Clothing and Lust

[anndet92]

Personally, the way modesty was taught to me was entirely based on “keeping my brothers in Christ pure” and I reject that with all my heart.

Was this "keeping my brothers in Christ pure" teaching done across the pulpit?

It was everywhere.

Sunday school (CLP), over the pulpit (mid-Atlantic type church), Bible school (Hope fellowship), school (CLE), and books (CAM and CLP, Rod and Staff)

My mom told me I needed to keep my ankles covered so that men don’t lust.

[Ernie]

Personally, the way modesty was taught to me was entirely based on “keeping my brothers in Christ pure” and I reject that with all my heart...

Please, please, please stop using the purity language with modesty. It is gross and off-putting. Not even Jesus put modesty and lust together.

I agree. We should stop using that framing.

Why is it a problem to talk about purity and modesty in the same paragraph?

[Ernie]

My mom told me I needed to keep my ankles covered so that men don’t lust.

If she indicated that men won't lust if they don't see ankles, that is indeed a problem.

But why would it not be appropriate to dress in such a way as to make it easier for some men (not all men) to be unnecessarily tempted to lust?

[Ernie]

I know a lot of Anabaptists would prefer to not be placed in the “over sexualization” category alongside Hollywood.

But from where I sit, when we are teaching little girls to cover up a certain way in order to help their “brothers”, we are sexualizing them.

Boys don’t get this same treatment; which says a lot.

Boys should. I know of men who are tempted to lust whenever men are not dressed appropriately.

[barnhart]

Personally, the way modesty was taught to me was entirely based on “keeping my brothers in Christ pure” and I reject that with all my heart...

Please, please, please stop using the purity language with modesty. It is gross and off-putting. Not even Jesus put modesty and lust together.

I agree. We should stop using that framing.

Why is it a problem to talk about purity and modesty in the same paragraph?

There might be ways of addressing both in the same paragraph but I don't think it is right to blame shift lust onto women to justify clothing restrictions.

I like to emphasize respect, in the same way men should respect women by monitoring what they look at, women should respect men by what they wear.

[anndet92]

Personally, the way modesty was taught to me was entirely based on “keeping my brothers in Christ pure” and I reject that with all my heart...

Please, please, please stop using the purity language with modesty. It is gross and off-putting. Not even Jesus put modesty and lust together.

I agree. We should stop using that framing.

Why is it a problem to talk about purity and modesty in the same paragraph?

When Jesus talked about lust, He never once even got close to suggesting that immodesty was the culprit.

I think we should get back to that.

[Ernie]

I know a lot of Anabaptists would prefer to not be placed in the “over sexualization” category alongside Hollywood.

But from where I sit, when we are teaching little girls to cover up a certain way in order to help their “brothers”, we are sexualizing them.

Boys don’t get this same treatment; which says a lot.

Boys should dress modestly also. I know of men who are tempted to lust whenever men or boys are not dressed appropriately.

This might be getting a little off track - but I’d appreciate a definition of lust here.

Noticing beauty or bodies is not the same as lust, in my opinion.

Bodies are not evil. God created our bodies and called us “very good.”

Lust is all-consuming. Lust is possessive. Lust does anything it can to get what it wants.

I agree that noticing beauty or bodies is not the same as lust. Yes, our bodies are very good.

Do you see any difference between a man noticing beauty in a woman, vs. a man noticing beauty in a man?

[anndet92]

I know a lot of Anabaptists would prefer to not be placed in the “over sexualization” category alongside Hollywood.

But from where I sit, when we are teaching little girls to cover up a certain way in order to help their “brothers”, we are sexualizing them.

Boys don’t get this same treatment; which says a lot.

Boys should. I know of men who are tempted to lust whenever men are not dressed appropriately.

Boys aren’t told to protect their sisters. Boys are not constantly harassed about their clothing.

[Ernie]

I agree. We should stop using that framing.

Why is it a problem to talk about purity and modesty in the same paragraph?

When Jesus talked about lust, He never once even got close to suggesting that immodesty was the culprit.

I think we should get back to that.

Men are responsible for what they think and do. Period.

But women are also responsible for what they think and do.

I think God can punish both a man and a woman or a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, if they were both doing inappropriate things.

If a person innocently attracted someone's attention, they certainly shouldn't be scolded. But if a person was told how to conduct oneself, and they rebelled against that, shouldn't they take some responsibility?

Even in public school they teach children about covering up what is private? Why? Why not allow nudity if there is no shared responsibility?

[Ernie]

I know a lot of Anabaptists would prefer to not be placed in the “over sexualization” category alongside Hollywood.

But from where I sit, when we are teaching little girls to cover up a certain way in order to help their “brothers”, we are sexualizing them.

Boys don’t get this same treatment; which says a lot.

Boys should. I know of men who are tempted to lust whenever men are not dressed appropriately.

Boys aren’t told to protect their sisters. Boys are not constantly harassed about their clothing.

I think they should be told to protect their sisters. I think they should be regularly instructed about their clothing.