A Pastor Tells Women How to Dress Modestly

“Adding comments have been disabled for this video.” HMM I WONDER WHY.

I wonder what he would have thought about the “Slut Walk” that was held in Toronto last weekend.

http://www.slutwalktoronto.com/

I don’t know because I’ve never sat down with a girl and asked her why.

Yeah? Then shut the hell up.

Seriously, if you can’t take time to talk TO someone, you don’t get to AT them.

Right. Someone who happened to be born with a dick should be the arbiter of taste: I’ve *seen* the things my male friends wear and it is, as they say, to laugh. The only person who gets to have any say in my wardrobe also happens to be gay – and he only gets a say because he actually *does* have fabulous taste.
Plus, since when is it *my* job to take responsibility for the fact that this guy is obviously a total sleaze? “I can’t look at her because of the sinful thoughts that will run rampant throughout my brain!” Here’s a quarter, jackass – go buy some self-control, STFU and never mind what the f*** I’m wearing. It’s my G-D body.

“To the girls who are ignorant, please serve your brother and have your dad screen your wardrobe. Ask him how you can better choose holiness over worldliness.”

I don’t know anything about “holiness”, but dressing congruently with the venue seems to be a lost art among both men and especially women. It has nothing to do with fashion.

“Got it, ladies? You have to dress modestly because Christian men don’t know how to stop thinking with their dicks.”

Its hilarious, the American right claim to be all about personal responsibilty when it comes welfare, healthcare or abortion but when it comes to having naughty thoughts its not his fault! No siree its those evil harlots dressing like sluts, they should just cover themselves in a veil or something..

C.J. Mahaney is one sick guy!!

Wow, was that an Islamic sermon preached in a Christian church? LOL.

If all women dress more modestly, wouldn’t that just lower the bar so that men lust after more modestly dressed women? Not only is curtailing freedom of dress a disproportionate and unfair solution to the “problem” of male lust, I’m not convinced it solves anything!

I definitely do NOT agree with the reasoning behind it, but I also don’t completely disagree with the message of being modest. As a woman, I’m completely sick of the media shoving unhealthy images at young women, and of seeing girls today dress at 8 years old in a way I wouldn’t have dressed until college. (And mind you I’m only 27 myself and am not exactly a pure little flower- so this isn’t some 60’s kickback.)

Nowhere in this sermon did it preach that girls should be wearing burkhas, just that wearing a midriff revealing shirt might not be the best choice for the school/church environment. Which I think is a standard we SHOULD be teaching students so they understand professional workplace dress. (Mind you I was labeled a “goth” in HS, college, etc- but I’m not going to wear my fishnet top and a mini-skirt to a class or community function. That’s just common sense.)

I’m sure that these guys (who actually feel the way the video represents) aren’t the ones going to clubs/bars, so it only seems that they would like modesty in the school/work/church environment. I think this is perfectly acceptable wish.

(How many of us women haven’t been distracted by a guy at the gym? And, man, I do enjoy watching some of those guys work out, but I’m not trying to understand calculus while on the treadmill. Do we want to be that distracted while we’re in class or at work? I think not. Because I WOULD like to be able to think with my brain and not my vagina.)

The main problem that I have with this video is that it’s about only the men’s needs, instead of condemning the real issues at hand. Sure, it would probably be nice for guys to be able to not be distracted by hot chicks in class. (And, btw, what 18 year old guy ISN’T thinking with his dick?) But it would also be nice for women to be able to feel attractive when they are fully clothed.

Somehow social conditioning and the media have allowed men to retain their modesty over the past few decades, while women have lost more and more of their clothing. And the whole time, the media tries to present it as “women are more “free” and that they’re “stronger” now because they don’t care what society thinks”- “they can dress however they want because they’re women”. (Man, this sounds like a teenage hissy fit, doesn’t it?)

How is it “freeing” to dress yourself like a slut and be thought of as a piece of meat by half the guys walking down the street? It’s not- but women (myself included) have on occasion fallen into the trap of dressing that way because if you don’t, well you’re ugly, or you’re a prude, or you’re anti-feminist, or you don’t know style so you can’t really be a woman can you?

Did you hear me? Somehow it has become ANTI-FEMINIST to say that we women can retain our DIGNITY. And that we don’t have to dress like frumped up sexpots on a constant basis. On this issue, I think most of us atheists are actually more blind that half the religious wingnuts we point fingers at and label nutjobs.

We DO have way too many over-sexualized pre-pubescent girls in this country. We as women ARE letting the media take our modesty and self-worth away from us. And maybe you dislike the reasoning this guy has behind the message, but don’t throw out the baby with the bath-water on this one.

I DON’T think that we need to change our dress because of some imaginary god or because some guy doesn’t want to have a f***fest in his mind, but I absolutely DO believe that women should go ahead and reclaim their bodies, their dress, and their self-worth as their own. I’m absolutely SICK of the notion that my sisters and I have to dress like objects of desire to be of value to the mainstream.

Which is worse: 1.Dressing conservatively because some imaginary guy wants you to keep your male friends focused on more important aspects of life? or 2. Dressing like a prostitute because the media says it’s necessary, then claiming that it shows how self-respecting and powerful you are. All the while you stand their and point at girls who actually ARE respecting their worth and bodies and condemn them for talking away your freedom.

Religion is not the only brainwash in this country. All hail the media gods.

This sheds light on something I will address on my own blog at a later date. Guys, unless you go up and talk to girls you will have no idea what is going on with them. Assuming anything about anyone until actually having a dialogue with them is pointless and disrespectful. Most girls like to dress attractively and talking with them isn’t going to cause your dick to become anthropomorphic and pummel them to death.

Does this inspire anyone else to tramp it up?

I wish people would stop being around me…I can’t tell you how many times people are around me and I just get pissed off at them. Sometimes I have to look down at the sidewalk, recite scriptures, or continously pray just to make it through the day. If people only knew how the violence runs through my head and how much of a battle it is to keep it contained, they would understand that they should not be around me. They should leave my town and live somewhere else.

I’m certainly not going to defend this guy. Women have the right to dress how’d they like and shouldn’t have to face any pressure to conform to someone else’ standard. (There’s pressure like that from other sources, like the fashion industry, but that’s beside the point). It’s also rather pointless since an attractive woman modestly dressed is still an attractive woman, and perhaps the “acceptability” factor makes them even more interesting to a guy thinking like that…

There’s a lot of scorn in the comments aimed at this, and probably rightly so. But I’ve been in that place. The letter from that college guy could have been me 5 years ago. (Though I doubt I’d think to ask girls to ask their dads how to dress). So I have some sympathy for guys like that, they have what can be a major psychological and emotional problem, and it’s likely because of beliefs that were foisted on them when they were little kids.

Just so there is a deeper understanding of the christian camp on this one, someone is going to have to explain the “creepy guys” part.

First off, I am NOT in agreement with the thinking behind this, but it needs to be understood exactly how these young men have been raised.

It is NOT that these guys want to grab the girls and rape them behind the old oak tree. It’s that by their specific denomination’s standard, to even THINK in a sexual manner about any women besides your wife is a SIN. The punishment for sin is DEATH. Therefor, when women dress provocatively, these men actually BELIEVE that if they look at these girls and have feelings of lust, their SOULS are at risk and they might go to HELL.

Now, for most of us it is a bunch of crazy talk- but these guys ACTUALLY BELIEVE they may have to burn in a pit of fire for all eternity because they looked at a girl wrong. They have been indoctrinated into this thinking.

Let’s say that YOU honestly BELIEVED THAT with all your heart. Wouldn’t YOU be a little bit upset with provocatively dressed girls? Wouldn’t YOU be thankful if they dressed a little more conservatively (as pretty much all men already do).

I’m NOT SAYING this video is right IN THE LEAST, but I am saying that we should NOT be angry at these young men for “trying to control women”, we should be sad for THEM, and hope that over time their views will change, because (and I’m just going to guess here) their views probably do more psychological harm to those young men than they do to the women in their church.

At many points they THANK WOMEN for saving their “souls”. From an outside view, maybe it appears they’re trying to control women, if you go stand in Jesus camp for a minute, they’re trying to say “thank you for not damning out souls to hell.”

We’re never going to make progress or hit common ground with these folks if we don’t take a moment to really understand WHY they say the crazy sounding things they say. And maybe you and I don’t believe in it, but these folks do.

I usually adore this blog, but seriously- there IS still freedom of religion in this country, and this guy isn’t asking any of US to change the way we dress- he’s asking other people in his religious sect who (because we DO have freedom of religion and are free people) can choose to ignore him, can choose to go to another church, or can choose to give up religion altogether.

I grew up goth, openly bi-sexual, and agnostic in the bible belt and no one ever stoned me. If you can get away with making out with your same-gender girlfriend in the school hallways in Alabama, I doubt this guy is advocating stoning, female-circumcision, or rape-as-punishment for these midriff showing girls.

QUIT COMPARING STUFF LIKE THIS TO THE HORROR THAT IS FORCED RELIGION WITH FEAR OF ACTUAL DEATH.

Whats with the tone of this video, its so melodramatic. The kid didn’t die of AIDS or anything.

I’m trying to wrap an engineering degree. I spend my days on campus in classes trying not to fall asleep because I’m tired from doing homework the night before and studying most of the rest of the time.

This guy is trying to take away the one thing keeping me sane.

It’s hard to type a response for the vomit on my laptop.

Hemant, you started your quotation just a tad late, right before he says “…Campus is a loaded minefield”, he begins by saying “I am thankful god has created me to be attracted to women…”, which I find full of delicious irony.

Because, if god had created him attracted to MEN, he’d be PISSED at god? He wouldn’t be thankful for ANY way that his god chose to make him? It SOUNDS like he wishes god had made him a little LESS attracted to women.

Does this mean that he can acknowledge that gay people ARE “created” that way? Is that what god is doing, creating straight AND gay people? Why the animosity, then? Would he support gay people if they sought to avoid lust, by forming lasting, committed, monogamous relationships? Does he care AT ALL about MEN who dress provocatively, and what that might do to gay men, or to straight women? Or are their feelings unimportant?

Deck17, very well put.

Deck17, very well put.

Thank you. 🙂

They put themselves into a double bind. They declared that all sexual thoughts and feelings are intrinsically bad, and can only be made just barely okay by God’s stamp of approval, they declared that thinking “lustful” thoughts is just as bad as acting on them, and of course they declared that taking care of their own unfulfilled urges is an abomination. So their only recourse is to blame their self-inflicted oppression and frustration on women.

You dealing with two different groups here, my friend- and have used the word “they” as if they are one in the same.

“They” Group 1: Those who assembled the Bible originally.

“They” Group 2: Those who have spent their entire lives being raised to believe/believing in the book.

You cannot say that the writing of the Bible is Group 2’s fault. They were indoctrinated as pre-schoolers in most cases. However, you can say that the actions/views of Group 2 may partially cast blame on Group 1. However, they are dead. And ranting about it does Group 2 little good.

As we atheists like to run around talking about how logical we are, maybe we should quit ranting about how stupid “blah blah blah” is and realize that some of our numbers are completely ingrained with a doublethink mechanism that makes them act as if the Christians who are alive today wrote the Bible. They didn’t. They were indoctrinated as small children. And just as we wouldn’t sit back and scream about how stupid a 5 year old is, I think it’s a bit absurd to rant about that same person 15 years later acting like it “all their fault”. (Whoever “they” may be.)

If my father decided the clothes im going to wear tomorrow, he would put me in a burka and we are jews, secular, but jews…or maybe just like a nun with a star of David..

I think you haven’t figured out how to not sound as if you think it’s the girls’ fault BECAUSE THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT YOU THINK! You’re just not being honest about it. You’re embarrassed by how irresponsible it sounds because it is irresponsible, but you’re still not willing to own your own feelings.

Do you feel the need to call all Christian’s liars? or do you just pick on the one’s who actually try to talk to you about their beliefs in a very non-offensive manner?

Comments like yours are why we atheists get a bad name.

Asking someone to help you carry a load because you do not have the strength to carry it alone is not the same as saying you’re going to sit back and drink a lemonade while they do all the work.

At least this guy has the cajones to admit that he needs help to follow his faith’s laws. (You, however, seem to have forgotten that being an atheist is supposed to be about thinking- something is appears you are not fond of doing.)

Quit with the name calling and finger-pointing and maybe you’ll begin to deserve the respect you so adamantly demand from others.

Reminds me of the hilarious days of Christian school. In eighth grade we had a ‘purity class’ (this is the Christian response of sex ed) And at least twice a week the class was split up, us girls had to listen to lectures on how to dress. My favorite was the super-safe side hug, complete with wrapping your arm around your boobs to prevent men from getting a split second feel.

Christians are so fucking perverted, it’s just creepy.

Wow. Just, wow.

This guy has some serious personal guilt issues to deal with.

All I can say is when girls in school are dressed sexy, it can be very distracting to the point that it’s almost impossible to ignore. Not saying that I dislike it. I loves me some cleavage. I wouldn’t want to demand girls dress modestly or force them to dress a certain way, but I wish they would have some consideration… Why must you hot girls torture us so.

How is it “freeing” to dress yourself like a slut and be thought of as a piece of meat by half the guys walking down the street? It’s not- but women (myself included) have on occasion fallen into the trap of dressing that way because if you don’t, well you’re ugly, or you’re a prude, or you’re anti-feminist, or you don’t know style so you can’t really be a woman can you?

Well, context is important, but when I was attending high school in midriff-baring outfits, I wasn’t doing it for fashion or to make anyone like me – I happened to feel comfortable in them. Long walk, Arizona heat – pretty normal. If some of the very strict Mormon boys felt I led them astray, they never said so to me.

If they thought of me as a piece of meat, it wasn’t because of what I wore. A man who can look at a woman who’s showing a little midriff and think “meat” is capable of seeing “meat” when he looks at a woman showing nothing but a strip of skin around her eyes.

Well, context is important

Well, yes it is- I was more aiming towards these with the word “slut” in reference to children:

http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-what-kind-of-parent-would-give-their-kid-this-slutty-wolfwoman-to-play-/

http://inyourface.ocregister.com/2010/02/12/like-miley-sister-plays-at-sex-appeal/15009/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8ijdgAwiO4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlsGr9ex6Z8

Sickening. It reminds me of this article from a few years ago. I really can’t imagine what it must be like growing up in that environment. Those poor kids are being taught that sexual thoughts are evil. That feeling lust for anyone other than their (heterosexual) spouse is wrong. That sexual fantasies are something to be avoided, and, if indulged, repented of. Of course, this whole “modesty” expectation is terrible for all the young women who are being guilted and shamed because their “brothers” can’t control their thoughts. But it’s also terrible for the young men who are being taught to feel horrible about themselves for having thoughts that are completely normal. Who cares if they are “devouring” a woman in their minds? Christians continually punish themselves and others for thoughtcrime, whether it’s the “crime” of not being able to believe in Jesus or the “crime” of fantasizing about an attractive person.

It all goes back to the Christian idea that humanity is wretched, fallen, and broken. That people are inherently “sinful,” only God and Jesus are perfect, and that lowly human beings must constantly repent for their so-called sins and imperfections. As a lifelong atheist, it’s mind-boggling that people can actually believe this stuff. Is their self-esteem really that terrible? Why can’t they stand up and feel confident in saying that there isn’t anything wrong with them? I wish there was some way to tell those young men that there’s nothing wrong with sexual fantasies and to tell those young women that there’s a great deal wrong with expecting them to change their clothing choices in order to be the gatekeepers of men’s sexuality. Furthermore, that they’re not sinners, there’s no such thing as sin or hell, and they should stop feeling ashamed of being human.

ckitching says:

I’ve not once had to hold myself back from raping a woman. Not once. Never. Ever. Whatever else I may be guilty of, this has never happened, and I can’t imagine it ever will. I find it incredibly offensive to suggest that men are all barely restrained animals.

This pastor can take a long walk off a short pier. Despicable useless idiot.

Maybe you should research what is actually being discussed before commenting- you make us all look ignorant with your remarks.

The guy in the video is saying it’s hard to restrain himself from having any sexual thoughts about women at all- he is NOT talking about raping them. Having sexual thoughts about a woman you’re not married to is considered a deadly sin in Christian mythology and is punishable by eternity in hell. So to even THINK lustfully about a woman’s breasts or legs if you are not married to her is considered hell material.

What the man in the video is saying is that it is very hard to remain pure all the time. I dare you to go take a walk down a busy street mid-day without having a single sexual thought. THEN, you can compare notes with the video.

I’m a guy and I’ll by my daughter a thong and a mini skirt if she wants one. I’ve already done it.

My daughter does not dress like a slut but she does dress sexy sometimes and there is nothing wrong with it. Women like to feel sexy and look good.

The sexually oppressed people in this world really do scare me. This guy needs to wack off a tad more. Won’t stop him for looking at women but I’m sure it will help.

To my son: it’s just skin. It’s just boobs. It’s just legs. If you decide to believe in God, then believe he made ’em, as well as your brain that makes you want them. Your thoughts are NORMAL. Sexual desire is NORMAL. Heavy heated passionate lustful feelings are NORMAL. You can appreciate pretty women (or gorgeous men, if you’re inclined) for what they are. You don’t have to act on your thoughts, but if you get a chance to have some consensual fun time, be careful and respectful and ENJOY. And none of it, not one boob, not one pretty little ass cheek, nor any of those thoughts are in any way any how any time sinful.

I wonder if the men in the video can say the word “uterus”?

@DK17, this rhetoric is used to excuse rape, violence, etc. And I have directly experienced violence and threats of violence, thank you very much (including having glass bottles thrown out of car windows as the boys inside shouted “lesbian”). I have had friends who were raped, beaten, thrown out of their homes, etc. If you have never experienced these kinds of violence, particularly sexual violence, you are the lucky exception, not the rule. Some of the things said in this video mirror the thing my molestor said about me. I was seven. This video is full of putrid, vile hatred of women and no amount of “biblical reasoning” or “upbringing” makes that okay. These are adults, a grown ass man and college students, who are old enough to be accountable for their behavior. Flimsy bullshit excuses like this are not good enough-not for sexism, not for homophobia, not for racism. Oh, and you silly notion that a woman’s value and dignity is based on how much she does and does not wear-also sexist. A woman should be able to walk down the street in a burka or buck ass naked and still be safe and treated with respect. Jen is dead on with this one, the problem is not the women and their clothing, it is objectification, something that this video praises and promotes. “I can’t talk to someone I am attracted to as if they were a human being” “I have never talked to women about this-because I only care what men think and feel” “Women are minefields” “Women are the enemy” “Good women cover up so we thank them for not damning us to hell, but those bad slutty bitches, it is their fault.” This shit is not a solution, it is a huge part of the fucking problem. Repeat after me objectification and sexism will not help the problem of objectification and sexism.

Deck17. this stood out to me in what you said:

How is it “freeing” to dress yourself like a slut and be thought of as a piece of meat by half the guys walking down the street? It’s not- but women (myself included) have on occasion fallen into the trap of dressing that way because if you don’t, well you’re ugly, or you’re a prude, or you’re anti-feminist, or you don’t know style so you can’t really be a woman can you?

Did you hear me? Somehow it has become ANTI-FEMINIST to say that we women can retain our DIGNITY. And that we don’t have to dress like frumped up sexpots on a constant basis. On this issue, I think most of us atheists are actually more blind that half the religious wingnuts we point fingers at and label nutjobs.

Isn’t it anti-feminist to denigrate women who choose to dress however they like because you find it distasteful by labeling them as sluts, frumped-up sexpots, and so on? If we honestly respect women’s choices to dress however they choose, how can we attack them for choosing the way we don’t like? Sounds like a false choice to me.

I guess I’d be more willing to see Deck17’s pov if this pastor had set some guidelines for the men also….but they’re glaringly absent. It’s a one-sided sacrifice that that this pastor is asking of the women.

In the end, the only difference I see between this and Islam requiring covering of women is that in the case a Islam, more people have grown up “indoctrinated” into the belief

Modest, immodest, or somewhere in between, when women choose to dress as they do, they should be free to do so for their own reasons. All these characterizations like “prudes,” or “frumped up sexpots,” or “sluts” come from the unquestioned attitude that women are supposed to dress in such a way to protect conflicted men from their lust on one hand, and to gladden the hearts of lonely or bored men on the other.

That’s complete horse shit. Men’s feelings are their own responsibility.

Men, take care of your own fricking feelings, and stop expecting women to fix them for you, one way or the other.

so…whats the news here? that young men lust after young women in their hearts and pants? And its the women’s fault? um…isn’t this a really old story? It would be a story if organized religions, culture, etc would finally dismiss the old “boys will be boys” mentality. My question is: Are young Christian women tempted when they see an “attractive” young man? So lets lock those boys up!

@ Richard Wade

Richard, I usually commend you for your wisdom and your cool head, but today you appear to have come completely undone…

I have a suggestion to all men of the Abrahamic faiths: Take a burka and instead of forcing women to wear it, wrap it tightly around your head and face. Then you won’t be having those awful thoughts and feelings any more.

Serously Richard, did someone hijack your account and spam the Friendly Atheist???

One more thing…where is all of this hatred coming from?? I see so many posts condeming C.J. Mahaney for this message, and I can’t figure out why…

Ok so fine, what we call sin you call sexual repression. It doesn’t really matter what you call a Christian man’s struggle with sexual impurity, the fact of the matter is that most Christian men struggle with this problem at one time or another in their lives. Please spare me the theories why, that’s not the point. The point is that they DO struggle with these problems, the problems are real, and women dressing immodestly only fans the flames of their desire. Is it too much to ask women to at least consider the fact that their immodest wardrobe might adversely affect these men? Is that really too much to ask?

Let me see if I can draw an illustration for you…would you, for example, have a bottle of wine for dinner in front of an alcoholic who is struggling with sobriety? The selfless, loving thing to do would be to forego the bottle of wine and therefore not tempt your friend. Would anyone disagree?
In a perfect world women would be able to wear whatever they want, and men wouldn’t be sexually tempted by their dress. This is not a perfect world. Every action we take has a consequence, and we should be mindful of those consequences. To disregard how our actions or choices affect others is to be selfish and self-centered, and selflesness always requires some sort of sacrifice.

I want to also add that I have absolutely no problem with a woman who CHOOSES to wear a burkha as long as she is not FORCED to do it or FORCED to be part of the religion. (I have met several women who choose to wear burkhas after converting to Islam from other religions.)

We talk about “sticking women in burkhas” so often, yet we refuse to acknowledge that some women WANT to wear them because of their own religious beliefs.

Sometimes I wish I could get a show of hands here to see how many people actually started off being brought up as conservative Christians and made the switch to atheism. Then, I’d like to see what types of people make that switch. Maybe check out the IQ score, the level of free-thinking traits, maybe follow it up with how well they fit into the community as a child to begin with.

I bet you $100 we’d start seeing some real similarities between these folks. One similarity being that we’d all understand the STRUGGLE it is to give up everything you have ever known, believed, and held true in the world and in return get a big unknown that doesn’t end in a sparkly kingdom in the clouds but in the total absence of existence.

For the rest of you who started out life sans-religion or superficially-religious, or Sunday Christians who didn’t “really” believe (or whatever the equivalent is for other religions)- well, I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that you have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about when you say things like:

Mmm…well, maybe these young fellows might want to reconsider a faith tradition that tells them that just thinking lustful thoughts is a terrible, terrible thing.

Why, yes! That’s it! I’m sure that now that you’ve suggested it, they’re just going to reconsider their ENTIRE EXISTENCE because they want to fantasize about boning the girl who sits next to them in homeroom.

Are you daft?

Here I’m not saying that they would likely throw all of Christianity away, but that instead they might be more likely to consider a different form of the religion, one that may be less restrictive in nature. The traditions in different forms of Christianity are often pretty distinct.

Thanks for the clarification, I did think you meant you were:

saying that they would likely throw all of Christianity away

as I have heard many people on here say should be so easy.

And I do agree:

it’s an exciting thing to watch students grapple with these larger ideas even when the conclusions they come to are different from mine

Sorry if I over reacted, I’ve just been getting a lot of: “Well why don’t they just give up their religion, then?” lately.

And I’m not suggesting they throw their religion away–like I said, I had several guyfriends of a variety of Christian faiths who were never bothered by the way we girls dressed. I’m suggesting they think about someone other than their selves.

And I’m not suggesting they throw their religion away–like I said, I had several guyfriends of a variety of Christian faiths who were never bothered by the way we girls dressed. I’m suggesting they think about someone other than their selves.

And I’m saying that Christian ministers should be free to preach what their holy book says. If preaching from their own holy text is “wrong” by your standards, then you are indeed saying you wish for them to throw their religion away. This minister isn’t just pulling some strange rhetoric out of his ass, he’s teaching from the Christian holy book. As a minister, that is his job. As a minister, that is what his congregation expects of him. And as a minister who sees that his congregation is not following the rules of their deity, it would be negligent NOT to address the matter.

The bible actually has a perfect solution for this problem. I suggest these god fearing men follow the advice of Matthew 18:9 .. And if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

Of course that means a lot of blind Christain men, but at least they won’t be tempted to sin anymore.

Let’s compare and contrast this:

For the rest of you who started out life sans-religion or superficially-religious, or Sunday Christians who didn’t “really” believe (or whatever the equivalent is for other religions)- well, I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that you have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about when you say things like:

Mmm…well, maybe these young fellows might want to reconsider a faith tradition that tells them that just thinking lustful thoughts is a terrible, terrible thing.

Why, yes! That’s it! I’m sure that now that you’ve suggested it, they’re just going to reconsider their ENTIRE EXISTENCE because they want to fantasize about boning the girl who sits next to them in homeroom.

with this:

By their faith’s standards it IS their responsibility to not encourage it. If they don’t like it, they can EASILY find another church, or even better, maybe they’ll question their faith and leave the church altogether. […] Call me a feminist, but I think women have the ability to decide for themselves if they want to listen to this guy or not. If they DO want to accept some of the burden of sin, that is their choice. (And if they are a deeply rooted Christian, I would not blame them for that decision.) If they want to leave the church/Christianity altogether, that is also their choice. I know what a hard decision that is, and I would admire those women for having the courage to question their faith.

Why is it unreasonable to expect teh poor menz to leave their precious deeply-ingrained religious beliefs when apparently, by your own words, it is so very easy for the women to leave their precious deeply-ingrained religious beliefs? That half-assed “oh, I realize it’s a hard thing to do” doesn’t cut the mustard. You suggest that the women just leave, you suggest it’s their totally free choice if they stay to be blamed for everything, but when someone suggests that the menfolk have a choice or should reconsider their faith, it becomes totally not their fault and they have no choice in the matter because they were so horribly indoctrinated, and it’s totally mean of all us meanies here to expect a man to maybe reject a doctrine that says “your boner is the fault of that temptress in the midriff-blouse, not yours, because your penis is God’s most precious treasure”. Because childhood indoctrination is so hard to overcome and it’s unreasonable to expect them to even try–unless we’re talking about women.

I find it amazing that you can dismiss the blatant injustice done to women with these sentiments–sentiments commonly parroted by rape apologists, BTW–with a “but it’s so HARD to leave their ENTIRE EXISTENCE in this faith!” while flippantly saying that if the women don’t like being told they’re responsible for men wanting to screw them then they can just so EASILY leave the church or religion all together. Or qualify it with a statement that it “may be hard” but that you’d “admire” them for it–while viciously attacking the very notion that perhaps men have an equal responsibility to do the same, that perhaps it isn’t the sole responsibility of the women to leave the faith that was driven into their skulls as children, and that the men should be held to blame for not questioning the beliefs they had driven into their poor defenseless skulls as children.

Why precisely is everything the women’s fault? It’s their fault if men get boners, it’s their fault if they can’t find the strength to leave their deeply-ingrained religion, but somehow nothing is the men’s fault, ever, no matter what. And it’s totally unfair to expect them to reconsider their faith, but it’s totally fair to expect the women to just up and leave, just like that. Perhaps teh menz are the Troo xians for whom their beliefs are inherently their ENTIRE EXISTENCE, while the wimmenz are just pretending to believe–possibly because they like torturing the poor innocent males in the church. Becuz wimmenz r sluts like that.

And apparently, by your own words, you have no more clue than “those who started out life sans-religion or superficially religious, or Sunday Christians”, since you yourself claimed that it was JUST THAT EASY for the wimmenz to leave the church if they don’t like what’s happening, that they have a free choice to go or stay. Unless, as I stipulated above, there is some kind of causal correlation between sincere religious belief and genitalia, which one could only “have a clue” about if they had been raised within the appropriate fundigelical Christian denomination.

But if you want to tell other practitioners of your faith that that is what your holy book says, then it is not up to ME to judge you on that.

This minister is speaking to people of HIS OWN FAITH. He is directing them to follow THEIR OWN HOLY BOOK. Usually, people of a religion like to know what their OWN GOD has said for them to do. Whether you and I agree with it is COMPLETELY BESIDE THE POINT.

It’s taking a considerable effort of will not to explain just how deeply you’ve managed to sink my opinion of you over the course of this discussion. That’s quite an accomplishment; I’ve never seen you before (just lurking occasionally, here), and I’m generally not quick to judgment. But what Richard said above about having respect until you put in a lot of hard work to lose it? At this point, you’re moving mountains.

You keep arguing that we need to respect this current instance of odious and oppressive indoctrination because it is prompted by past instances of odious and oppressive indoctrination.

You keep arguing that our concern for the people whose life it corrodes should stop at the imaginary borders of their ‘FAITH’ community, arbitrarily drawn by you.

You keep waving your hands about the terrible ordeal of the men brought up with a skewed worldview that can be difficult to reevaluate, and wave away the fact that for women, the consequences of that worldview are incomparably worse.

I’m not going to write an essay on how the shit you want us to turn a blind eye to lays the groundwork for inequality, rape and honor killings. I’m not going to rub your nose into the pious justifications for burqas that could have been taken word for word from this video. For whatever reason, you seem to be far more concerned about the inconvenience of the men than the suffering of the women.

But I really do wonder…

How is it “freeing” to dress yourself like a slut and be thought of as a piece of meat by half the guys walking down the street? It’s not- but women (myself included) have on occasion fallen into the trap of dressing that way because if you don’t, well you’re ugly, or you’re a prude, or you’re anti-feminist, or you don’t know style so you can’t really be a woman can you?

…do you really think that “dressing like a slut” is the problem in this situation, and that the normalization of obsessive male lust in this video has nothing to do with the notion that “you’re ugly, or you’re a prude, or you’re anti-feminist, or you don’t know style” if you don’t dress to appeal to men?

Deck17, as well as the point that you have indicated that xtian men just can’t help it because they were indoctrinated, whereas xtian women are responsible for their own actions; I do have to wonder what point you really want to go to with this –

PS: This minister in not FORCING any woman to dress in any way. He is asking that his parishioners follow their holy scripture. These are not his words, but those of his “god” and of those attempting to follow the scripture as it is written. The women in his congregation have the freedom to choose to follow his instructions or not.

…

Let them believe what they believe.

The bible, as I’m sure you’re aware, says a lot of things, often contradictory and mostly cherry picked by followers. As an ex-xtian you must know that women are regarded for the most part in the bible as chattel, possesions, second-class citizens. The bible is used to justify homophobia, racism, sexism and any number of prejudices and harmful practises towards others. You might be happy to see these go unchallenged, or pretend they don’t have an impact on the rest of society, but I and a good many people here are not.

You may also feel that any challenege of these positions is like asking people to abandon their religious beliefs entirely; this is demonstrably not true. There are many denominations and xtian individuals who manage not to be racist, sexist, homophobic etc. I still think their beliefs are silly and unfounded, but they aren’t having a negative impact on myself or society, and as such I’m happy to leave it alone.

Mother of! I’m saying that school probably isn’t the place to wear a halter top. Freedom of religion still exists in this country. And bashing Christians isn’t the way to change minds.

I’m also saying that girls often dress provocatively for the WRONG REASONS (media, social pressures) and in the WRONG situations- like at school, work, etc. I have also stated that I MYSELF dress provocatively when going out to clubs- but because I want to, not because someone says I should. The point being that whether it is the Church or the Media, women are often bombarded with equally shitty messages.

do you really think that “dressing like a slut” is the problem in this situation, and that the normalization of obsessive male lust in this video has nothing to do with the notion that “you’re ugly, or you’re a prude, or you’re anti-feminist, or you don’t know style” if you don’t dress to appeal to men?

Absolutely, not- and at NO POINT did I say I agree with the message. I have been VALIANTLY ATTEMPTING to get people to look at this situation from an inside the situation POV in order to maybe think about what might HELP the situation instead of just sitting around and bashing on people for following their holy texts.

Do I think that anyone should have the right to tell a woman what she must wear? Hell no! But do I believe that sitting on an atheist blog and calling Christians stupid, biggots, idiots and the like helps the situation at all? Absolutely NOT. The only way ANY OF US are ever going to get anywhere in making the world a better place is to develop a bit of tolerance for the situation as it is, try to understand where these ideas come from to begin with, and speak to Christians as if they are people and not the Enemy.

…do you really think that “dressing like a slut” is the problem in this situation[…]?

No, I don’t. I was talking about the Media at the other end of the spectrum.

You may also feel that any challenege of these positions is like asking people to abandon their religious beliefs entirely; this is demonstrably not true.

Nope. But I think that saying things like:

Does this inspire anyone else to tramp it up?

is not challenging Christians to think, but just fueling the fire of anger that already creates the divide between the theist and atheists.

Never has mocking people been a way to help them.

I’m not going to rub your nose into the pious justifications for burqas that could have been taken word for word from this video

At NO POINT did I say turn a blind eye on anything, I said that we need to understand why all this is said to begin with. I have tried to get people to step into the shoes of the “other side” for a second to possibly understand why these things are being said. You can’t change something you don’t understand.

Of course, I also don’t find it offensive if a woman CHOOSES to wear a burkha on her own accord. I know women who have converted to Islam by choice, with no other Muslims in their family, and chosen to happily wear a burkha. THEIR choice.

I also don’t find it offensive if a woman CHOOSES to dress conservatively. I think a woman should be able to dress HOWEVER SHE WANTS. And if she CHOOSES to dress by religious standards, I DO NOT DISAPPROVE. I also DO NOT disapprove of a woman wearing a mini-skirt, platform boots, and pasties instead of a shirt. However, I do think there is a time and place for it. (Unless the “woman” in question is a 13 year old girl, and then I just call that bad parenting and too much Media influence.)

So, fat ugly women in short skirts and low tops aren’t denigrated as ‘sluts’?

Not that I know of- unless she’s trying to screw every guy in sight. I think the male term for that it man-whore.

So, what do you think would help then?

Probably just letting young adult Christians be exposed to the world around them. I had several friends in college who started off as Christians but changed their minds once they saw the world outside their parents homes/small communities. I often spent a lot of time talking to them about agnosticism/atheism because they would ask me about my beliefs. (At first to try and convert me, later because they thought my beliefs might suit them better.)

Other things we can do? Be open about being an atheist. Speak openly and honestly about why we make the choices we do and why we believe what we believe. Becoming friends with Christians so that they can see that atheists are wonderful people. Raise children who are respectful, tolerant, open-minded individuals who are comfortable being openly non-religious at a young age so that other kids see that there is nothing weird about it. Work hard to eliminate religious teach/prayer/abstinence only education from our school. Make sure there is a firm line drawn between church and state. Educate conservatives on issues they don’t know much about. Help raise awareness about liberal Christian sects (such as Unity) so that even if a Christian will always be a Christian, maybe they will find a better church. Teach all children they are special. Respect young people’s ability to make decisions for themselves. Volunteer in homeless shelters, nursing homes, grief programs, mentoring programs, etc- all the while being openly atheist. Just be openly atheist and share our beliefs without anger, hatred, or disrespect. The more people see us and hear us, the less odd our position becomes.

There are SO MANY things we can do to get our message out there- however, bashing Christians just isn’t one of them.

If you see a fat ugly man just wearing skin tight jeans, do you presume ‘slut’ or something more akin to ‘bad dresser’?

Am I in the Castro? or at a plumbers convention?

Honestly, if you want an honest opinion of male sluts, you should probably ask a gay guy- preferably one in SF or NYC. The straight community doesn’t have nearly as many men slutting it up as the gay community does. It seems that women have less provocative standards for male clothing when it comes to hooking up at the clubs than other men do for each other. (Well, unless you’re in the BDSM scene- then most everyone is a slut and damn proud of it, straight or gay.)

Also, I will note that there is a blatant sexual discrimination in the language you’ve heard in that it’s deemed necessary to add ‘man’ to ‘whore’; the implication being that everyone should know that word is normally only reserved for women.

Whore is a term generally used to describe a female prostitute (not a promiscuous woman). When it is used to refer to a promiscuous man, the word man is attached to the beginning to differentiate.

I see this not as discrimination against women- just differentiating between two different ideas. There are many terms used for male-prostitutes (escort, rent boy, taxi boy, gigolo, call boy, etc), but using one of those to label a man promiscuous wouldn’t really work- you just be saying the guy is a prostitute. (Just as using the word “hooker” to call a woman a slut would not make sense.) I don’t really see it as wrong to borrow a generally female prostitution term and apply it to a man who is “slutting around”.

(Honestly, when I think of the word “man-whore” I don’t think anything about women at all, I just think “slutty dude”.”)

sunnybook3 wrote:

If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Good advice for these guys! Stop blaming the women and dictating how we dress–take responsibility for your “sin” and pluck out your eyes instead! Problem solved!

Deck17….why haven’t you responded to this point?

I mean, it’s what your ‘holy book’ demands, isn’t it?

What’s your justification for shifting the blame that you should be owning here?

Richard Wade wrote:

I have a mother, a wife, a daughter, two aunts, a sister-in-law and several female friends who all their lives have had to live with this idiotic, immature, irresponsible CRAP about women being to blame for pretentiously pious men having a conflict between their feelings and their beliefs, and expecting women to make whatever concessions and adjustments are necessary to make those conflicts less uncomfortable.

The women whom I love, admire and respect have been hurt deeply by this, not just because of the outward unfairness of it all, but also because the incessant bombardment has made it slowly soak into their psyches like a poison so that they struggle with thinking maybe it somehow IS their fault and their responsibility. NO IT ISN’T!

My strident tone about this may not be to your liking, but I do not think it takes anything away from the strength of my arguments that men must take full responsibility for their own conflicts, and adults must take full responsibility for their attitudes learned in childhood. They must either live with their conflicts, or get rid of their feelings, or discard their beliefs. Trying to hand the blame and responsibility to women is not just shameful, it’s extremely destructive to society

*applauding*

AxeGrrl writes:

I mean, it’s what your ‘holy book’ demands, isn’t it?

I’m an atheist. My holy book is Still Life with Woodpecker by Tom Robbins, closely followed by the Meredith Gentry novels by Laurell K. Hamilton.

What’s your justification for shifting the blame that you should be owning here?

What exactly am I shifting blame on? First off, I’m a chick. Secondly, I think women should be able to dress however they want. (I have a bondage-mini-skirt in my closet next to my cos-play goth kimono.)

All I’ve been trying to do is get people to look at it from the other side’s point of view so for ONCE instead of just bitching and moaning, maybe we could actually take a moment to understand why these folks think what they think. if we UNDERSTAND them, it might be a bit easier to talk to them about what we find absurd about their beliefs. Maybe actually think of ways to help the world, theists and atheists alike, instead of bash the Christians again and again and again.

If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Good advice for these guys!

So you’re advocating the physical abuse of men?

Stop blaming the women and dictating how we dress

I never said I agreed with this guy, I simply said we should all step into his shoes for a moment and think about the situation- because this is actually a really big issue with lots of points, bunches of scripture, and thousands of years of mass-culture indoctrination. Treating it so lightly by calling it “horse shit” as one commenter did is disrespectful to those subjected to the teachings and to the subject material itself.

PS: I don’t give a damn what you choose to wear.

take responsibility for your “sin” and pluck out your eyes instead! Problem solved!

Does that mean I have to quit frequenting strip clubs? Because I refuse. I just recently found the ones that have dancing men.

sunnybook3 wrote:

If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. Good advice for these guys!

Deck17 replied:

So you’re advocating the physical abuse of men

Oh good grief. Christian men are the ‘complainers’ here (about how women dress), and the ONLY reason they have this ‘complaint’ is because the holy book they follow tells them this.

So, shouldn’t they be the ones to deal with their religious beliefs?

It’s no one else’s responsibility to alter their lives because ooooh it might cause a ‘conflict’ for a Christian man.

Deck17, if a certain person’s religion deemed ‘modern technology’ as being a ‘sin’, should people on a public bus feel any responsibility to put away their ipods if/when said religious person is present?

Here’s what this ALL comes down to:

Whatever religious requirements/rules a person agrees to are their concern alone.

If I join a religion/cult that deems television viewing a ‘sin’, then I shouldn’t expect or demand that any other person alters their lifestyle in order to ‘keep me from temptation’.

Sorry. If a religious person is that ‘committed’, then they can deal with such situations.

Oh good grief.

Seriously???? Do you have to find a problem with EVERYTHING? I do not support the ripping out of men’s eyes any more than I support anyone forcing a woman to wear certain clothing. Can we not be happy that at least the Christian church has gotten rid of the actual physical abuse their texts suggest? Maybe they’ve still got a ways to go as far as human rights go on a psychological level, but at least they’re not stoning anyone any more.

Or would you rather we ask them to add that back in, too? Of course, it still won’t change the preachers message of conservative dress- because it IS in the bible- but I guess that then at least you could think it’s fair???

Deck17, lolwut?

-Sluts are denoted by the way they dress, except they’re actually recognisable by their figure type.
-Sluts have nothing to do with dress, it’s actually about their actions. Except when it’s about their dress.
-Men cannot be sluts by dress, except when they can, but Deck wouldn’t know anything about that because men generally have to be gay to be sluts.
-There is no sexual inequity in calling women sluts and men man-whores because one means promiscuous female and the other means female prostitute with a male clarifier, and somehow these are exactly the same things.
-Atheists are individuals, so we should act like a hive-mind.
-We should treat xtians like they’re normal people, except they’re not normal people. They will obviously get over this if we just treat them with kid gloves and never expect them to grow up.

Blogs like this can also

Then stop trying to enforce a hivemind mentality on a blog that isn’t even yours. Seriously, start your own so you can moderate all dissenting voices. I’m sure it’ll be an oasis of ‘free-thought’.

It seems that by doing all this trash talking, we are making it HARDER to appear to be sane, thinking individuals to the Christians who frequent this blog- as well as looking more and more like the people we normally speak out against.

When people here stop slagging off all the atheists that seek to control women, denigrate minorities and even murdering people who disagree, you’ll have a point.

I feel it would be more useful to try to rationally discuss why things like this video happen (1), what we can do to help the situation (2), and then support each other in doing what we can (3).

I’m aware that you don’t agree with it, but some people believe that
1) because it’s based on horse shit
2) point out, loudly and unashameadly, that it’s based on horse shit
3) not slagging someone off for pointing out it’s horse shit, and instead asking the theists to demonstrate it’s not horse shit

IS useful. You want that to change? Demonstrate it’s wrong.

And as to disagreement and mocking by anonymous commentators on a blog that you’re already aware is unlikely to hold the same views as a xtian being ‘psycholgically scarring’? I’ve disagreed with and mocked you here. Are you psychologically scarred now? If you’re not, you’ve just shown that you think xtains are weak and pathetic. How very loving of you.

Still not up to answering my question either I see…

Deck17 wrote:

at least they’re not stoning anyone any more

Ooh, there’s a convincing argument in their favour!

You know what- I give up. You two will go through everything I say and pick out the one line you disagree with to start more shit slinging. In all honesty, you’re no better than ministers who preach condemnation. In fact, I’m going to go with worse- because you’re are (I thought) free-thinking individuals who, if you actually paid a shits worth of attention to anything I said, might see the point I’m trying to make. Instead, you are missing it entirely and picking out any little thing you can argue over. Instead of actually trying to understand what I am saying, you’d much rather mock me because apparently you both have sticks up your own asses. I am honestly TRYING to answer your questions so that you might understand what I’m trying to say, and no matter what I say you just distort my words more and more.

How the hell do you expect to ever possibly help any Christian to change their ideas about the world when you can’t even carry on a peaceful, caring, honest discussion with someone who actually agrees with most of what you say? Yes, my views may be slightly different than yours, but you have at NO POINT even attempted to logically explain what you feel or make me feel like this is even a discussion rather than a one sided shove, with me attempting (not so well it appears) to defend myself against your verbal bashing.

And for you to act like anyone who believes in religion must be bat shit insane, I’m terribly sorry, but I whole heartedly disagree with you. I may not be a religious person myself, but I can honestly understand why some people are- and it ACTUALLY DOES make sense. Yes, I think it would be more beneficial to society if they came over to atheist camp, but guess what, they think the same thing about us.

You really need to take a moment to realize that these folks are good, decent, caring, loving people. Because to sit around and talk shit about them on a constant bases- well.. you know what, maybe I finally get the anger thing- because the way people talk about Christians on this blog makes me want to hurl.

You are absolutely no better than the people you spout off against. All about human rights my ass- you’d strip these people of their religion if you could and have them recite anti-religious rhetoric every morning when the bell rings.

I’m done. And going to bed. Goodnight.

At NO POINT did I say turn a blind eye on anything, I said that we need to understand why all this is said to begin with. I have tried to get people to step into the shoes of the “other side” for a second to possibly understand why these things are being said. You can’t change something you don’t understand.

What I don’t understand is why you have chosen this specific issue to dig in and play cultural ambassador on.

Absolutely, not- and at NO POINT did I say I agree with the message.

See, this would be more convincing if not for things like

I’m saying that school probably isn’t the place to wear a halter top.

And that throws your entire oh-so-earnestly hand-wringing message off. Because what women wear is a completely different issue from some men blame women for their own sexual obsession. You keep associating the two in your posts. Why?

From your very first post:

…but I also don’t completely disagree with the message of being modest. As a woman, I’m completely sick of the media shoving unhealthy images at young women…

You treat the two as though they are polar opposites, when they’re simply two sides of the same coin – taking away women’s choice. But, notably, you don’t treat them similarly. You describe dressing revealingly as “losing clothing” (contrasted with “retaining modesty”), “dressing like a slut”, losing your dignity, dressing like “frumped up sexpots”…and that’s just one post. What sort of invective do you reserve for the opposite?

“Dressing conservatively”? That’s it?

I’m a guy. I find tasteful conservative dress personally appealing. And I do not pass moral friggin’ judgment on women who do not dress that way – the sort of judgment your comments about “dressing like a prostitute” rather heavily imply, especially after you carefully note how you would not judge a woman for voluntarily wearing a burqa.

You really need to take a moment to realize that these folks are good, decent, caring, loving people. Because to sit around and talk shit about them on a constant bases- well.. you know what, maybe I finally get the anger thing- because the way people talk about Christians on this blog makes me want to hurl.

Most of this discussion seems to be various people criticizing this specific idea, and at times these specific Christians for advocating it – and you defending all Christians as though we want to put them in concentration camps. Still not sure why.

But plenty of Christians are willing to listen to other points of view until someone says that the best way to respond to this video is to have “a Slut Walk in the pastor’s neighborhood”. It’s kind of like saying, “Hey. I disagree with you, so I’m going to come to your neighborhood to mock you by doing exactly what you’re scared of while telling everyone I think you’re an idiot.” Talk about psychologically scarring.

…

Are you. Fucking. Kidding me.

Have you read the link you’re quoting? Do you understand the reason behind that event?

Did you seriously just use a demonstration of solidarity with rape victims in the face of a victim-blaming culture…to complain about how those who blame the victims might be “psychologically scarred” by the criticism of their attitudes?

All in trying to convince us of the benefits of a fuzzy-wuzzy detente with the viewpoint expressed in this video, which has bipolar swings between “women are a deadly weapon that must be holstered for public safety” and “women are clueless and should be guided by men”?

Words fail me.

Richard!

I love you! I also was a bit shocked at your strident tone – you ARE always so gentle. And I thank you for that!! I am a recovering fundie, taught to believe all of this and fought my way out. And I am a parent, married to a fundie, surrounded by fundies, trying to raise my children – now 14 and 12. I am alone in this sea of Christianity and “piousness” and guilt – trying to find a way free my children from this trap. You are my voice of reason. To see you react this strongly, stridently, even angrily to something that hurts me, hurts my children, hurts others – it gives me hope, encouragement, strength. Thank you for your words!! I hang on each one of them!

I emphatically do not agree with the idea that women need men to guide them on how to dress (anymore than they need men to guide them on how to think), and I think this video is both sad and pathetic.

But I have a great deal of sympathy with the person who said (in one of the comments above) that the media put an awful lot of pressure on women, particularly young women, to show as much of themselves as they can.

The reason why they do this is quite simple: it helps sell products and this keeps the god of materialism happy.

No, I do not like the sentiments expressed in this video, but nor do I like the sentiments expressed in our society, sentiments that cause as much pain to young women and young men as religion. “Be pretty/attractive/sexy or go away and die somewhere.”

And, talking of pain and psychological scarring, one of the most excruciating things these days is people (and, yes, women in particular) desperately trying to “hang on” to their youth. I can think of several women known to me personally who have spent a fortune on surgery simply because society has told them to reject their older selves.

I gather that the “plain” movement is increasing in numbers and strength in Christian communities, and I can honestly understand why.

Deck17 does not appear to understand liberty. Liberty does not mean you accept, condone, or like what the other person is allowed to do. It does not mean that you are not allowed to criticize or think their ideas (or them) suck. Let us take free speech as an example. Glen Beck says all sorts of utter bullshit jam packed with bigotry. Free speech means that he is not criminalized for that. It does NOT mean that I have to respect him, not criticize him, or think that his ideas are good. The same principle applies to “freedom of religion”, that is a position on what the limits of state action in policing should be, not on whether or not religion is good per se. Bigotry is bad. Sexism, homophia, slavery, rape, and racism are all bad-regardless of what bullshit is used to excuse them. So, yes, any holy book that teaches these things is bad. Any religious group that teaches them is doing a bad thing. The fact that they use some flimsy theistic crap to justify their hate and bigotry does not make it okay. The guy in this video is a sexist asshole. People who think like him-also sexist assholes. You are also a sexist asshole (your ridiculous slut shaming has been called out again and again). Freedom of speech and freedom of religion mean that I do not think you should be jailed for that alone, but that does not make you any less of a asshole or make your ideas any less harmful. So cut the wooey “all beliefs are deserving of respect” crapola. They aren’t. That idea is patently false. Some beliefs are true, some are not. Some beliefs are bigoted, some are not.

As to idea that it is hard to leave these systems. Sure, it is hard. Lots of things are hard. But you do not get an out on being a bigot or an asshole the second you have to put a little effort in to not do so. I was raised amoung racist, including a grandfather who was in the Klan. But, you know what? I did not sit around and use that as an excuse for being a lazy racist. Instead, I fixed my damned problem. And, yes, it was my problem, not the problem of the black people I was around. Just like the sexism here is the problem of the men, not the women. You have an ethical responsibility to try to act in an ethical manner, no matter what your upbringing. Besides, this is not a video discussing past issues or even one discussing an ongoing attempt to reform, this is an encouragement to continue and worsen the problem.

A comment from Jezebel, which also posted this video

Oh…my…God. I am a recovering Evangelical Christian and C.J. Mahaney used to be my pastor at this insane mega church. Ahhh! I remember getting lectured about this kind of stuff all the time at Jesus Camp. Ladies, you need to dress appropriately as to not lure good young Christian men to lustful thoughts. I feel like gagging now. Really glad I left that all behind. Someday I’ll write a book about all the fucked up things I was told and saw.

Sorry all you girls who are not ‘attractive’ – only the ‘hot’ ones get my attention! BUT, I am asking for divine intervention to help me like unattractive girls ’cause I want to share my love with everyone.

If all women dress more modestly, wouldn’t that just lower the bar so that men lust after more modestly dressed women?

I’ve heard a couple of friends who immigrated from the Middle East say exactly that–that men in their countries go crazy over fully-exposed hair, faces, a bit of calf, collarbone, that kind of thing. One told a story of how scary it got for her when her head scarf slipped and showed her hair. She doesn’t wear one here, and she’s not scared anymore. Of course, if the CJ Mahaneys of the world have their way, there would be a lot more fear.

I really don’t see the problem – we just force all men to wear blindfolds. After all, if muslim women can be forced to wear modesty sacks why shouldn’t those men, who cannot control their lusts, be told to wear blindfolds – or blinkers – or chastity belts?

Seems its about time the perps were penalised rather than the victims.

So rather than view a woman as a person he views them as objects that invite “sinful” thoughts. At least we all know where this particular branch Club Christian stands.

I’m going to continue to find women attractive. I’m going to continue to appreciate woman for who they are. There is something that is just beautiful about the female form and I don’t want to deny myself something that is beautiful. There is something beautiful about the person beyond just the way they look but you’ll never find that out if you can’t work past you’re petty hang ups about sex.

I think that it is extremely presumptuous to tell a woman how she should dress. How about you wear a tutu for a week. I think it would look good on you. I don’t have any right to say that but do it anyway. Just the tutu, nothing else. Prick.

If a woman dressed “immodestly” then maybe she just wants to show her body off. It is her body and it may very well be a beautiful body. I appreciate it. Other people appreciate it. She may well appreciate looking beautiful just because she can. Good for her.

Can I have those 8.5 minutes back now please?

Post on the guy’s channel page.
http://www.youtube.com/user/identity313

I blogged about modesty in Xian girls’ dress, too.
I’m pretty sure a hundred guys, Xian or not, didn’t devour me in their minds any time I wore a short skirt or showed any cleavage. This is ridiculous!

Seen this morning on Twitter, via @Egyptocracy, some images meant to compel women to wear the niqab. Both compare women to candy and men to flies:

http://sarahstil.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/hijab1wp1.jpg

http://twitpic.com/4hm9w8

I realize that there are significant differences of degree and culture, but the attitudes behind these images and CJ Mahaney’s speech seem awfully similar to me. Yet Mahaney probably thinks Islam and sharia law are evil, evil, evil.

@Steve, do you also buy into the assertion that only attractive people can ever dress like sluts? If so, this means that dress really has FA to do with anything then.

Along the same lines, I disagree with the idea that women can show off their bodies more easily when dressed – unless you wrap up like a snowman, breasts are usually difficult to hide. This does not mean that by not wrapping up like a snowman you are showing them off. It means that some people will judge you merely for showing any sign of being female.

Got it, ladies? You have to dress modestly because Christian men don’t know how to stop thinking with their dicks.

Well, everyone said that my dick could never learn calculus: they were wrong!

there’s no need to get defensive or offensive or vehement towards this man. just as a woman, with a no or little moral standard dictating the way she dresses, has a right to draw attention to the most sensual parts of her body by her dress, other people have a right to comment on it. this man in not “sexually repressed” or a “pervert” or “sleaze” because looking at a scantily clad woman makes him think of sex. just like it’s unreasonable for a woman wearing a push-up bra and a deep v-neck to say “hey, my eyes are up here!” with any valid indiganation. we know men are visual.in a perfect world, yes, men would all have 100% self-control and wouldnt be affected by minimally dresses women (which leads to the question of whether then women would dress so minimally.), but for the time being, dealing with the world we actually live in, women cannot just completely shirk responsibility for the consequences that may come from how they choose to present themselves.
so many people who i have encountered that would like to think themselves liberal or open-minded, react with such intolorence towards christianity and its precepts.most of the comments on this post aren’t rational arguments that level-headedly and non-biasely take both sides into consideration, but rather a yea-let’s-bash-the-christian-because-we-feel-threatened-that-someone-is-actually-questioning-the-way-we-live fest. within his belief system he makes sense. if you dont understand his belief system then it doesnt make sense to you. he’s not trying to enact legislation so it really isnt anything to get so up in arms about.

@Steve: Men’s muscles are not homologous to women’s breasts or hips.

To be comparable, you’d have to look at the actual secondary sex characteristics of men: chests and hips.

Imagine a world where boys had to hide the fact that their chests were wider and deeper than women’s chests, that their waist-to-hip ratio was >1, that their voicebox was the size of a nickel instead of a dime. Instead of burkas, men would wear corsets, collars, and hip pads.

Something like this dress should work:
http://www.artknowledgenews.com/files2009a/Wedding_dress_de_Holstein.jpg

Corsets are necessary because boys weren’t created with a normal hourglass figure. They may not be equal to women but they are complementary – our help-meets. Sadly, unless they take back their dignity and create that shape, women will be constantly forced to think about the shape of the penis. That’s a stumbling block.

You guys have no idea how difficult it is for us, the more visually oriented sex, to live with dudes waltzing around, flaunting their shoulders like frumped up sexcocks. NO IDEA. It is so hard for me to study in school when I can see the shape of a chesty boy’s collarbone through his shirt.

Boys don’t realize how even the sight of their shapely adam’s apples can drive us gals round the bend, so turtlenecks should also be worn at all times.

You’re just going to have to trust me, because as a woman, I know more about this than you.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s your choice, boys, but don’t expect me to respect you if you willingly slut it up. And don’t be surprised if you lead someone on and they can’t resist. You chose to dress like a piece of meat. Would God want you to lead your sisters astray?

Once you start dressing in a godly way, we poor, sinful women, plagued with lustful thoughts, will no longer have to be assaulted by realizing that we were looking at a male figure. No longer will we have to obsessively recite bible verses so we don’t glimpse a boy’s happy trail, or side-hug so we don’t inadvertently cop a feel of an errant pec.

Please, boys. It’s for your Sisters in Christ.

I have a suggestion to all men of the Abrahamic faiths: Take a burka and instead of forcing women to wear it, wrap it tightly around your head and face. Then you won’t be having those awful thoughts and feelings any more.

Thank you, Richard. That just about made my day and almost made up for the rage triggered by this post. Although I wish I hadn’t been taking a drink when I read it and snorted carbonated beverage up my nose.

@Yakamoz, thank you for making the point better, clearer and funnier than I was able.

Wish I hadn’t been recovering from a cold when this was posted….

About 80% of Deck17’s posts could be summed up with the words “tone argument”–“If you’re mean in your posts, you’ll make it harder to for people to listen to you.”

There’s something to be said, there, save that it ignores the fact that there are, in fact, vast differences in people. Some folks actually ARE better motivated to reconsider their position by mockery and strong emotional responses, just as others are better approached using a calm, rational tone that carefully couches everything in sugar-coated kindness.

So the best rebuttal against tone arguments, then, is one that was made only occasionally yesterday–that Deck17 should take the approach she prefers, while allowing others to do the same, in the hopes that the broadest number of folks can be reached.

Now, within that remaining 20%, there was perhaps 5% retained patriarchal language and assumptions (“man-whore” really stood out to me–so long as that particular construction exists, it says a lot about where we are in the equality fight).

However, taking the appeal to “find a better way” to deal with this sort of misogyny at face value, my suggestion would be this:

1: Start out by pointing out that, even if every woman in his faith were to start dressing in burqas, he would still be perpetually exposed to temptation by women not of the faith who chose to flaunt their bodies. Thus, the notion that this is somehow really limited to just the women of his faith is misguided–he wants all women to be Christians, ultimately, and Christians of his sect at that, so this message IS for ‘all women’.

2: If talking with someone with views like this, then, the Sermon on the Mount text about plucking out the eye IS relevant–as others noted, the sin is ultimately found in the sinner, not the object of the sin. Thus, the sinner should eliminate their temptation by isolating themselves, until their thoughts are more able to be controlled. Monastic existence is what is called for, here.

Finally, Deck17, if you do come back and see this, whether you want to admit it or not, there IS a direct chain of thought between this video and the “she was asking for it” school of rape culture. Any attempt at putting the responsibility for your own ‘sin’ on another person is ultimately an attempt to absolve yourself of responsibility for your thoughts and actions.

@Deck17

I’m sure you’re not even reading or responding to these comments right now, but I feel the need to say something.

/rant begin/

I understand what you were trying to do in the beginning. You were trying to show the point of view from Christianity. You seemed to be arguing that comments weren’t taking their POV into account.The problem is that many of us here were in that Christianity. We already know what they believe and why. Just because they believe it, doesn’t make it right.

You also said that, within their religion, what the pastor was preaching is right. You were saying that it’s ok for the pastor to try to control what these women wore because they shared his religious beliefs. That is asinine. Just because the women in that Christian church might believe every word that pastor is saying, doesn’t mean they are not harmed by the idea. The same goes for the young/adult men in the congregation.

I grew up in a church that preached the same things to the youth group. It does harm people. Even people who believe in it with all their hearts (like I did at the time). The idea that women somehow hold the key to sex, and that men can’t control themselves from trying to get it, is incredibly harmful to young boys and girls, especially those who had been abused. I was abused as a child. I was also terrified of telling anyone about it mostly because of these teachings. You can’t tell me that doesn’t cause harm, or that it’s still right for them to preach it just because it’s what they believe.

Just because the pastor or those young boys believe this doesn’t make it right for them to believe it. It doesn’t make it right for them to preach it to the congregation. Atheists pointing out that it’s not right in no way takes away their freedom of religion. They are still free to believe it, but we are also free to tell them how wrong they are.

/rant over/

I haven’t read this whole comment section (I’ll admit that) but I have one problem…why is this all about “young” men.

Ladies, sorry, but this “almost middle aged” man has lustful thoughts about women all the time. 🙂

But seriously, does that make me bad or some sort of “pig”? Oh well, the thoughts still roll on, and as someone else said, having women all dress conservative like wouldn’t matter. I admire beauty or what I may find attractive about someone regardless of the type of dress they have on.

Sorry, just was getting the feeling early on in this discussion that if I found a woman attractive I was some sort of molesting bastard who objectified them and didn’t think of them as people.

In this country, RAPE is illegal and NOTHING justifies it.

Have you ever been on the jury for a rape trial? I have. And I can tell you that what you just said is not true.

Despite the fact that the rapist denied ever having sex with the girl right up until the rape kit DNA results came back, and despite the fact that he was “kind” enough to cover her with photographable injuries when she tried to escape, there were a few hold outs on the jury who didn’t want to convict because they were sure that the victim had asked for it. Their evidence: her manner of dress.

@ Jenv

I keep getting Fundie Troll and Deck17 mixed up.

Huh? Well for starters, I’m not nearly as prolific a poster as Deck17…

Oh and my avatar is MUCH cooler 😉

He was eventually convicted on two of the four counts. The girl was lucky (what a word to describe a rape victim) that she tried to escape. If she’d been too scared to try to run away, the guy wouldn’t have broken her hand by slamming a door on it and the hold-outs would have never been convinced to vote to convict. And this is despite the fact that he lied to the police about having had sex with her, and only remembered having “consensual” sex after the DNA results came in. I felt like he was being convicted of breaking her hand more than he was being convicted of rape.

Side note: the amount of time it took the county to process the rape kit is DISGRACEFUL. It took nearly TWO YEARS. I will never get over that.

He got six years for each count, to be served concurrently, eligible for parole in a little over three years. If he gets parole, the time between the rape and the trial will be longer than the time he spends in prison. (And if anyone thinks this is thanks to an expensive defense lawyer – the guy had a public defender.)

I was raped when I was 20. Like a lot of women, I didn’t report it. After having been on that jury, I’m not sure I made the wrong decision. I was too scared and too drugged to try to escape. I didn’t have any visible injuries. I didn’t have x-rays or pictures of a busted head and hand to show a jury. To go through what the victim went through, to wait years for the trial, and then almost lose because it takes almost no effort to convince peole that it was the victim’s fault… Sometimes I regret not reporting it, but a lot of times I don’t. Reporting it could have very easily made things worse for me instead of better.

The only way ANY OF US are ever going to get anywhere in making the world a better place is to develop a bit of tolerance for the situation as it is

Ya know just for the record some atheists are also nihilists and don’t believe for a second that the world being a “better place” is ever going to happen, and really some of us don’t care if it gets “better” because it is all utterly useless and will end badly anyway. So there is that. Even if things never get better it can be fun to fight the wind, it’s fun to watch in any event.

Honestly, if you want an honest opinion of male sluts, you should probably ask a gay guy- preferably one in SF or NYC. The straight community doesn’t have nearly as many men slutting it up as the gay community does. It seems that women have less provocative standards for male clothing when it comes to hooking up at the clubs than other men do for each other. (Well, unless you’re in the BDSM scene- then most everyone is a slut and damn proud of it, straight or gay.)

Wow how cool of you to slagg off gay men and “most” people in the BDSM “scene”, (+ NY and SF) in one fell swoop! Way to make the world a better place. Really Deck17, people like you make me glad that entropy is going to fuck us all over, when I read your posts I’m glad we are all doomed. Your misery is infectious, you are a beautiful disease, a delicious cancer. If you ever feel the urge to be totally objectified feel free to look me up, I’m fond of “meat” and have the gear to “cook” it, (thank you Nikola Tesla). We could listen to Peter Murphy and let the darkness consume us. My life does not have enough insane awful shit in it right now, you could go a long way towards filling that gap. Thank you so much for your bitter ranting posts, they made the world a darker more awful place, we couldn’t do it without people like you.

@Deck17: I think you’re coming from the wrong angle, and I’m taking quite some issue with those parts of your comments that propagate a moderate version of the exact same thing you claim to be against.

Mother of! I’m saying that school probably isn’t the place to wear a halter top.

Apparently it doesn’t ever exceed about 18 degrees Celsius where you live. Meanwhile our quality of living would surely be better if no men or women would shy away from showing some shoulder *gasp*, some midriff *double gasp* or some back *triple gasp* and be too hot just because something weren’t the place. And A/C would be the opposite of a valid counter-argument. Something to do with the environment…

And I’m just going to go ahead and say it. If I was surrounded by a bunch of attractive, topless, tight-jeaned men everywhere I went, eventually I’d probably ask them to put some damn clothes on. I like a hot guy as much as the next girl, but seriously, could any of us ladies really focus if we were surrounded by Chippendales 24 hours a day??? I think not.

So when you’re at the beach you’re incapable of doing anything but staring at the hot guys that might be present? If so, whose problem is that? And for that matter, being disgusted at seeing obese people would be no different. Still all the viewer’s prerogative.

I also don’t find it offensive if a woman CHOOSES to dress conservatively. I think a woman should be able to dress HOWEVER SHE WANTS. And if she CHOOSES to dress by religious standards, I DO NOT DISAPPROVE. I also DO NOT disapprove of a woman wearing a mini-skirt, platform boots, and pasties instead of a shirt. However, I do think there is a time and place for it. (Unless the “woman” in question is a 13 year old girl, and then I just call that bad parenting and too much Media influence.)

You say you don’t disapprove, immediately followed by multiple examples of disapproving.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and presume that you’re American. The things you’re saying sound about as strange as having to cover my shoulders when entering some church in Italy (although actually they were rather haphazard about mine, but not about my wife’s shoulders; I covered mine in solidarity). Perhaps you have some trouble seeing the problem because you partially agree. People should be able to walk around naked if they want and you shouldn’t care.

The Muslim world would just love this moron, this is just the sort of crap thatputs women into burkhas and isolation: it is THEIR fault that men have lustful thoughts, and maybe act on them.

Can I use the same excuse for debagging and violating my of-age deliveryboy?

Did anyone catch a line near the beginning of this video?

“I am thankful God has created me to be attracted to women…”

Sooo… you’re saying that God creates men who aren’t attracted to women? That God created you to be attracted sexually to women? Whose fault is it for homosexuality and lusting again?

Sweet. This guy says that guys can mentally devour people.
“Campus is a loaded minefield. There are girls everywhere.” -Someone’s regressed to elementary school, still afraid of “cooties.”

I didn’t want to throw my laptop… I just laughed through the whole thing. hahaha @ the hushness of his voice near the end.

Misogynist assholes are hilarious. Why do these people want to keep Sharia Law out of this country? Because it’s competition!

It’s scary, though, to see this is the type of person who have been elected to congress recently. Why would they be so focused on turning back woman’s rights?

Now I’m waiting for the bills to go through blaming women for being raped because they weren’t modest enough. Men can’t be responsible around nice looking ladies! ugh

This type of person gets sexually excited by what he thinks he might see. To be completely modest, a woman should be totally nude. Everything exposed – nothing left to excite him.

(Eccles 26:9-10)”The whoredom of a woman maybe known in her naughty looks & eye-lids . If your daughter  be  shameless , keep her in straightly , lest she abuse herself through  over much liberty “. (Eccles 26:14-15)”A silent & loving woman is a gift  of the Lord : And there is nothing so much worth as mind well  instructed . A shamefaced & faithful woman is a  double grace , & her continent  mind  can not be  valued “.(Eccles 26:25) ” A shameless woman shall be counted as a dog , but  she that  is shamefaced will fear thew Lord “.(Eccles 42:13-14)”For from garments come a moth , & from women wickedness . Better is the churlishness of   a man  then  a  courteous woman , a woman , I  say  , which bring shame & reproach “. ( Gen.3:17)Then  to Adam ,he said,”Because   you have listened to the voice of your wife …”.(Job 2 :10) He said to her  ,” You speak as one of the foolish women speaks …” (Prov.9:13) “The woman of folly ( foolishness / foolish ) is boisterous , naive , & knows nothing “. (2 Tim.3:6-_…captive(married or slave) weak women weighed  down   with sin’s ,led by various(mixed)impulses “.(1 Corinthians 11:7-9) “For  a man is the  image &  glory of God , but woman is the glory  of man . For man did not come from woman , but woman from man ( his rib). Neither was a man  created for woman , but woman for man “.(Titus 2:4:)”….train the younger women to be subject to their husband . There is no equal power indication sharing in Marriage “.(Deuteronomy 22:5) “The woman shall not wear that which pertain  unto a man , neither shall a man put on a woman’s  garment/s : for all that do so , are abomination unto the Lord your God “.(Deut.22:11)”You shall not wear a garment of divers    sorts , as  woollen & Linen  together “.(1 Pe  3″2) “While they behold your chaste   conversation { coupled} w/fear”.
(1 Ti 2:13)”For Adam was first formed , then Eve “.(1 Pe  3:9) ” Not  rendering evil for evil ,or railing for railing , but contrariwise blessing , knowing that you are there  unto called , that you shall inherit a blessing “. ( Mat.15:11)”Don’t critisize other ppl. for their habbits . Not that which goes into the mouth defile a person , but what comes out of the mouth , does defile the body”. (Psalms 119:86)(Isaiah 61:1)”Prisons & drug  wars do not save souls . The lord has  sent me   to  bind   up the broken hearted , to proclaim Liberty   to  the captives & the opening   of the prison  to them  that are  bound “.             ( Ezekiel 34:29)  ” I will raise up for them a plant of renown , & they shall be no more   consumed w/hunger  in the land  , neither bear the shame of the heathen anymore “. ( Genesis 1:29-31) God said ,”Behold  , I have given every herb  bearing seed which is upon  the face of   all the   earth   , to you , it will be used for meat “.                                         ( Paul :1 Timothy 4:1-3) The bible predicts some herbs prohibition : “Now  the spirit  speaks expressly , that in later  times , some   shall speak  lies  in hypocrisy commanding   to abstain from meats  which  God have   created to be received with  Thanksgiving of them which believe & know   the truth “. ( Prov.27:15)”A continual   dripping on a rainy day & a quarrelsome  wife  , are    a like “. ( 1 Timothy 5:23) ” No longer  drink only water , but   use a little wine   for the sake of your  stomach   & your frequent ailments “. (Prov. 21:19)”It is better to live   in a desert land , then w/a  quarrelsome & fretful  woman “.

They wouldn’t have to , if   , probably ,if   females would stop  sinning by dressing  in jeans , showing their body frames  making males  sin through lust , shame on you , that do so . It’s not fare to male’s , also .

I really hope that’s sarcasm.

uhh what is wrong with dressing modestly? and what is wrong with Christian men asking their sisters in Christ to dress modestly, not only for their own sake, but for the sake of the girl too? No girl who has a heart dedicated to God wants men looking at her lustfully. and theres nothing wrong or stupid with any of that. i dont know why any of you here care enough to post a comment about something that means nothing to you. let us live how we want. these Christian men are way more respectable than any other men i will ever know, because they yearn to see women with purity and not lustfully. and the Christian women I come across are far more beautiful than women who dress immodestly because they want people to see their hearts, not what they look like.

Omg, I love normal christian girls instead of all these demolished feminists out there, you are the crown of nature! I would do anything only for modest christian girls!

We men simply don´t want feminists anymore, They act like mentally disturbed chickens.

We choose modest and divine normal christian girls with normal and beautiful values.

I hate rapists! They are lesser than human, Mentally disturbed people. 

However, to become feminist out of that and take out your aggression on innocent men makes you the rapist. Hate your real rapist not men in general! 

Because if you propagate that all men are rapists, what reason have men left to spare you?

Than we can´t adhere to you being the victim anymore, You become the oppressor which needs to be dealt with.

No there will be balance and normality, not extreme measures and covering up everything so much that you are totally hidden, nor so little that you are naked!

Balance, normality, sanity.

You know, not all men are mentally disturbed. We are pretty good, you know.

Chimpanzee mating normally starts with the female showing her end parts and the male response of arousal and mating. 

Why don´t feminists bracket these animals too?

Yes and perhaps men can also be free to choose not to engage in relationships with such women if we may?

Oh how I love sane, normal and balanced christian women and how feminists repell me.

Dicks are awesome! so fun to play with! mine rocks!

No thats not sarcasm thats feminism.

we reject nudity in society and most of us agree – those who believe in modesty or otherwise. what arguments are there for covering genitalia, while exposing everything else?