Who is responsible in situations like this?

[JohnD]

A young woman dresses provocatively, goes out and encounters several young men. They all look, and when she leaves their presence, they all start discussing in great detail what they'd like to do with her if they could. Obviously, this is sin. But just who is responsible? The woman or the men. Obviously, had she not dressed as she did, the discussion never have started (at least about HER in particular), but then the men have the responsibility to exercise a certain degree of self control. Whom does God hold responsible?

I think one needs to define provocatively. bikini's are not really provocative to me, but that full length green silk dress that my wife used to wear just drove me over the edge. Excites me just to think about it. (hope it's OK to lust over your own wife) And that was back when I was about 23 or 24 years old, so it's not just my age.

We all have different tolerances and drawing lines in the sand in a free republic just isn't an easy thing to do. I do believe that the vast majority of women and men who dress toward the provocative side are doing so for attention....

Our society is kind of hyper sexed this time in our history and so if you want to blame anyone, you might attack our media and advertising...... for it's they that set the tone for what inexperienced young ladies wear. Most guys are just hormone crazed beings that will get excited over something no matter what the norm is. My grandfather used to tell me that when he was a boy they used to get excited over ankles. If it weren't so cold we might be better off in the long run to just go back to the buff..... everyone would get used to it and we'd not have this probllem..... at least that's what my nudest acquaintances tell me, and they should know.

My husband said something similar when we talked about this thread. Basically, his response was that an attractive women is going to get attention no matter what she has on. Period.

So that's it then?

Whatever she can get away with exposing until all the decency laws catch up with her?

I am married to a head turning blond who in her 60's still gets the looks of lust from men and even boys and the look of jealousy and envy from women. And she's not dressed like a floosey. In fact she does not wear the fashions she wore as a youth in the 1960's (old photos are quite sexy from the bouffant on down that is).

So are we to just twiddle our thumbs and shake our heads as the hem line of discretion (which has long surpassed the waistline) simply vanishes?

Oh well, says people like you and your husband.... what can we say or think or do?

I may not be the most innocent angel on the block but I know when its about time to get the angels on the block rallying for truth and decency.

[Bold Believer]

A young woman dresses provocatively, goes out and encounters several young men. They all look, and when she leaves their presence, they all start discussing in great detail what they'd like to do with her if they could. Obviously, this is sin. But just who is responsible? The woman or the men. Obviously, had she not dressed as she did, the discussion never have started (at least about HER in particular), but then the men have the responsibility to exercise a certain degree of self control. Whom does God hold responsible?

I think one needs to define provocatively. bikini's are not really provocative to me, but that full length green silk dress that my wife used to wear just drove me over the edge. Excites me just to think about it. (hope it's OK to lust over your own wife) And that was back when I was about 23 or 24 years old, so it's not just my age.

We all have different tolerances and drawing lines in the sand in a free republic just isn't an easy thing to do. I do believe that the vast majority of women and men who dress toward the provocative side are doing so for attention....

Our society is kind of hyper sexed this time in our history and so if you want to blame anyone, you might attack our media and advertising...... for it's they that set the tone for what inexperienced young ladies wear. Most guys are just hormone crazed beings that will get excited over something no matter what the norm is. My grandfather used to tell me that when he was a boy they used to get excited over ankles. If it weren't so cold we might be better off in the long run to just go back to the buff..... everyone would get used to it and we'd not have this probllem..... at least that's what my nudest acquaintances tell me, and they should know.

OK...if I can see any part of her chest, or the dress qualifies as a belt, that's provocative. If her shorts get confused with her panties, that's provocative. If her shorts SHOW her panties, that's provocative. If her tukhus cheeks hang out of her shorts, that's provocative. If her pants are so tight they look like someone painted them on with an airbrush, that's provocative. If her clothing outlines her sexual area, that's provocative.

Men, you're not immune to this. If your pants show off ********, you need to consider changing. If your bare chest shows, you need to cover up, some women get excited over that.

These things should be obvious. I apologize in advance if I offend anyone, but since some have no clue what's wrong....

[Matthitjah]

A young woman dresses provocatively, goes out and encounters several young men. They all look, and when she leaves their presence, they all start discussing in great detail what they'd like to do with her if they could. Obviously, this is sin. But just who is responsible? The woman or the men. Obviously, had she not dressed as she did, the discussion never have started (at least about HER in particular), but then the men have the responsibility to exercise a certain degree of self control. Whom does God hold responsible?

I think one needs to define provocatively. bikini's are not really provocative to me, but that full length green silk dress that my wife used to wear just drove me over the edge. Excites me just to think about it. (hope it's OK to lust over your own wife) And that was back when I was about 23 or 24 years old, so it's not just my age.

We all have different tolerances and drawing lines in the sand in a free republic just isn't an easy thing to do. I do believe that the vast majority of women and men who dress toward the provocative side are doing so for attention....

Our society is kind of hyper sexed this time in our history and so if you want to blame anyone, you might attack our media and advertising...... for it's they that set the tone for what inexperienced young ladies wear. Most guys are just hormone crazed beings that will get excited over something no matter what the norm is. My grandfather used to tell me that when he was a boy they used to get excited over ankles. If it weren't so cold we might be better off in the long run to just go back to the buff..... everyone would get used to it and we'd not have this probllem..... at least that's what my nudest acquaintances tell me, and they should know.

My husband said something similar when we talked about this thread. Basically, his response was that an attractive women is going to get attention no matter what she has on. Period.

So that's it then?

Whatever she can get away with exposing until all the decency laws catch up with her?

I am married to a head turning blond who in her 60's still gets the looks of lust from men and even boys and the look of jealousy and envy from women. And she's not dressed like a floosey. In fact she does not wear the fashions she wore as a youth in the 1960's (old photos are quite sexy from the bouffant on down that is).

So are we to just twiddle our thumbs and shake our heads as the hem line of discretion (which has long surpassed the waistline) simply vanishes?

Oh well, says people like you and your husband.... what can we say or think or do?

I may not be the most innocent angel on the block but I know when its about time to get the angels on the block rallying for truth and decency.

Perhaps we should burn all of the dress shops that disagree with our point of view?

[Matthitjah]

A young woman dresses provocatively, goes out and encounters several young men. They all look, and when she leaves their presence, they all start discussing in great detail what they'd like to do with her if they could. Obviously, this is sin. But just who is responsible? The woman or the men. Obviously, had she not dressed as she did, the discussion never have started (at least about HER in particular), but then the men have the responsibility to exercise a certain degree of self control. Whom does God hold responsible?

I think one needs to define provocatively. bikini's are not really provocative to me, but that full length green silk dress that my wife used to wear just drove me over the edge. Excites me just to think about it. (hope it's OK to lust over your own wife) And that was back when I was about 23 or 24 years old, so it's not just my age.

We all have different tolerances and drawing lines in the sand in a free republic just isn't an easy thing to do. I do believe that the vast majority of women and men who dress toward the provocative side are doing so for attention....

Our society is kind of hyper sexed this time in our history and so if you want to blame anyone, you might attack our media and advertising...... for it's they that set the tone for what inexperienced young ladies wear. Most guys are just hormone crazed beings that will get excited over something no matter what the norm is. My grandfather used to tell me that when he was a boy they used to get excited over ankles. If it weren't so cold we might be better off in the long run to just go back to the buff..... everyone would get used to it and we'd not have this probllem..... at least that's what my nudest acquaintances tell me, and they should know.

OK...if I can see any part of her chest, or the dress qualifies as a belt, that's provocative. If her shorts get confused with her panties, that's provocative. If her shorts SHOW her panties, that's provocative. If her tukhus cheeks hang out of her shorts, that's provocative. If her pants are so tight they look like someone painted them on with an airbrush, that's provocative. If her clothing outlines her sexual area, that's provocative.

Men, you're not immune to this. If your pants show off ********, you need to consider changing. If your bare chest shows, you need to cover up, some women get excited over that.

These things should be obvious. I apologize in advance if I offend anyone, but since some have no clue what's wrong....

Perhaps you should lock yourself up in your own home and never go out? Yes, I see women dressed inappropriately all the time. It's my responsibility in a lost and fallen world to express Christ.

How's about we not let those dastardly women wear shorts in the summer?

Here's the Law of Christ though. If your eye offends you pluck it out.

[RedMomma]

That is why I want to go home! This world is filled up with this...

I so agree with fresno joe here and last post really made me laugh out loud hard rotfl belly laugh ty guys i needed that! God bless youns!!!

[Bold Believer]

A young woman dresses provocatively, goes out and encounters several young men. They all look, and when she leaves their presence, they all start discussing in great detail what they'd like to do with her if they could. Obviously, this is sin. But just who is responsible? The woman or the men. Obviously, had she not dressed as she did, the discussion never have started (at least about HER in particular), but then the men have the responsibility to exercise a certain degree of self control. Whom does God hold responsible?

I think one needs to define provocatively. bikini's are not really provocative to me, but that full length green silk dress that my wife used to wear just drove me over the edge. Excites me just to think about it. (hope it's OK to lust over your own wife) And that was back when I was about 23 or 24 years old, so it's not just my age.

We all have different tolerances and drawing lines in the sand in a free republic just isn't an easy thing to do. I do believe that the vast majority of women and men who dress toward the provocative side are doing so for attention....

Our society is kind of hyper sexed this time in our history and so if you want to blame anyone, you might attack our media and advertising...... for it's they that set the tone for what inexperienced young ladies wear. Most guys are just hormone crazed beings that will get excited over something no matter what the norm is. My grandfather used to tell me that when he was a boy they used to get excited over ankles. If it weren't so cold we might be better off in the long run to just go back to the buff..... everyone would get used to it and we'd not have this probllem..... at least that's what my nudest acquaintances tell me, and they should know.

OK...if I can see any part of her chest, or the dress qualifies as a belt, that's provocative. If her shorts get confused with her panties, that's provocative. If her shorts SHOW her panties, that's provocative. If her tukhus cheeks hang out of her shorts, that's provocative. If her pants are so tight they look like someone painted them on with an airbrush, that's provocative. If her clothing outlines her sexual area, that's provocative.

Men, you're not immune to this. If your pants show off ********, you need to consider changing. If your bare chest shows, you need to cover up, some women get excited over that.

These things should be obvious. I apologize in advance if I offend anyone, but since some have no clue what's wrong....

Perhaps you should lock yourself up in your own home and never go out? Yes, I see women dressed inappropriately all the time. It's my responsibility in a lost and fallen world to express Christ.

How's about we not let those dastardly women wear shorts in the summer?

Here's the Law of Christ though. If your eye offends you pluck it out.

In a proper society, decorum is maintained. When America was ruled by Christian thought, we had decorum. There was a standard and we for the most part abided by it. But now, anything goes in the name of alleged freedom. I have learned what I needed to know. You can lock the thread.

[ayin jade]

Im curious what standard you wish. You never explained how far you want women to go to dress. Give us a concrete example of what would be best for women to wear in your view. Be specific.

[oldzimm]

I am sure glad you guys are hammering what women should or should not wear and not men. I take part in 18th century reenactments, sometimes wearing a loincloth , of course with leggings and 18th century shirt. Believe me if I only wore a loincloth, I don't think I would be causing women to lust............ maybe

[Fez]

Im curious what standard you wish. You never explained how far you want women to go to dress. Give us a concrete example of what would be best for women to wear in your view. Be specific.

Well in Elizabethan England a flash of ankle under a long skirt was considered provocative.

I too am interested in the answer.

Do we impose law to impose decorum? Or do we use grace and run from temptation?

It is a very difficult subject to address. The mores and morals of different societies impose a plethora of challenges in trying to define "provocative".

[Matthitjah]

A young woman dresses provocatively, goes out and encounters several young men. They all look, and when she leaves their presence, they all start discussing in great detail what they'd like to do with her if they could. Obviously, this is sin. But just who is responsible? The woman or the men. Obviously, had she not dressed as she did, the discussion never have started (at least about HER in particular), but then the men have the responsibility to exercise a certain degree of self control. Whom does God hold responsible?

I think one needs to define provocatively. bikini's are not really provocative to me, but that full length green silk dress that my wife used to wear just drove me over the edge. Excites me just to think about it. (hope it's OK to lust over your own wife) And that was back when I was about 23 or 24 years old, so it's not just my age.

We all have different tolerances and drawing lines in the sand in a free republic just isn't an easy thing to do. I do believe that the vast majority of women and men who dress toward the provocative side are doing so for attention....

Our society is kind of hyper sexed this time in our history and so if you want to blame anyone, you might attack our media and advertising...... for it's they that set the tone for what inexperienced young ladies wear. Most guys are just hormone crazed beings that will get excited over something no matter what the norm is. My grandfather used to tell me that when he was a boy they used to get excited over ankles. If it weren't so cold we might be better off in the long run to just go back to the buff..... everyone would get used to it and we'd not have this probllem..... at least that's what my nudest acquaintances tell me, and they should know.

OK...if I can see any part of her chest, or the dress qualifies as a belt, that's provocative. If her shorts get confused with her panties, that's provocative. If her shorts SHOW her panties, that's provocative. If her tukhus cheeks hang out of her shorts, that's provocative. If her pants are so tight they look like someone painted them on with an airbrush, that's provocative. If her clothing outlines her sexual area, that's provocative.

Men, you're not immune to this. If your pants show off ********, you need to consider changing. If your bare chest shows, you need to cover up, some women get excited over that.

These things should be obvious. I apologize in advance if I offend anyone, but since some have no clue what's wrong....

Perhaps you should lock yourself up in your own home and never go out? Yes, I see women dressed inappropriately all the time. It's my responsibility in a lost and fallen world to express Christ.

How's about we not let those dastardly women wear shorts in the summer?

Here's the Law of Christ though. If your eye offends you pluck it out.

In a proper society, decorum is maintained. When America was ruled by Christian thought, we had decorum. There was a standard and we for the most part abided by it. But now, anything goes in the name of alleged freedom. I have learned what I needed to know. You can lock the thread.

I'm not locking any thread. I'm sorry that explaining yourself is really all that difficult, but you started the thread.

Explain how far the vice police should go please. Should we also circumsize women so that they won't experience pleasure during sex?