Author Topic: Modesty and how to dress (Read 32629 times)

MrsZ · « **Reply #120 on:** September 20, 2010, 06:59:50 PM »

Some women cannot wear "nice" long hair because of health problems, sometimes caused by illness, sometimes caused by poor nutrition. Other times it's because they've never learned to use certain products or styling appliances to make it look as nice as possible.

My hair tends toward frizzy because it's both fine and wavy. When I use a flattening iron or hot rollers, I get decent results.

Sometimes just washing, conditioning, letting it dry and putting it in a braid and atop one's head is the best you can do. And maybe it's best for the hair in the long run.

I understand that short hair on women has been the norm after the age of 40 since the 1920's. But prior to that, all women had long hair, young and old. How one styled one's hair had to do with age and state in life. Young girls wore it down ... older girls (teens) began wearing it up as they became more mature ... and there were various ways of braiding or fixing one's hair ... but it was up in most cases.

Today's older women associate aging with short hair. So many ladies diminish their looks by some of the hair styles they choose as they get older. So many are very unflattering. I sometimes imagine them wearing a nice bun and think that for most their faces and profiles would look better.

God Bless,
MrsZ

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #121 on:** September 23, 2010, 08:31:04 PM »

Quote from: MrsZ

Some women cannot wear "nice" long hair because of health problems, sometimes caused by illness, sometimes caused by poor nutrition. Other times it's because they've never learned to use certain products or styling appliances to make it look as nice as possible.

My hair tends toward frizzy because it's both fine and wavy. When I use a flattening iron or hot rollers, I get decent results.

Sometimes just washing, conditioning, letting it dry and putting it in a braid and atop one's head is the best you can do. And maybe it's best for the hair in the long run.

I understand that short hair on women has been the norm after the age of 40 since the 1920's. But prior to that, all women had long hair, young and old. How one styled one's hair had to do with age and state in life. Young girls wore it down ... older girls (teens) began wearing it up as they became more mature ... and there were various ways of braiding or fixing one's hair ... but it was up in most cases.

Today's older women associate aging with short hair. So many ladies diminish their looks by some of the hair styles they choose as they get older. So many are very unflattering. I sometimes imagine them wearing a nice bun and think that for most their faces and profiles would look better.

God Bless,
MrsZ

There's one lady I know that's hair almost resembles an afro-- meaning it's really frizzy and when it is grown out long, it poofs out kinda like this.

So she wears it short. I can understand that.

Kephapaulos · « **Reply #122 on:** September 24, 2010, 12:52:42 AM »

I agree with Telesphorus on the women and pants issue. It also seems to me that a woman wearing pants would be a hindrance to marriage for a Catholic man because of the example that could be given to possible future children someday. I find this issue of women and pants especially disheartening when even women who claim to be traditional Catholics are still alright with even the notion of women wearing pants. It is one thing for a traditional Catholic woman to have difficult time to break the habit of wearing pants and yet still having the proper understanding that it is not proper for a woman to wear pants, but it is another thing for a woman to keep wearing pants and think it is alright. I really do admire especially when I do seem girls and women wear modest dresses. It is still something not always seen in our times.

JoanScholastica · « **Reply #123 on:** September 24, 2010, 06:39:06 PM »

Hey, Keph, nice to see you around... :applause:

Kephapaulos · « **Reply #124 on:** September 24, 2010, 09:36:57 PM »

Quote from: JoanScholastica

Hey, Keph, nice to see you around... :applause:

Hi, JS. Thank you. :)

clare · « **Reply #125 on:** September 25, 2010, 03:53:21 AM »

Quote from: Kephapaulos

It also seems to me that a woman wearing pants would be a hindrance to marriage for a Catholic man because of the example that could be given to possible future children someday.

Only if he objects.

Quote

I find this issue of women and pants especially disheartening ...

Indeed, it is, because it is a non-issue. There are plenty of real sins to fret about without making more up.

Quote

... when even women who claim to be traditional Catholics are still alright with even the notion of women wearing pants.

As a woman who claims to be a traditional Catholic, I am all right with the notion of women wearing trousers.

It is nonsensical to make out that a type of garb which men never used to wear is exclusively men's garb, simply because they started wearing them first. And to find the idea of men and women wearing similar clothes as subversive and un-Catholic, even though Our Lady and St Joseph wore similar clothes!

It is utter, illogical, nonsense.

Quote

... It is one thing for a traditional Catholic woman to have difficult time to break the habit of wearing pants and yet still having the proper understanding that it is not proper for a woman to wear pants, ...

Well, I broke the habit of wearing trousers years ago, but I still do not see why it is not proper for women to wear them ever. It is, as I said, a non-issue. I only don't wear them because I am scared of what other trads will think!

JoanScholastica · « **Reply #126 on:** September 25, 2010, 04:37:08 AM »

Quote from: clare

I only don't wear them because I am scared of what other trads will think!

Why not stand out if you see there's no problem with it? I don't understand. As Catholics, our conscience should always tell us what is right and what is wrong.

clare · « **Reply #127 on:** September 25, 2010, 04:49:56 AM »

Quote from: JoanScholastica

Quote from: clare
I only don't wear them because I am scared of what other trads will think!

Why not stand out if you see there's no problem with it? I don't understand. As Catholics, our conscience should always tell us what is right and what is wrong.

My conscience tells me that trousers are ok (as long as they're modest). It also tells me that modest skirts are fine too. I am not going against my conscience by wearing modest skirts. I would also not be going against my conscience by wearing modest trousers, but I would be offending other trads, or inviting flak. So, I obey my conscience and respect other's sensibilities at the same time by wearing skirts! For a quiet life!

Although, obviously, if the issue crops up, I will argue about it, but I won't raise it by wearing trousers and inviting bother.

JoanScholastica · « **Reply #128 on:** September 25, 2010, 04:57:29 AM »

Quote from: clare

Although, obviously, if the issue crops up, I will argue about it, but I won't raise it by wearing trousers and inviting bother.

It sounds contradicting but I will leave it as that...

clare · « **Reply #129 on:** September 25, 2010, 05:07:58 AM »

Quote from: JoanScholastica

Quote from: clare
Although, obviously, if the issue crops up, I will argue about it, but I won't raise it by wearing trousers and inviting bother.

It sounds contradicting but I will leave it as that...

It isn't contradictory. I don't believe that women absolutely must wear trousers!

Telesphorus · « **Reply #130 on:** September 25, 2010, 05:51:59 AM »

Quote

It is nonsensical to make out that a type of garb which men never used to wear is exclusively men's garb, simply because they started wearing them first.

No, it isn't. Men started wearing them because they were suited to male occupations. Women did not adopt them. Why did they not adopt them? Christian societies accepted pants for men, but not for women. It takes only a modicuм of aesthetic judgment and taste to understand why. In feminist times however, it is always strongly argued that there is no reason women shouldn't wear pants. When I start to see an admission on your part that there are good reasons women shouldn't wear pants then I will start to think maybe you are looking at this issue more objectively.

female pantaloonery

Quote

And to find the idea of men and women wearing similar clothes as subversive and un-Catholic, even though Our Lady and St Joseph wore similar clothes!

What is your evidence for that? The clothing of the ancient world was quite different for men and women. Women wore skirts to the ankles even in pagan times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stola

The clothes that are called "modest" today are at the extreme limit, beyond the limit, of what would have been tolerable in any Christian society.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #131 on:** September 25, 2010, 06:09:19 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

female pantaloonery

It's a good article except it makes a serious mistake in presuming men and women's pants are equally modest or that it is prudery to suggest there is a difference. On that point Miss Townsend seems to contradict herself, since she spent a good deal of space describing how captivating actresses no longer concealed the pants under frocks coats to the knees. Certainly in the experience of anyone living today, there is no doubt that men's pants are as a rule more modest than the pants women typically wear.

clare · « **Reply #132 on:** September 25, 2010, 06:54:25 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Men started wearing them because they were suited to male occupations.

They were more convenient, in other words.

Quote

When I start to see an admission on your part that there are good reasons women shouldn't wear pants then I will start to think maybe you are looking at this issue more objectively.

There are good reasons why men shouldn't wear them too, at least without some kind of top covering the hip region.

Quote

Quote
And to find the idea of men and women wearing similar clothes as subversive and un-Catholic, even though Our Lady and St Joseph wore similar clothes!

What is your evidence for that? The clothing of the ancient world was quite different for men and women.

Have you seen paintings of them? St Joseph is not wearing trousers! The biggest difference is that Our Lady is wearing a veil.

Quote

Women wore skirts to the ankles even in pagan times.

So did men.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #133 on:** September 25, 2010, 07:03:17 AM »

Quote from: clare

They were more convenient, in other words.

They were more suitable for men than for women.

Quote

There are good reasons why men shouldn't wear them too, at least without some kind of top covering the hip region.

When a woman reaches maturity her pelvis typically asssumes a characteristic shape- this is an allurement to men and pants on women in contermporary times nearly always accentuate this allurement.

Quote

Have you seen paintings of them? St Joseph is not wearing trousers! The biggest difference is that Our Lady is wearing a veil.

Those clothes are not the same.

Quote

So did men.

They wore their tunics higher than women did.

So far you have not admitted any reason why opposition to women in pants may have some validity.

clare · « **Reply #134 on:** September 25, 2010, 09:29:17 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: clare
There are good reasons why men shouldn't wear them too, at least without some kind of top covering the hip region.

When a woman reaches maturity her pelvis typically asssumes a characteristic shape- this is an allurement to men and pants on women in contermporary times nearly always accentuate this allurement.

Which is why I favour the wearing of a long top or tunic over trousers.

I don't really want to spell out why it is in a man's interest for him to cover the hip area as well.

Quote

Quote
Have you seen paintings of them? St Joseph is not wearing trousers! The biggest difference is that Our Lady is wearing a veil.

Those clothes are not the same.

Similar. Men's and women's trousers are not the same either.

Quote

So far you have not admitted any reason why opposition to women in pants may have some validity.

Why should I admit something I am not convinced by?

There is a contradiction.

On the one hand, women should not wear trousers because they are men's clothes.

On the other hand, women should not wear trousers because they are immodest and present an occasion of sin for men.

So men are attracted by women wearing men's clothes??

On yet another hand, men find women in skirts more attractive.

So, men are attracted to women "dressed as men", and also attracted to women dressed as women.

As I say, the matter of the women's hips can be addressed quite easily with a long top. So it need not be an issue.