• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

What do you consider modesty on a woman? What makes a woman appear NOT modest?

rockfox said:
You have a pair of nuts, you know yourself what clothing is alluring. You've said yourself how clothing can cover but be alluring; I think you can figure it out.
Click to expand...

Yes we can figure that out. What I don't see in Scripture is the idea that just because its alluring it is wrong. This is what has been pushed by the church for centuries but it comes from the wrong mindset... It's not supported by scripture.
 
steve said:
then are offended when you are distracted by the display.
Click to expand...

I was reading this to my wife, she said "they are just offended because you are NOT the audience they are looking for".
She also said "I should know I dressed that way".
 
FollowingHim said:
T-shirts with writing on the chest are a really annoying example of clothing that is "modest" but draws attention
Click to expand...

Not as distracting as writing on the seat of her pants.

Pacman said:
What I don't see in Scripture is the idea that just because its alluring it is wrong
Click to expand...

I have shown you the scripture what says to be discrete. I can lead you to water but I can't make you drink.
 
Sometimes my humor is too obscure.

When guys look too long at a woman’s chest (I can be a slow reader when necessary) the response can often be: My eyes are up here!
But I haven’t heard of a woman responding in like fashion when her tail is being stared at.
 
rockfox said:
But displaying her sexual attributes in an alluring manner is an advertisement of availability. A silent invitation. In contrast if she dresses modestly she'll silently advertise that she's not available.
Click to expand...

FollowingHim said:
Women need to understand too that if they're showing something, it's impossible not to look automatically, however conservative your morality may be. I know of a Muslim man who worked on cruise ships in the Maldives. Rich Western women would wander around topless on board, and the Muslim authorities let it slide because of the money they brought in and the fact they were offshore. But working on the ship he couldn't help but see, and therefore couldn't help but look. So he wore dark glasses the whole time, simply so they couldn't see his eyes and he wouldn't make the passengers uncomfortable that someone was looking at what they were deliberately showing off.
Click to expand...

These are separate issues. I do understand that the world has become a confusing place, but it doesn't help if we conflate two distinct things that we're being invited to do.

When women dress provocatively, they are inviting you to LOOK. Therefore, if they then attempt to punish you for looking, they are in the wrong, and I'm pretty consistent about pointing out to any woman who attempts to shame me for looking at what is clearly being displayed that, if she doesn't want to be stared at, she shouldn't dress in a way that encourages live human beings to have their attention drawn to their assets -- and it's just not that hard to disguise those assets. I'm just not going to apologize for doing what is natural and, actually, automatic absent training oneself to suppress one's own natural visual reactions. I refuse to live in an Every Man's Battle world in which I'm somehow required to 'bounce' my eyes away from women. In the last church I attended where they tried to sell my teenage sons that nonsense, every one of the preacher's many teenage and adult daughters showed up every Sunday showing cleavage. He once told me I should keep my eyes to myself, and I knew what he was referring to, so I gently told him that he might want to tell his daughters' breasts to keep themselves out of my eyes.

However . . . ALL those women who display their assets are effectively doing is inviting us to LOOK at them. It may be part of what, among humans, is a very long, drawn-out mating ritual to advertise one's wares in order to see if one can attract the attention of those one is interested in oneself, but even if a woman could so fine-tune her displaying of herself that she only attracted the attention of the one guy in the room whose attention she wanted, that simply DOES NOT MEAN that she is inviting him to have sex with her. She might feel the desire. She might even down the road make such an invitation, but just doing what she does to get his attention doesn't equal an invitation to rock and roll.

There is no support in our legal system for such a conflation, and there certainly hasn't been majority support for such a conflation in our mainstream culture for hundreds of years.

Lastly, I've known hundreds of Muslims in this country, some of whom adhere to the very strict modesty standards that include things like the hijab. Many Muslim men have assured me that having nothing but the eyes available does little to stop women from signalling to men when they're available, but there again is that issue of the wanton eyes . . . no matter how modestly a woman dresses, that doesn't stop her from communicating that you just might be able to get you some of this.

I also invite you to visit a strip club if you have any doubt that even fully-unclothed women have every ability to convince the most dense dunce that full immodesty doesn't mean they're making any kind of invitation other than passing along one's Benjamins.
 
steve said:
Sometimes my humor is too obscure.

When guys look too long at a woman’s chest (I can be a slow reader when necessary) the response can often be: My eyes are up here!
But I haven’t heard of a woman responding in like fashion when her tail is being stared at.
Click to expand...
But dat probably be because she no have eyes on da back of her head! Lol
(Sorry....I had to!!)

Keith Martin said:
I refuse to live in an Every Man's Battle world in which I'm somehow required to 'bounce' my eyes away from women. In the last church I attended where they tried to sell my teenage sons that nonsense, every one of the preacher's many teenage and adult daughters showed up every Sunday showing cleavage. He once told me I should keep my eyes to myself, and I knew what he was referring to, so I gently told him that he might want to tell his daughters' breasts to keep themselves out of my eyes.
Click to expand...

Love it!
 
Keith Martin said:
These are separate issues. I do understand that the world has become a confusing place, but it doesn't help if we conflate two distinct things that we're being invited to do.

When women dress provocatively, they are inviting you to LOOK. Therefore, if they then attempt to punish you for looking, they are in the wrong, and I'm pretty consistent about pointing out to any woman who attempts to shame me for looking at what is clearly being displayed that, if she doesn't want to be stared at, she shouldn't dress in a way that encourages live human beings to have their attention drawn to their assets -- and it's just not that hard to disguise those assets. I'm just not going to apologize for doing what is natural and, actually, automatic absent training oneself to suppress one's own natural visual reactions. I refuse to live in an Every Man's Battle world in which I'm somehow required to 'bounce' my eyes away from women. In the last church I attended where they tried to sell my teenage sons that nonsense, every one of the preacher's many teenage and adult daughters showed up every Sunday showing cleavage. He once told me I should keep my eyes to myself, and I knew what he was referring to, so I gently told him that he might want to tell his daughters' breasts to keep themselves out of my eyes.

However . . . ALL those women who display their assets are effectively doing is inviting us to LOOK at them. It may be part of what, among humans, is a very long, drawn-out mating ritual to advertise one's wares in order to see if one can attract the attention of those one is interested in oneself, but even if a woman could so fine-tune her displaying of herself that she only attracted the attention of the one guy in the room whose attention she wanted, that simply DOES NOT MEAN that she is inviting him to have sex with her. She might feel the desire. She might even down the road make such an invitation, but just doing what she does to get his attention doesn't equal an invitation to rock and roll.

There is no support in our legal system for such a conflation, and there certainly hasn't been majority support for such a conflation in our mainstream culture for hundreds of years.

Lastly, I've known hundreds of Muslims in this country, some of whom adhere to the very strict modesty standards that include things like the hijab. Many Muslim men have assured me that having nothing but the eyes available does little to stop women from signalling to men when they're available, but there again is that issue of the wanton eyes . . . no matter how modestly a woman dresses, that doesn't stop her from communicating that you just might be able to get you some of this.

I also invite you to visit a strip club if you have any doubt that even fully-unclothed women have every ability to convince the most dense dunce that full immodesty doesn't mean they're making any kind of invitation other than passing along one's Benjamins.
Click to expand...
So the Pennsylvania retreat has a strip club visit scheduled?
 
The Revolting Man said:
So the Pennsylvania retreat has a strip club visit scheduled?
Click to expand...
A Biblical Families scavenger hunt?
Men’s teams vs women’s teams to recruit the most sister wives?

What an awesome idea!
 
I'm worried that some casual reader might think you're serious...

I'll just clarify for any such readers that this is NOT an accurate description of Biblical Families retreats!

I'll also make a mental note that if Keith ever says "hey, we're going on a field trip, want to come?" to say no... Or maybe yes... o_O
 
We may have gotten a bit into the weeds on this thread.
 
Keith Martin said:
However . . . ALL those women who display their assets are effectively doing is inviting us to LOOK at them.
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself that. The rest of the world doesn't call it attention whoring for nothing. Why would a Christian woman invite that temptation into her life?

Let's not forget that a married woman flaunting her sexual assets is inviting men to...

"You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Don't be a stumbling block.
 
rockfox said:
Keep telling yourself that. The rest of the world doesn't call it attention whoring for nothing. Why would a Christian woman invite that temptation into her life?

Let's not forget that a married woman flaunting her sexual assets is inviting men to...

"You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Don't be a stumbling block.
Click to expand...
On this note, many women don’t post their pictures so that non-husbands don’t have the ability to ogle them and fantasize about them.
 
The Revolting Man said:
A married woman should dress in a way that would not signal to men that she is interested in their attention. Remember that we’re told not to let jewelry and hair be a woman’s glory, what we admire about her or all she’s required to do to be admired. We’re not actually forbidden from wearing such things. That being said I am always suspicious of a woman with noticeably manicured nails and always predisposed to admire a woman with her head covered.
Click to expand...
My husband insists that I get a pedicure because he likes nice feet and polished toenails. I also prefer to wear sandals and open-toed shoes most of the year. I am not doing to entice men, but to please my husband.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top