Huether

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Jake Huether' date='Apr 21 2004, 11:06 AM'] Okay, then I wouldn't sin if I was used to it. Right...

Now, please explain to me the necessity of the Bikini. I still can't get that??


If I had the porn channel on all day long, so much so that I was immune to it, would I be sinning by having it on? I might not be sinning... Are they? And if I'm accepting the sin, am I too responsible for a sin.


If wearing a bikini is sinnful based on one of the three reasons I mentioned (which don't include my resultant sin of lust) then even if I didn't lust, wouldn't I be condoning those sins by accepting it as "culturally acceptable".

I know what goes on in the beaches of Brazil, etc.

But the question stands. What use is the bikini besides for self exposure?

Explain to me how a girl chooses to wear a bikini, and show that that choice isn't a sinful choice?

If she does it "because everyone else does it" does that make it right? [/quote]
Exactly!!

Desensitization does NOT justify anything. In fact, it is part of the problem. The fact that so many people have no issue with this is proof of how bad our society is, and NOT a justification for continued immodesty.

Good post Jake.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Azriel' date='Apr 21 2004, 11:06 AM'] popestpius - Can you remark on what Cmom has stated, please? [/quote]
Which one?

[Azriel]

"Its not just exposure, but habituation and novelty at work here as well."

This one, please.

[popestpiusx]

Sure, if she will clarify exactly what it means.

[pinstripes]

porn? brazil? where are we going with this conversation...?


someone said that they don't think mary would wear a bikini. in this culture, string bikini as close as you can get to acceptable nudity in public before it's illegal. 100 years ago in America, an simple ankle got men all hot and bothered. do you think mary kept her ankles coverd 24/7 too?

intention and moral conscience serve as the primary guide to wheather or not modesty is at hand.

doing something "because everyone else is doing it" is confused in this case for what the argument has been revolving around the whole time.

what everyone else is doing in your living environment is your [b]culture[/b].
it's a little known fact that Jesus almost certainly had a pony tail. Gallaleans were known to have had pony tails and the shroud of turen depicts a man w/ a pony tail. It's a cultural norm, not something Jesus did because everyone else was doing it.

when i get a bathing suit, i chose one that i would feel comfortable wearing. i can't help that the standards of baithing suits have changed in the last 15 years from really short shorts to down past my knees and back somewhere in the middle. that's the culture i'm apart of. it's my responsablity to make the best choice.

perhaps humility plays a roll in this.
is it more humble to cover as much as possable, or just to fit in. if you cover your body up, then you're humble to some people's standards, but if you blend into the environment, then you are humble in a different way because you aren't making a spectacle of yourself....

[Jake Huether]

[quote name='pinstripes' date='Apr 21 2004, 09:31 AM'] porn? brazil? where are we going with this conversation...?


someone said that they don't think mary would wear a bikini. in this culture, string bikini as close as you can get to acceptable nudity in public before it's illegal. 100 years ago in America, an simple ankle got men all hot and bothered. do you think mary kept her ankles coverd 24/7 too?

intention and moral conscience serve as the primary guide to wheather or not modesty is at hand.

doing something "because everyone else is doing it" is confused in this case for what the argument has been revolving around the whole time.

what everyone else is doing in your living environment is your [b]culture[/b].
it's a little known fact that Jesus almost certainly had a pony tail. Gallaleans were known to have had pony tails and the shroud of turen depicts a man w/ a pony tail. It's a cultural norm, not something Jesus did because everyone else was doing it.

when i get a bathing suit, i chose one that i would feel comfortable wearing. i can't help that the standards of baithing suits have changed in the last 15 years from really short shorts to down past my knees and back somewhere in the middle. that's the culture i'm apart of. it's my responsablity to make the best choice.

perhaps humility plays a roll in this.
is it more humble to cover as much as possable, or just to fit in. if you cover your body up, then you're humble to some people's standards, but if you blend into the environment, then you are humble in a different way because you aren't making a spectacle of yourself.... [/quote]
So tell me...

What's the point of a bikini again??


And are all cultural norms automatically not sinful. I can name a few American "past times" that are culturally normal but are damning.


For one thing, you "stick out" if you are a virgin. Should we humble ourselves by having sex before we're married so that we don't stick out.

LOL.

The justifications for wearing bikinies / being immodest are just silly!

What justification does a girl have for wearing a bikini? I'm not getting any answers that make sense.

To blend in... It'll have to be better than that.

what is the purpose of a bikini. Explain to me WHY it's a cultrual norm, then maybe we can get somewhere...

[cmotherofpirl]

What is the justification for the tight swimming trunks men wear? Or the tight shirts, or no shirts at all?

What is the justification of men working out?

People wear bathing suits for 3 general reasons.
To get wet, to tan, and to be seen.

How much does a woman have to cover up to be acceptable to you?

And remember I can put the exact same bathing suit on two different people with drastically different results.

Edited April 21, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[popestpiusx]

Look folks, despite popular opinion NO MORAL STANDARDS ARE BASED ON CULTURE!!! Despite what Azriel said, the CCC does NOT teach such nonsense. If it did,it would be guilty of heresy. That is, by definition, cultural reletivism. The Church has constantly taught that moral norms are based on man's very nature, as created rational beings. The CCC says the following:

2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. [b]Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies. [/b]

2524 [b]The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. [/b]Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

2525 [b]Christian purity requires a purification of the social climate.[/b] It requires of the communications media that their presentations show concern for respect and restraint. Purity of heart brings freedom from widespread eroticism and avoids entertainment inclined to voyeurism and illusion.

2527 "[b]The Good News of Christ continually renews the life and culture of fallen man; it combats and removes the error and evil which flow from the ever-present attraction of sin[/b]. It never ceases to purify and elevate the morality of peoples. It takes the spiritual qualities and endowments of every age and nation, and with supernatural riches it causes them to blossom, as it were, from within; it fortifies, completes, and restores them in Christ."


So,far from condoning any notion of cultural relativism, it in fact says that we must fight to restore true culture in Christ. The culture does not define the moral standards. Rather, moral standards must inform the culture.

Do standards of modesty vary? Yes. Does that mean the same thing as the standards of modesty are based on culture? Good Lord no. That would provide no standard whatsoever, especially in the US where fads and trends are manipulated contantly by the media and don't remain the same for more than a few months.

If there is no absolute moral standard, then there is no moral law whatsoever.