Covering Shoulders

[CrossCuT]

Everything is an endogenous zone to someone so are we going to resign ourselves to wearing comforters over our heads while we go to the grocery store? At some point we gotta hold dudes responsible for their pervy thoughts.

[Ice_nine]

your face is an endogenous zone.  Or erogenous. Oh whatever this thread is weird.

[Gabriela]

And, "another modesty thread? " ... Well, don't read it or post in it then.

Wait.

[Basilisa Marie]

I think the bigger problem is how people are treated when they come to Mass, dress code or none. I'd rather be at a parish with no dress code and everyone wearing jeans and T-shirts with a friendly, welcoming community than a parish with a strict dress code and everyone giving me the evil eye or coming up to me to complain about how my clothing is inappropriate. No matter how beautiful the liturgy was at the second parish, I'd never want to go back. 

When I go to Mass at my work parish I wear skirts that are at least to my knee or dress pantaloons, nothing low-cut, and shrugs over my shoulders if my top is sleeveless. It's more modest than my personal "line" for church modesty (I don't have a problem with nice dark jeans with a fancy blouse, or even sleeveless shirts if they're truly sleeveless and not a one-inch or less strap), but many of the people at my work parish make next to no effort to dress up for Mass in the slightest, wear sports jerseys and t shirts with writing on them and shorts, etc. Even many of the liturgical ministers don't always get it.  I'm trying to set an example because I'm staff and highly visible. But these people are very warm and welcoming, and would treat me no differently if I wore shorts or a wrist-length dress and a mantilla. 

If a pastor wants to enforce a dress code, there's a lot of good that can come from it. And people seem to be pretty quick on the uptake if they're the only ones wearing shorts and t shirts to Mass and everyone else is in skirts and jackets. People have eyes, and they'll want to fit in. 

[BarbTherese]

Any case for custody of the eyes and heart, thoughts? - and to remember that the poor most often do not have a wardrobe from which to make selections.  Most often they cannot select and buy clothing but are dependant on charity.  I really do think that I should rejoice at those brothers and sisters attending Mass with me, my worship community, rather than casting critical eyes over whatever they might wear.   "Man judges by appearances, but The Lord knows the heart" (First Book of Samuel Ch16)

I recall one Sunday many years ago a young teenage male coming in to Mass wearing sloppy jeans and Tshirt with a baseball cap.  When the collection went round, he took off his baseball cap and put it in the plate.  After Mass some ladies were quite disgusted with what he had done.  I was quite surprised indeed at their comments, since I had thought that he had probably put into the plate what he valued most.   Life is most often all perspective and attitude. 

Edited August 26, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[Ash Wednesday]

At some point we gotta hold dudes responsible for their pervy thoughts.

And women.

Nowdays it's considered socially acceptable for women to openly objectify and lust after men just the same. Really, custody of thought and having respect for one another applies not only to both sexes, but gay and straight as well. I think so often we focus on modesty for women and the wandering eyes of men, we forget that the responsibility applies to everyone.

[Ice_nine]

And women.

Nowdays it's considered socially acceptable for women to openly objectify and lust after men just the same. Really, custody of thought and having respect for one another applies not only to both sexes, but gay and straight as well. I think so often we focus on modesty for women and the wandering eyes of men, we forget that the responsibility applies to everyone.

While lust is immoral regardless of your gender, it's much less threatening coming from a female to a male. I think that's part of why it's seen as acceptable amongst some folks.

 

[CrossCuT]

And women.

Nowdays it's considered socially acceptable for women to openly objectify and lust after men just the same. Really, custody of thought and having respect for one another applies not only to both sexes, but gay and straight as well. I think so often we focus on modesty for women and the wandering eyes of men, we forget that the responsibility applies to everyone.

That is a given of course. But thus far in the thread we are only talking about women.

[Basilisa Marie]

While lust is immoral regardless of your gender, it's much less threatening coming from a female to a male. I think that's part of why it's seen as acceptable amongst some folks.

 

I agree, which is why I think we have to be more careful to actually talk about the fact that yes, women do physically objectify men and yes, it's a commonplace thing and not only socially acceptable but often encouraged. The implication being that it's easier for a man to sexually assault a woman than a woman to sexually assault a man, so a woman objectifying a man must be harmless! Which is a total farce. 

Yeah, we women should make sure we wear stuff that we aren't going to pop out of when we move. But that's because we're respecting our human dignity and making it easier for ourselves to focus on Christ and what we're doing and not being distracted by making sure our outfits are behaving. Any effect our appearance has on men has to be a secondary consideration to that.