Why are all bikinis often considered immodest by Christians?

OfArtemis said:

First off, I really hope this is the right place, but if not, please direct me to where this oughta be! And secondly, I'm sorry it's so long, I just wanted everyone to right away understand why I'm confused about this.

I’ve grown up going to a Christian camp with the rule you stomach cannot show for your swimsuit (even though it was an all girls camp… huh?), at church retreats it has always been one pieces or modest tankinis, or even going to someone’s pool for a homeschool event no showing stomachs were allowed. However, I never hear anything about the bust area. Ummm, why not? Why don’t they say, full bust coverage? I’ve seen v neck swimsuits as low as the bust itself with the breasts peeking out the sides too at my Christian camp, but nope, that wasn’t a problem. But an inch of belly showing was??? I understand wanting the bust covered. Gotcha, that’s, well, private and I don’t want everyone seeing that. Of course. And the bottoms. Ahhh, I understand the desire for even shorts cause ya don’t really want your bottom peeking out. However, I don’t see that absolutely necessary if it does have good coverage (debatable, I know).

So all that I agree with, except, well the midriff. Now I’m not saying I disagree with that rule. In fact, I don’t know *what* I think. Thus, this post. First off, I understand your bottom and breasts, those are, uhhh… special on female types. Sure. But the stomach? Everyone has one. Guys pull off their shirts at a beach retreat and who gives a second thought about that being modest? Very few. But if a girl wears a bikini top that covers the bust up perfectly, it’s “Oh my gosh, that’s immodest, put a shirt on!” But what’s so modest about guys being topless when even if a girl covered up her bust it’s considered immodest? I’ve never been able to find a swim suit that both covered up the bust AND the midriff completely but not end up looking like a grandma or a plain athletic one piece (I’m sorry, but no, just no, plus those athletic ones don’t have built in bras). So, I always have to compromise. My swimsuit shows ever so little of the bust, but it’s not completely covered. Also, I’ve heard from a Christian guy that after you are in the water, even if you’re wear a tshirt, it’s skin tight, anyway. And guys will lust no matter what you are wearing, I’d like to point that out, no one forces a guy to lust. Sure, some situations might be harder, but just cause you are wearing a once piece doesn’t make you lust proof.

Here are some examples of the bikinis I am thinking might be modest (I’m just looking at the tops in these pictures): Swimsuit 1 | Pinterest
Swimsuit 2 | Pinterest
Swimsuit 3 | Pinterest

Click to expand...

Hetta said:

TBH, the one with that big frill would annoy the heck out of me. I get in the water to swim and that thing flapping around would not work for me.

Click to expand...

Hetta said:

Those are cute bikinis, but watch out - you will be showing your midriff. :O

You are right that no matter how you cover up, some guys (not all) will find a way to lust. The best thing you can do is dress to suit yourself and not deliberately to be tempting, and you will be okay.

TBH, the one with that big frill would annoy the heck out of me. I get in the water to swim and that thing flapping around would not work for me.

Click to expand...

OfArtemis said:

First off, I really hope this is the right place, but if not, please direct me to where this oughta be! And secondly, I'm sorry it's so long, I just wanted everyone to right away understand why I'm confused about this.

I’ve grown up going to a Christian camp with the rule you stomach cannot show for your swimsuit (even though it was an all girls camp… huh?), at church retreats it has always been one pieces or modest tankinis, or even going to someone’s pool for a homeschool event no showing stomachs were allowed. However, I never hear anything about the bust area. Ummm, why not? Why don’t they say, full bust coverage? I’ve seen v neck swimsuits as low as the bust itself with the breasts peeking out the sides too at my Christian camp, but nope, that wasn’t a problem. But an inch of belly showing was??? I understand wanting the bust covered. Gotcha, that’s, well, private and I don’t want everyone seeing that. Of course. And the bottoms. Ahhh, I understand the desire for even shorts cause ya don’t really want your bottom peeking out. However, I don’t see that absolutely necessary if it does have good coverage (debatable, I know).

So all that I agree with, except, well the midriff. Now I’m not saying I disagree with that rule. In fact, I don’t know *what* I think. Thus, this post. First off, I understand your bottom and breasts, those are, uhhh… special on female types. Sure. But the stomach? Everyone has one. Guys pull off their shirts at a beach retreat and who gives a second thought about that being modest? Very few. But if a girl wears a bikini top that covers the bust up perfectly, it’s “Oh my gosh, that’s immodest, put a shirt on!” But what’s so modest about guys being topless when even if a girl covered up her bust it’s considered immodest? I’ve never been able to find a swim suit that both covered up the bust AND the midriff completely but not end up looking like a grandma or a plain athletic one piece (I’m sorry, but no, just no, plus those athletic ones don’t have built in bras). So, I always have to compromise. My swimsuit shows ever so little of the bust, but it’s not completely covered. Also, I’ve heard from a Christian guy that after you are in the water, even if you’re wear a tshirt, it’s skin tight, anyway. And guys will lust no matter what you are wearing, I’d like to point that out, no one forces a guy to lust. Sure, some situations might be harder, but just cause you are wearing a once piece doesn’t make you lust proof.

Here are some examples of the bikinis I am thinking might be modest (I’m just looking at the tops in these pictures): Swimsuit 1 | Pinterest
Swimsuit 2 | Pinterest
Swimsuit 3 | Pinterest

Click to expand...

OGM said:

If a person has a problem with women wearing bikinis...they don't have to wear bikinis or stare at people wearing bikinis. It is that simple.

Click to expand...

bhsmte said:

Agree and well said.

For the most part, many seem to hung up on what other people do, when in reality, it has zero impact on them.

Click to expand...

Inkachu said:

someone who patrols beaches with a Bible, whacking girls in bikinis on the head with it while bellowing "repent, harlot!!"

Click to expand...

OfArtemis said:

First off, I really hope this is the right place, but if not, please direct me to where this oughta be! And secondly, I'm sorry it's so long, I just wanted everyone to right away understand why I'm confused about this.

I’ve grown up going to a Christian camp with the rule you stomach cannot show for your swimsuit (even though it was an all girls camp… huh?), at church retreats it has always been one pieces or modest tankinis, or even going to someone’s pool for a homeschool event no showing stomachs were allowed. However, I never hear anything about the bust area. Ummm, why not? Why don’t they say, full bust coverage? I’ve seen v neck swimsuits as low as the bust itself with the breasts peeking out the sides too at my Christian camp, but nope, that wasn’t a problem. But an inch of belly showing was??? I understand wanting the bust covered. Gotcha, that’s, well, private and I don’t want everyone seeing that. Of course. And the bottoms. Ahhh, I understand the desire for even shorts cause ya don’t really want your bottom peeking out. However, I don’t see that absolutely necessary if it does have good coverage (debatable, I know).

So all that I agree with, except, well the midriff. Now I’m not saying I disagree with that rule. In fact, I don’t know *what* I think. Thus, this post. First off, I understand your bottom and breasts, those are, uhhh… special on female types. Sure. But the stomach? Everyone has one. Guys pull off their shirts at a beach retreat and who gives a second thought about that being modest? Very few. But if a girl wears a bikini top that covers the bust up perfectly, it’s “Oh my gosh, that’s immodest, put a shirt on!” But what’s so modest about guys being topless when even if a girl covered up her bust it’s considered immodest? I’ve never been able to find a swim suit that both covered up the bust AND the midriff completely but not end up looking like a grandma or a plain athletic one piece (I’m sorry, but no, just no, plus those athletic ones don’t have built in bras). So, I always have to compromise. My swimsuit shows ever so little of the bust, but it’s not completely covered. Also, I’ve heard from a Christian guy that after you are in the water, even if you’re wear a tshirt, it’s skin tight, anyway. And guys will lust no matter what you are wearing, I’d like to point that out, no one forces a guy to lust. Sure, some situations might be harder, but just cause you are wearing a once piece doesn’t make you lust proof.

Here are some examples of the bikinis I am thinking might be modest (I’m just looking at the tops in these pictures): Swimsuit 1 | Pinterest
Swimsuit 2 | Pinterest
Swimsuit 3 | Pinterest

Click to expand...