What do the ladies here have to say about this?This lady says you have too much time on your hands. Instead of searching for offensive photos on the net, when you see objectionable attire at church, AVERT YOUR EYES and say a short prayer for the person.
This lady says you have too much time on your hands. Instead of searching for offensive photos on the net, when you see objectionable attire at church, AVERT YOUR EYES and say a short prayer for the person.The answer you give then is to pray they will follow the example of more devout women at Mass and let the women take care of the offenders.
Everyone is in a different place on the road to eternity. Pray they will follow the example of more devout women at Mass. Be thankful they are at Mass to get the graces they are in need of to change their wayward inclinations. Let the women take care of the offenders.
At Mass your attention should definitely be elsewhere.At mass, my attention is on the mass and all of my children. The problem is that those young girls and women are bad examples to my girls.
But, the women have no authority to take care of the offenders,
NONSENSE ! Every Catholic has the authority and obligation to instruct the ignorant!
This is one area where the Christian Mothers Archconfraternity would step in in the past.
Just as the Holy Name Society would step in in a similar situation with a young man.
It is the duty of the fathers of the young ladies and the husbands of the older women to teach their females how to dress properly,
Well obviously their fathers or husbands didn't do a good job or the offenders are exercising their free will badly.
The problem is that those young girls and women are bad examples to my girls.
I totally agree that is why in such a case the priest should ask the older ladies to take care of the problem if
his sermons don't seem to be having an affect. A woman IF NEED BE, can be more blunt with another woman than a priest can. (unles of course it was St. Jean Vianney)
The OP is no small irony in so much as it displays 2 impure fashion images and then complains about impure fashions. As a man I can honestly say that were I to be pulled into staring at those images I would in all likelihood commit a sin if not necessarily by direct thought and even possible subsequent action then at the very least by having willfully and knowingly placed myself in the immediate occasion of sin.A Catholic gentleman with common sense.
Unfortunately, there are some Catholic websites such as traditioninaction.org that seem to think it is perfectly all right to place very impure images on their sites. (It is particularly ironic for tradtioninaction.org to do so in so far as they carry a number of excellent articles rightly decrying the use of immodest/impure fashions.)
As Catholics we should never forget the basic Catholic principle that one may never do evil in order to bring about good. That includes the placement of impure images on the Internet -- especially on a Catholic site!
P.S. I will not bother to try defending anything that I have stated above since it is my strong and informed conviction. Furthermore, what I have stated above is simple, clear, and unambiguous.
The OP is no small irony in so much as it displays 2 impure fashion images and then complains about impure fashions. As a man I can honestly say that were I to be pulled into staring at those images I would in all likelihood commit a sin if not necessarily by direct thought and even possible subsequent action then at the very least by having willfully and knowingly placed myself in the immediate occasion of sin.Easy to say anonymously to pictures, but do you have the manhood to say it to all those women wearing the same thing at your Church or your wife and children?
Unfortunately, there are some Catholic websites such as traditioninaction.org that seem to think it is perfectly all right to place very impure images on their sites. (It is particularly ironic for tradtioninaction.org to do so in so far as they carry a number of excellent articles rightly decrying the use of immodest/impure fashions.)
As Catholics we should never forget the basic Catholic principle that one may never do evil in order to bring about good. That includes the placement of impure images on the Internet -- especially on a Catholic site!
As a man I can honestly say that were I to be pulled into staring at those images I would in all likelihood commit a sin if not necessarily by direct thought and even possible subsequent action then at the very least by having willfully and knowingly placed myself in the immediate occasion of sin.Then you must live by yourself in a desert island and never see any women at all, for those fashions are nothing compared to what is ALL around us in the real world. What planet are you on?
This is one area where the Christian Mothers Archconfraternity would step in in the past.That was the case in the 1950's and before, but that has not happened in any SSPX chapel I've ever heard of. No group says anything anymore, they are all neutered just like the fathers/husbands. We have to start somewhere and so it must begin with the individual families and their head, the fathers. A good family here and there can affect many people, and be a good example.
Just as the Holy Name Society would step in in a similar situation with a young man.
Easy to say anonymously to pictures, but do you have the manhood to say it to all those women wearing the same thing at your Church or your wife and children?
Then you must live by yourself in a desert island and never see any women at all, for those fashions are nothing compared to what is ALL around us in the real world. What planet are you on?Why are you trying to turn this into a presumptuous ad hominem attack against me. Your placement of those images on this forum was wrong. Can you not simply admit that and move on?
Obviously the “women’s league” at his church isn’t doing their job or else these young ladies would be dressing more appropriately. You’re also assuming there is a “women’s league”...our chapel doesn’t have anything like that.
I never said there was a "women's League" I said IN THE PAST...... Please don't misquote me.
I also find it a bit feminist for a woman to be telling a father to “keep your head down and pray and let the women handle it.”
Oh? Just what should he do? Approach the woman and discuss her attire letting her know he's looking where he shouldn't ..at Mass yet? That should just about get him a punch in the mouth from the girl/woman's husband/father.. Also I don't think any woman here or at your chapel would want their husband addressing such a subject with a strange woman. I suggest the father make sure HIS girls don't dress like that and NOT use the woman as an example because then his daughters will know Daddy is looking at so and so's B...s.
The priest should get a nun or mature woman from the congregation to handle the matter if it is repeated ( some women are dumb) This could also be a very inappropriate conversation between the priest and the woman as it would have to be done in private and in this day and age that's asking for trouble.
HAVE THE WOMEN IN THE PARISH HANDLE IT. Period.
HAVE THE WOMEN IN THE PARISH HANDLE IT.
As a man I can honestly say that were I to be pulled into staring at those images I would in all likelihood commit a sin if not necessarily by direct thought and even possible subsequent action then at the very least by having willfully and knowingly placed myself in the immediate occasion of sin.The images are just pictures of what you will see in your SSPX chapel every Sunday, so if they are so dangerous to you as you describe, why don't you take the same holy anger you exhibit here and apply it to the real world in your chapel? The first place to apply it is where you are in charge, your family. Marilyn Monroe in those pictures is a pretty young girl like 23, maybe an older less attractive woman wearing the same thing does not affect you the same way? Don't attack the messenger, go and take care of the matter in the real world.
The OP is no small irony in so much as it displays 2 impure fashion images and then complains about impure fashions. Unfortunately, there are some Catholic websites such as traditioninaction.org that seem to think it is perfectly all right to place very impure images on their sites. (It is particularly ironic for tradtioninaction.org to do so in so far as they carry a number of excellent articles rightly decrying the use of immodest/impure fashions.)Instead of applying Traditioninaction's excellent information and articles, I hope you are not just attack the messenger and doing nothing in the real world to take care of the matter.
As Catholics we should never forget the basic Catholic principle that one may never do evil in order to bring about good. That includes the placement of impure images on the Internet -- especially on a Catholic site!
????Most of we women in our 50s don't have figures like Marilyn Monroe, so if we're wearing sweaters like hers, there is no possibility of tempting the men. More likely we're disgusting them, and everyone else! But, hey, I speak only for myself. I wouldn't ever wear a form-fitting sweater with push-up bra even if I did have a great figure. If women come regularly this way to mass, shame on them, and shame on their husbands, fathers, and the priests for not educating and correcting them.Exactly!
????Most of we women in our 50s don't have figures like Marilyn Monroe, so if we're wearing sweaters like hers, there is no possibility of tempting the men. More likely we're disgusting them, and everyone else! But, hey, I speak only for myself. I wouldn't ever wear a form-fitting sweater with push-up bra even if I did have a great figure. If women come regularly this way to mass, shame on them, and shame on their husbands, fathers, and the priests for not educating and correcting them.Another thing, as a son, I would be ashamed of my mother for wearing provocative clothes. She is a mother, not woman trying to attract attention from men to make herself feel wanted and pretty.
Priests should be directing their flock to heaven, not to years of purgatory for thousands of immodesty sins or worse. Parents should be enforcing their priests direction. Children and adults should be obeying them. And then their future children obey them.Exactly!
Another thing, as a son, I would be ashamed of my mother for wearing provocative clothes. She is a mother, not woman trying to attract attention from men to make herself feel wanted and pretty.
The problem with women in their 50's and older wearing those fashions is that they are a bad example to the younger girls. What are they going to tell a pretty young girl like Marilyn Monroe when she wears the same thing?Keep in mind that I am only talking here about one fashion the women (young and older) wear at my SSPX chapel, that fashion is minor compared to others and how they dress outside in the world all week, for the parents under 50, wear short shorts, legging as outside underwear, tight jeans, exposed belly, tank tops ........
What is it with all these pregnant women in bikini showing off their pregnant bellies in social media...?Just another sign that Hollywood and the world are insane.
This is what I meant by 'womens league' which does not exist in most chapels i've been to. Also, when should the priest address such a question - in the 5 minutes he has between confessions and the start of mass? I'm not suggesting that random men go correcting such ladies, but that they should be corrected and advised of the dress code policy by the ushers. And if not, then Fathers of families can go get an older lady to discuss the topic. I think we somewhat agree, except you are presuming that there's an organized group of ladies that watch/handle such things. I've never seen this type of thing in existence, that's my point.What part of "women of the parish" even hints that it is an organization? Stop accusing me of "presuming that there's an organized group of ladies".
So you advise that male ushers (strangers) approach a woman in a tight top and advise her of a dress code policy?Yes, our ushers are the ones responsible for enforcing the dress code and have been doing so for 40 yrs. I'm not saying that women shouldn't help either, but if it's not an organized effort, then one is just "hoping" it'll happen. A hope is not a solution to the problem.
I think, this might be more appropiate for the ladies to wear at the OP's chapel... ::)Which of the two fashions do you think God or Our Lady would look be shocked at?
(http://newswirengr.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Burqa.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Monroecirca1953.jpg/220px-Monroecirca1953.jpg) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Monroecirca1953.jpg)
Which of the two fashions do you think God or Our Lady would look be shocked at?Both.
I think, this might be more appropiate for the ladies to wear at the OP's chapel... ::)The perfect solution to face-to-face confession! Would be problematic for communion, however.
(http://newswirengr.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Burqa.jpg)
The sins of the world are too great! The sins which lead most souls to hell are sins of the flesh! Certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much. Those who serve God should not follow these fashions. The Church has no fashions; Our Lord is always the same."[color][size][font]
Which of the two fashions do you think God or Our Lady would look be shocked at?
Neither, as they both go against the true dignity of woman.The better question was: "Which of the two pictures of fashions above do you think offend Our Lord? Do you think those Moslem women are offending our Lord with their custom?"
The better question was: "Which of the two pictures of fashions above do you think offend Our Lord? Do you think those Moslem women are offending our Lord with their custom?"
I do not think so.
Besides, it is ridiculous to bring it up in the first place, as the Church has never asked women to cover their heads. The person that posted it likely thought it was funny, who knows what the reason was. I have six young daughters and I do not think it is funny to derail this serious thread with such stupid jokes.
Here are some examples of modern modest lady’s fashion (modern meaning not 1800’s)Most of the young girls at my SSPX chapel outside of mass, wear short shorts, tight jeans, tight revealing tank tops with belly exposed and such clothing same as anybody else in the world. If the fashions you posted are for every day wear, they are a step in the right direction.
Most of the young girls at my SSPX chapel outside of mass, wear short shorts, tight jeans, tight revealing tank tops with belly exposed and such clothing same as anybody else in the world. If the fashions you posted are for every day wear, they are a step in the right direction.These examples were only shown to give a rough idea of ‘modern modest’.
Some of the items though remind me of movies. There are some (very few) excellent movies, that teach a good lesson, entertain, or provide a good laugh (comedies), however, coming from Hollywood, they practically always contain one scene or a few words that makes the entire movie unwatchable for children and young adults. There is absolutely no need to add those scenes, as they only detract from the movie, but Hollywood has its purpose for adding those little details, to corrupt young people.
I am a father of quite a few girls. In the case of those fashions you posted, they are like the excellent movies I just described above, everything is fine, except they added something totally unnecessary which makes it unwearable for my girls. The two white tops are see through and the underwear is colored. There is no need for the see through, or the colored underwear below. If you blow up the first picture you will see what I mean. In the second picture, it is not as clear. The two tops are also tight. If those two models were built like Marilyn Monroe, there would be no difference between the tight sweater picture I posted of her and the white tops in your pictures.
There is no need for the tops to be see through, or tight, or the underwear colored. If those details were corrected, then these outfits could be worn by my girls.
Which of the two fashions do you think God or Our Lady would look be shocked at?Fake paradigm, brah, for both are inspired by the Jєω.
Fake paradigm, brah, for both are inspired by the Jєω.Thanks for the explanation.
The left is Wahhabism, which was created by crypto-Jєωs; and the House of Saud is a crypto-Jєω family, which is why you never see them intervene on behalf of, or give aid to, Palestinians who are victims of Israeli ethnic cleansing. It's why Saudi Arabia and Israel colluded to create ISIS to try to destroy Syria. They collaborated to foment the revolution in Syria along with providing outside mercenaries and ISIS to overthrow Assad.
The right is the early genesis of the spirit of Asmodeus, which manifests in pop culture's dress attire. As intended, in this post-modern age, the attire of prostitutes from 10-15 years ago becomes the normal casual wear of little girls and women, today.
As Cantarella says, both are an affront to the dignity of woman.
You are a good example to the your chapel and the world. An example affects many more people than you can even imagine.
I tweak clothing for my younger girls quite easily, which one could do similarly with these outfits also.
One example: Do you know those formal dresses for girls that are mostly tank style that come out every Spring? My solution, I put a white collared school shirt underneath(pictured below)..modesty problem solved. So no more fretting over not being able to find modest dresses I just use cotton shirts and sweaters. Easy-peasy: )
Because the modest families have 10 children while the immodest ones have 5. Eventually the laity will become modest again, by process of elimination.
Most of the young girls at my SSPX chapel outside of mass, wear short shorts, tight jeans, tight revealing tank tops with belly exposed and such clothing same as anybody else in the world. If the fashions you posted are for every day wear, they are a step in the right direction.Same goes for the young ladies at my sspx chapel, except they often wear the immodest clothing to mass, too. Nightie looking things, mid thigh skirts, super tight blouses (even from the "bonnet people" girls). Some of the girls post photos of themselves in bikinis on their Facebook pages.
Some of the items though remind me of movies. There are some (very few) excellent movies, that teach a good lesson, entertain, or provide a good laugh (comedies), however, coming from Hollywood, they practically always contain one scene or a few words that makes the entire movie unwatchable for children and young adults. There is absolutely no need to add those scenes, as they only detract from the movie, but Hollywood has its purpose for adding those little details, to corrupt young people.
I am a father of quite a few girls. In the case of those fashions you posted, they are like the excellent movies I just described above, everything is fine, except they added something totally unnecessary which makes it unwearable for my girls. The two white tops are see through and the underwear is colored. There is no need for the see through, or the colored underwear below. If you blow up the first picture you will see what I mean. In the second picture, it is not as clear. The two tops are also tight. If those two models were built like Marilyn Monroe, there would be no difference between the tight sweater picture I posted of her and the white tops in your pictures.
There is no need for the tops to be see through, or tight, or the underwear colored. If those details were corrected, then these outfits could be worn by my girls.
These examples were only shown to give a rough idea of ‘modern modest’.Yeah, i tried that, too. Problem is, when my daughter grew up and moved out, she was so used to buying such dresses that she continued to buy such but began to forget the undershirt.
I tweak clothing for my younger girls quite easily, which one could do similarly with these outfits also.
One example: Do you know those formal dresses for girls that are mostly tank style that come out every Spring? My solution, I put a white collared school shirt underneath(pictured below)..modesty problem solved. So no more fretting over not being able to find modest dresses I just use cotton shirts and sweaters. Easy-peasy: )
There has been for some reason a sudden arrival of Novus Ordo Latina women to our chapel. Latina women are the most affected group by this dress provocatively to attract men mindset, and despite bouncing from one man to another all their lives, they continue with the same error, teaching it to their daughters. Here is an example of the typical clothes they wear to mass, everything is always skin tight, like sausage casing.
Here is the lesson I teach my daughters from the time they start noticing boys:
Women erroneously learn from other women that their beauty and value comes from the attraction they can bring to themselves from men. They are taught that the way to attract men is to dress provocatively and to flirt. In poor countries this is the way a woman can become rich overnight, however, it is like the lottery, 99+% of the women will lose and will spend an entire life of misery, always wondering why they go from man to man, till their grave.
There has been for some reason a sudden arrival of Novus Ordo Latina women to our chapel. Latina women are the most affected group by this dress provocatively to attract men mindset, and despite bouncing from one man to another all their lives, they continue with the same error, teaching it to their daughters. Here is an example of the typical clothes they wear to mass, everything is always skin tight, like sausage casing.This is what some of the young ladies wear at our sspx chapel. They add a little bolo jacket or bolo sweater over it.
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/NnTSpPPpuLM/maxresdefault.jpg) (https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiylKjaxenZAhUN3FMKHTbCAP0QjRwIBg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DNnTSpPPpuLM&psig=AOvVaw1SLhH2msn1mj03Mx5SSTEy&ust=1521038890143238)
Here is the lesson I teach my daughters from the time they start noticing boys:I recommend starting before they notice boys. Long before.
Once a young girl is infected with this mindset, they are caught for life.
(https://mail.aol.com/webmail/getPart?uid=29992680&partId=1.2.2&scope=DWEB&saveAs=Embedded1520944439731.jpg)I do not see a picture
This picture was taken over 100 years ago. Although well covered these young ladies all wear dresses with
bodices that are skin tight from neck to waist. Although bras were not yet invented, they are definitely
wearing push up corsets, which was the fashion then.
Would the ushers of present day ask them to cover up?
Would the ushers of present day ask them to cover up?
This is what some of the young ladies at my sspx wear (haven't been for a couple of years, so things may have changed), along with a tight white blouse and dark underwear.It is worse than you think, because it is the mother that bought them those clothes and the Father who paid for them.
I just don't understand the parents of such girls.
You are a good example to the your chapel and the world. An example affects many more people than you can even imagine.Your daughters sound lovely and charming, and your wife appears to be doing a great job. Great story. Thanks for sharing!
When we would go to restaurants, there is practically not one time that some one does not come up to us to commend us on the behavior of our children. My wife is a very good cook, so the children are accustomed to eating adult foods from all over the world and food for them is a big festival. All the children at the table eating and conversing and trying each others dish, it is a big festival. You can see many couples and adults looking at the party and marveling. The clothes my girls wear is part of the attraction, it separates them from the world, it is what first attracts everyone. On two occasions, when I asked for the bill, the waiter told me it was paid already by someone who wished to remain anonymous. This is how one family can change the world, by actually looking like someone who is serious about living a happy holy life.
It is worse than you think, because it is the mother that bought them those clothes and the Father who paid for them.I wonder if the mothers DO buy the clothes, or if they send the daughter's out to buy their own clothing. Also, I wonder of the girls have a job and tell her parents "it's my money, I can spend it on what I want". I do believe men, as a general rule, do not respect women properly because they have not been taught properly.
The foundation of it all is that mothers erroneously learn from other women that their beauty and value comes from the attraction they can bring to themselves from men and they teach the same to their daughters. The fathers are indifferent to the whole thing, likely thinking about business, or golf, an NFL football game, or today, even the next video game he's going to buy.
We've seen mostly pictures of what not to wear, which is ok, but does anyone have some pictures handy of what to wear? I think it would be helpful to many. I might post some later if I have a little while to spare.Here are some I found modest, again, with no white or see through blouses and nothing tight.
Are you defending the present day fashions? Are you arguing that women had perfect modesty 100 years ago (which they didn't)? What's your point?I am absolutely NOT defending the present day fashions.
I wonder if the mothers DO buy the clothes, or if they send the daughter's out to buy their own clothing.This is how it was for me in highschool. My parents gave me money for clothes and I went shopping by myself or with friends. My parents didn't know the contents of my closet unless they saw me wearing it. I was not raised in a Catholic household, but I bet a lot of Catholics make the same mistake with their daughters.
I wonder if the mothers DO buy the clothes, or if they send the daughter's out to buy their own clothing.If the daughters do not have a car, or are not driving age, it is a certain that the mothers bought them the clothes. Besides, if they are wearing those clothes it is almost always because they always wore them, and the mother was dressing when younger for sure.
The link below has hundreds of dresses for sale- most all of them pictured are immodest (you've been cautioned), HOWEVER, you can customize the length of the skirt, the length of the sleeves and the style of the neckline, which suddenly gives you many modest options. They do have some attractive prints. I have bought a couple dresses from there. The customization fee is $10. They even give you the option to put in your measurements so the dress fits perfectly.SO expensive!
Eshakti (http://www.eshakti.com/Shop/dresses#sp=385-ep=416-pr=-col=-fab=-sorting=Featured-promotion=)
Someone wrote to me asking to post this; she was having trouble attaching the image.I would still call that immodest, as tight as those tops are.
There has been for some reason a sudden arrival of Novus Ordo Latina women to our chapel. Latina women are the most affected group by this dress-provocatively-to-attract-men mindset [....]
Here is an example of the typical clothes they wear to mass, everything is always skin tight, like sausage casing.
[....] and despite bouncing from one man to another all their lives, they continue with the same error, teaching it to their daughters.
SO expensive!Luckily they run constant promotions so you don't end up paying that price (I must say though, I do think it's a fair price for a quality product). I paid around $30 for the first dress I ordered. It really is hard to beat considering how customized they are. They are of excellent quality as well. If We could afford it, I'd buy more.
We stick to used stores. No one buys the modest ones, so they're always on clearance. :)
Oh how did my husband put it.... I think he said something like this, "I'm not going to be that dad that tells their daughter to change into something more modest because immodest clothing shall never enter this household!" :laugh1:He seems to be forgetting that those girls will continue to grow and grow. That piece of clothing was modest yesterday, not so much today. : )
So with all that "bouncing" from man to man, when do those Latinas find time to settle into a validCatholic marriage during which they produce "their daughters"? Shouldn't spinsterhood act as a genealogical dead-end for Latinas who teach "the same error" [†] that left them as spinsters?They bounce from man to man having children with each one as they go along.
The OP is no small irony in so much as it displays 2 impure fashion images and then complains about impure fashions. As a man I can honestly say that were I to be pulled into staring at those images I would in all likelihood commit a sin if not necessarily by direct thought and even possible subsequent action then at the very least by having willfully and knowingly placed myself in the immediate occasion of sin.
Unfortunately, there are some Catholic websites such as traditioninaction.org that seem to think it is perfectly all right to place very impure images on their sites. (It is particularly ironic for tradtioninaction.org to do so in so far as they carry a number of excellent articles rightly decrying the use of immodest/impure fashions.)
As Catholics we should never forget the basic Catholic principle that one may never do evil in order to bring about good. That includes the placement of impure images on the Internet -- especially on a Catholic site!
Many years ago, we had one priest from the SSPX that would fly in for Sunday mass. He was like 32, and a real man.I have not known another young SSPX priest that was as a man like that priest. The new seminary seems to be putting out in-natural inhuman robots with no manly temptations.
Someone wrote to me asking to post this; she was having trouble attaching the image.Thank you for posting the picture for me.
Just because they finished their lives as saints doesn’t mean they were so before they entered the convent. Objectively, their dresses were a little tight. Were they mortally sinful? No. But it’s wrong to point to that fashion as 100% acceptable.(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/ad/d2/69/add2695a3543b34b9ac59c989a18072a--sainte-therese-st-therese.jpg)
There’s a reason why nuns wear the habits they do - there’s 0% chance of immodesty - just like Our Lady dressed. Many women don’t want to hear that, but it’s true.
(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/ad/d2/69/add2695a3543b34b9ac59c989a18072a--sainte-therese-st-therese.jpg)Beautiful! Thank you.
I wonder if this is acceptable to the dress police.
or this painting from an original photo. This shows how she went to visit the pope with her father.
(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/6c/ef/b4/6cefb4ff9c80fc86e7f0c4ebc36f2e0d.jpg)
For one to think that any black-n-white photo from the 1800s or early 1900s is automatically modest doesn't know history. As an example, in the US in the "roaring 20s", immodesty and immorality was rampant. I think the Great Depression was a punishment for that.Just watch any "old movie" with a critical eye. Look at all the subtle problems. Sure, they had certain standards and lines they wouldn't cross back then, which is kind of refreshing here in 2018. But look at how the women dressed, wore their hair, their ambitions, family life, etc. the problems were already legion.
I posted this on the MALE modesty thread, but think it's relevant here too --That is not relevant to this thread at all, since this thread is about the "Slow Boiling the Mass Fashions of Women"
Well, there's more to covering up than not to be a temptation.
aSo, for instance, you might have a man or woman who is seriously overweight or otherwise extremely unattractive. If they were to expose themselves, they would not only NOT be a temptation, but it might actually have the OPPOSITE effect, to turn people off to allures of the flesh.Some men are attracted to fat women.
Some men are attracted to fat women.
Some men are attracted to fat women.If we look at nude art, the ideal beautiful woman was different than today, as all the women in nude art history were fat women by our standards today. If men were attracted to big women like that for like 4000 years, then there are still a large percentage of men today that have not been brainwashed to the "new" perfection.
If we look at art, the idea of a beautiful woman was different than today. All the women in nude art history were fat women by our standards today. If men were attracted to big women like that for like 4000 years, then there are still a large percentage of men today that have not been brainwashed to the "new" perfection.
You can find SOME men who are attracted to anything ... and tempted to sin by it.Bottom line:
...
Older women dressed in tight sweaters are not going to tempt young men, that's for sure, on the other hand, there's some older men who would be tempted by a light socket, however, like you say temptation is not the problem with the older women wearing that fashion. The problem with women in their 50's and older wearing those fashions is that they are a bad example to the younger girls. What are they going to tell a pretty young girl like Marilyn Monroe when she wears the same thing?
Well, what I had in mind was the EXTREMELY obese person where no evidence of figure (female or otherwise) can be detected ... not the slightly plump women you'd see in art. But the point was that even if almost NO ONE would find you attractive, you should still dress modestly.Ok, I see.
It's also important to remember that there are DEGREES of immodesty ... and therefore degrees of sin involved.....This looks like a typical sermon from a priests who will never reach anyone. It is just a series of copouts. In the end, the conclusion will be, OK, I'll do as I think.
This looks like a typical sermon from a priests who will never reach anyone. It is just a series of copouts. In the end, the conclusion will be, OK, I'll do as I think.
Problem is that not everything is black and white. Lots of people seek comfort in trying to force everything to be clear cut and simple.Here's the problem, the Prostitute shoes and such provocative worldly fashions as mass attire is just the tip of the iceberg, it is a big red flag, an indicator that those wearing them are dressing the rest of the week like everyone in the street, wearing short shorts, spandex leggings as pants, yoga pants, tight blue jeans, tight tank tops with belly exposed.........
Here is a picture of Marilyn Monroe in what was called I think the "tight sweater" fashion. No Catholic woman would have worn that to mass in those times, but today even traditionalist women in their 50's and up wear them to mass and think nothing of it. What do the ladies here have to say about this?Same top as Marilyn Monroe exhibited for all by the SSPX spokes girl on the SSPX News website:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Monroecirca1953.jpg/220px-Monroecirca1953.jpg) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Monroecirca1953.jpg)
Here's the problem, the Prostitute shoes and such provocative worldly fashions as mass attire is just the tip of the iceberg, it is a big red flag, an indicator that those wearing them are dressing the rest of the week like everyone in the street, wearing short shorts, spandex leggings as pants, yoga pants, tight blue jeans, tight tank tops with belly exposed.........They are called Sunday Catholics.
This is what I have personally seen because I see the same people here and there during the week.
These are the new generation of mothers in the SSPX and their children, mothers under like 45 and their daughters.
Same top as Marilyn Monroe exhibited for all by the SSPX spokes girl on the SSPX News website:Here is the YouTube link
Some good posts from Ladislaus in this thread -- I recommend that everyone read them.Accidentally down voted your post, sorry.
https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/slow-boiling-the-mass-fashions-of-women/msg599950/#msg599950
https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/slow-boiling-the-mass-fashions-of-women/msg599959/#msg599959
Same top as Marilyn Monroe exhibited for all by the SSPX spokes girl on the SSPX News website:
http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/five-new-subdeacons-ordained-united-states-video-36666?utm_source=SSPX+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=aa9ee6d9c0-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_03_28&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7e99fe6b53-aa9ee6d9c0-100028789&mc_cid=aa9ee6d9c0&mc_eid=b1d9a6890d
Girls erroneously learn from their mothers and other women that their beauty and value comes from the attraction they can bring to themselves from men. They are taught that the way to attract men is to dress provocatively and to flirt. Even the most amazing looking girl does not know that they are beautiful except from the reaction of others, unless they are taught otherwise.
I am a man who was in the world till I was 40, and I learned the fact that women gauge their beauty by the reaction of men, and I used it to attract the most beautiful women, by ignoring them and all of their flirting. The more I ignored them, the more they flirted, till they were caught.
Now I am a father of a lot of girls and I teach them to know their own self worth. I teach them that practically all the women in the world are infected with this mindset that "their beauty and value comes from the attraction they can bring to themselves from men".
In poor countries dressing provocatively and to flirting is the way a poor woman can become rich overnight, however, it is like the lottery, 99+% of the women will lose and will spend an entire life of misery, always wondering why they go from man to man, till their grave. Once a young girl is infected with this mindset, they are caught for life. Practically all women have this desease. It is the foundation of all immodesty and immorality.
I beg to differ.
Many teen girls give their parents hell during their teen years. Many, when they leave home, fall to the pressures of their friends. Many of those from sketchy backgrounds (born to non catholic parents who later divorced, then one remarries traditional), have pressure from their biological parents (male or female one, whoever is not sole guardian).
I get tired of people always blaming the parents for the falls of the children.
Everyone has free will and many use it against the advice of their trad parents.
I beg to differ.
Many teen girls give their parents hell during their teen years. Many, when they leave home, fall to the pressures of their friends. Many of those from sketchy backgrounds (born to non catholic parents who later divorced, then one remarries traditional), have pressure from their biological parents (male or female one, whoever is not sole guardian).
I get tired of people always blaming the parents for the falls of the children.
Everyone has free will and many use it against the advice of their trad parents.
Last Tradhican had written: "Girls erroneously learn from their mothers and other women"
Ahh, the ol nature vs nurture debate. Fanny says sin is due to nature. Last Tradhican says sin is due to nurture. My opinion...it's both.Yes, exactly.
I posit that it is not women who teach our girls immorality, but society, especially our public schools.Society contains no women?
Society contains no women?
Ahh, the ol nature vs nurture debate. Fanny says sin is due to nature. Last Tradhican says sin is due to nurture. My opinion...it's both.You are wrong.
It is men as well as women who are corrupting our little girls and little boys.I am talking about my daughters and the daughters of other traditionalists, talking to their parents. It never entered my mind that they are sending their children to public schools, or sending their daughters off to college to live by themselves. The people who send their daughters to public schools and away to college are of the world, too far gone for me to hope to have any influence on them. What I do for my daughters would be useless if I sent them to public schools, it would be like building a square fort with 30' high concrete walls on only three sides! What I write has barely any influence among the SSPX trads that send their children to SSPX schools, so you can forget about the rest of the world.
Our mandatory sex education from kindergarden to college corrupts all of the students, leaving them no longer virgins mentally, spiritually, and/or physically.
Who murdered St. Mary Goretti? Was it not a man who was attempting to rape her even though she said, "No."
Who wrote Paper Towns, a very seductive book which teaches boys how to seduce women, etc? Was it not a man by the name of John Green?
And my professor at the university who taught Literature in the High School Years and who compiled a mandatory reading list containing 14 books of which 10 were simply awful, he certainly was a man. In addition, this professor told us that seduction and rape occur too often in public schools, that teachers must prepare students to deal with rape, and that students should know how to protect themselves. However, there is a huge difference between giving students books to read that teach them how to seduce and how to rape, and in teaching self-defense.
No matter how children are nurtured they can still choose the right or wrong path, at any age of their life.Of course they can!
Of course they can!
It seems some here think that because children were brought up properly when they become teenagers the devil will leave them alone. SURPRISE.....these children will be tempted most. And many will fall.
And they value the opinions of their peers much more than they do those of their parentsPersonally, even though I went to public school and really never learned anything about the faith from my parents (mainly because they entrusted the teaching to the priests of the 1960's in Sunday school), and I was a jock and chased the girls at the beach, never did the thought enter my mind that my peers opinions was worth spit compared to my father and grandfather who lived with us or any of my uncles. They were all great men. Unfortunately, they came from a culture where the boys were allowed to chase girls. If my dad had told me the right thing to do regarding girls, I would have done it. My Dad and I lived and worked together, we were partners in business, all his life till he died, same as my grandfather. The "peers" of my youth came and went, lasting no more than a few years.
I understand the arguments made in favor of nature and free will, but I disagree with Fanny taking it to the point of completely excluding nurture. Pax is right, it is both. Otherwise, what would be the sense in parents teaching their children anything? If nurture has no part whatsoever, we might as well throw our children to the streets to raise themselves. But we don't. We put in a lot of effort and if we don't put in the effort or if we give bad examples, we answer to God. Why? Why would God bother creating the family unit and rewarding or punishing parents for their parenting if it makes no difference?I never said nurture doesn't help, I only said free will is the bottom line. For no matter how well a parent nurtures his children, free will is there for a child to choose evil. And no matter how poor the nurture, free will is there to choose good.
It is not the ultimate factor in a child's salvation, but it does still matter very much. If any child has a fighting chance at salvation it is usually through some sort of nurture. Unless they are St. Paul and convert through the direct intervention of Our Lord. That tends to be a little rarer though. Most of us depend on parental influence first, for better or worse.
Even in cases of adult children falling away, you never know if there was a seed planted by nurture that will help bring them back someday.
Too many parents with fallen young adult children blame themselves when free will is to blame.and too many parents with fallen young adult children blame free will when it was themselves who are also to blame.
Even in cases of adult children falling away, you never know if there was a seed planted by nurture that will help bring them back someday.That applies 100% to me. The seed was that somehow I learned fear of God, which is about all I learned of the faith. My Dad and grandfather taught me courage, responsibility, honesty and to jump in front of a bullet for your family. My mother and father taught me what marriage is by their example, as they were always faithful to each other till death.
If you allow your children to have friends who live a life different than what you know to be right, then you are just a living in a fort with three walls.Do your children socialize regularly with anyone outside your family?
Do your children socialize regularly with anyone outside your family?Yes they do socialize with people outside of the family. Our chapel has a congregation of about 200 people in total, so there are people their age. We homeschool, so their cirlcle of "friends" is nowhere near what it was for me when I was going to a large public school, however, despite my being "popular" because I was a jock, today looking back, I would call everyone an acquaintance rather than a real friend. These trad children have more real friends because they are among families that are like them. Despite my being in a school of like 1500 students, "friends" came and went, maybe lasting two years. The reason was that they were different than my family.
.
The rare families we know who keep to good standards of modesty do not live close enough to ever be close friends with our children.
I never said nurture doesn't help, I only said free will is the bottom line. For no matter how well a parent nurtures his children, free will is there for a child to choose evil. And no matter how poor the nurture, free will is there to choose good.I am sorry if I misunderstood but it sounded like you were quite adamant against both LT and PV that what children are taught and by whom has nothing to do with it.
Too many parents with fallen young adult children blame themselves when free will is to blame.
Very few women truly understand the effect that they way they dress, and look, and behave can have on men. (They know exactly the effect, their purpose is precisely to attract men. What they do not know is that a man can be attracted by anything with a pulse as long as it is easy)
And they value the opinions of their peers much more than they do those of their parents (If the parents are naïve idiots). Thus the teenage rebellion to which Fanny referred (This is where parents have to be on their toes). They hear their parents saying one thing and then see their friends doing another (If you allow your children to have friends who live a life different than what you know to be right, then you are just a living in a fort with three walls). They begin to resent the fact that they can't be like everyone else (if you teach them that everyone else is insane, like girls that wear bikinis in public but do not go around in their underwear in public. Those people are insane, and your children with see it.) .
We send our kids to a Traditional Catholic school. (We home school) I'm glad that you're capable of living in some off-grid bunker where your kids have no interaction whatsoever with the world (We live in a regular house on the grid and we go out into the world every day and we go to mass at least three days a week and "interact" in a parish of 200+ people. I do not know how you come up with "I'm glad that you're capable of living in some off-grid bunker where your kids have no interaction whatsoever with the world", from anything I have written. I guess you think that what I advise, could only be accomplished by someone who is "living in some off-grid bunker where your kids have no interaction whatsoever with the world". ) . Most of us can't. (This comment tends to corroborate that you think that the only way to do the things I have advised is by "living in some off-grid bunker where your kids have no interaction whatsoever with the world". But, as the Scriptural saying goes, pride goeth before a fall (I am doing what I am doing with my children because it has worked for others, and from my experience with my parents and grandparents and my having already lived through the 1960's. This is not something super human, that can't be done. Anyone can do what I have advised here.)I do not know where to begin, it really does not deserve a response, but since it is from someone I respect, I will respond. see red
(From here on, below, it is just your answer to a your own Strawman created above, not worth answering. Except to repeat, what I adivise can be done by anyone, one does not have to "live off-grid bunker where their kids have no interaction whatsoever with the world".)
I have personally known several families where the kids grew up in a similar "bunker" ... only to go crazy when they were first exposed to the world, shacking up, getting pregnant out of wedlock, ceasing to practice the faith altogether. You can "teach" them anything you want, but it's all about God's grace (and their free will) in the final analysis. I'm sorry, but most people who are fed the mentality that everyone apart from them is insane often end up going nuts themselves ... developing a neurotic paranoia. It's more likely that your kids will end up seeing YOU as insane rather than those in the world. In most cases, balance and prudence are important. You like to pontificate about every subject and judge everyone else who doesn't live up to your own perfection. Just be careful, friend, because that rarely ends well.
In being TOO rigorous, almost Jansenistic, there's always the risk of backlash, resentment (often projected against Traditional Catholicism), and "forbidden fruit" syndrome. One has to know the children involved and get a feel for how they are going to react. (What specifically is rigorous and Jansenist in what anyone here has written? No quotes provided.)
I have 4 girls. I could stand my ground with an iron fist and ruthlessly impose in unbending Draconian fashion: absolutely no makeup, requirement to wear nothing but glorified potato sacks for clothes, no Jєωelry whatsoever, absolutely no contact with any boys, and absolutely no contact with anyone who's not as perfect as we are. (all of these exaggerated examples are the same as the "living in some off-grid bunker where your kids have no interaction whatsoever with the world". It is a strawman. I do not see that anyone here said "absolutely no makeup, requirement to wear nothing but glorified potato sacks for clothes, no Jєωelry whatsoever, absolutely no contact with any boys, and absolutely no contact with anyone who's not as perfect as we are) What do I imagine their reaction will be the SECOND they gain a bit of independence from me? Especially since there's no requirement that's ever been taught by the Church along these lines.
I allow my daughters to wear a very light amount of makeup (never to the point of looking like clowns or prostitutes) and allow them to wear nice clothes that may be somewhat elegant and even form-fitting (without violating the standards of modesty laid down by Pius XI), allow them to wear a modest amount of simple Jєωelry ... letting them feel pretty. I allow them to mix with boys in very tightly-controlled situations ... but not to date one on one and certainly not in a "steady" fashion. If they don't get somewhat familiar with boys, with their faults and failings, how are they to pick out a good husband from among all the bums out there? ( sounds good to me) By acquiring this familiarity, they will be less likely to be ensnared by the blandishments of the first good-looking dirtbag who comes along, gives them attention, and tells them that they're pretty. Being more adept at sifting among the good and the bad, they will be in a better position to pick out someone who's more likely to be virtuous and otherwise compatible with their temperament and character. Similarly with my boys. If I never let them have some exposure to girls, then that merely increases the likelihood of their falling for the first pretty seductress who comes on to them. But if they have some familiarity with women, they'll be more likely to see through this and realize how shallow and ugly these types of women really are. There's a point where too LITTLE exposure can make someone more prone to fall into impurity ... obviously within limits. (all fine)
I let my kids drink a little wine and beer from time to time ... within strict limits. I could be like a Puritanical Prot and prohibit even a whiff of alcohol. Since I've let them try it, it's no longer some big enticing mysterious forbidden fruit. (OK) Lots of kids go to college and go from one drinking binge to another because they get their first taste of alcohol there.
And these limits depend on the kids and their temperaments and their characters. With some you need to be more strict, whereas with others you need to give them a little more latitude. So, for instance, I have one son who's an extreme choleric. I could beat him to within an inch of his life, and he would just grit his teeth in defiance more sternly with each blow. On the other hand, I have a couple of girls who break down into uncontrolled hysterical crying if I but raise my voice ever so slightly.
I’ve found that teaching my children ‘custody of the eyes’ is critical to helping maintain purity in these days. We can’t choose what other people wear so we can only learn what to do when faced with an immodestly dressed person whether male or female.Not only is custody of the eyes or guarding the eyes from seeing anything impure important, but also guarding all the senses: seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touching is extremely important for our salvation. If we guard our sense of smell and taste, then we will not be tempted to gluttony, which leads to lust. If we guard our sense of hearing by refusing to listen to certain news casts, commercials, TV shows, and movies, then we will be pure and not persuaded by the fashions and temptations of today. If we guard our ears and tongue, then we will not commit the sins of slander, gossip, and detraction. And touching -- we need to keep our hands folded in prayer.
So instead of being scandalized every time we see immodest dress my children know to say a quick prayer ‘Jesus my Lord and my God have mercy on us and on the whole whole world’. That way reparation can be done immediately and scandal is avoided. It’s a win/win I think.
In being TOO rigorous, almost Jansenistic, there's always the risk of backlash, resentment (often projected against Traditional Catholicism), and "forbidden fruit" syndrome. One has to know the children involved and get a feel for how they are going to react.You sound like you allow your daughter's to taste the forbidden fruit only a little bit. How did that work out for Adam and eve?
I have 4 girls. I could stand my ground with an iron fist and ruthlessly impose in unbending Draconian fashion: absolutely no makeup, requirement to wear nothing but glorified potato sacks for clothes, no Jєωelry whatsoever, absolutely no contact with any boys, and absolutely no contact with anyone who's not as perfect as we are. What do I imagine their reaction will be the SECOND they gain a bit of independence from me? Especially since there's no requirement that's ever been taught by the Church along these lines.
I allow my daughters to wear a very light amount of makeup (never to the point of looking like clowns or prostitutes) and allow them to wear nice clothes that may be somewhat elegant and even form-fitting (without violating the standards of modesty laid down by Pius XI), allow them to wear a modest amount of simple Jєωelry ... letting them feel pretty. I allow them to mix with boys in very tightly-controlled situations ... but not to date one on one and certainly not in a "steady" fashion. If they don't get somewhat familiar with boys, with their faults and failings, how are they to pick out a good husband from among all the bums out there? By acquiring this familiarity, they will be less likely to be ensnared by the blandishments of the first good-looking dirtbag who comes along, gives them attention, and tells them that they're pretty. Being more adept at sifting among the good and the bad, they will be in a better position to pick out someone who's more likely to be virtuous and otherwise compatible with their temperament and character. Similarly with my boys. If I never let them have some exposure to girls, then that merely increases the likelihood of their falling for the first pretty seductress who comes on to them. But if they have some familiarity with women, they'll be more likely to see through this and realize how shallow and ugly these types of women really are. There's a point where too LITTLE exposure can make someone more prone to fall into impurity ... obviously within limits.
I let my kids drink a little wine and beer from time to time ... within strict limits. I could be like a Puritanical Prot and prohibit even a whiff of alcohol. Since I've let them try it, it's no longer some big enticing mysterious forbidden fruit. Lots of kids go to college and go from one drinking binge to another because they get their first taste of alcohol there.
And these limits depend on the kids and their temperaments and their characters. With some you need to be more strict, whereas with others you need to give them a little more latitude. So, for instance, I have one son who's an extreme choleric. I could beat him to within an inch of his life, and he would just grit his teeth in defiance more sternly with each blow. On the other hand, I have a couple of girls who break down into uncontrolled hysterical crying if I but raise my voice ever so slightly.
You sound like you allow your daughter's to taste the forbidden fruit only a little bit. How did that work out for Adam and eve?13 girls! All married with children, traditional Catholic. Real world results. Can't argue that.
My father reared 13 girls. No makeup, no heels over 2 inches, no tight clothing, no hair dye, no hairspray or gels, no boyfriends until we were ready to marry.
Know what happened? Almost all, without exception are married with children, traditional Catholic, wear no makeup, no heels over 2 inches, no tight clothing, no hair dye, no hairspray or gels unless its a very special occasion.
So I obviously completely disagree with you.
Some of them.
Question? Were those girls reared during the 1960's?
You sound like you allow your daughter's to taste the forbidden fruit only a little bit. How did that work out for Adam and eve?
My father reared 13 girls. No makeup, no heels over 2 inches, no tight clothing, no hair dye, no hairspray or gels, no boyfriends until we were ready to marry.
Know what happened? Almost all, without exception are married with children, traditional Catholic, wear no makeup, no heels over 2 inches, no tight clothing, no hair dye, no hairspray or gels unless its a very special occasion.
So I obviously completely disagree with you.
Really the only difference in what I allow vs. your list, Fanny, is that I allow light makeup vs. your no makeup. So is that what you "disagree" about, suggesting that my daughters are being subjected to temptation like "Adam and Eve"? You need to think a little before posting stuff like that and making gratuitous accusations.You said:
... As a side note, acne and psoriasis are both due to heavy metal toxicity. Easy to detox those, so there is no reason to wear makeup.Yes, mercury amalgams and the mercury and aluminum in vaccines do contribute to acne and psoriasis. In addition, consumption of a typical teenage diet consisting of trans fatty acids in snack foods, hydrogenated oils, and fried foods causes pimples to break out and then become infected. The standard American diet (SAD) is terrible for one's physical and mental health.
Some-what form-fitting clothing is no good. I think there have been enough examples recently in other threads to see clothing can be nice without having to be either form-fitting or potato sacks.
You also said:
"There's a point where too LITTLE exposure can make someone more prone to fall into impurity ..."
You need to think a little before offending Catholics who try to teach their daughters to follow the example of Our Lady.
no heels over 2 inches
What the heck do you think I meant by SOMEWHAT form-fitting. I was contrasting that with the "potato sack" ... in other words expressing your very own in-between of "without having to be either form-fitting or potato sacks."I agree.
For crying out loud.
Only difference between my post and your example is the light amount of makeup.
I was writing in reaction to the type that would have their family look like and act like the Amish all the time.
Yes, mercury amalgams and the mercury and aluminum in vaccines do contribute to acne and psoriasis. In addition, consumption of a typical teenage diet consisting of trans fatty acids in snack foods, hydrogenated oils, and fried foods causes pimples to break out and then become infected. The standard American diet (SAD) is terrible for one's physical and mental health.Acne is typically directly related to heavy metal toxicity. Simple detox: drink 2 drops cilantro oil in a cup of water once daily. Take 3000 mg chlorella three times daily until the acne clears up then stop the cilantro for a month, continuing to take the chlorella.
You need to improve your reading comprehension before inserting your foot into your mouth and accusing me of raising harlots. And learn to accept correction when you're wrong. Those are both lessons that your father evidently FAILED to teach you.Wow. 3 posts on one of mine. I am sorry I hit a nerve...
Wow. 3 posts on one of mine. I am sorry I hit a nerve...Providing help when it is not asked is called officiousness. Mea culpa.
Never said you are raising harlots. Only tried to help.
As a side note, I have never, ever, been referred to as a holier-than-thou or a "bonnet person". People are so strange.
Providing help when it is not asked is called officiousness. Mea culpa.This entire website exists to try to help others. At least I think that's why it is here... Every thread, every post with information and not trolling, is attempting to help others.
Women are often accused of being bossy, which is acceptable in a man, but not in a woman.
This entire website exists to try to help others. At least I think that's why it is here... Every thread, every post with information and not trolling, is attempting to help others.I have the impression here at CathInfo that men do not like it when women volunteer any advice whatsoever.
Are you saying is that any woman who participates on this website is officious and should not be here, including you?
I have the impression here at CathInfo that men do not like it when women volunteer any advice whatsoever.
There is a difference between sharing personal experiences and news stories, and asking questions and responding to questions versus giving advice.