Author Topic: girls playing sports? Bikinis? (Read 10726 times)

curiouscatholic23 · « **on:** August 17, 2011, 05:25:47 PM »

Do you think its wrong for little girls to be introduced to sports like soccer/basketball/volleyball?

Do you think its wrong for women to wear the bikini to the beach? What about a one piece bathing suit?

I've always wondered these things, even before I became a traditional catholic.

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** August 17, 2011, 05:53:38 PM »

Yes it's wrong for a woman to be dressed immodestly in public. Common sense tells us there's no difference between most "bathing suits" and the woman being in her underwear. Why is one considered acceptable, and the other not?

It's not fitting for women to bring out their "masculine side" by developing a strong sense of competition.

In other news, it's wrong for a man to foster his feminine side.

But I suppose in the Modern World everything is mixed up and upside-down. Men are becoming soft and feminine, so it's natural that women should try to fill the void. We don't have enough real men today.

The fact that excessive athleticism can suppress a woman's monthly cycle shows how unnatural it is -- how against God's design.

Women running, jumping and grunting like so many male football players is about the antithesis of what it is to be female.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2011, 06:01:39 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Yes it's wrong for a woman to be dressed immodestly in public. Common sense tells us there's no difference between most "bathing suits" and the woman being in her underwear. Why is one considered acceptable, and the other not?

It's not fitting for women to bring out their "masculine side" by developing a strong sense of competition.

In other news, it's wrong for a man to foster his feminine side.

But I suppose in the Modern World everything is mixed up and upside-down. Men are becoming soft and feminine, so it's natural that women should try to fill the void. We don't have enough real men today.

The fact that excessive athleticism can suppress a woman's monthly cycle shows how unnatural it is -- how against God's design.

Women running, jumping and grunting like so many male football players is about the antithesis of what it is to be female.

I agree. But I am still hesitant about condemning a one piece bathing suit if a woman wants to go swimming and/or catch some sun. Before Vatican II, did catholic women go swimming? If so, what did they wear when doing so?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2011, 06:34:31 PM »

There are many naturally athletic women and women and girls can benefit from low and moderate intensity sport.

The problem is the cult of fitness that leads to women engaging in excessively strenuous activities and competitions. The title 9 scholarship scam is also conducive to many evils.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2011, 06:43:46 PM »

Moderation in everything. Look at female tennis players of decades ago and their graceful playing and look at them today -- manly pituitary cases grunting like chimpanzees. Then they are stripped down out of their clothing gradually, with the excuse that they have to be more aerodynamic and competitive.

I don't think wearing a one-piece bathing suit is considered wrong, someone correct me if I'm off-base here.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #5 on:** August 17, 2011, 06:49:42 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

Moderation in everything. Look at female tennis players of decades ago and their graceful playing and look at them today -- manly pituitary cases grunting like chimpanzees. Then they are stripped down out of their clothing gradually, with the excuse that they have to be more aerodynamic and competitive.

I don't think wearing a one-piece bathing suit is considered wrong, someone correct me if I'm off-base here.

If skirts above the knees are wrong the typical one piece bathing suit is wrong.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #6 on:** August 17, 2011, 07:01:50 PM »

Can you clearly see the entire female form in a one-piece? Is bare flesh exposed to within centimeters of the...most sacred/private part of a woman's body?

IMO, a one piece is substantially the same as a bikini for reasons I'd prefer to not explain in detail. A slightly larger, skin-tight "veil" is...still a skin-tight veil...and such "veils" don't hide a heck of a lot. If modesty rules out a mini-skirt or tight pants, why should it not rule out something that is arguably much worse?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #7 on:** August 17, 2011, 07:06:44 PM »

Quote from: curiouscatholic23

I am still hesitant about condemning a one piece bathing suit if a woman wants to go swimming and/or catch some sun.

Why does any man or woman need to 'catch some sun' on the upper, inner thighs?

LordPhan · « **Reply #8 on:** August 17, 2011, 10:54:40 PM »

http://modestswimwear4u.com/swimwear/newourlatestcollection

There was another site I was looking for that had good ones but when I did the google search to find the sites I was looking for the second link I clicked on was not modest so I'm stopping. None the less, this is an example of modest swimwear.

Darcy · « **Reply #9 on:** August 17, 2011, 11:03:22 PM »

In prev2 the bathing suits were two-piece and the trunks covered the navel.

This may have been considered immodest at the time but the women still wore them. The bikini did not become popular until the sixties, but it was invented in 1946 by Louis Reard.

I wonder if he was Catholic? :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_R%C3%A9ard

Telesphorus · « **Reply #10 on:** August 17, 2011, 11:15:41 PM »

And the banner ads for this topic are predictable . . .

Raoul76 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 17, 2011, 11:19:12 PM »

The Church never chimed in? One-piece bathing suits were worn long before Vatican II, weren't they?

I am not saying I know what the answer is here, nor am I recommending women wear one-pieces. But I will say, personally, I find one-piece swimsuits to be somehow not erotic, not suggestive. I can't explain it. It's not like a mini-skirt. It feels more utilitarian, and like it really is designed for swimming and not for ogling. I understand what you are saying about the crotch area being nearly exposed, gladius, but somehow it doesn't feel like the INTENT is to draw attention there. That isn't to say it isn't still wrong to wear one. But at this point, it would probably be wrong for a Catholic to go to a public beach, period.

Disclaimer: I walk my dog by the beach, but usually wait until it's night and cooler and people have more clothes on.

Raoul76 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 17, 2011, 11:27:21 PM »

Regarding my disclaimer about walking my dog in the evening, one time this technique failed and two Aphrodites in bikinis were strolling my way. Now, I grew up in a beach town, I have been around half-naked women all my life without thinking anything of it. But now that I have begun practicing custody of my eyes, it really has begun to struck me how obscene the bikini really is. To me, it's worse than being naked, because it firms everything up and emphasizes it. A naked woman would be boring; a woman in a bikini is eye-popping. When these girls came towards me, and I couldn't look away in time -- no really, I was caught unawares -- it was like being slammed in the gut by a giant iron fist. But I don't have that reaction when I see a woman in a one-piece; not even close. I really have no reaction. It makes me think of a professional swimmer in the Olympics. Again, this is not to say it's right...

I wrote a little post on Facebook about the show Gidget, how Hollywood tried to make the bikini seem so innocent and fun in that show. "Oh, look, it's cute little Sally Field, isn't she sweet and wholesome!" Like it's Heidi in a bikini. This is how they convince people to let down their guard. Who would be such a curmudgeon as to be against Gidget, a show so anodyne and all-American? In reality, the "Gidgets" of the world are exposing themselves to premarital sex, disease, abortions and broken lives. It is just so easy to fall into fornication being around someone who is dressed that way; it's practically inevitable.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #13 on:** August 17, 2011, 11:28:00 PM »

If anyone has ever read "Cheaper by the Dozen" the father of the family did not approve of his daughter wearing a "one piece" suit in the 1920s. It was a revolutionary fashion that was considered immodest. And in reality, it is. If it doesn't "feel immodest" that's a subjective impression - and no doubt many who wear them do not intend to be immodest and don't think they are being immodest - subjectively they are probably not as culpable because they think it's okay.

ora pro me · « **Reply #14 on:** August 17, 2011, 11:40:41 PM »

Our girls wore shorts that went almost to the knees or maybe a couple inches above the knees and short-sleeved shirts over a one-piece swimsuit. We'd look for surfer shorts at the thrift stores. Usually we were just swimming in a private pool at a friend or relative's house, but once in awhile we'd be at a hotel and if someone asked them if they forgot to bring their swimming suits our girls didn't hesitate to say that they dressed like that to be modest.