Well said--important point. Another analogy: if someone waves in front of a woman a chocolate sundae or other goodie that makes her drool, does that mean she loves it and wants to spend the rest of her life with it? (I mean that particular sundae, not an endless supply, which I suppose might be a different story.)
Maclin Horton | Homepage | 07.12.07 - 6:03 pm | #

a woman can be very attractive in non-form-fitting clothing ... cleavage and belly buttons do not have to be displayed.

yet, our teen-aged girls are not getting or hearing or listening to that message when the rest of the media says otherwise.

dawn - get this message out on these college campuses. especially to the religiously supported schools - what a terrible witness most are in this area - they appear as badly as the secular, and create even more scandal.
uncle jim | 07.12.07 - 6:16 pm | #

men can't help but look at car wrecks, too; but our looking doesn't mean we want to be in one.
pilgrimtraveller | 07.12.07 - 6:36 pm | #

Pilgrimtraveller, you beat me to the combox or I would have said exactly the same thing. There's a difference between being attractive and being an attraction. It's entirely possible that the gawking man is saying to himself, "Ick! Go wash your face and put some decent clothes on!"
C.J. | 07.12.07 - 7:35 pm | #

Ok, I gotta comment on this!

Yeah, my head may turn if there's too much skin in the "right areas" and wrong context. By wrong context I mean daily life. If you see most of a person exposed on the beach, it isn't nearly so sexy. Please remember that bare skin is unconsciously interpreted by the interested viewer as "ok to touch". If you don't want strange men to touch you there, don't bare it...

It's actually infuriating to know that some business woman I see, is dressing to distract me into lust. She knows quite well that dressing to accentuate her best features, can give her an edge over men and perhaps also against other women who perceive themselves as less alluring.

I'd like to end this by complimenting Dawn, (and other modest women) on her more chaste look. You've gone from seeking to elicit the response I described above to looking like a person I would like to know as a person. The light is shining out of your smile and you remind me of some of my favorite women - those young wives and mothers who just want to live a chaste married life in their community.
Bob P | Homepage | 07.12.07 - 10:44 pm | #

There are plenty of fish in the sea, as the saying goes, and what you catch will depend on the bait you use.

If you want somebody who is looking for cheap thrills with somebody "easy," dress like a tramp. If you want somebody who's interested in you as a human being, don't be displaying yourself as if you're a cheap hump.
Christina | Homepage | 07.13.07 - 7:52 am | #

Why doesn't anybody mention how horrible compulsion is.

Rubbernecking a hot babe is not a pure unadulterated joy. It's a compulsion.

For me, what restores my ability to appreciate female beauty, without the dark internal struggle with animal lust (which most of the secular world seems to give in to completely, to embrace without noticing the harm it does), is to give thanks to God for the beauty of the female form.

I saw a young southern European woman, probably Portuguese, at a big-box hardware/sporting-goods store yesterday. She was so gorgeous that it hurt to look at her, yet I felt I could not look away.

I think that at a deep level inside of me, it feels like hot young women are dangling themselves like sexual bait in front of the world, and it's like waving a red flag at a bull.

She was beautiful. I said my usual mental prayer in this situation: "Thank you, Lord, for making women so beautiful, but did you have to make her so gorgeous, and does she have to dress like that? It hurts, Lord.".

W

Edited By Siteowner
warren | Homepage | 07.13.07 - 9:33 am | #

In the language of chastity, every man would appreciate a little help from the ladies in maintaining custody of his eyes!

The pagan man doesn't have words for this concept, but he desires it. It is uncomfortable, being constantly bombarded with living sexual stimuli.

And even an unchaste man likes to feel special... he wants such skin to be shown especially to him, and not to every other guy.
Del | 07.13.07 - 9:51 am | #

The one particular style that has become popular lately, and I wonder why nobody talks about it, is the writing on the "seat" of shorts or pants. Is that only for females?

I find it really odd to direct people's eyes to that area. The worst 2 examples I saw were teenage girls with "[Boy's name]'s Girl" (their boyfriends, I guess?) and writing on the shorts of a girl who appeared to be about 8 years old. Both times, these girls were out with their mothers.

I'm just over 30, and I don't get it. Even if my mom wouldn't say anything, I think my dad would be concerned for his daughter's safety (not to mention reputation).
Kate P | 07.13.07 - 10:24 am | #

I agree, Kate. The human eye is attuned to the written word. It's why billboards work, it's why there are direction signs on the highway, brand names on almost every product. Writing on the seat of the pants is a demand that you look.

Thankfully, one of the youth soccer leagues around here has banned shorts with "soccer" (or anything else, for that matter) written on the backside. When a couple of 9-year-old girls showed up with them, that was the last straw.

One culturally defining moment that stands out for me happened at Typhoon Lagoon (Disney World's water park) a couple of years ago. Here's a young woman holding the hand of a 3-year-old boy, so I assume he's her son. She's wearing a swimsuit bottom and a T-shirt, about three sizes too small, with the message, "Don't stare at my chest." Of course, the words were right at breast level. She then turned around to reveal a tramp-stamp tattoo at her waistline.

If only she realized what this is teaching her son!
C.J. | 07.13.07 - 11:06 am | #

‘That is SO condescending‘
We like pretty things, it is true. Just because we live in a cave, doesn't mean we are lacking in morals or integrity.
Grogg | Homepage | 07.13.07 - 12:07 pm | #

Bob P - bare skin is interpreted by the viewer as OK to touch?

Not unless the viewer wants a broken wrist, it better not be. Looking is one thing, and I agree with Dawn's basic point - that what makes men stare, and what men actually want can be two different things. Sometimes very different.

Can I point out though, that not every woman is dressing with the eyes of men in mind every time she puts on clothing? I ran around all last summer in quite short shorts. Was I trying to be eye-catching? No. I had two pairs of shorts, both hand-me-downs, no money for other summer clothing, and it was too blasted hot for jeans. Men had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Tapetum | Homepage | 07.13.07 - 2:09 pm | #

I also agree with Dawn's basic point - with Tapetum's reservations.


I worry for my teenage niece and I suspect the only thing that got through to her 15-year-old brain about the inadvisability of a lower-back tattoo was my disgusting descriptions of droopy tattoos on mature skin (I've recently come back from an awful eyefull of these in Seattle.)

Other than that - yes, advise your daughters how to dress, but your internal monologue reactions to adult women are surplus to requirements.

I can't predict when my happy, bright red lipstick becames "a slash of scarlet mouth agape" (and I don't mean "agape" in the Biblical sense!)in the judging eyes of some chap.

Nor should I have to.
jody tresidder | 07.13.07 - 3:55 pm | #

Thank you, Dawn, Tapetum and Jody for doing a much better job than I would have trying to express these ideas.
Terezia | 07.13.07 - 6:08 pm | #

As another aspect of this, turning and looking, or leering, or whatever, doesn't equate with admiration.

Nearly any man would turn and look at, to take an extreme example, a naked woman walking down the street. Not all, by any means, would leap to the conclusion that they want something to do with her.

To give a more immediate example, this office has two women who dress in stark contrast. One wears clothing that is entirely too tight, and reveals quite a bit. Another dress very modestly. It seems to be the case that the modestly dressed one is admired as attractive and intelligent, while the other is regarded as somewhat cartoonish. Probably neither view is fair, but there it is.
Yeoman | 07.13.07 - 6:15 pm | #

No Tapetum, I didn't mean I thought it was ok to touch all bare skin, but that that idea is somehow wired deep inside our subconscious. Every once in a while I realize that it's there. The conflict between that impulse and good common sense is much of what makes me uncomfortable when too much is bared. Del had a good point above; it's special to be the only guy who gets to see all of a particular woman. We can debate if that feeling is a good one or not, another time.

Get a guy drunk enough or otherwise remove his inhibitions and he will be all hands, despite his imminent wrist injury. That's yet another reason not to get bombed guys... 8-)) No worries here, alcohol & my meds don't mix well. 8-)))
Bob P | Homepage | 07.13.07 - 10:26 pm | #

I always find beautiful women distracting. The skimpier or tighter the clothing, the more distracting; but even women dressed perfectly modestly, if beautiful, are distracting. (And I find a lot of women beautiful.)

All of the discussion about fashions, makeup, billboards, etc., is of secondary significance. Whatever the environment, one gets used to it and the level of distraction stabilizes -- though it changes when the environment changes (e.g. on a hot summer day, or when visiting a place where the customs of dress are very different).

I can't judge how the level distraction stabilizes at for me compares with the level for other men; if it is as high for the average man as it is for me, then the general level of male decorum in our society is an impressive achievement of self-control (though it was more impressive a few decades ago).

This is the way we have been designed, and all men have to learn how to deal with it.
Joseph | 07.14.07 - 10:49 pm | #

This is quite amusing in light of an experience yesterday. I was on the bus on what will probably turn out to be the hottest day of the year, so everyone was wearing shorts and t-shirts/sports tops.

But one woman was quite loudly going on to her friends of both sexes about how her jeans were too hot for her, but they made her butt look good. I couldn't help but taking a look when she stood up to get off. She was wearing jeans about five times too small for her, and as a result, the bit that fit into the jeans might have looked good, but there was a great deal of flesh *hanging* over the top of the jeans. A real freak show. I felt sorry for her, but also could not help dissolving into quiet giggling at the disconnect from reality exhibited.

So, it's not necessary that full-length is more modest than shorts!
Eileen R | 07.15.07 - 8:41 pm | #

Eileen, flesh hanging over the top of low-riders is known as a "muffin top."

I remember once overhearing the conversation of two young men at a bar, who were staring at the back of a woman wearing TIGHT! black jeans that revealed her butt cleavage and the waistband of her underwear. One whispered to the other, "Why didn't she look in the mirror before she went out like that?"
L. | Homepage | 07.16.07 - 11:26 am | #

Please remember that bare skin is unconsciously interpreted by the interested viewer as "ok to touch".

I have to disagree. I see dozens of women each day and am never gripped by the sudden urge to touch their noses.

We'd better be careful about overstating our case here. The next step is burqas for all. Modesty goes well beyond dress. Put a strumpet in a petticoat and she'll still be less modest than a nun in a swimsuit.
nightfly | Homepage | 07.16.07 - 12:58 pm | #

I appreciate a lady dressed in a pretty, though modest outfit. If my attention gets drawn I can simply say: "Thanks, God for making the female form beautiful".

When I see a woman dressed in a slutty manner, it makes me glance away quickly, the image still burned in my brain, saying a quick "Hail Mary" and being angry and the woman for making me react like that.
Tony | Homepage | 07.16.07 - 3:01 pm | #

I am a happily married, straight woman, and even *I* get distracted by other women baring almost everything to get attention. Of course, my thoughts tend towards "Oh, I feel sorry for her that she feels she must wear that."

So according to this reporter does that mean I desire other women when I am distracted by their immodesty?
Courageous Grace | Homepage | 07.16.07 - 4:30 pm | #