Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone  (Read 4958 times)

2 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2026, 03:04:58 PM »
I have always found the image of a woman in modest skirt to resemble flower petals. The woman transforms herself from a female of the species to something of beauty like a walking flower. What cretin wants to destroy a flower?

I have rarely had the luxury of seeing this, the novus ordo here the elder ladies wear trousers, hold their deacon husband by the nape of his neck.

Bp. Williamson helped articulate my perspective when he said, "The mother of God is strong and tender and gentle."

Not one woman exemplifies this trait in my family, nor my community, but hearing of the Saints, the Mother of God, hearing examples like yours, gives me hope.
What a sweet and innocent analogy! All glory to God.

Perhaps encouraging the women in your life to wear long skirts and dresses would help. Even simple comments such as "you would look lovely with a long, flowy skirt" may help, or subtle remarks on how much better women are treated when dressed modestly.

Alternatively, asking them how they feel wearing certain clothes, and if these feelings truly satisfy their hearts (which were made for virtue), may cause them to examine themselves and their actions more closely.

I have spoken to male family members who told me very honestly, that they are more inclined to treat a woman like a lady simply from her being dressed properly, and that when a woman is in pants or immodestly dressed, they do not see such a woman as worthy of the same respect.

Once, I read a story of a woman modestly dressed on an airplane, who was struggling with her luggage. A man nearby, who was married, and whose wife was wearing tight pants, left his wife to assist the modesty dressed woman. Incredible!

Re: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone
« Reply #11 on: March 26, 2026, 06:04:40 PM »
I am sorry that this happened to you. There are, of course, men who are not deterred by anything. It is equally important to invoke Our Lady and our guardian angel everyday, for protection, if there is no one else to protect us, as I am sure you do.

If I may ask, were your legs bare? I know that men will admire bare legs, even if only the calves are showing. Men used to drool over ankles once upon a time. Lust will find anything to desire. Opaque stockings = unattractive to an impure man.

Moreover, traditional Catholic men who are devout, have told me themselves, that they wish women, especially their wives and daughters, would wear ankle length skirts, or skirts just above the ankle. This is the type I always wear, and what I was wearing when being treated respectfully by men. One older gentleman in public, actually thanked me for demonstrating to him that I was a woman, through my skirt.

The events I described above all occurred in a big city, known for its successful business men and impurity. Encountering even disreputable homeless men and women, I was always treated very well. I would sometimes tell them about Our Lady and give them miraculous medals. One man was maybe 6'6 and a negroe, very strong looking man, and yelled at me angrily for telling him about Our Lady, because he was a Protestant. It was terrifying. But I somehow managed to calmly defended her honour, and to my surprise he softened, and actually bowed down with his hand extended to receive the medal. I hesitated to see if he was joking, but he was not, and he insisted on receiving it.

Perhaps part of it is my deportment. Women do not realize that men are enticed or feel invited by two things: fear and desire. If a woman is insecure, appears to be a woman who has no one, etc., she is an easy target, having the appearance of being defenceless. A sad or slightly fearful look in the face, slouched posture and the like, all give this impression. Men who do improper things with female strangers are predators. Think of lions who love the chase with their prey. The more timid the prey, and the more the prey struggles, the more the lion wishes to conquer and devour. It is the same with these men.

Encouraging the male stranger in any way through eye contact, prolonged staring (even slightly), smiles, polite conversation, etc. is a big NO NO. If I ever noticed a man staring at me in public and I was alone, usually at a train station, I would give him a good angry glare and wait until he looked discouraged and intimidated, and look away, never looking back, as I kept myself confidently upright, my walk determined, and carried myself as though I belonged to a King, and that this man was utterly beneath my dignity.
No! My legs were absolutely not bare! The only skin showing was my face, which he I don’t think he saw. It was January, cold, snowy, on the subway in NY. I had on a mid-calf length heavy wool coat, knit hat, scarf, mittens, boots to the hem of the coat. Let’s just say he took advantage of the packed car to grab my rear. No, it was quite on purpose, no accident. He was white, since you mentioned race. He made a lewd remark. I screamed and stomped his foot with my heel. The train pulled into 86 St. and he bolted out the door. When I reported it to the transit police at 96 St., the cop said, “Lady, what do you want me to do?” (“Butcher the pig.” I didn’t say that, of course, but it crossed my mind.) 

There are other times where some man or teen boy made comments. The worst incident I cannot and do not wish to tell on this forum. The two people who could have done something chose not to deal with the creep. One said he’d “take care of it,” but I’ve no evidence whatsoever that he did. The other implied I was exaggerating and had misinterpreted him, both of which are ridiculous. 
In no instance did I have bare legs, or flirt, stare, bat my eyes or engage in immodest or suggestive behavior! In NYC, a woman WANTS to be in a crowded place where even a creepy fellow can only go so far without lots of witnesses. Today, people would record it and post it online. You DO NOT want to be in a vacant or sparsely peopled area in a big city. You may as well wear a sandwich board with the words, “Easy Victim” written on it. And everyone with common sense knows not to stare into the eyes of a stranger, particularly, not a woman to some man. You do not do that in New York City, or start chatting up some person. It’s just not done in that area. It’s why people say New Yorkers aren’t friendly, all mean and nasty! Well, some are, but lots of aren’t. It just has to be the right situation. Packed in with strangers on the train, bus, in the elevator, you pretty much avert your gaze. 
Men who seem recently, to be CathInfo complaining about the sorry state of women, I’m presuming it is not the women at your chapel or where you hear Mass who are raging feminists, immodest, impure, immoral and everything repulsive. These are the numerous women in the world while at your chapel, there are very slim pickings, for example, a dozen women total and three are your sisters and four your cousins. That leaves five single women, none of whom you find attractive. You don’t hate them. They aren’t feminists, but well, they’re just not your type. Please let me know if I’m right. Married ladies, sometimes I wonder if you don’t do the same. In general, traditional Catholics are too judgmental of one another. There are issues caused by the crisis in the Church as a whole, that cannot, will not be 100% solved, “ex Cathedra,” until we have a thoroughly Catholic Pope and hierarchy, whatever that takes, whenever God Wills it. Until then, we are like the Israelites in the time of the Judges. “There was no king in Israel, but every one did that which seemed right to himself.” Judges 21:24.

When I read these hypercritical, condemning posts, I am assuming they do not apply to me, personally. Or maybe they do and I don’t see it. It would be good to specify.  


Re: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone
« Reply #12 on: March 26, 2026, 06:25:34 PM »
No! My legs were absolutely not bare! The only skin showing was my face, which he I don’t think he saw. It was January, cold, snowy, on the subway in NY. I had on a mid-calf length heavy wool coat, knit hat, scarf, mittens, boots to the hem of the coat. Let’s just say he took advantage of the packed car to grab my rear. No, it was quite on purpose, no accident. He was white, since you mentioned race. He made a lewd remark. I screamed and stomped his foot with my heel. The train pulled into 86 St. and he bolted out the door. When I reported it to the transit police at 96 St., the cop said, “Lady, what do you want me to do?” (“Butcher the pig.” I didn’t say that, of course, but it crossed my mind.)

There are other times where some man or teen boy made comments. The worst incident I cannot and do not wish to tell on this forum. The two people who could have done something chose not to deal with the creep. One said he’d “take care of it,” but I’ve no evidence whatsoever that he did. The other implied I was exaggerating and had misinterpreted him, both of which are ridiculous.
In no instance did I have bare legs, or flirt, stare, bat my eyes or engage in immodest or suggestive behavior! In NYC, a woman WANTS to be in a crowded place where even a creepy fellow can only go so far without lots of witnesses. Today, people would record it and post it online. You DO NOT want to be in a vacant or sparsely peopled area in a big city. You may as well wear a sandwich board with the words, “Easy Victim” written on it. And everyone with common sense knows not to stare into the eyes of a stranger, particularly, not a woman to some man. You do not do that in New York City, or start chatting up some person. It’s just not done in that area. It’s why people say New Yorkers aren’t friendly, all mean and nasty! Well, some are, but lots of aren’t. It just has to be the right situation. Packed in with strangers on the train, bus, in the elevator, you pretty much avert your gaze.
Men who seem recently, to be CathInfo complaining about the sorry state of women, I’m presuming it is not the women at your chapel or where you hear Mass who are raging feminists, immodest, impure, immoral and everything repulsive. These are the numerous women in the world while at your chapel, there are very slim pickings, for example, a dozen women total and three are your sisters and four your cousins. That leaves five single women, none of whom you find attractive. You don’t hate them. They aren’t feminists, but well, they’re just not your type. Please let me know if I’m right. Married ladies, sometimes I wonder if you don’t do the same. In general, traditional Catholics are too judgmental of one another. There are issues caused by the crisis in the Church as a whole, that cannot, will not be 100% solved, “ex Cathedra,” until we have a thoroughly Catholic Pope and hierarchy, whatever that takes, whenever God Wills it. Until then, we are like the Israelites in the time of the Judges. “There was no king in Israel, but every one did that which seemed right to himself.” Judges 21:24.

When I read these hypercritical, condemning posts, I am assuming they do not apply to me, personally. Or maybe they do and I don’t see it. It would be good to specify. 
I do not understand what your overall point is?

I was merely asking questions, not accusing you of anything, and gave some tips that have helped me personally.

Obviously, traditional Catholic women know not to be flirty, and what I described NOT to do, was not flirting, but a series of imprudences that can be done without an ill intent. Also, some women naively believe being politely friendly is a safe thing to do with strangers, when it is not, which is all I was trying to say.

I should note that I never give an angry glare to a man who is obviously dangerous. I have only done so with men when it seemed necessary, and who seem sleazy, but nothing more than that. 

There is no need to defend yourself to me nor to anyone else, if you have honestly done all you can to protect yourself, and if you observe the commandments regarding modesty.

As I said above at the beginning of my post as a disclaimer, some men are not deterred by anything. 

Re: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone
« Reply #13 on: March 26, 2026, 07:28:22 PM »
I did feel a bit on the defensive, like, No, of course I don’t go around with leg showing. But no harm done. 

I find that many trads from rural areas, women especially and young adults if they’ve been homeschooled, have been very sheltered and are therefore naive about certain things.  It can be refreshing to see innocence, but in today’s world, it can be dangerous. 

As you said, some men, and women, too, are not deterred by anything. They are possessed of demons and have no conscience, no honor whatsoever. 

Re: Bishop Williamson - women being allowed in public alone
« Reply #14 on: March 26, 2026, 07:36:59 PM »
No! My legs were absolutely not bare! The only skin showing was my face, which he I don’t think he saw. It was January, cold, snowy, on the subway in NY. I had on a mid-calf length heavy wool coat, knit hat, scarf, mittens, boots to the hem of the coat. Let’s just say he took advantage of the packed car to grab my rear. No, it was quite on purpose, no accident. He was white, since you mentioned race. He made a lewd remark. I screamed and stomped his foot with my heel. The train pulled into 86 St. and he bolted out the door. When I reported it to the transit police at 96 St., the cop said, “Lady, what do you want me to do?” (“Butcher the pig.” I didn’t say that, of course, but it crossed my mind.)

There are other times where some man or teen boy made comments. The worst incident I cannot and do not wish to tell on this forum. The two people who could have done something chose not to deal with the creep. One said he’d “take care of it,” but I’ve no evidence whatsoever that he did. The other implied I was exaggerating and had misinterpreted him, both of which are ridiculous.
In no instance did I have bare legs, or flirt, stare, bat my eyes or engage in immodest or suggestive behavior! In NYC, a woman WANTS to be in a crowded place where even a creepy fellow can only go so far without lots of witnesses. Today, people would record it and post it online. You DO NOT want to be in a vacant or sparsely peopled area in a big city. You may as well wear a sandwich board with the words, “Easy Victim” written on it. And everyone with common sense knows not to stare into the eyes of a stranger, particularly, not a woman to some man. You do not do that in New York City, or start chatting up some person. It’s just not done in that area. It’s why people say New Yorkers aren’t friendly, all mean and nasty! Well, some are, but lots of aren’t. It just has to be the right situation. Packed in with strangers on the train, bus, in the elevator, you pretty much avert your gaze.
Men who seem recently, to be CathInfo complaining about the sorry state of women, I’m presuming it is not the women at your chapel or where you hear Mass who are raging feminists, immodest, impure, immoral and everything repulsive. These are the numerous women in the world while at your chapel, there are very slim pickings, for example, a dozen women total and three are your sisters and four your cousins. That leaves five single women, none of whom you find attractive. You don’t hate them. They aren’t feminists, but well, they’re just not your type. Please let me know if I’m right. Married ladies, sometimes I wonder if you don’t do the same. In general, traditional Catholics are too judgmental of one another. There are issues caused by the crisis in the Church as a whole, that cannot, will not be 100% solved, “ex Cathedra,” until we have a thoroughly Catholic Pope and hierarchy, whatever that takes, whenever God Wills it. Until then, we are like the Israelites in the time of the Judges. “There was no king in Israel, but every one did that which seemed right to himself.” Judges 21:24.

When I read these hypercritical, condemning posts, I am assuming they do not apply to me, personally. Or maybe they do and I don’t see it. It would be good to specify. 
Sorry, Seraphina , I down thumbed by accident.  This was a good post.