For twenty years now Christians have been inundated with news about “every man’s battle” and how every man struggles with lust.
But what if our approach is part of the problem?
When I wrote The Good Girl’s Guide to Great Sex, one of my critiques with the way the church talks about sex is that it makes the same mistake the world does: we make it primarily a physical thing, by focusing on men’s urge to lust and women’s need to protect the men, rather than looking at how God made sex to be emotionally and spiritually intimate as well. When all we talk about is lust, we lose the beauty of sex.
But even more than that: People live up to their expectations. If you constantly tell men, “all men lust“, then when they start to lust, they figure it’s normal. There’s very little they can do about it.
I believe that because we talk about how all men struggle with lust, we’re creating the situation where most men struggle with lust.
It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. And that’s likely why, in my limited research, I’ve found that men who became Christians after their teen years seem to struggle with porn and lust far less than guys who grew up in the church. They weren’t taught that lust is normal. They were taught, in general, that treating women as people was normal.
That’s condition #1 that can lead to lust. Here’s condition #2:
Churches are so afraid of lust that they often do their best to separate men and women.
But as we learned on Monday, men are more likely to get aroused when they focus on certain body parts rather than when they focus on the whole person. Get to know a woman in context, learn to see her as a person, and lust is far less common. What if our two solutions to lust–talking about it all the time and separating men and women–are both making lust more common?
It stands to reason, then, that if we change the expectations around lust, and if we help men and women develop relationships that are focused on seeing each other as brothers and sisters in Christ, then we can start doing some serious damage to the lust problem many men have.
So let’s look at 12 ways to help men overcome lust:
1. Stop talking about “every man’s battle” and start talking about Christ in you
Yes, many men struggle with lust. But not all do. And whatever we focus on expands. Are we focusing on the sin, or are we focusing on Christ? In the parable of the sower, many seeds failed to grow well because they were choked by the weeds. Instead of focusing on the sun, they looked at all the trouble around them. When we make lust sound like it’s inevitable–like it’s something that every guy will face and will never really defeat–then we lose the battle before we engage. But if we teach people to look to the power of the Holy Spirit in all aspects of their lives, then they will feel like the battle with lust is one that they can win.
2. Treat men who don’t struggle with lust as the ideal, not as bogeymen who don’t exist
When I make a comment that I know men who can go to a beach and not lust after anyone, I am often told that I am wrong. I don’t really know those men’s hearts. I am a woman and I don’t really understand, and those men are lying to me. All guys struggle.
And I am often told this by Christian leaders.
Jesus did not struggle with lust. Paul did not struggle with lust. As I showed yesterday, the Bible presents a lust-free life as the normal condition for a redeemed man. So let’s start talking about real men being men who see women as whole people, not real men being men who struggle with lust.
3. Stop telling teenage boys that they will definitely struggle with lust and porn
Boys need to be equipped to deal with the pull that porn may bring, and they need to be told that they may struggle when they start to notice girls’ bodies.
But let’s not make the mistake of portraying the problem as bigger than the solution.
Yes, they may struggle–but they may not. And Jesus is bigger than any of their temptations (1 Corinthians 10:13). Warn them about the temptations, yes, but always temper that with the bigger idea that they can battle and win anything with the Holy Spirit’s help. Pair any teaching about lust with stories about guys who have victory.
4. Draw a distinction between lusting and noticing a woman is beautiful
Too many boys think there are only two alternatives: either you find a girl ugly, or you are lusting. But what if there’s another option? What if you simply notice a girl is attractive, and it doesn’t go any further? Let’s be careful not to confuse noticing beauty with lusting. If we make boys and men believe that if they see something beautiful they must automatically turn away because that’s just plain dangerous, then they’ll be constantly paranoid and never able to have normal conversations with women.
We also need to tell them that normal sexual desire and normal feelings are not lust. When a guy starts having sexual feelings, it does not mean he is sinning. When we heap guilt when there is no sin, we make it seem as if it’s impossible to overcome real sin.
Noticing a woman is beautiful does not mean a guy is lusting! Let's stop heaping shame.Click To Tweet5. Stop warning women and girls not to “cause men to sin”
When my daughter Katie was 11, she was warned by a kind-hearted Sunday School teacher who meant well that now that she was developing, she was going to have to watch what she wore, because men might look down her shirt.
It took quite a while for her father and I to calm her down and convince her that not all adult men at our church were perverts trying to see her new training bra.
And as I told on Monday, we frequently blame women’s and girl’s clothing choices for causing men to sin–even if those girls are only 13.
When we talk about women causing men to sin, we lay the blame for lust at women’s feet and make it less likely that men will feel the need to fight lust. It’s a losing battle, and only women’s actions can keep men’s thoughts from straying. As I showed yesterday, that’s entirely unbiblical. If an adult man is lusting after my 11-year-old daughter, I’m pretty sure I know who is to blame. And if a guy can’t worship God because a female seeker has come to church in a tight sundress, then the problem is not with her. We need to be very, very clear about that. The “don’t be a stumbling block” issue doesn’t mean that women bear the responsibility for men’s sin.
6. Start talking about how all of us should respect ourselves and honour God in our clothing choices
At the same time, all of us can honour each other in how we dress. But we can do this without laying the blame for sin at women’s feet. Let’s change the conversation so that it’s no longer about “stopping a guy from stumbling” or “not causing him to sin”, and it’s instead about honouring God.
If we all asked these three questions:
- Who am I dressing for?
- What is the first impression someone looking at me will have?
- Am I a good ambassador for Jesus? Do I look approachable, friendly, and appropriate?,
then we wouldn’t have problems with how people dressed (I’ll be talking about this more on Friday!).
We can have a modesty message that does not shame or lay the blame for men's sin at women's feet.Click To Tweet7. Make any dress code rules apply to both genders.
When we make dress codes only for women, we reinforce the idea that women are dangerous and men will lust if women don’t behave. Besides, men can make inappropriate clothing choices, too. That’s why those three questions should also apply to BOTH men and women, to BOTH girls and boys. Just as bikinis aren’t wise choices at youth group pool parties, perhaps guys could be asked to wear T-shirts, too. Or just as mini-skirts may give a bad first impression to people, so slouchy jeans may as well. If we are going to make dress codes, then they should not be focused on only one gender. They should focus on how all of us can honour Christ.
8. Make sure there are strong female youth group leaders
As soon as boys enter puberty and start having sexual thoughts, it needs to be reinforced to them that females are more than just objects of sexual temptation. They are people who can lead; who can be respected; who are wise.
9. Encourage more co-ed church activities to make it easier for strong, platonic friendships to form
Too often churches gender segregate most activities, especially for adults. But the more we separate the genders, the more we define ourselves almost entirely in terms of our gender. We don’t see each other as people; we see each other as men and women. It is healthy to develop friendships with the opposite sex (especially in couples, when you are married) that are platonic.
When we divide all church activities by gender, we sexualize women & worsen problems with lust.Click To Tweet10. Honour women for their intelligence, ideas, and creativity
Similarly, don’t relegate women to only childcare roles or roles where they serve men. Put women on some committees and listen to their ideas. Make it normal that your church sees the whole person that God created, rather than sees her simply as an appendage for men or as an object that men may use or be tempted by.
11. Do not put up obstacles to women breastfeeding in church
A side-effect of all this modesty talk is that women’s bodies are seen as sexual. No matter what. So breast-feeding in church is often off the table.
Interestingly, it is only in church today that this is the case. This gives the impression that while “the world” thinks breastfeeding is okay, we Christians know that breasts are really off-limits, because they’re absolutely and inherently sexual, all the time, even when an infant is attached to them.
It sexualizes women’s body parts all the more.
Let’s make the expectation that men can be real men and honour women, especially when they are feeding children.
12. Do not try to keep young boys from seeing our culture
No matter how many “t-shirts over bathing suits” rules you try to enforce, your sons live in the real world. They’re going to see models in lingerie stores in the mall, they’re going to grow up to work with women who wear tight or low-cut clothing, and they’re going to go to the beach where girls are running around in bikinis.
When you shelter kids from things, those things become taboo. And when something is strictly forbidden, it ironically becomes the spotlight (the “don’t think of a pink elephant” phenomenon.) If you are constantly avoiding anything that could “cause your son to lust”, or make a fuss or get offended when any girl is wearing something inappropriate, you’re doing your son a disservice. Instead, ignore it, walk by the potential distraction, and keep your conversation or activity going no matter who or what’s around. That teaches your son, “It’s OK if there are attractive girls around–they don’t need to be the focus. They have no power, you can make that decision yourself.”
I believe that if we change the expectations around lust, we can free both men and women.
For the last three days I hope I’ve contributed to that conversation. I’ve talked about how the “men are visually stimulated” idea has been wrongly twisted to say that all men will inevitably lust over women they see in passing. I’ve talked about how women have the right to expect that their husbands won’t lust. And today I’ve tried to show 12 changes that churches can make to start winning the battle with lust. Tomorrow I’ll be summarizing everything with a healthier way to talk about lust and sex (it’s a must-read!).
I’d like to end today’s post with an observation a male commenter left a few years ago on my post about how we’re abusing the Christian modesty message. I think it’s very insightful, and a great way to wrap all of this up:
I was in my early twenties before I could look at a young woman without some sense of paranoia that I might end up stumbling. After all, I was trained all of my life that there was a fine line between finding someone to be beautiful and turning her into a sex object in your mind. In fact, it was much better that I avoid the line altogether and, somehow, refrain from allowing myself to find a girl attractive until the wedding night – at which point I was expected to go from hiding in a cave to launching into space. I was taught, like most Christian boys, that we are not really in control of our sexuality or desires. Avoidance is the only option – something that is impossible in modern times.
Of course, the female body, in certain contexts, was meant to be titillating. It was also meant to be simply beautiful. When I am entranced by a sunset or left speechless by the Rockies, I am not tempted to objectify them as something I want to conquer, own, or plunder. I simply appreciate the beauty of God’s handiwork. Can I not do the same with women? Can I not see them as beautiful, appreciate that, all without objectifying or lusting after them?
Yes. Yes I can. I know because I do.
Instead of doing some odd head dance in a mall to avoid seeing anything attractive, I can look the world full in the face, appreciate its diversity, nuances, and beauty, and rejoice in the same. Victoria’s Secret stores, once seen as a black hole of evil, no longer bother me. Of course, it is certainly helpful that everywhere I go doesn’t look like the beaches of Brazil. However, unlike what I was taught, I am in control of my sexuality. I decide what to do with what I see – to be saddened, to objectify, to sexualize, or to simply see as beauty. I can pass by or interact with someone I find attractive without turning them into a object of sexual desire. I am a man redeemed by Christ. Not a boy who can’t help what he thinks about what he sees. So, to the church, stop telling me that I’m a helpless sex fiend who’s better off with a blindfold. Teach me of beauty apart from sexuality. Teach me that my mind can be used to see women as imago Dei rather than objects of temptation. Teach me how to control what I do with my thoughts and what I see rather than sending me on a lifelong fool’s errand of avoiding all thoughts and keeping my eyes on my feet (or in space). Teach me strength and mastery rather than cowardice. Teach me these things and you might have less men who live with the idea that they are one-thought creatures, and less women who are shamed into hiding.
Amen.
Other posts in this series:
Monday: Why the “Men are Visual” Fact Should Not Mean that All Men Lust
Tuesday: Why Calling Lust “Every Man’s Battle” Backfires
Tomorrow: How Can We Have a Sex-Positive, Non-Shaming Message about Sex and Lust?
Friday: Let’s Have a Modesty Message that Isn’t Focused on “Not Causing Him to Sin”
Sheila Wray Gregoire has been married for 25 years and happily married for 20! She loves traveling around North America with her hubby in their RV, giving her signature "Girl Talk" about sex and marriage. And she's written 8 books. About sex and marriage. See a theme here? Plus she knits. Even in line at the grocery store.
Sheila, you’ve put into words an idea that has been swirling around in my head for several years now. I, like many other guys, was taught the “looking is lusting” approach that you’ve pointed out. It’s taken me into my 30’s to realize this is not the case, and it truly helps free up the mind. You’re right that constantly “bouncing your eyes” makes it difficult to engage with other human beings who happen to be women.
I hope to be able to pass this on to my three boys. I hope they will grow up knowing that women are not merely a trigger that causes men to sin, and that women are not responsible for our thoughts and actions. I hope they develop healthy relationships with women as equals instead of objects.
I hope I do my job.
I’m sure you will, Austin! You and Keelie are awesome.
I do think that this is a BIG disservice that we’ve done to men–to tell them that seeing is somehow sin. And I think it sets up the expectation that they will struggle even more. We need to talk more about this!
It’s also a big issue to us as women if we believe that every man is going to lust after us. I spent years struggling being around guys and being concerned that I was causing them all to be sinners- simply because I have boobs. It really can make having good relationships with guys that you’re not married to very hard. It feeds the idea that men are all pigs and not to ever be trusted. When a woman feels that way, she is already suspicious of his every comment, gesture, or action- causing major marriage issues. I’m so glad that you are making the distinction in noticing people are attractive v. lusting. Also, dispelling the myth that every man lusts. There’s a lot of men carrying unwarranted guilt for things they haven’t done wrong. Super happy about this series.
I so agree with this. How can we have a loving relationship with a guy if we secretly believe he’s a pervert? And that’s what we’re being told to believe. It’s scary.
It’s been awhile since this was posted, however I felt compelled to comment. Your positive outlook and emphasizing that not “all men struggle with lust” is such a breath of fresh air for me. After all, God does not want men to live in such constant bondage. And God is able, I believe, to help men if there are struggles (if the man wants to help himself). There is victory to be embraced through Christ. I caught my husband looking at porn a year ago. We have been married for 29 years. He had been the caretaker of his mother which took a real toll on him. Around the time of her death, he was looking at sports sites (although he is computer illiterate and doesn’t care for technology) and clicked on a pop-up about dating. For two months or so he would re-visit sites every 3-5 days. I know that satan and the timing had a lot to do with this. He did not masterbate and I believe him because of physical signs (no need to go into detail). He has never been into porn or had any signs of sexual addiction. I’ve never know him to masterbate, although many websites also say “all men do this as well.” My husband has made every effort possible to win back my trust (because he lied about the incidents at first). He even went to counseling with me. This has been a painful journey, however, many good things have come from this (including reading about how to be a Godly wife, and fulfilling some unmet needs). The point of my post is that I read Every Mans Battle after the incident. For the past year, I have felt hopeless. My faith has been weakened. I have felt differently towards men, even good men at church. I’ve wondered so many things and had an extremely difficult time accepting what I had read in Every Mans Battle. I’ve seriously had to change my beliefs and stopped listening to the critical inner voice of hopelessness. My husband says he doesn’t struggle with lust. One thing that is helping me to trust and believe him is his history. 30 years he has been loyal to me. In my opinion, if he had a real struggle with it, it would have caused problems in our marriage over the years. It is extremely difficult to believe someone when you just caught them looking at porn. And I do understand better now men’s temptations. However, men do not have to choose to be in the bondage of lust. They may fail at times, but it doesn’t have to settle in and stay, or be such an overwhelming battle that can’t be won, as most websites indicate. Yes the temptation to sin is all around us. But God gives us our own free will. Men, my question to you is how will you respond to God? What choice do you make in those few seconds of deciding to lust or deciding to be a man who will honor God and his wife with his thoughts? “These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. John 16:33. This article was so encouraging. Thank you, and also for the book “To Love Honor and Vacuum” which has helped our marriage be even stronger and more passionate than ever!
Oh, that’s awesome! I’m so glad you left that comment. Sometimes I wonder if I’m the only one who thinks that Every Man’s Battle has been overdone–and does verge on dangerous. I really appreciate your comment–I may use it as the basis for an email to my list soon (though you’ll remain anonymous of course!) 🙂
I taught youth group and high school Sunday school for all the years my 3 kids were babies. You better believe the guys in the group were around LOTS of nursing. It doesn’t take that long for them to get desensitized. It IS possible to de-sexualize an activity. I once read research (sorry I can’t cite it) that found that dads that regularly changed diapers of their baby girls were actually immunizing themselves against becoming child molesters, so to speak. Like, constantly seeing genitals in a caregiving context changes a guy’s brain. It was interesting research; I wish I could find it. Talk to a male nurse and see if they see all female nudity and bodies as titillating. I tend to doubt it.
Great thoughts, Anna! And speaking as a woman married to a male physician, I can assure you that male health care workers are not lusting all over you all the time! 🙂
Where then, does one draw the line? Could a man watch say, Game of Thrones and not be lustful? How about a sex scene in a movie? Couldn’t a man ogle and just be “appreciating the human body” (of the naked woman he is looking at)? Many wives might have an issue with this.
I think there’s a difference between seeing someone out in your daily life who is not really trying to be sexy or draw attention to him or herself, and watching movies or tv shows that have obviously sexual scenes. I know for me, as a woman, watching things like that is over the line and easily tempting for me. When my husband and I are watching something and a “questionable” scene comes up, we both just look away – out of respect for each other and the desire to avoid that temptation.
Sheila, I’ve been reading your blog for a while, but this is my first comment. I am loving the series this week. My husband and I are having great conversations about it!
Exactly, Julia–when you watch a movie, you’re choosing to put yourself into that situation. That’s a choice–we’re talking about what happens if you’re at church and a woman comes in with a low-cut top. It’s a different conversation, but such an important question, and I love your response.
Welcome! And I’m glad you’ve commented, Julia!
I really think that that’s an issue that each couple has to work out for themselves. But I’d just note that watching things like Game of Thrones goes deeper than that. It’s not just that you may seek sexual stimulation from someone other than your spouse; it’s also that you’re supporting a TV show that makes its actors basically have sex on screen. Apart from the effect that has on you, I personally struggle with whether that’s right.
Anonymous:
You ask some fair questions. It’s hard to get away from media with sexual images, and men aren’t the only ones who can be turned on by it. I think that instead of asking a generic question, “Can a man …?”, each person needs to know what’s going on in themselves. If a lot of my thought energy is about sex, or food, or whatever, it’s unbalanced whether lust is involved or not. So, I have to work on why the imbalance is there — and usually more work and time is involved in that than is required to just avoiding the stimuli. Sometimes though, in avoiding the triggers, it becomes easier to pinpoint what’s happening inside of us.
It’s interesting that you used the word “ogle” in the last example. That goes beyond just noticing or appreciating someone who is desirable to you. That’s a way of feeding the desire that you don’t want to feed. That is more like lust.
I feel like this article does the best job in putting the other 2 articles into perspective. I agree wholeheartedly that women and men both have responsibilities when it comes to matters of sexual purity, integrity, respecting others as brothers and sisters in Christ, and the whole matter of modesty.
Having said this, as a mother of 2 who has nursed both of my children, I personally have made the choice not to nurse in front of other people unless it is absolutely necessary. And when it is, I cover myself. I do this out of respect for God, myself, my husband and others. My body, including my breasts belong to my husband. They are a part of me that he enjoys in our most intimate moments. They are a love offering for him and only him to delight in. I am not saying that other men will automatically delight in the sight of my breasts while breastfeeding. What I am saying is that they are a sight that only my husband has a right and privilege to enjoy. Yes, they were made to feed and nourish my children as well and I thank God for that gift. BUT I will not forget that my breasts were a gift to my husband before we had children and they are a gift that he will continue to enjoy long after I am done having and nursing our children. I am not saying breastfeeding is dirty or sexual in any way. It is a beautiful sight and a gift and quite frankly I think there is something incredibly intimate in the fact that my husband is the only person who gets to see me do it in a completely relaxed and open manner.
And in this same way, my husband’s body belongs to me. I expect him to reserve his body for my eyes and enjoyment only. I don’t even like it when he walks across the street to get the mail without his shirt on. Lol and as a side note, I reserve my cleavage as a special treat for him around the house. Yes, it is hard to keep cleavage totally hidden when you have children tugging at your clothing every time you go out in public, but I do my best. Hahaha and this is what matters, I do my best to reserve my body (including my eyes) as my husband’s gift. And I do ask and expect that my husband reserves his body (including his eyes) as a gift to me and only me.
I think this is a concept that a lot of people struggle with these days. Our bodies don’t just belong to us. They belong to God, and they belong to our spouse. We don’t have a right to share or show off our bodies willy-nilly with other people. As children of God, we have an obligation to represent God and Christ with how we present our bodies. Our bodies are a temple for the Lord. We have an obligation to respect others by how we view them with the eyes that also belong to the Lord. We have an obligation to our spouse (or future spouse for single people) to respect and reserve our bodies out of respect for them.
And trust me, I love to dress to please my husband when we go out. I strive to do it. But that doesn’t mean I show my body off. I strive to highlight my God given beauty (all women have this beauty!) in a way that makes me feel and look feminine and in a way that reflects God’s handiwork. I want to be beautiful like a flower when I am out in public. I want to be beautiful like a sexy naked woman only in the comfort of our bedroom.
Wow. Samantha, you should start a blog. Beautifully put! This is exactly how my wife and I feel.
This was a beautiful comment that is exactly the way we feel about breastfeeding as well as modesty. It isn’t about shame or hiding but respect and honor! I only wish more Christians felt this way.
I don’t understand. Are there lots of women out there who have to expose boobs in order to nurse babies? I don’t think ANYBODY ever saw my boobs while I was nursing unless they were intentionally looking INTENTLY at my chest during latching on. My kids all nursed with my shirt over their faces. My sister-in-law and I could have played basketball with nursing babies and it just would have looked like two women attempting to play one-handed while holding infants. Goofy, but not sexy.
I don’t understand either. I breastfed my kids and never used a cover and yet no one ever saw my breasts. I wore an undershirt, then used my top shirt to cover my breast and their faces and there was no exposing anything. I have done everything whole nursing. I don’t have time to go off into a dark corner or a back room to nurse my baby. If my baby is hungry, I will feed him, but never ever showing my breast to anyone. I don’t know why you would ever need to show any of your breast.
I’ve breastfed five children and not a single one wuld nurse with a cover. They stopped immediately. So I learned to nurse without a cover and it was never an issue. Ever. The baby’s head covers everything and no skin is showing. To anyone around me it looks like I’m holding my baby. I, personally, don’t see a need to make such a big deal out of it by going into another room.
Hi Samantha! Thank you for your comment. I love your focus on how you dress for your husband vs. how you dress when you’re out of the house. That’s great!
I also really respect how you feel about breastfeeding, and I understand wanting to keep that intimate. That’s certainly a choice that everybody can make.
My only plea is that we recognize that it is a choice the MOTHER should make, not the church. If mothers prefer to breastfeed totally in private, that’s fine. But when churches decree that it must be that way, then that does add a layer of sexualization to women’s bodies that doesn’t need to be there, and I do think that it can make the lust problem worse. But again, I totally respect women’s decisions to feed their babies as they want to!
Samantha I couldn’t agree more! I have felt this way too but didn’t know how to express it with such eloquence as you. When I was nursing I would try to nurse as privately as possible and if that wasn’t an option then I would cover up with a blanket. It’s about treating your marriage like gold. If you want it to last forever then you do your best to treat it with extra care.
Women must have the freedom to decide these things for themselves and their families. Deciding to cover up is not a bad choice, more power to you! There are so many people who make choices to honor God, such as never drinking alcohol, eating a certain way, never watching TV and so on. But we can’t expect our personal convictions are necessary for all others or believe that others who don’t do what we do are somehow lesser Christians. Breastfeeding has many challenges, and I believe that insisting women don’t expose themselves for the purpose of feeding a child is very dangerous. It causes shame, it can affect the relationship with the child, and it can marginalize women by saying they can’t do what they are intended to do and still be welcome around others. Something very important that I’ve learned about breastfeeding is that, like anything else, context is extremely important. Does an OBGYN who is male struggle all day every day? There was a nude scene in Schindler’s List, but the person was tortured or dead (I believe) and the context was anything but sexual. If breasts are exposed for feeding a child, we as mothers should expect that the context is enough for men, ESPECIALLY Christian men, to not lust. That said, I do always take great care to note my surroundings when I’m nursing. I have one person who told me that it makes him uncomfortable. It’s a balance of expecting him to respect me and not being careless in front of him because I care about him. But I can’t do that around a bunch of strangers. And I can’t do that in my own home all the time. Christians don’t have to be the ones to push boundaries all the time, but we should never stand for something that hurts people. I will always be the one to stand up for women not being made to feel unwelcome when they are doing something normal.
I do want to point out the fact that my comment was not about churches or anyone else making rules about women not breastfeeding in certain places. It is absolutely up to a mother to decide when and where to nurse.
Here is my point though:
I don’t know about the rest of you, but my son wiggles and flails so much while nursing that it is quite a struggle to keep my breasts totally covered while nursing. I have to be very diligent and yes, in church that would be very distracting for me and others as I sat there struggling to keep my son focused on eating as he flings himself away from my chest to look around while eating. My daughter was the same way. No child is cooperative all the time. Because I know there is a possibility that my breasts could be put on display by my unsympathetic and easily distracted son, I choose to plan feedings accordingly and either use nursing facilities when available or cover myself and remain diligent while nursing. If there is a slight flash here and there, it isn’t because I’m not trying. It just happens. And that’s what I am trying to stress. I try even when I do nurse in public. I try and fail at times and I for give myself for it because I know what I am trying to do and who I am doing it for: God, my husband and myself. I do my very best to reserve my body for my husband’s eyes only. It is a precious gift. And I will not use my precious gift to him in order to make a statement about desensitizing men to naked female breasts. And I am not not breastfeeding in public to keep other men from lusting although I am not above being sensitive to those who are struggling and actively battling with temptations and lust. I do it out of respect for the fact that my body is a gift for my husband’s eyes and pleasure only. My breasts play a role in our intimate moments. And I get the whole viewing breasts in context argument, but is it wrong for me to feel that my breasts still ultimately belong to my husband? It’s my way of saying, “hey, I know the kid’s are borrowing these, but that doesn’t mean I forget that they are your gift and I won’t let other men have a chance to look at them just because they are being used for feeding and not in a sexual context.”
In addition to this, there are many women out there who are very against even covering their breasts with their shirt while nursing. They are very aggressive about their right to breastfeed in public and you cannot even express your own views about using a cover without them pulling the “shame card”. It is not shaming the act of breastfeeding to want to do it in private or in a discreet manner. It is a way for me to show my husband that his precious gift of my naked breasts is still his and his alone. Babies don’t nurse forever. My breasts will belong to him for the rest of our lives together. I protect that part of my naked body because it is something we both enjoy in our most intimate moments. Why on earth would I want to diminish that intimacy of sharing them only with him when it is completely possible to nurse our children without showing my breasts to others? That is what I don’t get.
I can’t help but feel like you are talking to (about) me because of your use of the phrase “desensitizing to naked breasts.” Nobody had naked anything. I was talking about desensitization to the act of breastfeeding. There was never any skin showing. That said, I feel your frustration regarding kids who aren’t nice, socialized nursers. It is hard with those kids, and I support your decisions that were made with the intent to be the best mom possible. Could you give other women the same benefit of the doubt? I have never encountered a mom who wanted to actually undress to nurse, and it would probably freak me out. But what I DID see, is quite a few moms who were so suffused in embarrassment and shame, that their experience nursing was unpleasant and unsuccessful. I don’t want that. I want women to love each other in the middle of all our junk, good and bad.
I apologize for having to be brief, but the husband and children are calling! I was not talking about you, Anna. I saw in your comment that you clearly tried your very best to be a modest nurser, just like me! Your phrasing probably did influence the phrase I used in my second comment because it is similar, but I promise I was not attacking you. I come on strong sometimes when I get passionate and I am very passionate about married couples reserving their bodies (eyes included) for each other only. I believe we are honoring God’s design for marriage when we do this for each other. And to me, that includes the way I nurse in public.
When I was nursing my kids, I always wanted to be in a private place, or covered. That was for my peace of mind more then anyone else’s. To be honest, I just didn’t want to risk the conflict, if it offended someone, or the possible exposure, someone deciding to take a picture to post on social media to illustrate their point. But one day, while in the check out line at Walmart, my son thought he needed to eat right that moment. He reached down my shirt, and yes, pulled out my breast to try to feed. I quickly recomposed myself and hoped no one saw…A nice old man did see and was trying not to laugh LOL. I was embarrassed, but didn’t feel any guilt over the matter. My son was just acting like a hungry baby. I still never wanted to breast feed in the presence of others, but at least I was able to discover that not everyone would choose to be offended, or to view it as sexual in nature.
Thanks for explaining your position so thoughtfully, Samantha; I greatly appreciate it. You’ve articulated better than I could how I felt when my first was born. Things changed for me when my third had an oral delay, though, meaning she could not drink out of a bottle or cup or eat any kind of solid food until after 14 months old. She was therefore EXCLUSIVELY breastfed that entire time and not capable of receiving calories in any other way. She also had a lot of sensory issues for which nursing was her only comfort, and so she nursed until she was nearly three years old. Combined with her big sisters, that is five years of breastfeeding so far. I am now pregnant with our last and hope to nurse again, so that will be a total of six to seven years of nursing. I simply can’t spend 7 years of my life hiding to feed my children. I could when I had two children, but it isn’t possible with four, Lol. So with my third I learned how to nurse discretely without a cover in public, even though I had been dead set against it with my first two. But I just can’t put my entire life (and the lives of my school-aged kids) on hold because I’m breastfeeding.
I find it so confusing that public breastfeeding is very common in my area and completely acceptable; it has only been in my *church* community that I’ve been told to go do that in the bathroom, or have had men refuse to be in the same room as me (and this was while COVERED) because they “didn’t want to think of me in that way.” In what way?! As a woman, with breasts?? Last time I checked… I am a woman, and I have breasts. Shocking, I know! 😉 Being aware that I have breasts is NOT lust!
I do disagree with the sentiment that our breasts are primarily for our husbands, because I feel this is a very recent mentality that has only existed since formula and breast pumps rose in popularity. (This isn’t meant to be anti-formula; I supplemented with my second. I’m just stating history, because prior to this it was not possible to divorce the breast from its primary function like it is now with formula and pumping.) The sexual function of the breast is actually secondary; the primary function of the breast throughout all of human history until now has been to feed our children. To me it is the same as our mouths. We actually HAVE SEX with our mouths, yet we do not cover them in public. Why? Because their primary functions are communication and eating. Why are we able to make this distinction between our mouths but not our breasts? Again, the context is key. The breast is not sexual in itself, at least not beyond the fact that it indicates my sex (gender); only the context makes it sexual. Does that make sense? My breasts are primarily for my children; without them they would starve (prior to formula, or you had to find another woman’s breasts to feed them). The sexual pleasure they provide (both my husband AND ME, as I greatly enjoy stimulation) is secondary. I think even Scripture supports this. A woman in the crowd calls out to Jesus, “Blessed are the breasts at which you nursed!” Yet this was a totally normal thing to say! Why are there thousands of Christian/Catholic paintings and statues of Mary breastfeeding Jesus? Many of which have her nipples exposed? Because never before in history has breastfeeding been sexualized. It isn’t too often where I feel the world has a healthier view than the church, but as far as breastfeeding goes, I think the church has really messed this up. I hope we can change the conversation for the next generation…
Thank you, Kay. That’s very well explained. And I didn’t realize you were pregnant! Congratulations.
Thank you! ? We just found out it’s a boy. ? So he will have three big sisters to help change the conversation in this house. ?
Love that comment, Kay! I especially liked the bit about the breasts vs the mouth. Very thought provoking!
I really appreciate you sharing your personal experience! I think it is wonderful the way you met your child’s specific needs and how long you breastfed her to meet those needs. I think it is a beautiful blessing to be able to sacrifice ourselves for the sake of our family!
I truly do feel sorry that you are treated that way in your church when it comes to breastfeeding your children. And I understand from your other comments that this is how it has always been there even in the nursery where you should be able to nurse freely. And this is your father-in-law’s church? I honestly would not be able to stand for that, Father-in-law’s church or not. I can see why you have the attitude you have towards the church’s view on breastfeeding. I have never been met with anything but support and acceptance in my own church. They are wonderfullying loving conservative people I might add. It’s the same with the church that I grew up in. I’m sorry the people that you have known have caused you to have such a negative opinion on this particular group of people.
I do have to disagree with your opinion that the primary function of the breasts is for breastfeeding and I feel I can adequately back this up with scripture. But before I even go into the subject of breasts specifically I think it is important to note that when God created Adam and then Eve He put them in the garden alone and without children. This was the very first marriage and the scripture stresses the fact that a man will leave his father and mother and cling to his wife and they will be one flesh. (Genesis 2:24) One flesh. The marriage relationship is our primary relationship after the one we have with God. Therefore, everything about my body is for my husband primarily because children are a secondary addition and blessing to the marriage relationship.
I also think it is important to note that our bodies only belong to two people: God and our spouse. (1 Corinthians 7:7-8 talks about the authority spouses have over each other’s bodies). My children (though I love my children dearly and gladly sacrifice my own body in order to carry, birth and feed them) cannot claim any ownership of my body. It is a temporary gift to them in order to give them a life of their very own and nourishment while they need it. Once they are grown and married, they will leave me to become one with their own spouse. And who will be left with me? My husband. The one who has been given my body as gift for as long as we both shall live. And who is the one who will delight in my breasts forever? My husband. (Proverbs 5:19 “…may her breasts satisfy you always, may you ever be intoxicated with her love.”) Not my children. I will always be grateful to my Heavenly Father for the gift of breastfeeding and the bond I have had with my children because of it. But my children are a product of the love my husband and I share. He delighted in my breasts first. And I delighted and still delight in him delighting in them. And we will both continue to delight in the role my breasts play in our intimate life long after the children are gone. I cannot see how the temporary role of breastfeeding is the primary function of my breasts and the permanent role of pleasure would be secondary because my relationship with my husband is primary and the relationship with our children is secondary.
I also this it is interesting to note that our breasts do not come already equipped with milk. It is produced only when we have a child and only continues to be be produced as long as we are nursing. If it was the primary function of our breasts, then we would produce milk our whole lives. However, it is only a function of the breasts while our children nurse. Still a wonderful and beautiful function but a temporary one.
As a side note Song of Solomon 7:7-8 is a great verse about the delight our husbands have in our breasts as well.
Thanks, Samantha! When I say primary, I mean most important and biologically necessary. Because yes, my husband will get a whole lot more mileage out of my breasts than my children, ha! And I am not saying breasts have no sexual function; they do, and it is a function I enjoy tremendously! (Sorry, TMI?) But looking at all mammals, milk production is the biological function of breasts and necessary for survival. Without milk production, mammals become extinct. This makes the breast’s primary function to be producing milk and feeding offspring.
By God’s good design, He gave human females an added secondary function that no other mammal has, and that is the added bonus of sexual pleasure that can be derived from breast stimulation, just as only human females have a clitoris. God clearly cares A LOT about His daughters’ enjoyment of sex! But the biological function is still its primary function, just as the biological function of the vagina is sexual intercourse, menstruation, childbirth, etc. That is why they exist. The sexual pleasure isn’t actually necessary at all! But God gave us this good gift to enjoy. And enjoy them we shall. (And I do! Often! ?) I just don’t think these bonuses trump the biological primary purpose of these body parts, just as we all understand that we don’t need to cover our mouths because of their primary purpose despite their secondary sexual functions.
I feel as if today’s porn culture and the introduction of formula has flipped this when it comes to the breast because combined they both divorce the breast from its primary functioning milk production. We are told their sexual nature trumps their biological function, and never in history have breasts been seen this way until now, because it has never been possible before now! As such, it is a view that is prevalent only in first world countries, where porn and formula are readily available. I know correlation isn’t necessarily causation, but I do believe they are related. This shift first became prevalent in America only in the 50s or so when formula first gained popularity. My grandmother was told to give her babies formula in the hospital, because she should save her breasts for her husband instead. After all, if science can blast men into outer space, why would she do something as barbaric as nurse her children when science can do it better? (Not joking, this is what she was told.) Women were shamed into abandoning the biological function of the breast by formula companies. (Again, please know I’m not anti-formula. I supplemented with my second daughter. But this is historically how it was advertised when it first became popular, that science can do it better than biology.) And then with the rise of porn following the next generation, now we have come to believe that breasts are for men first, and breastfeeding is an added (albeit inconvenient) secondary function. This is utterly backwards. Breasts are not seen as primarily sexual in any other parts of the world but as necessary to raise offspring. Does that mean these women and men don’t get sexual pleasure from them? Of course not. They’re bodies function the same as ours, but their primary function has always been the primary (and heck, the ONLY option), and so they have no trouble making the distinction between the two contexts.
Yes, my body belongs sexually to my husband, and no one else shall have my body in a sexual content. But there is nothing sexual about feeding my children. Nothing.
(Sorry so long! I’ve had a lot of time to think about it while nursing for 5+ years, lol.)
Kay, I think your history is exactly right. And the tragedy and utter corporate malpractice where Nestle tried to get Third World women to stop breastfeeding and start using formula (despite the fact that they would have to mix it with unclean water) is just terrible. I’m glad that we’ve come back to breast is best.
I forgot to say that my response was for Kay.
Kay, you have a lot of knowledge regarding the history of breasts. I applaud you for that and I would be foolish to try to argue that the sexual function of breasts is more critically important to sustaining human life than the function of breastfeeding. In fact, I was never trying to argue that. I was merely trying to point out what a profound and important role that breasts play in regards to connecting emotionally and physically with our husbands. I don’t think it is a mistake that so many women find breast stimulation pleasurable. God designed the bodies of man and woman differently and therefore created us to be stimulated differently. He designed us differently even right down to the chemicals released in our brains during intercourse! Here is a great article discussing how sexual intercourse helps to bond couples emotionally.
thehttp://www.familylife.com/articles/topics/parenting/challenges/sexual-purity/hooked-the-bonding-power-of-sex
It is very interesting to note that the chemical, oxytocin, that is released during sex to bond a woman to her husband is the same chemical that bonds us with our babies during breastfeeding! I find it so incredibly amazing that God created a way for us to bond with our entire family in such a profound and neurological way! The experiences are totally and completely different, but the chemical is the same. Having said this I will express my original opinion. I believe wholeheartedly that EVERYTHING about our bodies belongs to our spouse primarily. I believe that if breasts play a role, and a leading role at that, in the intimate moments between my husband and me, that they ARE primarily for my husband. And they are for me too. They play a role in helping to bond me emotionally to my spouse and I happen to place as much value on the emotional functions of my entire person as I do my biological ones because human being have the unique distinction of being the only living things on earth that have both a body and a soul. I AM NOT saying that breasts are purely sexual or that there is ANYTHING sexual about breastfeeding. What I am saying is that my breasts, along with the rest of my body, are PRIMARILY for my husband because after we got married we began giving ourselves to one another and through sexual intercourse and stimulation (along with the breast stimulation that helps me to achieve orgasm) we bonded physically and emotionally. And to me, this emotional bond that I have and continue to strengthen with my husband is JUST as important and meaningful to me as the act of feeding my child. And yet my breasts (along with the rest of my body) still belong to my husband who joyfully shares them with our children because he is not some kind of barbarian who selfishly demands to have them only to himself for his pleasure.
Samantha, that is a beautiful comment! I especially loved this part
“We have an obligation to respect others by how we view them with yes that also belong to the Lord.”
I never really thought that when we are ogling someone, we are basically doing it with His eyes! That is a great shift in thinking that I am sure will be helpful to people!
Your comment is so spot on! I love it I’m screenshot it it right now!
Thank you for your insights. I’ve been reading the last few days and I don’t know that I can add much to what’s been said. But I have thought about this issue a LOT. I’m a 40+ yr old pastor with a wife and two kids. I grew up in a strict environment (home and church) and thankful for it. boys and girls didn’t swim together, boys were told to keep their shirts on too, we changed the tv channel when inappropriate things came on and the like. And I see both sides of the issue. The lust of the flesh in Galatians 5 covers more than just sexual things. So we are wrong to over emphasize sexual lust and forget things like idolatry and envy, and we are wrong to lay the blame of men’s sexual lust at the feet of women.
When “every man’s battle” came out, I think it filled a void and addressed an issue pastors were not addressing. Remember that the Internet was not around until the late 90’s and early 2000’s when it really took off. And that’s when the pornography problem really became an issue for men. Lots of men who would not ever buy a playboy now saw images they never dreamed of seeing at the click of a button.
Before that, the closest thing lots of men got to porn was the swimsuit edition of sports illustrated. So, I think “every man’s battle” gave lots of men the permission they needed to admit the problem and get help (especially in the church context) with porn addiction – especially the ones who fell into the Internet porn trap when they never had a problem with porn before. To be fair, I never read the books, but I used to listen to the author’s radio program a lot.
I think what you’ve pointed out is that the pendulum has swung the other direction where people have almost come to the conclusion that lust is just a sin guys will have to deal with and women just have to do what they can to help them. I agree that notion is totally false.
I’m a red blooded American guy (even though I’m a pastor lol) and I deal with my share of sexual temptation when I see certain women I find attractive. Having a healthy sex life helps with that because my marriage is my God ordained outlet for sexual expression. Like all marriages we are hot and cold depending on life “stuff” but we have developed a healthy balance. It wasn’t always that way, and when times were bad, the lust issue was harder for me than it is now. When our sex life is good, I barely notice other women. If we have a cold spell as a couple I will have a little more trouble. In fact, at times, I’ve said, “honey, think we could get some alone time soon? Cause I’m starting to have some trouble”. That’s my way of asking to re connect. And we plan it if we have to.
But even when things were bad, I had to be honest before the Lord and accept that whether my wife responded to me sexually or not it was my responsibility before the Lord to stay pure. All that being said, I don’t have sex on my brain constantly. If I go to the beach or a public pool I don’t find myself fantasizing about every woman there. When I talk to a woman I don’t have to consciously make myself NOT look at her chest. When a Victoria’s Secret commercial comes on I don’t lose my train of thought. I was “flashed” once by a woman on the interstate and my first thought was “put those away woman. I don’t want to see that!” Maybe I’ve become callous to the culture. I hope not. But as a Christian man, my focus is Christ, loving my wife and my children. Now don’t get me wrong – if I feed my fantasy life or purposely look at images I know are immoral then yes, I could go down that list road very quickly. It’s powerful, dangerous, and like most men, I’ve struggled at times, especially in my younger years.
On the other hand, I remember at church once in my single days, there were two very attractive young women sitting in front of me. Both were wearing dresses that were so tight I could see every curve they had. And when we stood to sing worship songs, I literally had to look away to keep my mind on worship. So, I think it is definitely an issue women should recognize, because even Christian women unknowingly dress in ways that lend themselves to becoming sexual objects in the eyes of men. But ultimately the responsibility of the sin of a person, man or woman, lies at the feet of the person who’s committing the sin. Just my two cents
Hi there! So glad to have a pastor chime in! Thank you.
I think your post is really balanced, and I love what you said about Victoria’s Secret or the woman flashing you. That’s perfect. And it totally is possible!
As a female pastor I also appreciate your comments. There are times we in ministry walk on eggshells so as not to entice or tempt the opposite sex. The only one I want to entice is my husband.
Unfortunately, this sexuality mindset can hinder the process and progress of ministry.
There are attractive people out there. God made beautiful beings…inside and out. Some may lust after intellectual conversation rather than the physical body. Same principle.
As Christians it is our devotion…our passion for Christ which supersedes all others and the Holy Spirit to bring our focus back to our first love when we our eyes wander.
I know I’m a blunt conversationalist and I’m really, really not trying to offend or shame anyone, but that whole book philosophy had a terrible effect on me when we were trying to glean some usefulness from it in our marriage. Being told by your beloved husband that you need to have sex with him because he was being tempted to use porn or do whatever else, is icky. Like, THE BIGGEST turnoff there could be for me. It’s like “I’m an alcoholic and I really want a bourbon, but c’mere and you can be my lame substitute glass of water.” Um, let me go poke myself with a stick instead.
Yes, I’ve been trying to explain that to some people this week. And just wait until tomorrow’s post–that’s where I’m REALLY showing how it has made women feel!
I understand women’s perspectives about this being a “turn off”, but I also think both spouses should clearly understand that a lack of sex in a marriage is going to make the high desire partner start to become angry, resentful, and potentially justify looking elsewhere. I think the example is that if you go fishing at the same fishing hole and you never catch any fish, you either need to prepare to suffer a miserable, slow, sad, death or move to a new fishing hole.
I think Shelia’s best quote (paraphrased) ever is “Satan want us to have as much sex as possible before marriage, and the least amount of sex after marriage. Why do Christians only condemn the one”. So, a sexless marriage is a possible, and often, gateway to lusting, pornography, affairs, etc.
Hi there! I can really feel your pain, and I’m so sorry. You’re right–I do think sex-starved marriages are a REAL problem. I’m actually talking about this tomorrow, because here’s my big issue (and I’ll give you a preview!). I think what happens is that pastors realize that so many guys especially are in sex starved marriages (though many women are, too). And the thought is that if they can just make the women understand how hard this is on the guy, then the women will start having sex! They figure that the solution to sex starved marriages is to explain how men feel. I actually think to a large extent that’s the CAUSE of sex-starved marriages (as this comment shows). The “obligation sex” message where we tell women that men will not be able to remain mentally or physically faithful if you do not have sex with them completely eradicates any sex drive that’s there.
So what’s to be done? I think I have quite a good answer. It all comes from changing the way we talk about it. Instead of shame filled or guilt filled messages, there’s an entirely different way of framing the issue, which is what I try to do in my books, and which I suggest people in sex starved marriages use. And it really is far more effective.
I really do feel for the men (and the women) who yearn for intimacy and aren’t getting it. But my concern is that the messages that we are giving women especially are actually contributing to the problem. So let’s talk about it differently! But more on that tomorrow…
Yes! I agree, Anna.
Amen, Anna!
Sex is Gods gift for BOTH spouses, not just (another) way for wives to serve their husbands!
Yes, I really don’t like that slant on it. I don’t think it’s particularly helpful. But that’s what’s coming tomorrow! (I think you’ll like it, E)
Thanks forthis little series! I loved it. I especially loved the 3 questions that guide making modesty decisions. As the mother to two young little girls so far, I am always looking for ways to put into words what I would like to teach them to help them be confident in themselves, their standards, and their faith. I do have one question that I would love your input on. I was never taught to my recollection to be modest so I don’t tempt boys, but I was told on multiple occasions that being modest will help me to attract the ‘right’ kind of boys that I would rather associate with and then marry. Luckily I found one 🙂 I just wonder if you find an arguement with this logic, or maybe wording I should stay away from as my little girls grow up?
Hey, Kaylee! Sheila’s daughter stepping in here 🙂
Just my personal two cents, I think that instead of saying “the right kind of guy will be attracted to you if you wear modest clothes,” a message of, “if you feel like you need to wear skimpier clothes to attract a boy, that means he likely isn’t seeing you for you. And you don’t want to be with someone who is only attracted to you because you’re showing more skin.”
The problem with the whole “modesty attracts the right boys” mentality is that it isn’t always true–sometimes horrible boys go for modestly-dressed girls. So it’s more important to teach girls how to tell if someone’s interested in their heart than to teach them a dress code to attract a good guy! 🙂 (I was told that message, too, a lot, but was also told the “you’ll tempt boys” message which were honestly a little confusing put together. So it’s wrong to tempt boys with what I wear, but if I wear the right clothes I’ll tempt the right boys? Huh?)
Slightly off topic, but you’re very right, Rebecca; sometimes horrible boys do go for modestly-dressed girls, and I’m here to tell ya, some of those same horrible boys see a purity ring as a challenge and an aphrodisiac. Seen it happen.
Hi Kaylee! I just want to chime in about that mentality of “attracting the right boy by dressing modestly,” as I was raised with that mentality (hard-core) and I have two problems with it, one is logical and the other is based off my experience.
I’m sure we’re all familiar with the term “dressing to attract” or “dressing to kill” – usually meaning a woman who dresses herself to be a showstopper and get the attention of a guy, or guys. We as Christians would recognize that this is not a mentality we should practice or instill in our young girls and teens. However, teaching a young girl just starting to experience attraction to boys, that she should dress modestly to attract “a good guy,” inverts the previous message but still tells her that ATTRACTING A MAN should be the deciding factor behind her clothing decisions. I think teaching this can easily be misunderstood by the immature teens that the PURPOSE of their clothes is to attract the opposite sex, whether that means dressing scantily or modestly. The damage here is more “mental” as it skews the way a girl sees the purpose of her clothing. I wish someone had told me (before I was 21) that I should dress in ways that were comfortable, stylish (not frumpy), and made me feel confident (and inconspicuous, haha).
Second point – I was raised very conservatively and only wore dresses that were very long and very loose. My family knew lots of other families that had similar values and also very nice sons whom my parents would have approved if they had wanted to pursue me. However, one by one, all these “good guys” met and married girls who wore jeans, t-shirts, knee-length dresses, and things without sleeves (all taboo in my book, at the time). I remember explaining to my dad when I was 20 that it was very confusing to be told that “these kind of guys” would be attracted to my long baggy dresses (haha) but instead they were clearly attracted to girls who were ambitious, educated, opinionated, and stylish. Astonishing, I know.
Sorry this was so long. The short of it is, this mentality and teaching backfired on me -haha- and also gave me some very unhealthy objectives in my mind about clothes, as a teenager.
Epilogue: today I love wearing cute clothes and my husband really appreciates how I look in a good pair of bootcut jeans. 😉
Great comment, Christine! Thank you. And that is very interesting about all the boys that you grew up with! I’ve seen similar things in our wider homeschooling community here, too!
Good point, Christine–love what you said! Don’t be sorry it was long haha 🙂
“Interestingly, it is only in church today that this is the case….”
Um, no, not at all. I guarantee you, I could not walk into my office, pull down my blouse, and start breastfeeding. That would involve a series of discussions with HR. That’s why they have dedicated “wellness” rooms with locking doors.
There is nothing about breastfeeding that magically makes breasts not breasts. If you did exactly the same motions and revealed the same amount without a baby, it would be incredibly indecent and make people uncomfortable.
Cleaning a diaper is also natural and not sexual, but if you were dangling your half nude baby with their rear in the air while you arrange a Pampers on the pew, people would notice and it would be an issue.
Just go to the bathroom or a private corner or use a blanket. Part of showing respect is doing private things in private. If people are seeing your boobs or seeing you unbutton your clothes in public, that is a problem.
/ pet peeve
(I say this as someone who has no children of her own.)
Hi Sunny-Dee,
I do hear what you’re saying, but I think there’s a fundamental difference between a workplace (where children generally aren’t allowed) and a church.
I can tell you that when I had my babies, I didn’t initially plan on breastfeeding in public. It was kind of uncomfortable. But eventually you just get to the point where you really have no choice. And once you start, you realize no one really thinks it’s a big deal, in general.
I could breastfeed in restaurants, in parks, in shopping malls, in doctors’ offices or other offices in the waiting rooms, with friends, etc. I think that’s pretty much universal (in fact, many states and provinces have laws that say that restaurants or public places must allow breastfeeding). So there really isn’t a big taboo issue with it in most public places anymore.
Now, I also went to a church where it wasn’t a big deal, either.
But I think if you live in an area where you can breastfeed in public pretty much everywhere (except at work, which, again, is an entirely different kettle of fish), but then you’re told you can’t at church–that’s just really weird.
Again, before I had my kids I never thought I’d be able to breastfeed in front of people, especially brothers-in-law, etc. But then you realize, “I don’t want to miss out on the Christmas dinner discussion”, or “I have nowhere else to go that’s comfortable right now, and I’d really rather sit on this comfy couch than on a hard bench somewhere else” (you actually need to be quite comfortable to breastfeed, and your back can get quite tired.)
And I also think that there is a difference in how a person is breast-feeding.. if you are whipping your entire shirt off, that’s a bit of a problem because, yes, it violates other people’s right to not see your boobs in their face. But I’ve been around scores of women breast-feeding and I’ve never been flashed once, even when they’re not using a cover, because mothers generally know how to let everything happen under their shirt. So yes, be respectful about it, but you can very easily be respectful about it while breastfeeding in church 🙂
Yes, Sheila and Rebecca! I missed conversation at Christmas because I had a 2 day old and literally had to take my shirt off. But why should I have to miss a sermon because I have a 2 month old? Churches can be more accommodating by having comfortable rooms with rocking chairs and a live feed, but if they don’t, they shouldn’t make moms feel like outcasts for choosing to exclusively breastfeed. I had 3 choices. Pump and leak, miss the service, or feed him where I was. So I wore a nursing top and fed him where I was with no more skin showing than many other women at church that day.
What you are saying is actually illegal and could be constituted as harassment if spoken to a woman breastfeeding.
Would YOU eat in a public bathroom?
Feeding a baby is not the same as pooping.
I fed my babies wherever I wanted. I fed them during sermons, in my pew. I fed them while dancing at a wedding. I fed them while actively grocery shopping. I wasn’t going to stop my life or haul all my other tiny children into a public restroom so I could feed my baby.
And no, I never once flashed or exposed my breasts to do so.
Insinuating that feeding my child is as dirty as urine or feces is highly insulting. Not at all comparable. I don’t change my baby’s diaper in the pew becaue of sanitary reasons. There is nothing unsanitary about feeding my baby.
Growing up I had friends of both genders. In college I had a lot of good friends that were guys as well as my girl friends. For me, it was just a matter if enjoying the person. My sister was also a student at the same college. She and I once had a disagreement over if it was even possible for a college age guy to want to be “friends” and nothing more or not. I told her of course it was and mentioned the guys I was friends with. She insisted that they ALL wanted to be more then friends (clue, I’m not THAT pretty). Not a one of these fellows ever acted as if they wanted to be more then friends. We just worked and studied together & yes, were friends. She insisted that a particular one was crazy for me, but in fact, he was my future husband’s biggest cheer leader. He encouraged me to get to know my husband, and insisted that he was one of the few guys that could be trusted. Many of my guy friends supported me, and encouraged me, but none of them every tried to date me, or even flirt with me. It would have been creepy in fact as I started college at 16 and many of these guys were in their 20’s at the time. They tended to look after me as they would a kid sister.
I think the fact that I was able to make friends with them, and welcomed friendship from them, actually protected me. It’s when we tell people that that friendship between genders is impossible, that we give them the idea that it simple must be more. I never believed that I HAD to have a crush on every guy I met, and would be dismayed if my daughters felt that they could only chose their friends from the females they know. They both (14 & 15) have friends of both genders and in the younger one’s case, her closest friend is a guy she’s known since kindergarten. He’s been a good friend to her, and she’s been a good friend to him. When we say, “no” to the idea of friends from other gender’s not only are we cutting out half the population based on biological factors, we are actually encouraging our children to see the other gender only as a potential sex partner, rather then as a person. It’s actually not that far from what was taught for many years to support bigotry, and slavery. Look at them as objects, property, not people. I’m not teaching my children that.
Your experience mirrors mine! I had a lot of great guy friends, and my daughters did, too. In fact, at many stages of my life my best friends were guys. And we each cheered at each other’s weddings!
The whole breastfeeding conversation has made me remember a few things. First, learning to breastfeed was awkward and uncomfortable at first. I had the hardest time using a cover because I couldn’t get my baby latched on correctly, and he would cry, then my milk would go EVERYWHERE! I remember sitting next to my brother in law on the couch using a cover, and he didn’t think anything of it. But my other bro in law would walk in the room, see me nursing baby with or without a cover, and walk out. It made things even more awkward and uncomfortable, and all I was doing was feeding my baby! I felt ashamed a few times because of that. Sometimes, I would go into another room by myself, but I didn’t like being away from the family. I think if you make a big deal about something, it becomes a big deal, and it does a huge disservice to both men and women.
The difference between my dad’s response to breastfeeding and my FIL’s (who is a pastor) was frankly very distressing to me. My dad waltzed right into the nursery when I was nursing, kissed me and then my baby’s head, and proceeded to lay his hand on her and tell me how beautiful she was. He couldn’t care less that my breasts were exposed, because I am his daughter and he has always seen me as a whole person.
At my in-laws, however, I was always forced to go upstairs. When I finally refused, my MIL set up a blockade of chairs to let my FIL know I was “indecent.” I once tried to nurse (COVERED) during a women’s bible study that my FIL was leading but he excused himself and repositioned his seat to where he could not see me. Um, I was using a cover!! I asked my husband about it later, if he was REALLY that uncomfortable just *knowing* that I was breastfeeding even though there was nothing to see, and my husband just shrugged and said, “He doesn’t want to think of you in that way.” IN WHAT WAY?! As a woman, WITH BREASTS?? *gasp* Last I checked, I am a woman, and I have breasts. Being aware of this fact is NOT LUST. But my FIL seems to think it is, and he trained my husband to feel the same. It is so discouraging. I’ve nursed for five years of my life so far (one more on the way) and I am so tired of being treated like a leper *only* in my church community. What’s wrong with this picture??
I gotta be honest…the men I have the most problem with are middle aged men, and men who grew up in more conservative communities. I have noticed that more liberal guys, millenials and post millenials are far more respectful and able to interact respectfully with women. When I people watch in target, it is the middle aged men who crank their heads at Miss Leggings-for-Pants. The millennial hipster (whether with a girlfriend, friend, or wife, or not) doesn’t ogle or even cast a sideways glance! When I am in Wal-Mart, which demographically caters to the more conservative (politically and religiously) than Target, I get uncomfortably stared at all.the.time! In Wal-Mart the baby-daddies are no where to be found or cussing out their kids to behave. In target, the millennial hipster dad has baby strapped in a sling, as he discusses the importance of stainless steal sippy cups over cheap plastic ones.
When I hang out with registered democrat and liberal men, they don’t bat an eye that I breast feed. They encourage, chat about baby-raising challenges, and offer to change diapers or show off burping skills. When I hang out with registered republican and conservative men, especially Christian ones, they are REALLY uncomfortable with anything to do with a baby, and especially breast feeding. Diapers are women’s territory.
I don’t mean to paint with a broad brush, but this has LARGELY been my experience. It is far more easy and comfortable to hang out with non-Christians, homosexual, worldly men than it is to hang out with most Christian men.
Thankfully, my current church is far more welcoming, respectful, and easy going, and breast feeding in church is a non-issue.
Libl, YUP. I went to visit a non-Christian very liberal friend of mine since we had babies the same age not too long ago. While visiting, we were both nursing when we heard her husband come home. I asked her if I needed to grab my cover (because my husband would be horrified to see any of my friends nursing) and she was like, “No, why would you? Hello…” pointing to her own breasts. Her husband not only came over to say hi, he sat down and chatted for a while to see how my family was adjusting to the newest addition. And the thing is… it wasn’t even weird after my initial shock (more like shouts of praise) wore off. He truly could not care less. Whereas at my church, a middle aged elder (white republican) told me to go nurse in the bathroom, because the other kids in the nursery don’t need to see that. UM, WHAT. Thankfully my husband did stand up for me there. “No way. It’s called a NURSE-ry. Because that’s where women go to NURSE.”
I like what your husband said. It’s a NURSE-ry! Lol!
I should probably,add the caveat that where I live is still a bit in the stone age. Misogyny is quite common here. Domestic abuse is almost expected. Single motherhood is the norm. My husband gets asked how many kids he has. When he says (we have a larger brood), he is asked by how many women. He says just one, my wife, and they nearly fall over in shock.
Local christian circles are rather legalistic and conservative (or waaayy out there.) So, maybe my point of view is skewed.
I think a lot of this has to do with familiarity with breastfeeding. My dad is super conservative and 70 but is very comfortable with breastfeeding. If I was nursing in front of him and the cover was pulled off by little hands or the baby popped off to look around, he would avoid looking at my breast but it wouldn’t be a big deal. My mom nursed their 4 kids and it’s normal to him. All middle aged men who I’ve run into who aren’t comfortable haven’t been exposed to nursing. There was quite a bit of time in this country when most people didn’t nurse their babies. The breast has been labeled as simply sexual because they are removed from the nurturing aspect of breasts. I have experienced liberal middle-aged men who left the room when I was nursing under a cover or who began a conversation with me and when they finally realized I was nursing, blushed like crazy.
It has been very enlightening to read all the comments as it has helped me understand how the culture around breast feeding is different in the US to Australia. I have been in church all my life and yes, we were encouraged to be modest in what we wore but men weren’t painted to be sexual fiends, it was more about honoring God with what we wore.
I exclusively breastfed both my babies and, like some of you in this thread, feeding with a cover was almost impossible for the first 6 weeks or so (my first baby would come off every minute or so and reattaching was a challenging process) and then when they were older they loved to pull the cover off! Thankfully, all of the churches I’ve been to have nurseries where mums can see and hear the service. I always used the nursery so that I could feed without a cover in the early days when it was too hard. I’m sure I could have fed in the church if I wanted to buy it was far easier on a comfy couch in the nursery!
In saying that, though, I always fed with a cover when out, friend’s houses, shops, anywhere (I avoided feeding out apart from church in the early days anyway…feeding was so time consuming and traumatic). But I was never worried about my breasts being objects of lust I covered up because a) I don’t want random strangers, friends etc seeing my breasts and b) I know lots of people (not just guys but often women who haven’t had children) find it uncomfortable and awkward to have a conversation with someone who has their breast hanging out while they burp their baby. I see them politely focusing on the woman’s face but it is awkward. Why should I use my freedom to make someone else feel awkward when it’s easy to be discreet and considerate of their feelings by chucking a cover on? That’s how I feel anyway.
I say all this within the context of my culture where I’ve never seen someone told that covered breastfeeding in public is offensive.
I love this. Because, no matter how much we debate it, it will always make some people feel awkward. I, personally, don’t want to see another woman’s boobs. And yet I have no issue with breastfeeding in public. I did with my daughter, but I always had a cover or something over. But, if someone felt that awkward because I was doing this infront of them, I was quite happy to move to a bedroom or something. And not for one minute did I think they were lusting – some people are just not comfortable with this and it has NOTHING to do with lust or trying to shame anyone. Surely our hospitality to their feelings is as important as us demanding our rights to breastfeed wherever and whenever we wanted to? Please note that I have breastfed in public, but I was ALWAYS covered, so I am NOT against breastfeeding or saying that we should always be relegated to the bathroom… I just think we need to consider those of us who may just naturally be inclined to be more introverted and therefor awkward in these circumstances.
As Samantha said above our bodies are reserved for our spouses. And our breasts belong to our husbands first and foremost. And if baring our breasts would cause someone to stumble, then surely it would be the Christian thing to cover up? Just asking…
Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats. Romans 14:20 – I know they’re talking about food here, but could this same principle to breastfeeding (with boobs showing) in public?
As a mom of two little boys, thank you for this. I’ve spent so much time since I was pregnant with my first trying to figure out how to raise them to treat women respectfully, especially once they’re mature enough to start dating, and this post gives me a lot of helpful insights to lay a foundation for that.
I’m also currently breastfeeding my 2 month old , and it’s been interesting to read that debate. The church we recently moved to has been good about having a dedicated “cry room” for nursing. The only time I got asked to move was because the service was ending and they needed the same room to count the day’s offering. I’m personally more comfortable with a cover, since my baby is often one of those fussy eaters who moves around and makes me squirt milk everywhere. And when I’m with my in laws, I usually go to another room. But that’s more to avoid awkward situations like my toddler yanking the cover away while his little brother is screaming his head off and not latching. It’s frustrating enough without having to also deal with a bunch of questions about what’s wrong with him. I’ll chalk that up to introvert problems.
I have what I think is a humorous story regarding the “your boys live in the real world” point.
My son was about 4 when we had dinner with my (now) former sister-in-law and she’s pretty proud of her breasts and they were barely contained. My son reached over and poked her boob. ?? she said something to me (enjoying the attention) and I said “well, they’re right there! Put em away”
I did tell my son not to touch her chest.
Another thing is I never “hid” my body. I didn’t parade around naked for sure but I didn’t gasp and cover when he walked in to tell me something. And as far as I know he has never looked at porn or sought out images (I check his iPod)
Kudos for taking this subject head on. Additionally, I think it helpful to stress that all men are not wired the same and therefore, each will face varying levels of sexual pressure. Some men have weak sex drives; some men strong. The weak should not try to speak for all men. The same goes for the strong. That said, a man’s background plays much into what he will face going forwards. Pornography is usually accompanied by masturbation which trains a man’s sexual response; it wires his brain. Therefore, a man with a history of porn will find it much more difficult to control his thoughts than a man without the mental baggage. Thankfully, by God’s grace a man’s mind can be retrained. This is best accomplished by loving a wife, and by making the development of intimacy and her sexual pleasure the goal. Toward this end, many men could use a healthy dose of ED.
Everything you have written is great and so true! Love it!
I just wonder about what you wrote about Christian’s being more involved in pornography then people who hasn’t grown up in non-christian homes. Can that be because they grew up not having to surpress theire sexual desires? I mean they can masturbate and have sex without feeling that they are going to besocially shamed or the fear of going to hell. Maybe that’s why for example porn isn’t that big of a deal for them whereas for Christian youths both men and women everything sexual is so suppressed so it must come out in some way and that way is usually lusting or pornography because that’s the easiest way to get the feelings out. I don’t know i just wonder if what you wrote about that is true then it would be interesting to know why. Most people who struggle with for example porn rarely started while theywere married but usually started before that so it would be interesting to know why.
And couldn’t it be so that christians are more targeted by the devil because he knows how devastating it is ? He doesn’t have a reason to attack those who belong to him as much as he wants to destroy foes who doesn’t belong to him.
Honestly, I think it is a matter of expectations and getting used to things.
Expectations – I am from a different country and (as a very involved Christian) I have never even heard about it being possible to cause another person to “stumble” (I assume that means being tempted to sin?) by how you dress. That is so weird to me. How does that even work?
I would say, in my country lust is expected to be every teenager’s problem. Then, after a.couple years, you are expected to habe yourself under control again – no matter what anybody else is wearing. At no point is it thought nessesary that woman change how they dress. Teenage boys are expected to learn how to cope and not stare at people. And you know what? It works. Men here can go to the swimming halls, beaches etc. and not stare at people but focus on their friends or family who are there with them.
Getting used – I honestly believe you are doing men (and women, for different reasons) a disservice if you remove everything teenagers would consider a temptation and segregate the sexes. Rather, expect teenagers to learn how to deal with it! They are going to encounter cleavage, right dresses or short skirts in the world and instructing them (or griwn men!) to bounce their eyes constantly is leaving them unequipped to deal in the real world.
Imagine it this way: If you were to live (for research etc) with one of the tribes were women don’t cover their breasts at all – Would you be lusting all day every day?
Of course not! It would be uncomfortable for a little bit, but very quickly, you would get used to it and would not see bare breasts as something sexual any more. Because in that context, they are not. You really can get used to things. And in my opinion, Christians in the US are taking the wrong approach if they prevent men from ever getting used to cleavage, tight dresses, or even being friends with women.
In my opinion, that is why Christian men in the US seem to have more trouble dealing with women/breastfeeding/ certain dress styles than “worldly” men.
Yes!! Your comment wins! I have tried saying this exact thing to my husband and he always responded with “So you’re trying to say breasts are NOT sexual?” Ugh. No! I’m sure those women experience just as much sexual pleasure from nipple stimulation as any other woman anywhere else in the world, but the CONTEXT is everything. There is nothing sexual about it in those cultures, and training our young Christian boys in America to see breasts as always sexual no matter the circumstance period is just plain absurd.
I have a husband who is in recovery for porn addiction. I don’t agree that Christians have more problems with it. He came from a secular home where anything goes. I am sure that women have felt perfectly comfortable in his presence all these years. He was able to hide it very well. In fact he had absolutely no idea himself how bad his lusting and his thoughts were until he decided to fight it after I found the porn.
He goes to 2 different groups. I have gone to different women’s groups for partners. The men all come from entirely different backgrounds. There is no more of this one or that one. There just isn’t from our experience.
The women’s clothing comes up alot in the meetings. Yoga pants are huge for men that have addiction issues. Women say so what. I get it. At the same time knowing where some men’s thoughts go now is enough reason for me to never ever wear those things.
I used to try and dress to impress my husband. I saw and observed his lusting even though he would deny it. So my dress became riskier as time went on trying to keep his attention on me. It didn’t work. It did end up giving me attention from other’s that I did not want. I feel so bad about those years. I knew what I was doing. I knew how risky it was and that others would see in order for him to see me. Where their thoughts might go. For women to say that they are not aware of that is not being honest with themselves. The exact same lie as the men say to themselves that they are only hurting themselves. I hurt other wives, girlfriends, fiancee’s by dressing the way I did. I hurt the men too. I can own that. I take responsibility for that. I have changed that.
I am now back to dressing for me. I don’t want to ever be someone that I am not. I also don’t want to dress purposely in a way that I know some men will use for sexual thoughts. Yes, some will do it no matter what we wear possibly. Not all are willing to fight for what is right. But if I know certain clothing items are given, which I now know, I stay away from them. To me it feels like a sexual assault to be put into someone’s sexual fantasy without my permission.
I actually came to these articles today, because I was struggling and wanted to make sure I wasn’t causing someone else to lust. Thank you for your words of encouragement. Remembering that I have more authority over my body and my thoughts, and that I am not entirely responsible for the thoughts of others is empowering. But my favourite part, is the quote you shared. I too am sometimes in awe of a man’s beauty and have been afraid of it, even though honestly lust didn’t enter my heart to start, but that is what I had been taught it was, that that was something I had to get off on. I fight because I don’t want to see people that way, or for them to see me that way. But to see one another as breathtaking, invigorating, loveable, refractions of God.
I read all the comments! lol I have a question, I talked this over with my husband because he swears he notices beautiful women but does not lust after them or undress them with his eyes. He can’t help but notice but he tries not to.
But! This still makes me feel so insecure. Last night, we went to a restaurant in Toronto. The area was full of beautiful women and I had these posts on my mind so I was watching him. He definitely looked but it was a glance, not a stare. Our waitress was beautiful and he definitely was trying to not look at her. The whole dinner I felt so uncomfortable and really just wanted to leave. He was honoring me by not looking but it still made me feel like I wasn’t “pretty enough” in that moment.
What are some tips or advice to not feel insecure about him noticing beautiful women and what are some things he can do to make me feel like I’m still the only woman in the room he wants?
P.s. We live in NYC, the women strut around mostly naked and very sexualized- this is a common problem for us when we go anywhere together. Also, he works in the city so I try to not think about what he fills his head with all day (even though he says he doesn’t fill his head with it)
This is a great question.
I hope others chime in–and I’ll keep it and maybe write a post on it once I’ve had some time to mull it over and pray a bit. I don’t think there’s an easy answer! But others may have had more experience, so I’ll welcome what they say!
I, like you, have read all the comments because I genuinely enjoy seeing other people’s perspective on things and it helps me to think more critically about my own perspective.
I have thought and prayed over the topic of noticing vs. lusting a lot. My husband has struggled with lust in the past. It was something he has struggled with since his youth and he has been struggling with it since. He is fighting though. And he is growing closer to God and to me in his battle. And because of his focus, he is getting stronger through Christ’s strength. I have grown closer to God through all of this as well and have put a lot of deep thought into the topic of lust and the topics that are related to it. I have had my own struggles in the past both with focusing too much on my own sexual desires and with wanting others to find me beautiful and sexy. I explain all of this because I want you to know where I am coming from with my perspective.
I personally feel very strongly about the idea of noticing vs. lusting. It may be an unpopular opinion, but I feel like even the act of noticing CAN be dangerous and can lead a person away from the way in which God wants us to view others. I agree with Sheila that noticing is not lusting, but I disagree that it is ok to label others based on attractiveness and on whether or not they have a “good” figure. To say there are good figures is to say that there are bad figures. And how do we make a distinction between the two? Our own personal taste? The world’s standard? It’s the same with attractiveness. How do we make these distinctions? The answer is simple. With our human eyes and minds. I stress that I am not saying that these distinctions don’t exist. What I am saying is that it is our carnal nature that draws these conclusions about people based on our own opinions that we have regarding earthly beauty. “For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.” (1 Samuel 16:7)
(EDITOR’S NOTE: We had to cut this comment because of its length as it was over the maximum word limit.)
Is there any way to post the rest of my comment? I don’t think I can remember all of what I wrote and I feel like I couldn’t express myself as well trying to type it all out again. I will try if it’s not possible for you to post the rest and I will try to be more brief. That is not a strength of mine.
Thank you!
We lived in NYC for a couple of years and my husband worked in manhattan, so yes, I sympathize!! Honestly, when my husband recognizes another woman’s beauty and I feel threatened by it, it’s my problem. Not his. Not talking about lust here, which clearly is wrong. I have to deal with my own insecurities about myself and learn to love my own body and not compare, or I will always feel threatened by another woman who is “more beautiful” than I am. And who gets to say who’s “more beautiful”? No one. We are all uniquely, wonderfully, fearfully, magnificently made. Rewiring my mind to love my whole self and to see myself through God’s eyes takes work, it’s not an overnight fix, but it is so worth it. What makes you feel loved? Is it words of affirmation or gifts or physical affection? I know for me personally it really helps me feel more secure in those testing moments if my husband reaches over and squeezes my hand, puts his arm around me or tells me I look lovely. Don’t be afraid to let him know what will make you feel loved and cherished by him. I bet he’d be glad to know specifically how he can show you how much he delights in you. Hugs sister! 😀
I’m honestly feeling a little confused and hurt that my question hasn’t been answered regarding my comment. And I have to admit that I have also noticed that there are lengthier comments posted than what is remaining of my original comment. I am not trying to be confrontational or rude. I am just honestly feeling hurt and confused. I don’t believe that what I said was unbiblical or offensive. And I was genuinely trying to be helpful to Leah. I just don’t understand why some lengthier comments made the cut and mine didn’t.
Samantha, I’m sorry–you weren’t being offensive! It’s just that the comment was about 2000 words long, and when a comment is that long, it makes it hard to have a discussion because it takes so long to scroll down, and when it’s in reply to someone else, it’s a really narrow column already.
Unfortunately we can’t repaste some of it because my assistant deleted it, and we are trying to monitor and keep most comments to under 400 words, allowing some to go over if they’re telling a long story or something. We did leave your first one in which was also very long. But I can’t repaste what you wrote–I’m sorry.
In the future, if you want to post a comment with one thought, that would be great. And then you can always come back and post another one. But just with the nature of the blog, it’s very hard if people leave comments that are 2000 words long, because people just can’t read that much in the comments section. I hope that makes sense!
It makes perfect sense and I do apologize for being so long winded. I tend to get really carried away when I am passionate about something. My husband has learned to be a patient listener.
I hope I didn’t come off as rude when I asked about it. I really didn’t intend it that way. Just kinda feeling discouraged about the time and thought I put into the comment. I’m feeling rather deflated and sheepish. The Lord never misses an opportunity to humble me. I will thank Him for it.
Thank you for your response and God Bless!
Totally guilty of length issues here too, Samantha! ? This is super helpful, Sheila; I will keep this is mind!
I have a comment about #7 (“Make any dress code rules apply to both genders”). I understand the point about not singling out just girls, but it’s not the same between girls/women and boys/men. I agree that, just as girls likely shouldn’t wear bikinis, boys shouldn’t go bare-chested. Even though the best-looking boy’s chest won’t excite most girls the way an average-looking bikini-laden girl will excite boys, girls can be affected by a good-shaped boy’s chest, so the guy should cover up. It’s not the same though, but I still agree with Sheila that we should be consistent here. I don’t understand the mini-skirt vs. slouchy jeans comparison though. Do girls find slouchy jeans sexy?
But now think of this: if you ask 100 women which is sexier, a guy with just swim trunks on, or a guy with a nice business suit on, I believe more women will find the guy with the business suit a sexier look. This sounds just crazy to us men, but I’ve heard/read that this is the truth. As a guy, I just don’t understand how showing almost NO skin can be sexier than showing a LOT of skin. This makes me as a guy feel that women just don’t find guys attractive. It’s very depressing. Anyway, back to what I was saying about suits, should we then say a boy/guy shouldn’t wear dress clothes or suits?
Tom, I think you’re still operating from the assumption that dress codes should be based on “not causing someone to sin.” That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying dress codes should be based on, “who are you dressing for? What is the first impression I’m giving? Am I approachable/friendly to others, or am I creating barriers (by too many status symbols, for instance)”.
So the issues of suits is a nonstarter. Yes, women find them very attractive because of the impression a man in a suit gives (I respect myself. I am dedicated to earning a good living. I take myself seriously). But just because a woman finds it attractive should not mean a guy shouldn’t wear it, because the guy is not responsible if the woman stumbles.
The bikini/slouchy jeans, thing, though, can be analogous because of the question “what is the first impression I’m giving?” I’m not saying all bikinis are wrong, by the way. And I do think it depends where you live. But slouchy jeans say, “I don’t respect myself, which also means I don’t really respect conventions, which means I don’t care what you think, either.” It’s a way to distance yourself from others, so it puts up a barrier to the gospel. That’s the issue there. It’s not about causing someone to stumble. It’s about being wise in how we present ourselves because of what our clothes say (and our clothes do have a message, whether we like it or not).
Ok, but this still bothers me: “But just because a woman finds it attractive should not mean a guy shouldn’t wear it, because the guy is not responsible if the woman stumbles.” I think we’re at loggerheads here. You seem to want to make everything gender-independent, and I keep trying to say “it’s not the same”. So you’re saying a guy can wear suits because he’s not responsible if the woman stumbles. But a woman generally doesn’t drool over a guy in a suit to the same degree as a guy drools over a woman in a bikini. It’s a whole different level of attraction. I don’t think it’s fair of you to expect a guy to be unaffected by something like a heaving chest. You don’t understand visual stimulation the way I and many men do, but you still want to say men should act just as women do. I think that’s unfair.
Someone posted that you wrote that it’s a good thing that guys are visually stimulated. Can you point me to where you explain that, or explain it again here? I think you are always trying to “have your cake and eat it too”. (you know I’m not trying to be disrespectful Sheila – this is all just so frustrating to me. I just don’t like what I perceive is a lack of compassion for what men struggle with. (saying you “feel for us” guys but then give no leeway means to me that you don’t really “feel for us”))
Tom, we’re going around in circles. If you read my posts, it’s quite clear what I’m saying. I think you just don’t want to accept it, because you’re struggling with porn and lust.
THAT’S the problem, then, not what women wear. It’s that you need to defeat lust in your life.
And as I showed in Tuesday’s post, biblically, that is possible and that is God’s will for you.
Continuously writing about how absolutely hard and impossible this is is going to do nothing to help you win this battle.
So I’m left wondering: Do you want to win it? Because endlessly talking about how bad you have it and how this is far too difficult shows that you aren’t really dedicated to healing.
God calls you not to lust. God calls you to take responsibility. God calls you to surrender.
And you still want to talk about women’s clothing choices.
God does not want to talk to you about women’s clothing choices. God wants to talk to you about your heart. Continuously deflecting shows that you’re not interested in what God is saying. I know that’s harsh, but I’ve said this 100 different ways in comments to you on all the posts last week, and you’re refusing to hear it. Your sin is your sin. It doesn’t matter if it’s the hardest sin in the world, or if you have it so much harder than anybody else, or if it’s just plain not fair. It’s still your sin. And God wants you to face up to it. And He sent you the Holy Spirit to live inside you to empower you to do just that. Until you stop focusing on what everybody else is doing wrong and how hard it is for you, and start focusing on Him, though, you will never get ahead. And you will only ever harden your heart and increase the power of sin in your life.
I know I probably shouldn’t be even reading your blog, and even more not posting, since I lean heavily toward the probability that man created God, not the other way around.
This doesn’t sound like God though: “It doesn’t matter if it’s the hardest sin in the world, or if you have it so much harder than anybody else, or if it’s just plain not fair.” I choose to believe that God, if He exists, is fair.
And I guess I’ll have to look for myself to where you write that men being visual is a good thing.
It is a good thing–in marriage. But it has nothing at all to do with whether or not we should not lust right now. And that’s the point!
Look up Doug Weiss and read his books. They explain why and how .
I have really really enjoyed this series, Sheila, and I admire you for talking about this subject. I grew up with the mentality that women are dangerous. Since I was one of the more attractive girls in our circles, I was therefore more dangerous, more criticized, more blamed for men’s sin. It’s taken me years to get to where I am not afraid and ashamed of my own body. So glad to see more people addressing what I believe to be truly dangerous ideology/theology.
I’m so glad that you’ve enjoyed it! I really do want to get this message out there!
I love this so much. It is exactly what I think. Thank you for this series, and this post in particular! We do ourselves (both our men and our women) such a disservice when we speak of lust and women’s bodies in the way that we so often do.
Sheila,
I have a lot of respect for you but you can NEVER know how a guy’s mind works.
Breastfeeding – If I saw tits, I would be tempted to look. WOMEN have to STOP saying ‘we shouldn’t sexualize tits’ they ARE SEXUALIZED BY GOD!!!!!!
I didn’t make myself like this !! They are already sexual organs. Breastfeeding, I’m sure can be done out of sight!
Looking at a woman with lust is committing adultery…and since MOST guys struggle in this area, PLEASE STOP weakening their defensive measures of ‘bouncing their eyes’ by saying things like ‘It gets hard for men and women to interact if there’s all these bouncing eyes.
Finally, You have no idea how sexy you are. Not as Sheila (well, yes as Sheila, kudos to your husband) but how sexy you are AS A WOMAN ! – Am I saying that women are nothing but sex objects? NO! I am not saying that but please stop jesting at the defensive measures…it DOESN’T HELP.
Did you know over 60 percent of marriages experience emotional or physical infidelity because measures weren’t taken to protect the marriage? It’s not paranoia its the truth..
Men and Women were NOT designed to be friends.. ask other christians about this, elders, pastors, hell even secular psychologists will tell you a huge resounding NO. Opposite sex friendships are dangerous, so spending too much time with someone, ANYONE of the opposite sex, so is showing tits in church, so wearing leggings, so is not taking measures to protect a relationship, .. etc… I could go on.
I don’t mean to be rude but I am just so infuriated when I come across these statements because, while I don’t want this to be disrespectful, it is entirely the truth: Your statements ONLY reflect your inability to see things from guys points of view. I don’t care how many so-called ‘men’ on here, even though we can’t tell, comment on “Oh Sheila I completely agree” its all bullcrap and many of them are just feminized, or infantalized, or have become enamoured with your writing.
You are a good soul, but you are altogether incorrect here I guarantee it. Sorry for the long message.
Hi there,
I am really sorry that you don’t believe the men here. I can tell you that they are not lying. Just go to Scripture. Paul says, “greet one another with a holy kiss.” Paul had so many women who travelled in his circles, and he greeted many of them in his letters, and showed platonic affection for them.
I am sorry that you cannot experience relationships the way that God meant you to. And perhaps that’s worth praying about, rather than believing that every man who CAN is somehow effeminate or gay?