#91428 Modesty

What do you think about the latest hot topic from the 100 Hour Board? Speak your piece here!

Moderator: Marduk

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

#91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Sat Sep 22, 2018 10:13 am

https://100hourboard.org/questions/91428/

I really liked the answer of Anne, Certainly.

I’d like to ask a few questions related to part of what she said. “So, if I were to go out walking in a shirt that exposed significant cleavage because I want men to look at me and appreciate my hotness so that I can feel like my body is so glorious, I'm not being modest, because I'm seeking to attract attention so that I can glorify myself.” My question is, how often to men or women have that sort of thought in their heads when they make clothing decisions?

Let me ask that question in some different ways. How often to men or women decide to wear something because they think that it makes them look sexually desirable? Wearing a see-through top, extremely tight pants or skirt, figure hugging clothes that accentuate their sex, low necklines or plunging necklines, high hemlines. Why choose those clothes if not to call undue attention to their bodies?

So, how often do men or women choose to wear clothes they consider sexy precisely because they think it makes them look sexy? I’d say, in the case of men, all the time.

I think focusing on modesty in this way takes it appropriately out of the realm of being modest for the sake of another. We avoid being immodest because of the harm it does to ourselves.

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Sat Oct 27, 2018 8:27 am

The question of modesty seems to come up often. Usually the discussion revolves around how women need to dress modestly so as not to cause men to lust after them. This is often met with a protest that it is the man’s responsibility to control his lust, and a woman should be free to dress as she pleases.

I totally agree that a woman should not be held responsible for a man’s lust. Men can and should learn to control their response to sexual stimulation. I would like to bring up a feature of modesty that I haven’t seen discussed before.

First, what is lust? Recently I read an interesting article, “Understanding Lust,” written by Jim Vander Spek. Very briefly, lust is not to be confused with sexual thoughts and sexual desires which are God given and can serve a good purpose. If you are healthy you will have a strong, involuntary, immediate sexual response to sexual stimulation. But an involuntary sexual response is not the same as intentionally choosing to indulge in a “sexual buzz,” the “electric feeling of pleasure that makes sex so enjoyable.”

The sexual buzz needs to be confined to the bonds of marriage, otherwise it is sinful and spiritually damaging. Jim Vander Spek’s definition: “Sexual lust—the illicit sexual buzz—is willfully allowing pleasurable gratification of wrongfully directed sexual desire that takes place deep inside.”

Much has been said of a person’s lust as he or she views pornography or dwells on thoughts of sex when he or she is stimulated sexually. The problem begins when the person goes from being stimulated to taking to heart the stimulation, and to willfully take pleasure in this sexual buzz outside of marriage. This is a choice a person may make and he or she is accountable for it.

Less has been said about another form of lust. This is the sexual buzz that comes from sexually stimulating another. It is when you take pleasure in having someone “mentally undress you with their eyes,” as guppy of doom put it. It is the lust to be sexually desired.

Most men and women have a knowledge, through contemporary local social norms, that if they wear tight fitting or revealing clothing that calls undue attention to their bodies, they will elicit a sexual response in others. By knowingly sexually provoking others they feel a measure of sexual gratification, an illicit sexual buzz. Thus the wearer of immodest clothing is committing adultery in his or her heart.

I suspect that few men and women will admit to wearing immodest clothing for the purpose of stimulating a sexual response in others. They will rationalize and say it is for comfort, or to dress in an attractive fashion, or you cannot tell what others will find sexually provocative, or they just don’t give that a thought. I think that in many cases they are deceiving themselves.

And I am not saying that those who lust have a hope, desire, or expectation to find a sexual partner. Lust is gratification, perhaps all they are looking for. As Jim Vander Spek says “those who lust are not just thirsty—they are drinking from the cup as well.”

The more women insist that they are sexual beings and are turned on by tight fitting clothes or bare chests as much as a man is aroused by immodestly dressed women-and that they just have learned to deal with it-the more they feed the male ego that he really can stimulate sexual desire in others. It doesn’t take much to convince a man that he is the object of sexual desire and glory in it. I suspect that men or women who wear immodest clothes don’t know or don’t care that they are making others uncomfortable, or they cause others to feel sexually violated by being unwillingly provoked to sexual stimulation by someone not of their choosing.

Despite the fact that immodesty is a sin of lust, I am not suggesting in the least that the person who is lusting should blame, shift guilt, or shame another. Everyone is entirely responsible for his or her own lust.


So, I’m not as much concerned with immodest clothing causing others to lust after them as I am with the wearer of immodest clothing committing the sin of sexual lust.

Emiliana
The Other Token Non-Mormon
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Emiliana » Sat Nov 03, 2018 10:22 am

vorpal blade wrote:I suspect that few men and women will admit to wearing immodest clothing for the purpose of stimulating a sexual response in others. They will rationalize and say it is for comfort, or to dress in an attractive fashion, or you cannot tell what others will find sexually provocative, or they just don’t give that a thought. I think that in many cases they are deceiving themselves.
I'm sorry, but this is bull. I live in Texas and run 10-20 miles a week, even in summer, and in the summer I run in 9" compression shorts and a compression sports bra. I choose my running gear 100% on what is comfortable and appropriate for the sport and for the weather. Virtually all of the men I see running are shirtless too, and sometimes I notice they are attractive. Sometimes I enjoy the fact that they are attractive! Whoop-de-do-da. I doubt anyone is lusting after my muffintop, but if they are, idgaf because that's their deal and I'm too busy chasing after my next personal record to worry about that.

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:32 am

So, I say that sometimes men and women will wear immodest clothing for the purpose of stimulating a sexual response in others and in many cases they deceive themselves as to this motive. Your rebuttal is that you know of one woman who honestly doesn’t recognize this motive when she wears this one outfit during this one particular activity. Moreover, she doesn’t care at all about the men, women, and children she is visually sexually assaulting with her immodesty, because she is too focused on herself, and her personal needs. Visually sexually assaulting others is the victims’s fault, not hers. Not only that, but she enjoys it when handsome bare chested men do it to her.

That’s it? That’s all you got?

User avatar
TheBlackSheep
The Best
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake County

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by TheBlackSheep » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:23 am

She's sharing her own experience, you pompous zealot. All you shared were your stupid, myopic, sexist ideas, so calling her out for her own experience is pretty rich.

No one here gives a single shit about your ideas, Vorpal. Nobody gives any credence to you. Stop being rude to try to draw people in to your messed up arguments.

Zedability
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:17 pm

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Zedability » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:15 pm

TBS I love you

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:32 pm

Ever notice when someone cannot formulate a logical argument they resort to name calling?

User avatar
TheBlackSheep
The Best
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake County

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by TheBlackSheep » Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:57 pm

Of all people in this forum, vorpal, you lack the moral high ground. Just stop.

I'm willing to let you spout whatever shallow religious argle bargle you want to (unless it upsets me too much, but in general) as long as you are leaving people alone, but whenever you rudely call someone out or shame someone, I'm going to do my best to make you feel as small as you've made me feel. And I know I'm not alone.

Emiliana
The Other Token Non-Mormon
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Emiliana » Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:18 pm

Visually sexually assaulting? Are you fucking kidding? What happened to people being responsible for their own minds and thoughts? Are you seriously comparing me running in a bra to someone physically violating someone else? Fuck you.

Emiliana
The Other Token Non-Mormon
Posts: 1353
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Emiliana » Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:20 pm

Also, fwiw, I didn't say I enjoy it when handsome shirtless men check me out. I'd really just as soon they didn't, but that will have no bearing on my choices.

ETA: I just realized I misinterpreted what you said. You said that men sexually assault *me* by running shirtless. That is bullshit too. And saying that I *enjoy* men "assaulting" me is downright creepy. So, fuck you.
Last edited by Emiliana on Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
TheBlackSheep
The Best
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake County

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by TheBlackSheep » Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:22 pm

Emiliana, strong work on meeting your needs, despite thre challenges that come with being a woman trying to meet her needs. And strong work on doing that while hurting NOBODY. And strong work on the healthy hobby!

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:29 pm

You are thinking of sexual assault with a much too restrictive definition.  According to the U.S. Federal Government “Sexual assault can include non-contact activities, such as someone “flashing” you (exposing themselves to you) or forcing you to look at sexual images.2....  Sexual assault can also be verbal, visual, or non-contact. It is anything that forces a person to join in unwanted sexual activities or attention. Other examples can include:4
Voyeurism, or peeping (when someone watches private sexual acts without consent)
Exhibitionism (when someone exposes himself or herself in public)
Sexual harassment or threats
Forcing someone to pose for sexual pictures
Sending someone unwanted texts or “sexts” (texting sexual photos or messages)"

Action against Sexual harassment has been pursued by feminist women’s rights groups, which are certainly not pompous religious zealots, primarily in the workplace, because they can use the handy Title VII judicial rulings. Among other things you cannot compliment a woman’s looks if she doesn’t want you to, because she may feel that this is a form of sexual assault, making her feel uncomfortable and viewed as a sexual object. As a man you cannot hang up in your private office a picture of a muffin top woman in skimpy running apparel, because this creates a hostile work environment for the women who work with this man. No locker room humor is to be tolerated. After a warning or two you will be fired, and perhaps faced with a huge lawsuit. You make think that I am kidding you, but I am not. That’s basically what they told me when I worked for the government.

So...immodest dress is not just “like” sexual assault, it IS sexual assault when you expose yourself or sexually harass others, according to the Federal Government.

So, please take responsibility for your own actions, Emiliana, and stop sexually assaulting the innocent men, women, and children of Texas. The Federal Government reminds your victims, “If you have been sexually assaulted, it is not your fault, regardless of the circumstances.” Please, just stop it.

Source: https://www.womenshealth.gov/relationships-and-safety/sexual-assault-and-rape/sexual-assault#16

User avatar
TheBlackSheep
The Best
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake County

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by TheBlackSheep » Sun Nov 11, 2018 4:45 pm

Oh hi, Gay Blade. I see you haven't changed at all.

Arcaiden
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 9:39 pm

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Arcaiden » Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:46 pm

Honestly the behavior exhibited by Vorpal in this post should be enough for a permanent ban. I don't know where the mods are, but falsely accusing someone else of sexual assault in such a misleading way is unacceptable.

User avatar
TheBlackSheep
The Best
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake County

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by TheBlackSheep » Thu Nov 15, 2018 2:22 am

Arcaiden wrote:Honestly the behavior exhibited by Vorpal in this post should be enough for a permanent ban. I don't know where the mods are, but falsely accusing someone else of sexual assault in such a misleading way is unacceptable.
Agreed.

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Thu Nov 15, 2018 8:25 am

TheBlackSheep wrote:Oh hi, Gay Blade. I see you haven't changed at all.
Hello, Random Internet Stranger!

Yes, you are right. I haven’t changed in my basic approach to teaching truth. I start with principles, concepts, and language that my audience knows and believes in. Then, using this foundation I build toward the truthful conclusions one reaches through logic. I find it very powerful and don’t want to change my teaching method.

One of the consequences of this approach is that people then see that their cherished beliefs have no basis in fact or logic. If they embrace the truth they are enlarged, enlightened, and more joyful. If they reject the truth they become bitter, angry, and diminished. The truth can hurt, and they retaliate trying to injure the one they blame for their miserable feelings. Or ban you. They try to make the messenger feel small, because they feel smaller.

I am not entirely happy with the language changes which uses the same two words, “sexual assault,” to cover both rape and comments such as “You are looking fit, do you work out?” It has the advantage of pointing out that unwanted comments about one’s body can make you feel like a sex object. You can feel threaten and the atmosphere becomes hostile. Pictures of pinups on office walls bothers you with this constant emphasis on sex. I greatly sympathize with these feelings.

Similarly immodesty can feel like being groped. Your sexual responses are jerked around without your consent. Some people may like that, but not all. Of course, many can deal with it and life does not come to a stop there. But using the terminology of sexual assault helps us to understand immodesty is an attack, and not just a problem the victim has and the victim needs to take responsibility for.

The downside of the language shift is when rape comes to be thought of as equivalent to an unappreciated compliment. That would be tragic.

If there is any question as to whether I am falsely accusing someone of sexual assault, please follow the link I provided.

I do change, however. Just in clarifying my thoughts regarding how immodesty is a form of sexual assault I’ve come to better appreciate the suffering of victims of sexual harassment.

Amity
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 10:52 pm

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Amity » Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:42 pm

Vorpal clearly has no intention of engaging in a good faith debate around this topic and has lobbed unfounded accusations against Emiliana, so consider the call for a permanent ban thirded.

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:19 pm

If you claim that my “accusation” is unfounded, prove it! Go to the official government link I provided, and shows us how the definitions and examples of “sexual assault” do not include exposing oneself to others and exhibitionism. Show us how sexual assault does not include sexual harassment. If you cannot do that then you are not willing to engage in good faith debate and your accusations against me are unfounded.

Katya
Board Board Patron Saint
Posts: 4631
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 10:40 am
Location: Utah

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by Katya » Sat Nov 17, 2018 2:36 pm

Amity wrote:Vorpal clearly has no intention of engaging in a good faith debate around this topic and has lobbed unfounded accusations against Emiliana, so consider the call for a permanent ban thirded.
Fourthed.

User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: #91428 Modesty

Post by vorpal blade » Sat Nov 17, 2018 5:17 pm

It is kind of funny. All these people make untrue, unfounded accusations against me all the time, and no one says a word in my defense. I point out how the government definition of "sexual assault" applies to Emiliana, using legitimate sources, proofs, logic, and reasoning and suddenly people wonder where the moderators are. They call for me to be permanently banned. Yet they offer no proof at all of their accusation that what I said was false, or untrue. It is as though they can say with impunity anything they want to say, but as soon as someone challenges them they can think of no logic or reason. They must shut off the truth without any real justification. They say I have no intention of engaging in a good faith debate, yet they never say anything of substance to support their point of view. Is this a free country where we engage in reasoned discussion, or is this mob rule?