If you had looked at yourself in a rear-view mirror, chances are that you would not have put them on in the first place--at least in public and especially not in church, unless you have an exceptional, trim, and proportionately balanced figure, and your pants are tailor made to fit properly without wrinkles, indentations, stretch folds, side seams that pull out of line, or hanging chads.
Nobody cares what you look like at home. Feel free.
But, you see, this is what troubles me. I do not want to involve myself in something to adorn myself to be astheitcally pleasing. This crosses the rubicon into doing exactly wgat we are trying not to do.
Either we look too good in pants or we don't.
I and I know many other women striving (at least) to be pleasing to God take care to look attractive and feminine even in when we wear our jeans.
Unless there is a problem with gluttony, most women, in fact, look great in jeans. If I am to understand the complaint, we look so good men are lusting over us.
If this is the complaint, then we want to pay attention.
In other words, if these is aboout cleaning up the scenery of women suffering with gluttony, which you find displeasing to your eyes, I and many others are not interested in putting this complaint into the category of a virtue.
A well-fitting pair of pants does exactly what you want it to do: call attention to the person, esp. the face and eyes, not to the body. All modest, attractive clothing allows the beauty of the person wearing it to shine above it because the clothing becomes backdrop and does not call attention to itself.
It is the stretched-tight, unseemly, immodest clothing that calls attention away from the person inside but, rather, makes an object of that person, either for lust or ridicule or both.
The human body is a complex set of angles and plains in three dimension--especially pants. These three dimensions must be covered with a two-dimensional piece of fabric that must be manipulated to fit smoothly in all directions. To make matters worse, there are no two bodies alike. The manufacture of clothing cannot accommodate all these variations, so they make general, close-enough sizes, that fit only a handful of figures. The result is that, on almost every figure, something is fitting too tightly or too loosely on one plain or angle or another. Most of the time, the bulges emphasize the very worst of us, but we never see it because we never bother to look at ourselves in the rear view mirror. When I see such ill-fitting clothes and having been a dressmaker, I mentally cut and fit to make a smooth, relaxed, attractive, INCONSPICUOUS garment that lets the beauty of the person shine through.
"we look so good men are lusting over us." Isn't that what we don't want? to be an occasion of sin? And don't forget that "air of mystery" that a modestly dressed, discreet woman carries with her is far more sexy than laying it all out for all the world to see--for good or ill. Another old saying: Who is going to buy the cow when they can get the milk for free?
Unattractive, un-aesthetically pleasing adornment gives no glory to God, because it gives no glory to God's creature.
Carol, sorry for the mix-up. I don't understand some of the logistics of these things. I hope you didn't receive my post TOO many times. Once may be too much. (And it really isn't the weight. Weight has very little to do with it.
No problem on the number of times. I would rather see a post submitted twice than have the thoughts lost. I have moderation on and so you can't tell. I may change that at some point if the trolls stay away.
"we look so good men are lusting over us." Isn't that what we don't want? to be an occasion of sin? And don't forget that "air of mystery" that a modestly dressed, discreet woman carries with her is far more sexy than laying it all out for all the world to see--for good or ill. Another old saying: Who is going to buy the cow when they can get the milk for free?"
Yes. I wholeheartedly agree. Those of us who try to be careful about cleavage, clothes, make up, hair so that it is attractive yet classy,reserved sporty, casual, cute, rather than giving the impression that we give away our sexuality cheaply -- we are trying to process this in good faith. Pants are one piece of a big puzzle about how we are reserving our sexuality.
I don't think we have the duty to be frumpy, dumpy and plain so as to make it impossible for men to have a lustful thought. That seems to us to be carrying the onus on women too far.
You don't have to be pencil thin to be attractive in jeans. A lot of us are working overtime to keep within the bounds of respectable yet attractive with our whole look and our behavior and yet men still don't want to seem to control their eyes and their thoughts.
Obesity, sloppiness and unattractive doesn't turn men on, it turns them off. I don't see how that is brought into a discussion of how our pants are causing men to lust. That seems to be about improving your scenery as your eyes are looking around.
I think the crux of the matter is, there are women who dress and act to highlight their sensuality and then there are women who have been very careful about their dress, hair and behavior.
You have men whose eyes are wandering places they shouldn't and having impure thoughts. Men don't want to discipline their eyes and thoughts and Catholic men are now telling respectable women to dress in attractive sacks.
When men see an attractive woman in pants, keep your eyes off of their bum bums. Take out your book and put your eyes and thoughts there.
Telling women they are ugly or too pretty whichever the case may be for us now not to wear pants - is quasi-taliban.
Once we put our slacks and jeans away, you're going to have another epiphany. Our eyes, our faces, our hair, our voices, our demeanor - all very attractive and you will still will not be able to control your impure thoughts.
You have a responsibility here that you are trying to pin on women and this is over the line. Way over the line, in my opinion and I am a woman who will go to the unreasonable to avoid the near occasion of sin.
I think you have touched on the essence of this topic--that there are two people in the "occasion of sin" equation. The sinner and the sin-ee. The possible sinner in the equation can't always have life handed to him in a perfect gift box with a bow. We as women can cover our knees and elbows, our faces and our heads, but we still need to see where we are going, so someone might lust after our eyes or our voices. We can only hide so much to "help out" our brothers in Christ. Conversely, mass attire really has gone off the deep end, especially where I live. And don't even get me started on what our local women deem appropriate clothing for a funeral, wedding or baptism. My belief, though, is that those of us who know better, should do the best we can, according to our consciences. And we should have Christian patience with those who at least are attending mass, and pray they will look around one day, or feel a breeze in certain areas of their body and a light bulb will go on. IF you are talking about not wearing jeans or pants in every day life, then I guess I am not there yet, but God bless you if it is your heartfelt conviction to do so. Blessings and Peace, Kelly
"You have a responsibility here that you are trying to pin on women and this is over the line."
Well, SOMEBODY"s got to be the grown-up and be responsible. As in so many situations, if the men won't save themselves, then I guess it's up to the women to save them from themselves. And, it might keep your husband from punching someone in the nose for what he's thinking.
Our duty is to be respectable and if my brother still complains of impure thought my duty is to tell him how to discipline his eyes amd mind. Otherwise, he will go on having th problem every time a woman walks by.
I'm not going to be there when he's at the grocery store or walking down the hallway at a college or at the grocery store - when respectably dressed women walk by him and he finds himself without the tools to discipline his thoughts.
At some point, we're not helping the men, we are enabling them to continue the pattern when we don't stand up and say you are doing this to yourself and here are the tools to stop -- instead of making unreasonable demands upon respectable women.
The problem isn't pants. The problem is a libido without discipline. We are not decreasing sin in the world when we blame this on women dressed respectably who are wearing pants. It is the wrong fix.
Well, I guess I'll never convince you two. It's a generational thing I guess. Mother Cabrini crossed the Andes in her skirted habit and there are wonderful photos of 19th-century women standing atop Mt. Rainiere in the Cascades in their long skirts. Maybe these days you need to wear pants to carry on the battles that you do so well. Have you considered chain mail?
I wear slacks to tend my sheep and mow the steep hill pastures while wrestling with the tractor, and to weed the gardens and hack down brush, but I feel a lot better at Mass in a skirt. I'll also say that even in my advanced age, I look pretty darned good in slacks. I guess that climbing up and down the hills every day keeps the chads from hanging. :) It's been fun.
Pre-Requisite For the Triumph of Mary’s Immaculate Heart
How can we expect Mary's triumph and world peace in an unchastened human society? And how can the reign of purity be established as long as these "certain fashions" continue to fan furiously the flame of passion in the hearts of men? Is it not evident from Our Lady's messages at Fatima that modesty in feminine attire is a prerequisite for Her triumph and for world peace?
Let's use our God-given faculty of reasoning. Our Lady tells us "Men must cease offending God...." In the next breath, as it were, she reminds us that one way in which God is offended "very much" is by those "certain fashions." The conclusion should be plain. These semi-nude fashions retard Mary's triumph, and are one of the chief causes bringing the world to the brink of annihilation.
Our Lady further revealed that "More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh, than for any other reason." Who can count the millions of mortal sins of the flesh that are daily occasioned by immodest attire—evil thoughts and desires, touches, impure embracing, kissing, raping, etc. How can the Immaculate Heart of Mary triumph as long as "more souls go to Hell" through shameless fashions?
Again, a Christian society would never tolerate the current flood of indecent literature, movies, and television if it had not first tolerated the public appearance of semi-nude women and girls IN THE FLESH. As Pius XII points out, "vice necessarily follows upon public nudity." Which implies: when public nudity is tolerated, innumerable sins against purity necessarily follow, and the corruption of mankind.
Yet, who will convince our Catholic women and girls that their shameful attire is responsible that so many "souls go to Hell..."?
It will take a miracle to save a world which has forgotten God to such an extent that even many Catholics have turned to the worship of human idols in the form of body cult and sex worship. Our Lady of Fatima has promised this miracle that will save us from the "greatest catastrophe since the deluge," (Pius XII) if we do our part.
Listen to the Virgin Mary's pleas for "prayers and sacrifices." There can be no doubt that one of the sacrifices that is very acceptable to Our Lady is the sacrifice required to become ever more Marylike ourselves; and to promote energetically in others the "Marylike Way of Life'' which will restore Marylike chastity and modesty to the world. This will hasten true world peace, which is promised only through the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
16 comments:
Cure yourself of pantophobia and put those jeans back on!
If you had looked at yourself in a rear-view mirror, chances are that you would not have put them on in the first place--at least in public and especially not in church, unless you have an exceptional, trim, and proportionately balanced figure, and your pants are tailor made to fit properly without wrinkles, indentations, stretch folds, side seams that pull out of line, or hanging chads.
Nobody cares what you look like at home. Feel free.
Thank you for your thoughts.
But, you see, this is what troubles me. I do not want to involve myself in something to adorn myself to be astheitcally pleasing. This crosses the rubicon into doing exactly wgat we are trying not to do.
Either we look too good in pants or we don't.
I and I know many other women striving (at least) to be pleasing to God take care to look attractive and feminine even in when we wear our jeans.
Unless there is a problem with gluttony, most women, in fact, look great in jeans. If I am to understand the complaint, we look so good men are lusting over us.
If this is the complaint, then we want to pay attention.
In other words, if these is aboout cleaning up the scenery of women suffering with gluttony, which you find displeasing to your eyes, I and many others are not interested in putting this complaint into the category of a virtue.
A well-fitting pair of pants does exactly what you want it to do: call attention to the person, esp. the face and eyes, not to the body. All modest, attractive clothing allows the beauty of the person wearing it to shine above it because the clothing becomes backdrop and does not call attention to itself.
It is the stretched-tight, unseemly, immodest clothing that calls attention away from the person inside but, rather, makes an object of that person, either for lust or ridicule or both.
The human body is a complex set of angles and plains in three dimension--especially pants. These three dimensions must be covered with a two-dimensional piece of fabric that must be manipulated to fit smoothly in all directions. To make matters worse, there are no two bodies alike. The manufacture of clothing cannot accommodate all these variations, so they make general, close-enough sizes, that fit only a handful of figures. The result is that, on almost every figure, something is fitting too tightly or too loosely on one plain or angle or another. Most of the time, the bulges emphasize the very worst of us, but we never see it because we never bother to look at ourselves in the rear view mirror. When I see such ill-fitting clothes and having been a dressmaker, I mentally cut and fit to make a smooth, relaxed, attractive, INCONSPICUOUS garment that lets the beauty of the person shine through.
"we look so good men are lusting over us." Isn't that what we don't want? to be an occasion of sin? And don't forget that "air of mystery" that a modestly dressed, discreet woman carries with her is far more sexy than laying it all out for all the world to see--for good or ill. Another old saying: Who is going to buy the cow when they can get the milk for free?
Unattractive, un-aesthetically pleasing adornment gives no glory to God, because it gives no glory to God's creature.
Carol, sorry for the mix-up. I don't understand some of the logistics of these things. I hope you didn't receive my post TOO many times. Once may be too much. (And it really isn't the weight. Weight has very little to do with it.
In Christ,
No problem on the number of times. I would rather see a post submitted twice than have the thoughts lost. I have moderation on and so you can't tell. I may change that at some point if the trolls stay away.
"we look so good men are lusting over us." Isn't that what we don't want? to be an occasion of sin? And don't forget that "air of mystery" that a modestly dressed, discreet woman carries with her is far more sexy than laying it all out for all the world to see--for good or ill. Another old saying: Who is going to buy the cow when they can get the milk for free?"
Yes. I wholeheartedly agree. Those of us who try to be careful about cleavage, clothes, make up, hair so that it is attractive yet classy,reserved sporty, casual, cute, rather than giving the impression that we give away our sexuality cheaply -- we are trying to process this in good faith. Pants are one piece of a big puzzle about how we are reserving our sexuality.
I don't think we have the duty to be frumpy, dumpy and plain so as to make it impossible for men to have a lustful thought. That seems to us to be carrying the onus on women too far.
You don't have to be pencil thin to be attractive in jeans. A lot of us are working overtime to keep within the bounds of respectable yet attractive with our whole look and our behavior and yet men still don't want to seem to control their eyes and their thoughts.
Obesity, sloppiness and unattractive doesn't turn men on, it turns them off. I don't see how that is brought into a discussion of how our pants are causing men to lust. That seems to be about improving your scenery as your eyes are looking around.
It is certainly food for thought.
I've given more thought to this subject matter.
I think the crux of the matter is, there are women who dress and act to highlight their sensuality and then there are women who have been very careful about their dress, hair and behavior.
You have men whose eyes are wandering places they shouldn't and having impure thoughts. Men don't want to discipline their eyes and thoughts and Catholic men are now telling respectable women to dress in attractive sacks.
When men see an attractive woman in pants, keep your eyes off of their bum bums. Take out your book and put your eyes and thoughts there.
Telling women they are ugly or too pretty whichever the case may be for us now not to wear pants - is quasi-taliban.
Once we put our slacks and jeans away, you're going to have another epiphany. Our eyes, our faces, our hair, our voices, our demeanor - all very attractive and you will still will not be able to control your impure thoughts.
You have a responsibility here that you are trying to pin on women and this is over the line. Way over the line, in my opinion and I am a woman who will go to the unreasonable to avoid the near occasion of sin.
I think you have touched on the essence of this topic--that there are two people in the "occasion of sin" equation. The sinner and the sin-ee. The possible sinner in the equation can't always have life handed to him in a perfect gift box with a bow. We as women can cover our knees and elbows, our faces and our heads, but we still need to see where we are going, so someone might lust after our eyes or our voices. We can only hide so much to "help out" our brothers in Christ. Conversely, mass attire really has gone off the deep end, especially where I live. And don't even get me started on what our local women deem appropriate clothing for a funeral, wedding or baptism.
My belief, though, is that those of us who know better, should do the best we can, according to our consciences. And we should have Christian patience with those who at least are attending mass, and pray they will look around one day, or feel a breeze in certain areas of their body and a light bulb will go on.
IF you are talking about not wearing jeans or pants in every day life, then I guess I am not there yet, but God bless you if it is your heartfelt conviction to do so.
Blessings and Peace,
Kelly
"You have a responsibility here that you are trying to pin on women and this is over the line."
Well, SOMEBODY"s got to be the grown-up and be responsible. As in so many situations, if the men won't save themselves, then I guess it's up to the women to save them from themselves. And, it might keep your husband from punching someone in the nose for what he's thinking.
Am I my brother's keeper?
I am my brothers keeper.
I am NOT my brothers enabler.
Our duty is to be respectable and if my brother still complains of impure thought my duty is to tell him how to discipline his eyes amd mind. Otherwise, he will go on having th problem every time a woman walks by.
That make sense?
I'm not going to be there when he's at the grocery store or walking down the hallway at a college or at the grocery store - when respectably dressed women walk by him and he finds himself without the tools to discipline his thoughts.
At some point, we're not helping the men, we are enabling them to continue the pattern when we don't stand up and say you are doing this to yourself and here are the tools to stop -- instead of making unreasonable demands upon respectable women.
The problem isn't pants. The problem is a libido without discipline. We are not decreasing sin in the world when we blame this on women dressed respectably who are wearing pants. It is the wrong fix.
Amen. And thank God, cause I love my pants.
Well, I guess I'll never convince you two. It's a generational thing I guess. Mother Cabrini crossed the Andes in her skirted habit and there are wonderful photos of 19th-century women standing atop Mt. Rainiere in the Cascades in their long skirts. Maybe these days you need to wear pants to carry on the battles that you do so well. Have you considered chain mail?
I wear slacks to tend my sheep and mow the steep hill pastures while wrestling with the tractor, and to weed the gardens and hack down brush, but I feel a lot better at Mass in a skirt. I'll also say that even in my advanced age, I look pretty darned good in slacks. I guess that climbing up and down the hills every day keeps the chads from hanging. :) It's been fun.
My kind of woman!
Pre-Requisite For the Triumph of Mary’s Immaculate Heart
How can we expect Mary's triumph and world peace in an unchastened human society? And how can the reign of purity be established as long as these "certain fashions" continue to fan furiously the flame of passion in the hearts of men? Is it not evident from Our Lady's messages at Fatima that modesty in feminine attire is a prerequisite for Her triumph and for world peace?
Let's use our God-given faculty of reasoning. Our Lady tells us "Men must cease offending God...." In the next breath, as it were, she reminds us that one way in which God is offended "very much" is by those "certain fashions." The conclusion should be plain. These semi-nude fashions retard Mary's triumph, and are one of the chief causes bringing the world to the brink of annihilation.
Our Lady further revealed that "More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh, than for any other reason." Who can count the millions of mortal sins of the flesh that are daily occasioned by immodest attire—evil thoughts and desires, touches, impure embracing, kissing, raping, etc. How can the Immaculate Heart of Mary triumph as long as "more souls go to Hell" through shameless fashions?
Again, a Christian society would never tolerate the current flood of indecent literature, movies, and television if it had not first tolerated the public appearance of semi-nude women and girls IN THE FLESH. As Pius XII points out, "vice necessarily follows upon public nudity." Which implies: when public nudity is tolerated, innumerable sins against purity necessarily follow, and the corruption of mankind.
Yet, who will convince our Catholic women and girls that their shameful attire is responsible that so many "souls go to Hell..."?
It will take a miracle to save a world which has forgotten God to such an extent that even many Catholics have turned to the worship of human idols in the form of body cult and sex worship. Our Lady of Fatima has promised this miracle that will save us from the "greatest catastrophe since the deluge," (Pius XII) if we do our part.
Listen to the Virgin Mary's pleas for "prayers and sacrifices." There can be no doubt that one of the sacrifices that is very acceptable to Our Lady is the sacrifice required to become ever more Marylike ourselves; and to promote energetically in others the "Marylike Way of Life'' which will restore Marylike chastity and modesty to the world. This will hasten true world peace, which is promised only through the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary
Post a Comment