Interesting Article!

[McScribe]

I wrote down my point of view above. I think I did say rather clearly that we are not given license to treat others badly because of how they dress. The blog writer said it was counsel for a future conversation with his son. MK is satisfied because she feels he is telling his son to respect women. I tried to explain something of the nature of my own moral struggles. I feel that this is being disregarded or misunderstood and not even acknowledged.

 

[mkgal1]

You asked a question about how you should treat them, and so I'm basically confused by your comment regarding 'reality check'.

How is your answer telling us our viewpoints are wrong, or are you just wanting to remind us once again - watch how you dress? Which could be taken as a diversion quite honestly! I mean where was the error?

The world may treat others badly based on how they dress, act, or any other host of things.

Christians also need to take responsibility for that their actions and attitudes - regardless of the other person - especially if they profess to be a Christian. Is that not also true?

What people seem to miss most of the time? The moral choice goes both ways to be honest.

I have friends that work in missions towards women of the night, prisoners in jail, etc. Thankfully, they are able to look past their crimes to see the person in order to serve them. Some of the 'criminals' do believe they are Christians, sinners, etc. Our friends find that serving them where they are at times makes a much larger impact on their life, view of the world, and their walk with Christ. If they spend most of their time wagging their finger at them, and reminding of things - instead of allowing God to change their hearts...knowing that change will come naturally with his help? I doubt their impact would be as great.

(Shrugs) maybe a bit of a reality check that needs to be recognized by the Christians that tend to worry to much about how others dress and appear to them.

Its rather humorous to me at times how quickly offended people of faith seem to be over just about anything under the sun. They tend to be just like politicians at times. They pull out the extremes to use as the norm to get their point across, and then sin sniff around others so they can dream up some strange reality....just to make a point. Its so bizarre to me.

To me someone that isn't dressed just so? I view them as possibility not mature enough in the faith yet. They are here, and so I will reach them where they are...and go from there. (giggles) and no that would start with asking them take responsibility as you mention. I have faith it will come to them as they mature, and they will figure it out all by themselves...with God's help.

In thinking about this......the alternative view (making them take 'responsibility' for their clothing----whatever that means) seems like expecting them to be blameless before they're seen in a positive light. I don't see that as Christ-like AT ALL.

 

[ValleyGal]

I wrote down my point of view above. I think I did say rather clearly that we are not given license to treat others badly because of how they dress. The blog writer said it was counsel for a future conversation with his son. MK is satisfied because she feels he is telling his son to respect women. I tried to explain something of the nature of my own moral struggles. I feel that this is being disregarded or misunderstood and not even acknowledged.

McScribe, I just want to give you kudos for sharing your own moral struggle. That is not an easy thing for most guys to do. It sounds to me like you are saying it is up to men to treat women respectfully regardless of what they are wearing, but it is also up to women to not deliberately go about wearing garments to deliberately gain the sexual attention of men. Is that sort of right?

I went to my hometown for a bit during the heat of the summer. I was out for appies with hubby, and in comes a gal wearing a string for a top and another string for a bottom....which was hanging out all over the place. Hubby just happened to be in the washroom when the gal walked in - and was seated at the table beside us. I was thoroughly disgusted, and was about to complain to the waiter, but then she went to the washroom. Hubby came back and I told him what to expect when the gal returned. I was giving her the benefit of the doubt that she would put clothes on while she was in the washroom. She came back clothed, thank goodness!

At her age, the young gal was doing what is socially accepted (doesn't make it right), to attract a young man's attention - it's all part of seeking someone for a partner. Her mind was only on attracting someone's attention, not on what her nudity might be stirring up in others whose attention she did not want to attract. That is the world's way, and we as believers are to exercise self control when that sort of thing happens.

However, as a believer, I am aware of men's struggles with visual attraction, and have not dressed in a way that might deliberately cause them to stumble (back when I was something pleasing to look at).

While it is important to talk to young men about respecting women and having self control, it is also important to talk to our young women about dressing in a way that will not cause a brother in Christ to struggle with sexual temptation. That way, we can honestly stand before God and say "as far as it depended on me, I did not deliberately lead someone into temptation." That is the key - "as far as it depends on me."

The conversations we have with our youth should not only be limited to men treating women respectfully; it should also be about women respecting that men struggle with visual stimulation and we do not want to cause them to stumble. I'm not saying we should all wear one of those huge covers that women have to wear in the East where you can't even see their eyes. I'm saying we need to have conversations with our young ladies about not deliberately using our assets to lead men into temptation.

However, even if we do wear a bikini into the restaurant, it is not an invitation for disrespectful behaviour towards her. We need to be responsible as far as it depends on us.

 

[McScribe]

McScribe, I just want to give you kudos for sharing your own moral struggle. That is not an easy thing for most guys to do. It sounds to me like you are saying it is up to men to treat women respectfully regardless of what they are wearing, but it is also up to women to not deliberately go about wearing garments to deliberately gain the sexual attention of men. Is that sort of right?

I went to my hometown for a bit during the heat of the summer. I was out for appies with hubby, and in comes a gal wearing a string for a top and another string for a bottom....which was hanging out all over the place. Hubby just happened to be in the washroom when the gal walked in - and was seated at the table beside us. I was thoroughly disgusted, and was about to complain to the waiter, but then she went to the washroom. Hubby came back and I told him what to expect when the gal returned. I was giving her the benefit of the doubt that she would put clothes on while she was in the washroom. She came back clothed, thank goodness!

At her age, the young gal was doing what is socially accepted (doesn't make it right), to attract a young man's attention - it's all part of seeking someone for a partner. Her mind was only on attracting someone's attention, not on what her nudity might be stirring up in others whose attention she did not want to attract. That is the world's way, and we as believers are to exercise self control when that sort of thing happens.

However, as a believer, I am aware of men's struggles with visual attraction, and have not dressed in a way that might deliberately cause them to stumble (back when I was something pleasing to look at).

While it is important to talk to young men about respecting women and having self control, it is also important to talk to our young women about dressing in a way that will not cause a brother in Christ to struggle with sexual temptation. That way, we can honestly stand before God and say "as far as it depended on me, I did not deliberately lead someone into temptation." That is the key - "as far as it depends on me."

The conversations we have with our youth should not only be limited to men treating women respectfully; it should also be about women respecting that men struggle with visual stimulation and we do not want to cause them to stumble. I'm not saying we should all wear one of those huge covers that women have to wear in the East where you can't even see their eyes. I'm saying we need to have conversations with our young ladies about not deliberately using our assets to lead men into temptation.

However, even if we do wear a bikini into the restaurant, it is not an invitation for disrespectful behaviour towards her. We need to be responsible as far as it depends on us.

Thank you, and this generally reflects what I was trying to say. I feel that moral responsibility is a two way street.

 

[mkgal1]

Thank you, and this generally reflects what I was trying to say. I feel that moral responsibility is a two way street.

The problem with that is......it's relying on the morality of others (something we don't have control of). In essence......if morality is a two-way street, we'd be allowing others to hold our morality hostage. We *do* have the authority of our own morality----regardless of others.

And God is faithful. He will not allow the temptation to be more than you can stand. When you are tempted, he will show you a way out so that you can endure.~1st Corinthians 10:13

 

[mkgal1]

I don't think it comes as a surprise (or that it's even a topic that people will debate) that we live in a immoral world (and it's moving MORE towards immorality than morality).

For this reason it says, "Awake, sleeper, And arise from the dead, And Christ will shine on you." Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil.~Ephesians 5:15

In my opinion......it's our counter-culture (love & respect for others) that causes people to recognize the difference in how they're being treated (even if it's in their sub-conscious). Isn't that what caused all of you to be drawn towards Christ.....that He loved you anyway---even though you didn't "deserve" it?

Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?~Romans 2:4

 

[McScribe]

Now I realize that for women and the men supporting them in speaking up about this topic that it's about not wanting to have to feel shame about their bodies. I realize that for some women they have in the past been told that they were responsible for men's lusts for them and needed to be ashamed of having provoked this even when that was the farthest thing from their minds. And that's fair--to want to be free of shame. Shame doesn't really work to create morality; shame just makes people feel bad for being human. It is not the same as taking responsibility for one's own behaviour.

However the answer to this is not to absolve women of any standards and insist that men hold to a standard that is nebulous and impossible to focus on. This blogger proposed some stuff that is so vague that I can see it only establishing a sense of shame in his son, rather than a sense of clarity and understanding. That is part of what bothered me. The other thing is that his point of view suggests that men are entirely responsible even for their involuntarily or instinctive intentions towards women, while women are not responsible even partially for their intentions towards men. This isn't making things more fair; it's demanding chivalry from men in exchange for nothing from women. What would be right in this case would be for people to be more supportive towards one another.

It is not shameful that a man finds a woman attractive. It is not shameful that a woman is attractive to a man. However both men and women can be more intentional about how they deal with sexual attraction.

 

[mkgal1]

It is not shameful that a man finds a woman attractive. It is not shameful that a woman is attractive to a man. However both men and women can be more intentional about how they deal with sexual attraction.

No one said it is shameful to find a woman attractive. It's when women (or men) are dehumanized and seen *only* as what they're wearing (or not wearing) or what their body looks like. When they're summed up as "what can they do for ME" and not seen as a whole person with their own thoughts/opinions/emotions/background. (And no one has said that the resolution is to shame men that struggle).

If a man (or woman) is being ruled by a shame cycle----they're not living in freedom. Somewhere.....they have something that needs to be exposed to the light like this article points out:

Michael says, &#8220;I love the quote, interestingly by Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He said that the pursuit of purity is not about the suppression of lust, but about the reorientation of our life to a larger goal. The second part of my life has not been about suppressing the sin, it&#8217;s about knowing God, letting God love all of me, living free, living whole, learning what it means to be intimate.&#8221;~Michael Cusick: The End of His Double Life < Amazing Stories on The 700 Club | CBN.com

 

[McScribe]

I'm tired of the way you constantly contradict me no matter what I say. Clearly nothing I say actually matters beyond being fodder for arguments. Find someone else to do that with.

 

[mkgal1]

Okay.......I agree.

 

[mkgal1]

MK is satisfied because she feels he is telling his son to respect women.

It goes far beyond him telling (in the future) his son to respect women; he's planning on telling his son how he can live in freedom.

You are not a helpless victim when it comes to your eyes. You have full control over them. Exercise that control. Train them to look her in the eyes. Discipline yourself to see her, not her clothes or her body. The moment you play the victim you fall into the lie that you are simply embodied reaction to external stimuli unable to determine right from wrong, human from flesh.

Look right at me. That is a ridiculous lie.

You are more than that.

- See more at: Seeing a Woman: A conversation between a father and son | From One Degree to Another | Nate Pyle

 

[mkgal1]

If a woman dresses in a manner which is known to be sexual provocative according to the social circumstances or according to the general views on modesty in her culture, then she is strongly suggesting an intent of being sexually provocative. Recognizing this still gives a man choices, but it is nevertheless hardly a moral choice on her part. Women do need to take responsibility for this if they profess to be Christians.

This sounds eerily close to "she asked for it".

How does one know (by looking) if a person professes Christ or not? Is the response different? If one is able to control their response (based on the other person's profession of Christ)....then, why can't the same control be exercised in the response to women who profess to be Christian?

**Not necessarily addressing McScribe, but just voicing my opinions on this comment.

 

[mkgal1]

In a book by Lysa Terkeurst (Made to Crave) she brings up how Satan used the same tactics with Eve and Jesus (recorded in Genesis 3:6 and Matthew 4:1-11). The distinction between the two was what they wanted most of all---what they craved. Eve's cravings displaced God and made Him secondary to her other desire. Terkeurst wrote, "Eve focused only on the object of her obsession.....Eve craved what she focused on. We consume what we think about. And what we think about can consume us if we're not careful".

OTOH....what mattered most to Christ was the will of God.