OK, first off, let me be clear that I don't want to make women's search for modest dress any more confusing than it already is. Still, I cannot deny that I am irresistibly attracted (perhaps inordinately so) to women in red, both when it comes to hair colour (something that can't be helped) and clothing, and I'm sure I'm not the only man who is. The following article raises some interesting points on the matter (if you can ignore the evolutionary baloney):

Women wearing red send signals that attract men - Telegraph

Some highlights:

The researchers found that men who were shown photographs of women wearing a red shirt found them more attractive compared to when they saw the same women wearing green or white garments.

The study, which tested 96 men from the United States and Austria, also found that the men felt the women would respond positively to their advances.

...

"It is possible that women actually wear red clothing more when they are interested in sɛҳuąƖ encounters. We are currently investigating this possibility, and preliminary evidence suggests that this is indeed happening."

...

Mr Pazda added: "From a pragmatic standpoint, our results suggest that women may need to be judicious in their use of red clothing.

"More generally, our finding that female red carries sɛҳuąƖ meaning will likely be of considerable interest to fashion designers, marketers, and advertisers."

OK, maybe this ranks up there with "the sky is blue, grass is green." Still, it raises an important question. I know many Catholic women are trying their best to look attractive so as to attract a potential husband while still remaining within the bounds of modesty. But would wearing red send the wrong signals?

Red = blushing

I will not go any further to elaborate what activities make a woman, and a man, blush.

Well, it's not really a 'battle,' I'm just looking for other people's opinions, and I thank you for yours (and no, I did not know about that, thank you for informing me!).

There's an old movie in which Bette Davis wears red when she shouldn't and it provokes a duel.

IMO, it depends on the context.

IMO, it depends on the context.

I guess you're right. I suppose there's a difference between wearing red to a bar and wearing red to Mass, for example. Presumably (hopefully) in the latter case, it is less likely to be misconstrued as being "available".

Yeah, I think context is key. I don't think the color red is immoral, but I think we can reasonably say that a vibrant shade of red sticks out. For this reason I would never wear it to mass. I never thought about it attracting men. Interesting. I would feel immodest wearing it to mass for the simple fact that it would draw attention to me that clearly needs to be elsewhere, even if just for a moment.

You make a good point, though, of it potentially being distracting. I hadn't thought of that. Perhaps there is a good reason to avoid it at Mass after all (though I would hardly condemn anyone that did).

However, I do fancy the color red, and I confess to wearing it frequently during my day to day...hopefully this isn't bad.

No, by all means, wear it! I think the intention is the important thing, and like Telesphorus said, the context. So if you wear red because you like the color red, that's different from wearing red in order to make yourself sɛҳuąƖly attractive.

I just thought that article provided, perhaps, some food for thought. It's an interesting topic, I think. The idea that certain colours send certain messages, that is. I suppose none of this is actually new, but it is interesting, nonetheless.

Straining gnats, swallowing camels.

Yes, I suppose you're right.

I must admit I'm scandalized with this thread.

The fact is, Catholics ought to know that when the liturgical color of the day is red, because it's the feast day of a Catholic Martyr, it is then not only appropriate, but DESIRABLE for all the ladies to wear red. In fact, it shows lack of community and pride (if not merely ignorance) for a lady to wear any other color instead.

The same goes for all the other liturgical colors in the Roman Rite:

White
Green
Purple
Rose
Gold
Black

(Note: no yellow, blue, orange, purple, turquoise, rust or brown, but most women don't wear orange anyway; Byzantine and Russian Orthodox use blues, purple, orange or rust sometimes)

Time was, before the infamous Vatican II, when women knew that, they would keep the parish calendar near their dressing room, so they could check the color of the day before they selected their outfit for Mass. They would also plan a week or two ahead so they were sure to have the colors they need for particular Masses, by having the clothes laundered, mended or cleaned on time, relying on their calendar to help them plan ahead.

What's the point?

When the priest enters the sanctuary dressed in his liturgical colors, he is transported with joy to see the congregation adorned with the same color that he is wearing himself. And the women in the pews have assisted with the silent acclamation that the Church is One.

Up to this post, everyone has been contemplating their belly buttons, musing about how red suggests this, that or the other thing. HOGWASH! Red suggests MARTYRDOM when worn to Mass. Make no mistake about it!

That goes for red hats, red scarves, red gloves, red belts, red overcoats, red stockings, red lipstick, red hair ribbons, red purses, and red shoes, too. They all suggest MARTYRDOM, in honor of the saint of the day.

Exception: fingernails. It has always been considered proper for women to use only natural color for fingernails, if any color at all.

That applies to women. Do not presume it applies to men. It doesn't. Men are perfectly proper wearing a black suit and a white shirt every day of the year. Recall the old canard, regarding automobile colors. Henry Ford is quoted saying, "You can have any color you want, so long as it's black." Boring? Not boring, standard. Of course, various orders have habits for the monks and/or priests, but that's for religious, and we're talking about laity here.

I beg to differ. Mine was a serious answer to a serious question.

It seems to me that red is not inherently suggestive of anything immodest. It is rather the WAY that the color is worn, such as the style of article that is red. If you have an immodest dress, whether it is red or green or blue or pink or camouflage, it is still immodest.

Fishnet stockings or leather straps, for example, suggest prostitution, but they don't have to be red to do that. They can be red, but the color isn't what makes them suggestive.

The point is, if her clothing is modest, the prominent color can be red, worn to Mass on a martyr's feast day, and nobody can legitimately say anything critical about it.

Now, ignorant people might see the lady at the supermarket after Mass, or walking to her home after Mass, and presume to "know" what the purpose of her red clothing is, but they would be wrong. That's their problem, and they need to grow up, learn something, and it could be an opportunity for them to get their mind out of the gutter.

There is one factor that breaks all the rules, however, and that is gang colors. Someone wearing red in the wrong part of town could be risking their own life, even if they don't know it. But it could already be too late.