Who is responsible in situations like this?

[winsomebulldog]

We live in a society that tries to make men act like women and women like men.

Women don't "get" it that men are stimulated visually. They dress for attention, and they dress to compete in beauty with other women.

Women do not "get" it that the low cut, the midriff exposure, the high leg exposure, the skimpy outfit, the tight otfit, the slits in skirts, etc. cause a visual stimulation in men that is akin to when a man touches her thigh.

While we cannot control dress codes, we can do what we can to educate the women, and teens, on the visual triggers that stimulate men, and how strong that stimulation is.

THANK YOU !

Yet Neb still has not said that the women are in any way more "responsible" than the men who are "stimulated" by what they are wearing.

We live in a society that tries to make men act like women and women like men.

Women don't "get" it that men are stimulated visually. They dress for attention, and they dress to compete in beauty with other women.

Women do not "get" it that the low cut, the midriff exposure, the high leg exposure, the skimpy outfit, the tight otfit, the slits in skirts, etc. cause a visual stimulation in men that is akin to when a man touches her thigh.

While we cannot control dress codes, we can do what we can to educate the women, and teens, on the visual triggers that stimulate men, and how strong that stimulation is.

THANK YOU !

So John, should we educate them and express Christ or should we regulate them?

I know personally, at my home Church, that we have women that will step in and tell these young women that they are dressing inappropriately and they are doing so with Grace. I, myself, have stepped in with some of the young men and advised them that their behavior is not what God would expect of them. Sadly, society has an impact all day long seven days a week. We have maybe an hour on a Sunday. Thank God for His Grace. Meanwhile, we need to express Christ any chance we get.

The problem is in the heart not on the exterior and the approach must be done with Grace and Love, not the condemnation and scorn that I discern, and maybe I'm wrong, has been advanced on women in this thread.

That's why I asked in anyone knew what the purpose of correction was within the Body.

Well of course this is the way we ought to proceed. And thank you for doing so AND with the appropriate approach (women with women and men with men). For this is good and right and how we effect change in the name of the Savior. The difference in the way the Sanhedrin addressed sin and Yeshua (Jesus) addressed sin was the former laid heavy burdens and guilt upon the sinner... the latter took the burden upon himself and said "go and sin no more." The first was enslaving the second freeing. Not to lambaste men and women for their weakness or ignorance and sin... to help them by identifying the problem they are oblivious to or apathetic to or even ambivalent to and show them the cure and the way of love and compassion for their fellow man and woman. That's in the name (intention / meaning) of the Savior.

I don't think anyone here has ever suggested anything other than this. But the point of the OP was the responsibility of the scantily clad woman vs. the responsibility of the lusting men. In the scenario put forward, the reason why the woman is dressed provocatively is never brought into question. Indeed, it does not matter if the woman is dressed in revealing or provocative clothing because she is intentionally trying to entice men or because she merely doesn't "get it" about how her appearance affects men who look at her. The question was and is, "who is responsible?" And the answer still is, both the woman and the men/man.

I think all of us would agree with both Neb and Matthitjah's responses, in that it is clear that instruction based in love is needed, at least as far as our fellow Christians goes. Our young women need to be taught how to behave with propriety in all the aspects of their lives. But it does not stop there. It isn't just the young women who need to be trained. It is the young men, as well. And that's the point I have been trying to make.

Whether intentional or not, it has seemed that some of the comments being made have attempted to dump all the responsibility into the lap of women. "She ought to dress less provocatively." "She's dressed like a tart." The implication being that if she was just wearing more clothes then the poor men wouldn't have been led to ogle her and then lust after her. So where is the training for the men? Where is the outrage that they not only looked on her with lust, but then behaved like real jerks by egging one another on and taking it to the next level by openly discussing what they'd like to "do" with her?

Not to start some kind of argument between "us" and "them" (me being a woman and all) but this is precisely what annoys many of us women. The behavior of the group of men in the OP's scenario is inexcusable. Yet it has long been ignored as "men just being men." And that' what my husband was saying. If you've got a group of men who are the sort to be this vulgar in public, then it wouldn't matter how many clothes the woman was or was not wearing.

Bad behavior is bad behavior. And no matter how many ways we strive to find the "why" of the situation, the basic truth remains the same. Both the men and the woman in the opening scenario are guilty of their own sin. Anything beyond that is another topic entirely.

[ayin jade]

Whether intentional or not, it has seemed that some of the comments being made have attempted to dump all the responsibility into the lap of women. "She ought to dress less provocatively." "She's dressed like a tart." The implication being that if she was just wearing more clothes then the poor men wouldn't have been led to ogle her and then lust after her. So where is the training for the men? Where is the outrage that they not only looked on her with lust, but then behaved like real jerks by egging one another on and taking it to the next level by openly discussing what they'd like to "do" with her?

Not to start some kind of argument between "us" and "them" (me being a woman and all) but this is precisely what annoys many of us women. The behavior of the group of men in the OP's scenario is inexcusable. Yet it has long been ignored as "men just being men." And that' what my husband was saying. If you've got a group of men who are the sort to be this vulgar in public, then it wouldn't matter how many clothes the woman was or was not wearing.

Bad behavior is bad behavior. And no matter how many ways we strive to find the "why" of the situation, the basic truth remains the same. Both the men and the woman in the opening scenario are guilty of their own sin. Anything beyond that is another topic entirely.

This reminded me of an incident years ago at my husbands workplace. This is a medical building pharmacy, next to a prestigious hospital. All the men involved are in the medical field with college level education. My husband called me for some reason then said the men are talking about the sex they have with their wives and getting into details. He didnt know how much he should say and he was embarrassed but felt like he needed to join in the conversation. I said what??? Why do you have to say anything? Our private life is not open to locker room topics.

In that instance, no woman was dressing provocatively. No woman was even around. This was a case of husbands openly discussing things they shouldnt ever do regarding the women they supposedly loved. Who gets the blame here? In this case it is wholly on the men.