Modest woman's clothing, woman's modesty and sexual purity thread

No. Women need to dress modestly so as not to tempt men. They don't need to dress modestly to please men. If you want women to wear dresses because you like to see women in dresses, you're no different from guys who want to see women in bikinis or yoga pants.

Are are a redditor are what? What kind of feminist cuckold is this ?
Women ought do dress modestly and femininely, meaning with a dress. Women ought to obey their husbands and their brothers and if they are given free reign, they will lead society to astray with their natural tendency to corrupt and seduce people into lust and thus destruction.
Go back to reddit preach your happy Jesus propaganda.
old.reddit.com/r/Christianity/

lol >>>/islam/

>lol >>>/islam/
Thank you for confirming that your are a Pr*t*st*n Happy Jesus heretic.

Attached: 1543401647731.png (1511x749 593.65 KB, 300.42K)

It feels like I'm on facebook. Do you have an argument or just a bunch of reaction gifs?

Great, discord shills found our board.

Attached: coffee.jpg (250x208, 5.25K)

First things that come to mind are 1 Timothy 2:12 and 1 Peter 3:1.

I understand deeply how influences like Zig Forums and whatever else can skew your point of view. I feel bad for you, but take a second to look at this properly. What user said was
Which is 100% correct. If you are gaining some sort of erotic enjoyment out of women wearing dresses, then it is no different lust than getting some sort of erotic enjoyment out of women wearing yoga pants or whatever.
As an additional note, I don't think you are saying any of this out a Christian interest. I think you have a motivation in stamping out "degeneracy" or "feminist propaganda" and "preserving our society" and other memes that you attempt to bolster by saying a Christian ought to hold the same interest. A Christian, however, ought to hold to the good for the sake of the Good. You are attempting to hold onto the good(so much as you really are, which does not appear to be greatly) for the sake of what exactly? "Society", the appearance of a "better time" or what else? user's point, that this isn't a Christian thread but something else wrapped in Christian appearance is correct.

This board has been dead, at least in quality, for a long time. I doubt anyone cares enough to shill here. I am sorry because I contributed to the decline of quality. I would like this board to improve.

No one ITT said this. You and your discord friends are dishonestly assuming this.
The fact that this thread got swarmed by literal 1 posts by ID because it dared criticize modern women suggests otherwise.

This. Christian women need to stop blaming men for everything and have some personal accountability.
Christian men have no problem making judgements about one another, because we want to see ourselves improve. Only Christian women have a problem with being judged.
Everyone seems to forget the part where Jesus tells the woman "Go and sin no more".

Attached: 1423242.png (1261x362, 95.32K)

...

That chain of posts started with 71bdf8 and c55893 assuming that advocating for modesty is itself a form of fetishism.

Given the response to them, I can't say they were entirely wrong.

Sure they can - by wearing less revealing clothing. Women aren't helpless infants incapable of dressing themselves. They know better.
I agree with these statements.
No, but they are not blameless either. Talk to any Christian woman about the issue of modesty and watch her lash out at you and take not the slightest bit of responsibility for the way she dresses. That's where my issue lies.
Of course. Even the most scantily-dressed of Christian women I do my best to ignore. I only ask that they do their part in being good Christians as well.

God. If a women dresses in an unmodest way she becomes a seductress and in biblical times she would be seen as a harlot.

Of course there are guys who will force themselves on even modest women, but Modest woman encourage a different set of values than clad women.
Thats wrong, it's proven that the less partners a woman has the successful the marriages are.

Attached: anti-fornication s.jpg (4920x4161, 5.84M)

You are not welcome there you judaizing pr*testant heretic.

My point was this: If a man can say he is biologically hard wired noticing, then a women could say she is biologically hardwired to want to be noticed. If that is the case, she really could not help it, any more than the man could help noticing. So to fall back on "men have a biological weakness" but to say it can't be applied to women as well is really bad reasoning.

The first line of OP is literally
How was it incorrect to point out the obvious connection between OP's Zig Forums tendencies and the spirit of the post he made, and the spirit of many of the posts made in this thread?

So you want to tell me that all of these things aren't for the sake of the Good, that sexual purity and sexual modesty isn't the Good? That modest dresses for women isn't the Good, that fighting this Jewish death cult parasite that is feminism isn't the Good and that preserving society with sexual pure, modest women (and men) with traditional natural roles for each sexes and having a pure society for better marriage and strong families to procreate a lot of children and to raise them in pure loving families isn't Good ?
Is this some kind of sick joke ? What kind of Christian are you ?
What kind of idiotic reasoning is that ? Women wearing dresses that are good looking and that hide the form and curves of the body and drastically reduce the exposition of the flesh is obviously not lusting but the complete contrary. It's modesty, it's sexual modesty, it's simplicity, it promotes beauty and love instead of lusting and envy for the flesh. And yes, femininity and womanhood is deeply associated with dresses, that's the way it's meant to be in Christian societies, women have to dress modestly not to arouse and tempt men and yet, they have to look attractive and beautiful in the same time to make them good-looking and to allow love (opposed to lust and fornication) and thus to allow pure marriage and strong families.
Now, thanks to (((feminism))), women started to dress pants like men which is a disgrace and then, they wear clothes that are really sticky to the skin and they also wear as little clothes as literal whores. They are turning themselves into sex daemons and corrupting and undermining the Social Order and Moral Order of Society, ultra-sexualizing society, turning society from Love,Faith and Spirituality to Lust/fornication, atheism and materialism/carnal materialism and thus leading to cultural suicide and demographic suicide, since it completely obliterate the foundation of society, namely pure and strong marriages.

This is a christian board,we are taught that men and women aren't born inherently good by nature but that we have a (very) bad side, our fallen side because of the original sin. But yet, we are taught that we have that not only we can but we have an obligation to control our passions, to control our urges and impulses with the use of Logos (reason), which will control the Ethos (the Will) which will control the Pathos (Emotions, passions). We are rational creatures, we can control our passions and we will never be tempt beyond what we can manage so we have no rational excuses to sin.
Men are visual and Women are beautiful, that's the why it's supposed to be. The reason we are civilized and christian is because we submit ourselves to the diktates of the Moral Law, which will guaranty the Social Order. If a woman can't help herself not to dress as a literal whore and to parade her boobs and ass like a savage monkey, then men also can't help themselves to take women by force and rape them violently, since we are "biologically hard wired" for it. If you want to free yourself from the Moral Law, then you just ask for society to go back to the primitive animalistic ways, just like savage tribes in South America. The fact we have civilization is because we have rules and often times, the very first step to society and civilization are dresses for women. I also think that men ought to wear decent clothes that don't overexpose muscles but it's a lesser problem, women are way less visual than men.
So men have a biological weakness toward rape and rough sex and also to be violent and kill and women have a biological weakness to dress and parade like literal whores, yet the bible and the Christian tradition is clear that we have to use reason to deal around that, to deal around the original sin and so that we have to submit our will to reason, to Logos. And that's why we have civilization, that's why we have spirituality, that's why we have LOVE (instead of Lust and Fornication) that's why we have Faith. And by letting women dress as little as whores, and by promoting non-feminine clothes and roles, you are destroying and corrupting all of the founding of society, it's a direct assault on the foundation of Society and that's intolerable, we ought not let individuals undermine and corrupt the Social Order because of "Americanism", "Liberalism" and "Freedom", those are all protestant heresies which will allow Satan and Jews to use them as vector to spread darkness and corruption at an epidemic rate, without any levers to defend against it.

Attached: Moral.png (806x236, 22.3K)

Often times, Zig Forums and Zig Forums have similar ideas, except on race obviously, so the muh Zig Forums bogeyman doesn't work here, and if you read the title and the thread on Zig Forums, you would realize that it is very christian by nature, since sexual purity is the a duty of the most importance to Christians.

Attached: 1542846555640.png (1501x1911, 2.23M)

wasting you time. chistians need to be hardcore anti-government. you wasted 3 decades now already.

If by "anti-governement", you mean "don't tread on me", "let me do what I want as long as I don't infringe on your freedom", then you have been infected with the libertarian ideology which will every society to suicide, that be cultural or demographic.

That doesn't make sense; both sexes are "hardwired" to lust. Try getting ripped (if you aren't already) and walking around in public with nothing but shorts on. Women will be stealing glances at you left and right, because they are hardwired in the same way as men… not that you should dress that way in public mind you, as that would be immodest.

They also are "hardwired" to lust on the flesh on men, but on a different manner. Men are way more visual than women and men tend to love parts of the body of women. Women tend to love the whole person instead of specific body parts. We are different. But still, I agree that men should also wear decent clothes, there are too much immodest men nowadays too, wearing tight shirt to show muscles and small t-Shirt unnecessarily exposing muscles but it's a lot more destructive when women do it.

weak shill.

You realize that mere sinning in thoughts with her is a sin of lust right? Therefore every girl in yoga pants facilitates the sin for every guy she passes by
sure. But offering the sin so easily, even dressing for this purpose to stir the lust in men is not modest, it is not nice, it is even sinful in essence.
Who cares right?
Who cares that our societies are over sexualized, with guys drooling all the time over clad dressed women
Who cares that even very young girls dress this way
Who cares that our civilization sinks into the abyss in the midst of sterile hookup culture
Who cares?

It's ok/ I do not mind Zig Forums. It is a pol thread and it is not a bad thing necessarily.

But i realize you're probably that "muh pol" user from christian pol thread - judging by the use of red text/greentext flood.

Sure goys…just let's not be modest, do not require it from women. You do not want to fetishize it right? Right?

Christian should strive to correct his brothers who strayed away from God. So promoting degeneracy makes you a bad Christian by default.
How about fixing the society so people do not get to hell and so our children do not live in a hellhole? That you consider to be un-christian? ok.
That's right goy…there is nothing in between. However the woman dresses you may be "turned on" so give up on modesty, do not want women to dress modestly there is no point.
no comment
Nope.
There are shills. You probably are not one, you're just misguided protestant or something of the sort.
By posting "nazi drag queen" and "muh paganism memes" in Zig Forums thread?
By whinning muh pol?
Seriously doubt that.
The point is that they handle they lust so the society does not turn into animalistic lustful state.

Just so you know…we are allowed to enjoy beauty of women. If they are dressed modestly like pic related you can do it without having sexual thoughts. You cannot do that if she wears yoga pants. But do not worry I do not expect any serious argument from you other than twisting words, implying bs etc. I think I have debated with you several times and each time it led nowhere.

I believe you are talking with the guy from pol thread. Do not expect any honest argument or reasoning.

Now, thanks to (((feminism))), women started to dress pants like men which is a disgrace and then, they wear clothes that are really sticky to the skin and they also wear as little clothes as literal whores. They are turning themselves into sex daemons and corrupting and undermining the Social Order and Moral Order of Society, ultra-sexualizing society, turning society from Love,Faith and Spirituality to Lust/fornication, atheism and materialism/carnal materialism and thus leading to cultural suicide and demographic suicide, since it completely obliterate the foundation of society, namely pure and strong marriages.
Exactly

Attached: bq-5c5ee7fc11bb1.jpeg (600x901, 158.86K)

Posting few pics. Notice the dresses. It is nothing like "modern clothing". It is modest yet it shows off the female beauty. You are able to enjoy the beauty created by God without having the lustful thoughts. I seriously doubt you can do that if the girl wears yoga pants or she's barely dressed. I do not know how about you but seeing this I do not get sinful thoughts. All I see is nicely dressed beautiful woman who shows her beauty but not to the detriment of others and to her own detriment.

Think about it for a second.

Attached: bq-5c8670e156e39.jpeg (600x600 326.81 KB, 143.84K)

Nice shilling. Women should obey their husbands that is christianity. Get over it

This board would improve with a new board owner who could be bothered to judge anions here equally.
And bring back flags.

No it isnt prove me wrong.

They are good, but the question is "Why do you want them?". If you want them for a bad reason, then you aren't wanting them for the sake of the Good(the Good is God by the way) but are at least in part motivated by a more base, less noble intention. For example, if a person was to want to prevent abortion, but only because it meant more white children in the world, we could not say he desired a good for the Good, but he desired a good for either a good or some other worldly reason(like "Whites make all good things. blacks/Asians/Hispanics/etc don't make anything good. We need more whites"). It is obvious to anyone that such a reason is not the Good. Your insistence on mentioning "jewish death cults, feminism, better marriages" etc betrays that you are caring primarily about the worldly benefits of such a practice, which is fine, but a Christian should, I think, care about them for the sake of it being the right thing whether or not there are any benefits at all. Perhaps I am overly harsh, but if I am it is only because I feel you are focusing on the wrong reasons and it will bring harm to you or another.
There are many people today who lust over them precisely because they are so contrary to the standard today. I am saying that if such a person is there, they are only exchanging one source of lust for another.

Doing it for the wrong reasons doesn't make you a good Christian either.
I don't know what you are talking about.
Yeah of course. You can do the same with a woman wearing yoga pants. You can get inflamed with passion at a woman wearing yoga pants, just as you can when she is wearing your pic. Is what we wear a problem for us? I won't dispute that. Is the solution to return to dresses? Maybe, I don't intend to argue on that at least. Can a person be inflamed with lust when a woman is wearing a dress? Yes. Can a person be inflamed with lust because a woman is wearing a dress? Yes. I suspect many people who advocate for it do so out of some degree of lust. I want to make clear that is bad since many anons here are not capable of making such a distinction or may be misleading themselves thinking they have no impure motive when the contrary is or could be the case.

but they should
Women should be attractive to men. The whole problem is that women are trying to pkease their own thirst for status instead of pleasing actual decent men.
Women shpuld never ever be independent from men, they belong together.

Shill. Men can like women in ways thatbare not erotic. In fact dressing modestly, is very helpful for this purpose.

Just to make it more clear where I am coming from with base and less noble reasoning example, look at replies to

This thread demonstrates what I believe to be a fundamentally uncharitable, and unchristian, view of the world by anons.

(I don't want to believe this is a genuine post though)

Pol has a superior spirit compared to lukewarm judaizers like you.

jew confirmed

This is so true, it hurts. You come on Zig Forums and you get a bunch of soft boys telling you you're not a "real christian" because you aren't a literal cuck, or they call you a piece of shit for your sins because they are all holy and pure saints who never sin. Then you go to Zig Forums and they at least mean well. They want to change things for the better, they want some kind of unity. A lot of them are winnie the poohed up losers, so they get each other and they have a kindred spirit. But Zig Forumsis just filled with self-righteous normies who like to circle jerk about how holy they are. I seriously don't get how there are so many normies here. I feel like this board must get linked a lot on r/christianity or something. I feel almost no brotherhood towards people on this board, but I feel right at home on /fit/ and Zig Forums and /r9k/, even though I haven't browsed the latter two in a long time. I only come here because there's no porn

This is exactly what I wrote about. You twist words then claim the moral highground. Those who want chastity should all think deeply about "muh reasons". Look man…most men who want this have the right reasons…to return the society to morality. That itself is good. Here we have that "we want more whites" is a bad reason. I will argue that me wanting more of my people in my nation is not a bad thing because this country(and Europe) belongs to europeans, not to migrants. There's nothing wrong with that. And no…I do not judge things based on "muh superiority". Other peoples have the right to do the same. in THEIR own countries.
You realize that we are responsible for the "wordly things" and will be judged accordingly right?
Sure man. You may be inflamed by a nun dressed from head to toe. As you can be left with peace if you take a peek on porn. But the point is that the less clothes, the more the chance of you sinning.
What makes you believe that?

I will make this clear: I will pick Zig Forums over centrist pseudointellectuals like you anytime. At least they have some standards…well some of them. Your shilling in this thread can be summed up: Hey guys guys, think again before shaming sluts and yoga pants, it is just your fault you have lustful thoughts when the woman is poorly dressed. I mean it is of course bad by fellow christians but please think again about the "reasons" because "muh nation" is a bad reason. Also morality is a bad reason because as I have said the problem is solely on your side and holding women up to some standards would not be nice. It would not be good because I do not consider your reasons to be good. Also I get the feeling that you advocate for modesty because you get kick out of this (????????) and therefore muh lust. As said. This is a very jewish way of arguing. Constant preaching from above, making morals relative, rather shaming those who want to return to morals while claiming to be "objective".
I will pick Zig Forums even retards who are there before lukewarm any time. Any.

This is so true. It got better recently but man the sanctimoniousness of some normies here. Zig Forums is bad because they want to change things, "real christians" should never do anything because "insert a stupid reason here". Political threads are full of shill saintposting. muh pol this muh pol that. Meanwhile the purity thread is full of opposite direction if you know where I aim. This is 8ch I do not understand that so many blue pilled anons are here.

My concern here is that Christianity is being used a front for a largely secular concern, or is being used for a secular way of thinking. That is, the reason women should dress modestly is not because it makes marriages more stable, though it may, and not because it is better for the nation, though it may be, but because it is aligned to the proper way of living. When you say something should be done because it results in this given benefits, you are giving more priority to the consequence of an action than the content of the action itself, and in this case we could say it exchanges the cause(being good) with the effect(some good things happen) and I don't believe that is a proper thing to do.
And I made clear there is a justifiable reason for demanding modesty, because it is carrying another's burden. I don't view "because it makes marriages more stable" as a proper reason, but it is a nice consequence if it be true.
I don't believe I have done any of these. I have only expressed the idea that reasons and intentions matter and can't be discarded in place of merely pragmatic concerns.

I forgot to include
My other concern was that a person is advocating for women dressing modestly because he finds it attractive in the same way a person may advocate women to wear yoga pants because he finds them attractive. That is certainly a danger that can exist(as you admit) and I only wanted to point it out so that it can be recognized that is not a good way of thinking.

Prove it. I seriously doubt people get more turned on by modest dress than yoga pants. And your "concern" actually just looks like preaching from above the jewish style.

Again you twist what has been said and you are the only one expressing the "merely secular concern". You are the one pushing that those who mind sexualized clothing are secretly turned on by modest clothing, thus just pushing their form of degeneracy.
You sure do sound like a concern troll that intends to derail the thread. Look I am going to be harsh: You probably are not as smart/virtuous as you think you are and you try to project your own insecurities here - objectifying women. What has been said is in no way secular - straightening people so they do not get to hell is in no way secular. The secular way is to claim that yoga pants are ok because its all in your head.
After reading through 8 posts of yours I agree with that you probably are a jew. Debating style fits, subversion fits, preaching from above fits. You either are one or you follow their line of thinking very, very closely. Thanks for provving that even on christian there will be sshills to contradict modesty thread.
Have a nice day user.

I know you know this but let it be said for that Jewish shill. Women who dress modestly are attractive to men not because the modest clothing makes them more sexually attractive, but that it suggests to the man that the woman is a virgin. Men (barring monastics) fundamentally want one virgin wife no matter what the Freudians or degenerates say. It’s what I want and what most men I know want in their heart of hearts.

The implication that modest clothing is some kind of sexual fetish is just nonsense. It’s just Freudianism where everything wholesome has to be interpreted as a sexual fetish. Modest clothing is a suggestion of the woman’s character and her fidelity.

This here is why Normie “Christianity” is toxic because it intellectualises what should be common sense to avoid being against the current year. Just look at any icon of Mary or any other female saint and she is veiled. This stuff is obvious, unless you’re going to make the semi-heretical argument that Christian women shouldn’t be emulating Mary.

The modernists reveal their heresy in their own arguments. They attack others as “incels” the sane cheap shot that feminists use. The amount of mental gymnastics done to appease the yoga pants wearing female fornicator is ridiculous.

The kind of B.S. I've seen in this thread is why nothing gets done. I remember college. Every time I closed my eyes, I had to push away the, literally, dozens of perfectly formed butts perfectly outlined in spandex I had seen that day alone, because 30% of the women on that campus wore skin tight clothing every day of the year (and I'd bet 90% wore it on occasion), and most of them were at the peak of their physical attractiveness. Christian men on that campus would, in meetings with each other, discuss ways of keeping lustful thoughts from our heads, because a simple walk across campus could potentially provide weeks worth of material in what degenerates call the 'spank bank.' It was so bad that I made a point of telling girls I knew rather well and who dressed modestly how much I appreciated it and was sure to compliment how much their clothing made them look good without provoking lust.
Any time a local pastor tried to take a stand against the degeneracy (most of these women went to church), the backlash was swift and horrible.
Or the even popular:
Women are physically incapable of understanding the effect a scantily clad woman has on a man, and this lack of sympathy or even simple obeying of the commandment against putting stumbling blocks in the way of your brothers is making things worse.
And now, we have Christian brothers, who should know better, making excuses for them because 'muh fetish.' The fact that some men fetishize women in certain types of clothes is the worst excuse I have ever seen for shutting down discussion of female modesty. Men naturally know that women are self-conscious about their appearance, so they talk about how good women can look in modest clothing to let them know that they don't have to dress like a thot to be attractive, and whenever they do, some contrarian/shill/male feminist has to show up and claim that this show of support is just proof that there is literally NOTHING WOMEN CAN DO TO HELP MEN WITH THEIR LUST! Take your defeatist self to the nearest church and ask God why you are so invested in shutting down anybody who advocates trying to make things better. All you're doing is shooting the message because you don't think the messenger is genuine enough.

I'm not anyone that's posted here but you can't unify around anything but the truth, and that's the thing sorely missing there. Verbally wanting to do something and effectually doing it are two separate things.

Now secondly a lot of the other problem you're talking about with condescending is due to the current staff.

A bit of self control goes a long way, and yes I do know generally what you're talking about. It's just a question of not liking harlots and being surrounded by them. But I know that in the end of the day God will be on the right side.

That's why nothing of the sort even bothers me now.

Brilliant article here on the tradition of head coverings for women in Orthodoxy. This is 2000 years old tradition, not some sexual fetish as someone previously suggested.

stluketheblessed.com/womens-headcoverings/

Virtually every single female icon is veiled.

Yoga pants are obscene.

I think so too the freudian spirit is just palpable.

THIS.

Truth is there but it is among rubbish. I am not saying one should become a mere Zig Forumsack. I am just saying I will pick Zig Forumsacks who seek truth even though misguided, over lukewarm christians who just countersignal Zig Forums because "muh pol" and then saintpost.

This thread is a proof that once a thread gets derailed it's all over. This could have been a good thread so I will create another one for this topic.

Go to reddit if you want people to stay on topic, normie

ok

The absolute state of Zig Forums