Are Skinny Jeans / Leggings / Tight Fitting Pants Modest?

[lovefaithhopeinJesus]

Hi guys; so this is kind of an opinion question I guess. I’m a 16 year old girl (a sophomore in high school) and it seems like just about every girl wears skinny jeans and jeggings and leggings (basically, form fitting jeans) practically every day. Rarely do I see a girl wear boot leg or other less form fitting jeans (and those that do still wear tight jeans sometimes). I wear types of jeans that aren’t as form fitting, more loose jeans because I feel like that’s more modest and like it is what Jesus would want me to do. But I feel like boot cut jeans (and other non-form fitting types) are unflattering and I really dislike the way I look in them. My question is, what do you think about Christians wearing skinny jeans? The reason I’m hesitant to wear them is because I don’t want to make guys lust when they look at me, but am I just being overcautious and will it not make any difference either way? Will guys look at my butt (as awkward as that sounds, lol) no matter what I wear anyway?
I pray about this a lot and I feel like I am at a crossroads. Thinking that Jesus wants me to be as modest as possible but also knowing that he wants me to be comfortable with my body (and I feel kind of unattractive and lack confidence in my appearance when I wear boot cut and other non-form fitting jeans.) What is your opinion on this- girls, do you wear them, and do you think Jesus approves? And guys, do you have thoughts as well; do you have more trouble keeping pure thoughts around woman wearing skinny jeans? Thanks for sharing your thoughts, guys!

 

[jacknife]

Hello welcome to christian forums. you are posting in a section where other religions and beliefs are allowed to comment. for example i am unaffiliated with any religion (atheist) there are sections on here where only Christians can comment if you wish. that out of the way I feel that it is not up to women to control my feelings that's all on me

 

[anewman1993]

I'm on the more conservative side, contrary to what many people on this site say I think men and women both have a STRONG responsibility to not draw their brother or sister into sin by dressing modestly. I think anyone who is unwilling to change the way they dress to help a brother then they love their clothing more than they do the sibling.

That said, There are skinny jeans, then there are SKINNY jeans. My thought is as long as a woman keeps her chest/legs covered and nothing is skin tight she is probably alright, you could make an argument against midriff as well but the main thing is to leave something to the imagination lol.When i say legs coverd I'm just talking shorts/skirt/whatever like around halfway to the knee's, doesn't have to be crazy long. As far as legging, I think anything as form fitting as yoga pants are to immodest, but most jeans are probably ok. Lets be honest the person in yoga pants might not as well be wearing anything at all.

Thats just my opinion. "skinny" jeans are ok in the sense that "skirts" are ok. Some are fine and very modest, some are DEFIANTLY not ok. there really isn't a way I can 100% say "that is ok" "That is not".

 

[BL2KTN]

Do you worry if guys look at your fingers or just your butt?

 

[Desk trauma]

Do you worry if guys look at your fingers or just your butt?

As an aside I have always found it most awkward when people stare at my face rather then other parts of my body.

 

[keith99]

Hi guys; so this is kind of an opinion question I guess. I’m a 16 year old girl (a sophomore in high school) and it seems like just about every girl wears skinny jeans and jeggings and leggings (basically, form fitting jeans) practically every day. Rarely do I see a girl wear boot leg or other less form fitting jeans (and those that do still wear tight jeans sometimes). I wear types of jeans that aren’t as form fitting, more loose jeans because I feel like that’s more modest and like it is what Jesus would want me to do. But I feel like boot cut jeans (and other non-form fitting types) are unflattering and I really dislike the way I look in them. My question is, what do you think about Christians wearing skinny jeans? The reason I’m hesitant to wear them is because I don’t want to make guys lust when they look at me, but am I just being overcautious and will it not make any difference either way? Will guys look at my butt (as awkward as that sounds, lol) no matter what I wear anyway?
I pray about this a lot and I feel like I am at a crossroads. Thinking that Jesus wants me to be as modest as possible but also knowing that he wants me to be comfortable with my body (and I feel kind of unattractive and lack confidence in my appearance when I wear boot cut and other non-form fitting jeans.) What is your opinion on this- girls, do you wear them, and do you think Jesus approves? And guys, do you have thoughts as well; do you have more trouble keeping pure thoughts around woman wearing skinny jeans? Thanks for sharing your thoughts, guys!

Let me get this right.

Almost every other girl is wearing tight jeans.

You feel a bit unattractive wearing a more conservative cut of jeans.

But you also do not want to be immodest and a cause of lust.

Might I suggest from fitting jeans, but not 2 sizes too small! Go with the tightest pair of form fitting jeans that is still physically comfortable. You may still inspire some 'lust' but it will most likely be because there is something about you that some particular guy likes and there was most likely little you could do to avoid it and such 'lust' usually involves seeing you as a complete person and is not apt to go bad.

That you are physically comfortable is not a bad side effect.

 

[Paradoxum]

Shouldn't the responsibility for lust be on the one lusting? If not, you can't stop at western modesty. Some guys will likely lust unless you are fully covered, to the extent that you don't look like a human female. Are you going to wear a burqa? That would seem to be the logical conclusion.

I'd say that responsibility for thoughts is with those whose thoughts they are. If not, your are enslaving yourself to the 'sin' of others, and having your life dictated by their issues.

Humans are naturally totally naked, and I don't think that's in itself immoral. Wear what your are comfortable with.

 

[anewman1993]

Shouldn't the responsibility for lust be on the one lusting? If not, you can't stop at western modesty. Some guys will likely lust unless you are fully covered, to the extent that you don't look like a human female. Are you going to wear a burqa? That would seem to be the logical conclusion.

I'd say that responsibility for thoughts is with those whose thoughts they are. If not, your are enslaving yourself to the 'sin' of others, and having your life dictated by their issues.

Humans are naturally totally naked, and I don't think that's in itself immoral. Wear what your are comfortable with.

Nice sentiment, but it doesn't hold up to the bible, and since this IS a christian forum, that would be the ultimate decider .

The bible is very clear in multiple places that we hold a responsibility to keep ourselves from leading others into sin. It also is very clear that we are to dress modestly. You CAN NOT debate this, you are to dress modest, that is what the bible says. The debate is what IS modesty. Not IF you have a choice as a christian, you don't have a choice in regards to dressing modestly any more than you have the choice to have sex outside marriage, or steal, or commit any other sin. You have the ABILITY to do those things, but its undeniably wrong according to the bible.

Modestly does not mean you have to wear a burka, and that argument is idiotic. Don't wear anything skin tight, don't show your chest/butt. Don't draw attention to the specifically sexual parts of your body, and your fine. You don't have to wear a burka, that argument is lazy.

I'm very tired of this, the bible is so clear on this issue its not funny.You are not wholly responsible for someone else's sin, but if you LEAD them into it( such as providing an very easy means to lust by half you chest hanging out and drawing attention to it) then you DO have part to play in their sin and you do bear some responsibility.

We do not live the christian life in a vacuum, but around others, if you love showing off your body more than you love your brother who may struggle with that (and realistically most men do) then YOU have a serious heart problem that you need to work out with god because your clothing and self image has become and idol to you.

 

[jacknife]

Nice sentiment, but it doesn't hold up to the bible, and since this IS a christian forum, that would be the ultimate decider .

The bible is very clear in multiple places that we hold a responsibility to keep ourselves from leading others into sin. It also is very clear that we are to dress modestly. You CAN NOT debate this, you are to dress modest, that is what the bible says. The debate is what IS modesty. Not IF you have a choice as a christian, you don't have a choice in regards to dressing modestly any more than you have the choice to have sex outside marriage, or steal, or commit any other sin. You have the ABILITY to do those things, but its undeniably wrong according to the bible.

Modestly does not mean you have to wear a burka, and that argument is idiotic. Don't wear anything skin tight, don't show your chest/butt. Don't draw attention to the specifically sexual parts of your body, and your fine. You don't have to wear a burka, that argument is lazy.

I'm very tired of this, the bible is so clear on this issue its not funny.You are not wholly responsible for someone else's sin, but if you LEAD them into it( such as providing an very easy means to lust by half you chest hanging out and drawing attention to it) then you DO have part to play in their sin and you do bear some responsibility.

We do not live the christian life in a vacuum, but around others, if you love showing off your body more than you love your brother who may struggle with that (and realistically most men do) then YOU have a serious heart problem that you need to work out with god because your clothing and self image has become and idol to you.

You sure about that? I'm pretty sure men who act on their lust are a minority. And how far should we take this? should men wear shirts while swimming? should we get rid of shorts? Since I'm not religious and sin doesn't mean anything to me am i exempt from all this?

 

[anewman1993]

You sure about that? I'm pretty sure men who act on their lust are a minority. And how far should we take this? should men wear shirts while swimming? should we get rid of shorts? Since I'm not religious and sin doesn't mean anything to me am i exempt from all this?

Lust in and of itself is a sin, acted upon or not.

We arn't talking about how nonchristians should behave, but Christians, based on the bible.

 

[Paradoxum]

Nice sentiment, but it doesn't hold up to the bible, and since this IS a christian forum, that would be the ultimate decider.

"And since this the Islamic State, conformity to Islamic extremism is the ultimate decider."

If you have to define what is right based on where you are, then you are basically admitting you can't prove your point.

The bible is very clear in multiple places that we hold a responsibility to keep ourselves from leading others into sin. It also is very clear that we are to dress modestly. You CAN NOT debate this, you are to dress modest, that is what the bible says. The debate is what IS modesty. Not IF you have a choice as a christian, you don't have a choice in regards to dressing modestly any more than you have the choice to have sex outside marriage, or steal, or commit any other sin. You have the ABILITY to do those things, but its undeniably wrong according to the bible.

1) A literalist understanding is anti-Christian, perverted, and morally corrupt.

2) You can question everything in the Bible (and everywhere). Should women talk in church, and wear hats?

3) There is nothing immoral about wearing little, or nothing. Whether you think the Bible disagrees is relevant. What matters is what is moral. What someone thinks is their responsibility; wearing little isn't 'leading someone on'.

4) There is no such thing as modesty. It's arbitrary.

Modestly does not mean you have to wear a burka, and that argument is idiotic. Don't wear anything skin tight, don't show your chest/butt. Don't draw attention to the specifically sexual parts of your body, and your fine. You don't have to wear a burka, that argument is lazy.

Chest and butts don't have anything to do with sex. There's no objective difference between chest and face. If you want to avoid lust, the only way is total coverage... a burka.

I'm very tired of this, the bible is so clear on this issue its not funny.You are not wholly responsible for someone else's sin, but if you LEAD them into it( such as providing an very easy means to lust by half you chest hanging out and drawing attention to it) then you DO have part to play in their sin and you do bear some responsibility.

You don't have any responsibility... there is nothing objectively lustful about showing your chest, or whole body. Lust is only in the eye of the beholder. It's their psychological issue. Being completely naked doesn't mean your leading someone to lust. Someone might lust, but you didn't make them.

This is no better than blaming a rape victim for being raped, based on their clothing. It's pretty scummy.

We do not live the christian life in a vacuum, but around others, if you love showing off your body more than you love your brother who may struggle with that (and realistically most men do) then YOU have a serious heart problem that you need to work out with god because your clothing and self image has become and idol to you.

Whether someone wants to lust over me, or rape me, isn't my fault because of my clothing. Placing blame where it is appropriate isn't idolizing looks, it's a healthy relation one's body, and not letting other people run from their issues.

I do love liberty and opposing oppression and repression more than I love protecting others from their own psychology. Liberty shouldn't be compromised because some people feel 'naughty' feelings.

 

[anewman1993]

Why are you on a christian forum? Honestly, because you very obviously are not a christian. Christians get our morality from god, we strive to obey him. Thats what I meant, why would you come to a christian forum and try to stir stuff up other than to just be a troll. Your entire argument is basically "I don't like what the bible says therefor I'm going to ignore the parts I don't like".

 

[DaisyDay]

Let me get this right.

Almost every other girl is wearing tight jeans.

You feel a bit unattractive wearing a more conservative cut of jeans.

But you also do not want to be immodest and a cause of lust.

Might I suggest from fitting jeans, but not 2 sizes too small! Go with the tightest pair of form fitting jeans that is still physically comfortable. You may still inspire some 'lust' but it will most likely be because there is something about you that some particular guy likes and there was most likely little you could do to avoid it and such 'lust' usually involves seeing you as a complete person and is not apt to go bad.

That you are physically comfortable is not a bad side effect.

Lycra and spandex have solved the problem of too-tight jeans being uncomfortable.

 

[JustMeSee]

I suggest you wear what you feel is appropriate for you. The jeans you wear hardly define your attractiveness. Modesty and not following the crowd does not lend to a lack of attractiveness.

Different Christians have different standards. I am not even going to dare to judge what is wrong or right in their jeans choices.

Note: my icon.

Designer jeans were big when I was a teen. Not major pant cut changes, but the label was the thing. I had one or two hand me down pairs, and wearing them did practically nothing for my self esteem.

Wishing you well.

 

[jacknife]

Lust in and of itself is a sin, acted upon or not.

We arn't talking about how nonchristians should behave, but Christians, based on the bible.

Let's define lust then how would you define it?

 

[Mystman]

Shouldn't the responsibility for lust be on the one lusting?

Sure, but if you are deliberately clothing yourself in order to incite lust, or lust-like emotions, you should also be honest about what you're doing.

If I set up a lemonade stand with big blinking neon-lights going "FREE LEMONADE!", someone picking up a glass of lemonade would still be responsible for picking up that glass, but it would be dishonest to suggest that I had nothing to do with it.

In the same way, if you are aiming for attractive/cute/sexy with your clothing choice, you should not be surprised if someone finds you attractive/cute/sexy. And the line between being attractive etc and "inciting lust" is pretty vague, imho. Now, there's nothing wrong with wanting to be attractive etc, but if a person wants to be attractive but also doesn't want to incite lust she should be aware that the two concepts are connected. Not every person who finds your "flattering" jeans attractive is going to lust after you, but the more people find them attractive, the bigger the chance some people are going to lust.

 

[Dave-W]

LOL!!! On this page the ad showed some serious legs and the text said "Hot Looks, Hot prices." Since this thread is about wearing too-tight jeans, I find that amusing.

But on a more serious note to the OP: Modesty is all about what calls attention to you as a whole person. Immodesty tries to draw attention to sexual parts with the intent to elicit arousal.

It all depends on what kind of attention you are wanting.

 

[Inkfingers]

Shouldn't the responsibility for lust be on the one lusting?

No.

Both sides have a responsibility because human psychology is not such that we are immune to our hormones and appetites; which, even if we do not act on them, can still arise to disturb and twist our thinking.

It is popular today to play the vanity card of "but people can control themselves", however that is a blinkered view of human psychology.

An obvious example is in how it is a crime to incite people to violence. Some argue against this being a crime, as if we are all little gods in total control of ourselves at all times....but this is just playing to people's vanity. We are not little gods insulated and inviolable. We are humans, with human weakness and human frailties.

So each dress modestly, and each think modestly, and each speak modestly, and each act modestly, and life will tick along fairly nicely but never perfectly because that is impossible.

 

[Archivist]

Nice sentiment, but it doesn't hold up to the bible, and since this IS a christian forum, that would be the ultimate decider.

Perhaps it does not hold up to your interpretation of the Bible. Whether it holds up to what the Bible says is a different matter.

The bible is very clear in multiple places that we hold a responsibility to keep ourselves from leading others into sin.

But the ultimate responsibility rests with the sinner.

It also is very clear that we are to dress modestly. You CAN NOT debate this, you are to dress modest, that is what the bible says. The debate is what IS modesty.

Lets look at what Scripture actually says. 1 Timothy 2:9 states "I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety." We can agree on that. However, Timothy goes on to describe what he means by the term modestly: "adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes." Therefore modest dress is a question of overdressing, not underdressing.

Not IF you have a choice as a christian, you don't have a choice in regards to dressing modestly any more than you have the choice to have sex outside marriage, or steal, or commit any other sin. You have the ABILITY to do those things, but its undeniably wrong according to the bible.

But "modesty" is, from what Scripture clearly states, a matter of not wearing expensive jewels or gold, not of wearing shorts or jeans.

Modestly does not mean you have to wear a burka, and that argument is idiotic.

Agreed

Don't wear anything skin tight, don't show your chest/butt. Don't draw attention to the specifically sexual parts of your body, and your fine.

Can you provide anything in Scripture to support this? Actually in Biblical times nudity was fairly common. Women would have breastfeed in public. Fisherman would have been naked while fishing in plain view from the shore (Paul provides us with an example of this). In the early Christian Church baptisms were performed naked.

I'm very tired of this, the bible is so clear on this issue its not funny

.

Again, clear according to your interpretation.

You are not wholly responsible for someone else's sin, but if you LEAD them into it( such as providing an very easy means to lust by half you chest hanging out and drawing attention to it) then you DO have part to play in their sin and you do bear some responsibility.

So where do you draw the line? If you serve someone a good mean, are you responsible for them committing the sin of gluttony? If you have a bank account are you responsible for the bank employees committing the sin of usury? If you own an expensive car are you responsible for others committing the sin of envy?

We do not live the christian life in a vacuum, but around others, if you love showing off your body more than you love your brother who may struggle with that (and realistically most men do) then YOU have a serious heart problem that you need to work out with god because your clothing and self image has become and idol to you.

Again, where do we draw the line?

 

[Dave-W]

Where does one draw the line? There are no scriptural descriptors of what is and what is not immodest. I am sure much of the definition needs to be culturally derived. Breast feeding in public is not a big deal where breasts are not considered sexual. And I am sure that nudity is not considered sexual or immodest in cultures where that is commonplace like certain tribes in equatorial South America.

So what does our culture tell us? And what does the Holy Spirit tell us in that "still small voice?"