Is It Wrong For Men To Be Shirtless In The Presence Of Women?

[jeffboom]

We obviously don't have many swimmers on this thread. After all, the first GTA you could swim in was San Andreas. 

Edited May 2, 2013 by jeffboom

[havok579257]

good, no scandal was caused.

 

 

I quoted a father, doctor, Summa, and Mary. What does it take to convince you, it is a sin for the person who causes lust, due to their immodesty.
 

 

what is your issues with women?  You seem to have serious issues with women.  It seems you look down on women and blame women for a lot of your problems and put them more at fault for your sins than you.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

 

“My dear Mother, the sins that bring most souls to Hell are the sins of the flesh.

Certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much.

Those who serve God should not follow these fashions. The Church has no fashions;

Our Lord is always the same."

 

Our lady of Fatima

 

That does not contradict what i've said, though. It's too vague. 

[jim111]

The whole point of it being taboo to show ankles was because it caused sexual arousal.  During King Henry VIII's time, women thought male calves were incredibly sexy.  Now, not so much.  Different body parts become sexy depending on the context.  Some women dig muscular shoulders and strong arms, some men are attracted to a defined collar bone and long legs.  People get turned on by more than just the "swimsuit areas" all the time.  

 

If I went to live with a tribe in South America and dressed how they dressed, the only things out of the ordinary that would draw attention to me is the fact that I'm pastey white and the fact that I wouldn't have a small child in tow.  It wouldn't be sinful.  If I made some friends in the tribe and brought them back to the States to visit with me, all of us would have to put on some "regular" clothes, because it's scandalous for women to walk around topless in the US.  

  :shock:   ----> :covereyes:---->  :cry:   -------> :pray:

 

 

 

 

 

Some how I did not see this.

I say this not to offend you, but for your soul. :)

 

I too went too South Ameraica, three times Actually. I have also been to Africa, Indonesia, and Greece. No matter what other people wore, I was not going to expose certain parts of my body, nor did I feel any reason to wear their clothes. One thing I notice is that people dress a certain way because of there religion. Weather you are Easter, Roman, Coptic, all christian rites have a certain minimum they must dress according too. The church has never approved Nudism. It has always made the people change their ways and conform to the universal teachings of the church. It is for the people to adapt to the culture not for the culture to adapt to the people. If what you say is true, then in one of these hot nations you should be able to find a pic of topless religious sisters. The kind that don't wear habits. You will not find this because the church does not approve of this.

[Quid Est Veritas?]

I think the point of hypothetically "going native" was to demonstrate that the native men would not find a woman who did that immodest, not that it would be a comfortable/uncomfortable thing for a Western woman to do.
I agree with you that I would never feel comfortable going topless even in a culture where it was considered the norm. But if I did, there would be no reason for the natives to find me immodest.
Another interesting example of cultural constructs of sexual attractiveness is that in the past in Japan the back of the neck was considered highly "sexy" and any woman who showed it off was being immodest.

[jim111]

I think the point of hypothetically "going native" was to demonstrate that the native men would not find a woman who did that immodest, not that it would be a comfortable/uncomfortable thing for a Western woman to do.
I agree with you that I would never feel comfortable going topless even in a culture where it was considered the norm. But if I did, there would be no reason for the natives to find me immodest.
Another interesting example of cultural constructs of sexual attractiveness is that in the past in Japan the back of the neck was considered highly "sexy" and any woman who showed it off was being immodest.

First off its irrelevant if they find it immodest. Its not decent for women to expose that part of there body to unmarried men, (except Dr. etc...) even if they are desensitized.

     The Church teaches us that there are three degrees of decency regarding the parts of the human body. Some parts are considered honest for show in public, some less honest, and other dishonest. Some moralists used to employ a more rigorous language, qualifying these parts as not-shameful, semi-shameful and shameful. The honest or not-shameful parts are the face, hands and feet; the less honest or semi-shameful are the lower neck, back, legs and arms; the dishonest or shameless are the reproductive organs and their proximities. The criterion that establishes this classification is the degree of incentive toward the sensual passions that the mentioned parts arouse.

 

     By mans nature he is sexually attracted to certain parts of the woman's body. Yes it may be dulled as is the case in nudist colonies, however if this were total true then nudist colonies could not have children, cause non of there men could, you know. Men are attracted to body parts because of Biology not culture. though style can make one person prefer a certain look, breasts are a universal form of sexual pleasure for straight men.

 

    You will find boys that hang naked picture of girls in their room. They see this picture every day, but they are certainly turned on by breasts.

Edited May 2, 2013 by jim111

[jim111]

us would have to put on some "regular" clothes, because it's scandalous for women to walk around topless in the US.  

 

So we are in agreement, it is a sin of scandal for men and women?

 

 

 

Here is what JP2 said about scandal.

2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor's tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.
CCC
2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."86 Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep's clothing.87

CCC

Edited May 2, 2013 by jim111

[Kateri89]

One of my favorite pieces is this one which is quite evocative. But very artistically valuable, influential, tasteful, etc.. The proper context in which the human form as an artistic subject can be appreciated.

 

The girl in the background looks like she's puking because this chick is posing nude... :hehe2:

[Lil Red]

The girl in the background looks like she's puking because this chick is posing nude... :hehe2:

 

i thought she looked like she was headless :|

[Nihil Obstat]

The girl in the background looks like she's puking because this chick is posing nude... :hehe2:

Lol. :hehe: I believe the meaning is that she is fetching clothing from a set of drawers.

[ToJesusMyHeart]

Nihil, what is she (miss naked) holding and why?

[Nihil Obstat]

Nihil, what is she (miss naked) holding and why?

I used to know that, but alas I have forgotten. I would check, but I am working. :p
It is called Reclining Venus if you want to check wiki. I know it says there.

[Archaeology cat]

Sometimes I wish Minoan dress were still in fashion - it would make it so much easier to feed my child. (Yes, I'm actually being serious; no, I don't go topless)

[Nihil Obstat]

Nihil, what is she (miss naked) holding and why?

 

 

I used to know that, but alas I have forgotten. I would check, but I am working. :P
It is called Reclining Venus if you want to check wiki. I know it says there.

Ah, I was wrong again. It is Venus of Urbino.

From what I can find, she is holding a posy of roses. I believe it is meant to be a bridal allusion, as are a couple other elements. I believe the painting itself was a gift for a young bride.

[HisChildForever]

Men are attracted to body parts because of Biology not culture. though style can make one person prefer a certain look, breasts are a universal form of sexual pleasure for straight men.

 

Breasts were not created for men, they were created to feed children. Any sexual connotation they have is the product of a society.