We had some WILD conversations about lust on Facebook this week!
But first–the podcast is delayed by a day.
I know today is podcast day, and it’s all recorded, but Katie, who does my editing and uploading, was without internet all day yesterday due to an internet outage where she lives. So I’m just going to switch Thursday and Friday of this week, and we’ll do the social media round-up today, and the podcast tomorrow.
Sorry about the delay!
Let’s talk lust and modesty!
I started a conversation earlier this week on Facebook about lust and modesty, and it kept snowballing as I would post new things related to some of the comments that were coming in. I haven’t seen this much engagement in ages. I think this really resonates!
Post #1: What if legalism about what clothes to wear wasn’t the problem?
Here’s how it started:
I’m grateful that the larger evangelical community seems to realize that the modesty message often given to teens was fraught with danger.
Big ministries and authors are saying, “we can’t be legalistic anymore.”
But are they missing the point?
I’m doing research for our mother-daughter book right now and combing through many big name writers and influencers, and most seem to be critiquing clothing rules—shirts 2 inches from the collarbone, etc. They know that was harmful.
They say, “legalism was wrong!”
Their response? Instead of rules, we’ll say, “Put on the gospel every morning.”
What does that even mean? That opens the door wide to even more judgmentalism. “You can wear that if you want, Brenda, but does it say ‘gospel’ to you?”
The real issue was not the rules.
It was that girls were being blamed for boys’ lust, told their bodies were dangerous, and told that their dress determines whether they will be abused.
THAT is the issue. And dressing it up in new language doesn’t change it.
Post 2: An amazing comment left by a guy on why we shouldn’t talk as if lust is “every man’s battle”
In the original post, a guy was saying that women should have compassion on men who struggle with lust and should change what they wear. So many people chimed in to show how this logic was faulty, and eventually the guy deleted the thread–which deleted some very thoughtful comments, including this one (which was reposted by the author of it). I thought it deserved its own post:
Should women cover up to have mercy on their Christian brothers who find the battle with lust unrelenting?
An awesome comment left by a guy on a post yesterday, responding to a man who was struggling. Seriously, this needs its own post:
“In certain seasons of life especially, cooperating with the Spirit to conquer lust can seem next to impossible. (Even more so if we do not distinguish between noticing and lusting.) You are right, we are all called to be our “brother’s keeper”, and to try to understand how we can best help each other with our struggles.
However, all relationships work best when we esteem others better than ourselves and have compassion on those who seem to be making things difficult for us. Many (Most?) women that Christian men would ask to dress differently in order to help them not to lust after them are in no way intentionally trying to tempt men. And, when a woman is intentionally trying to tempt a man to lust after her, as compassionate men, we can ask ourselves why that may be the case.
Compassion would have us see the many, common, heart-breaking reasons she is looking for attention in this way. Shaming women who are in this predicament will just continue the cycle that has put them there in the first place. Compassion is a useful tool in our battle to slay lust. Blaming and criticizing women and pleading with them to shoulder more of the burden for OUR lust problem furthers the narrative that we are doomed to be slaves to our sexuality, unless women do their part to protect us from ourselves. After all, Jesus didn’t say that we should pluck an eye out if a woman causes us to lust. He said we should pluck an eye out if OUR EYE causes us to lust.
Michael, you have more power available to you than you realize. What are we saying about ourselves and about God’s ability when we plead with women to consider more seriously our lust problem, and when we insinuate they should consult with us more to avoid dressing in the specific way that “triggers” us to sin? It’s a pathetically false narrative about God and about us that so many of us have believed. When we esteem Our sisters and our mothers better than ourselves, we will hear them crying out in forums like these saying “we don’t feel protected by you, men! We feel like you have given yourselves over to your own lusts, and are demanding that we somehow keep your sin at bey for you! We love you, and want to help you, but the role you are putting onto us is not in your best interest or ours! Modesty cannot save you from your sin, but God can!”
Listen, God is big enough to cause us to be able to love women well in the midst of a pornified culture, no matter what anyone chooses to wear or not wear. Let’s believe that God has called us men to be the ones who will allow Him such access to our minds and lives that we will be willing to guard women from our lust even if we perceive that they refuse to see how difficult it might be for us. Let’s stop demanding grace from women, and instead give it to them without any expectation of getting something in return. Once we stop focusing on the grace we think women should give us because of our lust problem, we’ll start to live in the grace God has already provided. It’s God’s grace that is the context for victory over lust, and every other sin. It’s time we take hold of it.”
So many women said they found what he said so healing–especially knowing a man wrote it.
Post 3: Women are sick of feeling unsafe
As beautiful as that man’s comment was, EVEN ON THAT THREAD another man commented about how women were still to blame. And by that time I had just had it. So I wrote this–which went the biggest of all.
Okay, forgive me because I’m going to get snarky.
I published a beautiful comment this afternoon by a man who perfectly summed up God’s grace to both men and women when it comes to the modesty/lust debate.
BUT EVEN THERE, in the comments, another man doubled down on how women need to be careful not to cause these poor men to stumble.
This may be a bit over the top, but I’m really, really tired of this, and I’d just like men to understand how this sounds to women. So hear me out for a minute:
If a man is lusting after me, I’m not sinning against HIM by existing as a female in his general vicinity. He’s sinning against ME. And quite frankly, I don’t feel safe hanging around guys like this. The more men say: “But how can we guard our thoughts around women?”, the more I hear: “I am not a safe individual to be around, and you should likely stay away, warn your friends and daughters to stay away from me, and never, ever be in my small group at church, sit near me at church, or have any interaction with me at all.”
That’s what women hear. And you know what? We’re getting angry. We’re sick of it. And I think you’re going to see women fleeing churches that are putting this burden on them when it should be on the men to deal with it and treat women with respect.
If you’re struggling with lust, I do have compassion, especially because I think we’ve conflated noticing with lusting so much that we’ve caused hyper-vigilance and shame which makes matters worse. But, please, own your own struggle and don’t blame women for it. Because the more you do, the more you simply sound unsafe. And quite frankly, women are ever so sick of feeling unsafe.
Again, check out the comments on that one!
I think I’m done on this subject; I won’t post anymore on Facebook. But Rebecca and I have been thinking about this subject some more with all the comments that have come up, and we might revisit in next week’s podcast! And I want to really pick up on that last bit–do men understand how women perceive them when they start talking about how men lust all the time?
Instagram: Are Authors Telling on Themselves about Lust?
While all of this was running through my head, I decided to make a reel (a short video on Instagram) that summed up the issue. When a man says, “all guys are visual and will think sexual thoughts about women all the time if given the chance,” a woman hears, “I am not safe to be around.”
I don’t think guys understand this. So I tried to explain it, with an example:
Or check it out on Instagram! (Lots of comments too!)
On the Josh Duggar trial for possession of child sexual abuse materials
I just had to share this:
Christianity Today wants my take on the verdict when it comes down today (if it does), no matter which way it goes, and I do think I’ll mention this element. Anything else you think I should say?
The Great Sex Rescue
Changing the conversation about sex & marriage in the evangelical church.
What if you’re NOT the problem with your sex life?
What if the things that you’ve been taught have messed things up–and what if there’s a way to escape these messages?
Welcome to the Great Sex Rescue.
Finally, a webinar and some other miscellaneous things!
Hundreds of people chimed in about cloth pads and menstrual cups when I shared my post about them yesterday.
People love our merch! And I added some new products based on the comments there. If you haven’t seen our merch, check it out!
Or check out our other merch collections:
I also have an “I Stand with Aunt Matilda” line, and I’ll tell you all about that soon!
And, of course, don’t miss the Tide Has Turned webinar at 9 pm EST tonight!
I hope to see you tonight! And if you have any feedback on what I should say about Josh Duggar, leave it in the comments!
Sheila Wray Gregoire
Founder of Bare Marriage
Related Posts
These Books Would Have Changed Our Lives
If we had had these Great Sex Guides before we got married, there would be no Great Sex Rescue. No...
On Vipers in Diapers, Emotional Enmeshment, and Toxic Churches
Dads shouldn't need their adult daughters to give them adulation and affection. That's called...
The Uncomfortable Truth about Waiting until You’re Married for Sex
Growing up, we hear, over and over again: "Just wait for the wedding night! The wedding night will...
Is Someone Stepping on Your Air Hose?
So many women--and many men as well--honestly feel like the church is hurting them. I do not...
Can Sex Be Hot and Holy at the Same Time?
Can sex be hot and holy at the same time? One of my big picture passions that I want people to...
Who I WON’T Be Calling Out for Bad Teachings–But I’m Grateful You Are!
This week, as we've celebrated one year of The Great Sex Rescue, I've received some amazing...
When Going to Church Leads to Worse Outcomes for Teen Girls
On almost every measure, church attendance is good for you. Researchers have consistently found...
Echoes of Menstruation: Spoken Word Poetry
Let's talk about the echoes of menstruation. Yesterday on the podcast, we were discussing how...
I’ve been following the Duggar case for about a whole year now. There’s a YouTuber who has dedicated herself to exposing the cult of the IBLP. Which is something that started out as a foreign concept, and I assumed it was because she’s not a believer.
However the more she’s talked and uncovered about how they teach, you and her have been finding the same harmful teachings.
The 1st and most glaring fact that first jumped out as unhealthy:
The Duggar kids aren’t being taught to leave and cleave. They’re given spouses and then expected to do things for dad. In return he supplies for them, but nobody is aware if he ever actually pays them.And That’s not healthy!
And right now, there’s very few married children who actually chose to support themselves and it seems Jim Bob frowns on that.
If you want to hear the full coverage of the things at play, without a crystal ball on YouTube is the place to go. She’s interested in covering women and the abuse they take in many kinds of cults. And Jim Bob has labeled her dangerous.
Thanks, Bethany. It is so scary. It’s just extreme patriarchy. It’s wrong. And I feel for the oldest girl who isn’t married but is basically a mother to all the younger ones and the nieces and nephews. So sad.
I’m cautious about Without a Crystal Ball because she was very unfair to the Preacher Boys podcast, but a lot of what she says about the Duggars can be corroborated elsewhere.
I think it could be a very good conversation to talk about women like Anna who are raised in cults or other high control groups and why it’s so difficult for them to leave. Not only from a practical standpoint, but an emotional and psychological one as well.
She’s been flooded with all kinds of people who have gotten out of it, some who still believe in God and some who don’t. It’s been interesting hearing about those, because that’s when the clear picture of extreme control and father worship comes out.
Men telling on themselves. Yup. 100%.
And then they wonder why people have a problem with them saying men only should be in charge.
To be fair, a guy could push back and say “seizing sexual opportunity doesn’t mean rape, come on! It means men are on the lookout for women who are interested/available!” They’ve never been wolf-whistled by someone twice their size, so they don’t know that even being perceived as potentially available can be threatening.
Exactly. It’s not that we’re afraid that dudes in church are going to rape us, it’s that we feel threatened by EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAID THEY HAVE PROBLEMS NOT DOING: Looking us up and down and imagining sexual stuff. That is a violation and a sin against me, as you’ve said, Sheila.
If they don’t agree, I wish they would imagine some church guy doing that to their 14-year-old daughter.
“ It’s not that we’re afraid that dudes in church are going to rape us”-well, mostly. But some women are, for good reason.
And tbh, I don’t know if “think about your teenage daughter” helps. Isn’t that what all the modesty messaging girls get in purity culture is doing? Thinking about everybody’s teenage daughters in exactly these hyper sexualized terms?
You’re absolutely right. I really tried not to mention daughters, but my personal mama bear junk oozed out.
But yeah essentially it’s just admitting “hey I’m objectifying you women all the time, I just thought you should know,” and then going “what?? You don’t like that? It’s really kind of a compliment, you know!” No, dude, it is not. Never has been, never will be.
I just wish I could turn the tables on them in some way that would get through their granite. I know the same things (sexual attention) don’t threaten them, but something must.
If we could get men to remember their prepubescent lives and then imagine walking past a group of high school football players who start hassling them, that might be a good start.
Unfortunately, the analogy doesn’t completely hold, as prepubescent boys eventually go through puberty, which means they’ll eventually be physically similar to the older football types, while women physically remain more similar to young boys who haven’t hit their growth and strength spurt.
Or perhaps men should imagine themselves in the company of a bodybuilder who is eighty pounds heavier and ten inches taller, then imagine some bad intentions, or even just threatening comments, from the bodybuilder.
🤷♀️🤷♀️🤷♀️
Ha, I know what you mean. Ofc threatening people back doesn’t change their minds, more often than not just makes them double down.
So let’s just carry on dismantling patriarchy where we find it… oh wait. THAT’S pretty threatening to some isn’t it!
Prostate exams.
“Every time I see a good-looking man walk by, I just can’t help myself. I start imagining what it would be like to give him a prostate exam in intimate detail.”
Sounds weird, right? And kinda gross (unless you’re an MD, I suppose), clinical, and impersonal.
“Once we stop focusing on the grace we think women should give us because of our lust problem, we’ll start to live in the grace God has already provided. It’s God’s grace that is the context for victory over lust, and every other sin. It’s time we take hold of it.”
What a beautiful comment! I don’t know who wrote it, but THANK YOU from the bottom of my heart – if all Christian men were like you, church would be the most amazing place.
And to anyone who STILL thinks it’s a woman’s responsibility to ‘dress modestly’ so that ‘men won’t lust’ – I constantly wore super-baggy and unflattering jumpers (high neck, sleeves down to wrists) and thick, ankle-length cotton skirts in an attempt to help men control themselves. In summer, I would turn beetroot red with heat before I would take off my super-baggy jumper to reveal my super-baggy, high-necked, long-sleeved t-shirt, because I was worried that the thinner fabric was ‘more revealing’. I got backache hunching over to try to hide my breasts, because however thick & loose-fitting my clothing, they still showed. The only way I could have been ‘more modest’ was if I had worn a burkha. And I STILL had multiple occasions when I was sexually assaulted by older ‘Christian’ men. There is literally no outfit on earth that will prevent a pervert from sexually assaulting women, so please stop pretending that there is.
And you know what? I always felt safe hanging out with non Christian guy friends. I never once had inappropriate behaviour from any of them. And very rarely from the ‘stranger in the street’ that we’re all taught to fear. No, 99% of my problems came from older males in church. Christian guys who are blaming your lusting on ‘what women wear’, please take a long hard look at yourselves. Why is it that non Christian guys (who don’t have the Holy Spirit to help them) can exercise self control where you can’t? How is it that other Christian men can take responsibility for their own actions when you can’t? And why is it that the church is the place where I and many other women feel least safe? If ALL men are hard-wired to lust and seek ‘sexual opportunities’ every single minute, we should be equally in danger, if not more so, outside the church than in it. And that’s just not the case.
100% truth here!
When I was a teenager, my mother taught me to dress modestly, but she never said it had anything to do with what boys and men thought or how they would perceive me if I dressed a certain way. I think it might have been the times she grew up in. In the late 60’s when mini-skirts were the height of women’s fashion, my grandmother still insisted on my mom and her sisters dressing more modestly. Skirts were no higher than two inches above the knee.
While I don’t see anything wrong with dressing modestly, yet fashionably, I don’t think the way a woman dresses makes any difference to sexual predators and/or harassers. In spite of always dressing modestly when I was a teenager, I was sexually harassed by several male classmates. I know it had nothing to do with the way I dressed. These men who insist that the way a woman dresses causes them to lust are just using that as an excuse for their inappropriate behavior.
“While I don’t see anything wrong with dressing modestly, yet fashionably, I don’t think the way a woman dresses makes any difference to sexual predators and/or harassers.”
Totally agree – dressing appropriately (which includes modestly) is important. As believers, all our behaviours should reflect who we are in Christ, and going out of our way to shock people or to draw attention to ourselves by what we wear is not how we should be acting. (NB: It’s quite clear from the context, that Paul’s instructions to women to dress ‘modestly’ have nothing to do with necklines or hemlines and everything to do with them flaunting their wealth – today’s equivalent might be designer labels!)
But a) I’m responsible for what I wear but NOT for how someone else responds to that and b) based on my experience and that of my friends, the more ‘modest’ you are, the more likely you are to become the victim of sexual assault by someone in church. Which makes a nonsense of the ‘women are making me lust’ argument – if that’s so, how come they don’t grope the girls wearing short, tight dresses with low necklines then?
Christianity Today is not the safest space for women. They platformed Mark Driscoll and still platform John Piper AND Douglas Wilson, published a terrible review of Kristen DuMez’s book, such a horrible obituary for Rachel Held Evans after she died that they had to take it down and post a different, gentler one… I could go on and you might be aware of these things and others I don’t know about (I infrequently pay attention to CT). I feel like they might be of the Focus on the Family variety, that you’d be shocked at their reaction if you tried to push back on something.
For example, I’m remembering your pinned tweet on Ravi Zacharias, how you explained the problem being more systemic and rooted in the false teachings we promote on sex and I wonder what would happen if you sent CT a piece where you locate the Duggar scandal in purity culture teachings, the sexualization of children even in our more respectable non-quiverfull churches when grown men complain that 13 year olds are causing them to lust, I’m also remembering your story about 11 year old Katie being warned about V-necks… Maybe the fact they asked you means they are turning the ship slowly, I mean, it’s not like they wouldn’t know what you’re all about. But I am suspicious, as well as curious as to how far they would let you push it, especially if you criticize people they’ve platformed.
I didn’t know Christianity Today was that bad. I think The Gospel Coalition is more toxic. I think they were the one who printed an article demonizing women who dealt with PMS.
I don’t follow CT that much but i don’t know that I would say it’s “bad,” but you have to remember it’s part of the same evangelical industrial complex as all the rest.
For example, The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill. Very interesting as far as it went but to my way of thinking glossed over a lot. This is a review by a non Christian academic who studied Mars Hill in depth before it went under:
https://religiondispatches.org/sharing-many-of-the-same-flaws-as-its-subject-the-rise-and-fall-of-mars-hill-podcast-puts-blame-anywhere-but-where-it-belongs/
It’s a long article. The TL:DR is: CT misses the deeper issues behind Driscoll and Mars Hill because it shares a lot of the same cultural blinders.
Frankly, I would also add that you can’t expect a publication to deplatform or criticize Wilson or Piper and their ilk if they are trying to sell subscriptions to people who like Wilson or Piper. Not with the current state of American Christianity the way it is.
Yes… but I think/hope this is slowly changing. When I first subscribed a few years ago, I noticed the little bios for women they post at the end of the article ALWAYS had her status as a wife and/or mother. Plus sometimes her education and/or professional qualifications. Men’s only rarely included their family roles. Sometime over the course of the last year or so (don’t know exactly when), that changed, and now both emphasize education and professional qualifications.
Sheila, I will be praying for you – that God gives you wisdom & the exact words to say as you give your perspective on the Duggar verdict. I’ve loosely followed it… the whole thought of everything makes me feel so sick to my stomach. From the little bit I’ve read, my understanding is there are people who believe Josh has already been “punished” & that his former sick, abusive past should not have been made relevant – because he’s been “forgiven by Jesus”!? I’m not sure if I’m correct in that – but if that thinking is the case, I will say this: God knows the depths of our hearts & He knows whether someone is truly sorry & truly repentant. If someone is truly repentant – God has changed their heart & mind & they actually do the hard work to change, with the help of The Holy Spirit – then there must be evidence of true change. True repentance, would not have landed Josh in this highly questionable circumstance. There would be some sort of lament or evidence of true grief over his past horrendous behaviour. This goes for JimBob, as well, who is absolutely complicit in where Josh is now. His dismissal of his Daughters’ & other girl’s horrific abuse is evident by his “selective” memory. It is evident he has lied on the stand. It doesn’t matter what his reasoning was – he lied. We know that God hates a lying tongue. In this season of Advent – the Study I am doing is about The Everlasting Light. Sin festers in the darkness & cannot fully be dealt with until it is brought into the light. You cannot change, what you don’t acknowledge. So either JimBob’s heart is completely deceived (as King David’s was for an entire year) & he cannot see the Truth of the permanent, life long damage his son did to his Daughters & others or he doesn’t see or understand the depravity of his son & what he did – to his own Daughters. Or, something even more sinister, that he sees nothing wrong as he may be guilty of this horrendous sin himself?
I find it disturbing that there seems to be no concern for Josh’s Wife Anna & especially that there is no concern that Josh most likely is abusing his own small Daughters or has a high probability of doing so. Aren’t JimBob & Michelle disturbed by the very thought that their Grandchildren are in danger? I am actually appalled that JimBob appears to be running for the Senate in the USA – he must be delusional – how can he be part of the Government, when he couldn’t even have his son receive proper punishment & treatment for his crimes. That he denies the severity of the damage done to his own Daughters? He is absolutely complicit in this reaching the point that it has. He needs to be held accountable too. May God deal with him severely. May they all understand the gravity of the depravity done by Josh in the past & that he obviously continues to do. May they wake up & examine themselves through the true lens of the light of Jesus, & see their offensive & wicked behaviour. May justice be served for all who have been abused by Josh & the ongoing effects it has had. May God rescue the innocent little ones in the abuse material – my heart breaks for them. Come, Lord Jesus, Come. We need You, Now!
Why do people, and especially Christians, conflate “forgiveness” and “lack of consequences”?
God forgave David for his sin with Bathsheba and Uriah, but the rest of his life, and his children’s lives, and the nation collectively, suffered all kinds of consequences.
Absolutely!! 100%! That’s the other point I was thinking of. Regardless of demonstrating true repentance, regardless of forgiveness – there are still consequences for our own behaviour! I believe that a truly repentant person accepts the consequences of their own actions, because they realize it is just & fitting for their behaviour. Also, we realize the consequences that our sin has had on others & we try & make it right, if we can possibly do so. We accept full responsibility & accountability & accept the consequences, without blaming or shaming others.
I totally agree with what you’re saying, but I had to laugh at the irony of your statement about JimBob running for the senate without holding his son accountable for his actions! I mean, our current president has a son who is strongly suspected of similar misconduct and other illegal activities that his dad may have helped cover up… so yeah, unfortunately I don’t think family corruption is a deterrent for most people who want to be involved in politics!
There’s actually been a little bit of light shone on Jim’s past. His own father was a broke con man deadbeat. And spent time in jail for bad car sale stuff.(sound familiar? They’re big on car lots and have bad reviews)
It’s been theorized that it might’ve been a mental health issue, and is a generational problem. It’s an interesting point, as JB seems to have been desperate to over correct financially. But at any cost, and that’s finally caught up with him.(verdict is in: guilty! Praise God)
For men (the ones who are sending out these messages) to blame how a woman dresses on their lust issues is like overweight people suing McDonald’s for their health problems. We are all responsible for OUR own behaviors! A person who struggles with lust can either avoid looking at the person they see as a temptation or instead, just look them in the eyes.
As for the modesty issue, it still comes up with adult women.
In Celebrate Recovery (a Christ-centered 12-step program), the leaders (mainly the women address this) tell women that we need to dress modestly because there are men who struggle with lust issues. To hear this as a woman in my 40’s sounds appalling and I cannot help but think, “Here we go again being told that looking and/or dressing a certain way is a stumbling block to men.” Of course, I do not want to be a stumbling block to anyone, yet I am sick of this garbage being shoved down my throat.
After COVID blows over and I return to Celebrate Recovery, I plan to address this issue and tell the leaders that I think we need to find a better way to resolve this. What I’ve learned as a CR leader is that no one is responsible for the thoughts and actions of other people. That turns into codependency. While I understand that there are men who struggle with lust (believe me, I’ve heard all kinds of testimonies about porn addiction and was married to a sex addict), what about the self-esteem of women? I’d love to hear some additional thoughts on this.
With Jim Bob’s treatment of his daughters post-molestation…
I remember the first time my oldest deliberately harmed her younger sister. She was two, and her infant sister was lying on the floor getting a diaper change. The older got “the look,” and I could see her mental wheels turning. I said firmly, “Leave your sister alone.” And she proceeded to basically do a falling body-slam on top of her baby sister. And my stomach lurched.
It’s really hard (or maybe it’s just me) to discipline a child for something BIG like that. It’s far easier to just pretend it didn’t happen so I don’t have to deal with the emotional turmoil from both myself and the child being disciplined. But you know what? That is called “being an adult.” Doing the right thing even when it’s hard. ESPECIALLY when it is your own child. Because it’s better that you do it now than that law enforcement have to do it later.
Jim Bob, grow up. MAN up, for crying out loud. This just exposes the hypocrisy on so many levels. I don’t have the verse reference in front of me, but one of the qualifications for an elder is that he manage his household well (if I remember correctly). Jim Bob is clearly not “managing” his household well. The US government is having to do it for him. And now he is running for a position in said government? What baloney.
I’m not from an evangelical Christian background, but years ago I started to explore dressing modestly after a religious youth group introduced me to the idea. It was put in empowering terms: allowing people to see the real me without objectifying myself, etc. It sounded great and somewhat similar to advice I was getting about how to dress professionally, but I was confused on why some men seemed to react so violently toward women dressing immodestly. Then, I stumbled upon a more frank discussion that gave the reason for modest dress as preventing men from having arousing thoughts, and I was horrified.
I think the answer is to focus on what it is that we DO want people to focus on. For example:
– seeing every person, male or female, rich or poor, as made in the image of God and worthy of respect
– understanding that anything sexual ALWAYS requires the full, uncoerced consent of the other person, who needs to be a competent adult
– understanding, as you say, that true intimacy is the goal of sexual relations
– understanding the importance of commitment and responsibility in a relationship
If people actively work on that, instead of focusing on what not to do (because that inevitably backfires), any problem of “lust” would take care of itself.
So good, Cynthia! Exactly.
All good points, and none of those are things that can be controlled by the other’s clothing.
Sheila, if and when you write a statement for them, please post it! I’m not on social media but I’d like to read it! I’ve been following this case constantly, non stop since his arrest. And I’m probably not the only one, who’d love to read it.
It’s up now!