Immodesty and Lust - From a Man's Perspective

[TsukinoRei]

TR

 

I think you are missing my point.  I did not watch Sex in the City either....I mentioned it as a popular program the run of which portrayed women as lustful as any man

especially the blond woman whatever her name was.  Not the main character.

 

I don't need evidence about female sexuality...I am a female and I'm not dead.  Suffice it to say that IMO,  why compare?  As I stated, unless there has been some sort of

upset in the balance of testosterone,  the majority of it is not going to be found in women.  Exceptions not included because they are exceptions.

 

This is the 21st C...I'm aware of what you are presenting ... I haven't been hiding in a log cabin in the woods somewhere   although from time to time that does appeal to me

 

You have completely ignored the rest of my post to refresh my memory on what I already read.

 

I can read what you posted until my eyes are debilitated.  It's not going to help me change my behavior; it may actually encourage bad behavior.

 

AT any rate, I think this is going off topic and does not really address the op.

 

I'm not interested in all the facts that explain human behavior.  Those facts do not deal with sin but the Bible does......the facts were facts when the Bible was written.....God knew all about them......

 

How do you define lust?  How do you define attraction?  Are they synonyms or intrinsically different?  Are they caused by the same biological and mental processes?  Is the difference situational or is there something more in your understanding?  What in the Bible causes you to believe that women are not prone to lust? 

[nebula]

 

 

All this talk about men lusting after women completely ignores the fact that women also lust after men.

 

Perhaps to a degree. But women are more turned on by touch - physical and emotional - than sight.

 

 

Typically this is true. But not always.

I've read studies that say typically women are super talkative needing what 50,000 words a day while men only really need say 20,000 words a day. I think in my marriage the opposite is true sometimes.

 

Typically in conflict a man will withdraw and a woman will try to engage to resolve the issue. In my marriage I typically respond by trying to engage and my wife typically withdraws in conflict.

So perhaps the whole concept of men are the ones that primarily deal with lust could be off in some cases.

God bless,

GE

 

 

Yes, that's why I said, "Perhaps to a degree."

 

But your explanation is worth noting, nonetheless.

[enoob57]

Lust is the desire for the pleasure God has put within creation without the specific order in which that pleasure was to be arrived at...

another words to enjoy the blessing of God without submitting to the authority of God!  Love, Steven

[nebula]

 

 

All this talk about men lusting after women completely ignores the fact that women also lust after men.

 

Perhaps to a degree. But women are more turned on by touch - physical and emotional - than sight.

 

Not necessarily Nebula.  Not at all.  

 

That's why I said, "Perhaps to a degree."

[TsukinoRei]

Lust is the desire for the pleasure God has put within creation without the specific order in which that pleasure was to be arrived at...

another words to enjoy the blessing of God without submitting to the authority of God!  Love, Steven

 

That's a good working definition.  I especially like that it can be applied to more things than just sexual pleasure.  Thank you Steven!

[Sevenseas]

 

 

 

All this talk about men lusting after women completely ignores the fact that women also lust after men.

 

Perhaps to a degree. But women are more turned on by touch - physical and emotional - than sight.

 

Not necessarily Nebula.  Not at all.  

 

That's why I said, "Perhaps to a degree."

 

 

 

Gotcha.  Sorry I missed it.  Thanks

[Sevenseas]

 

TR

 

I think you are missing my point.  I did not watch Sex in the City either....I mentioned it as a popular program the run of which portrayed women as lustful as any man

especially the blond woman whatever her name was.  Not the main character.

 

I don't need evidence about female sexuality...I am a female and I'm not dead.  Suffice it to say that IMO,  why compare?  As I stated, unless there has been some sort of

upset in the balance of testosterone,  the majority of it is not going to be found in women.  Exceptions not included because they are exceptions.

 

This is the 21st C...I'm aware of what you are presenting ... I haven't been hiding in a log cabin in the woods somewhere   although from time to time that does appeal to me

 

You have completely ignored the rest of my post to refresh my memory on what I already read.

 

I can read what you posted until my eyes are debilitated.  It's not going to help me change my behavior; it may actually encourage bad behavior.

 

AT any rate, I think this is going off topic and does not really address the op.

 

I'm not interested in all the facts that explain human behavior.  Those facts do not deal with sin but the Bible does......the facts were facts when the Bible was written.....God knew all about them......

 

How do you define lust?  How do you define attraction?  Are they synonyms or intrinsically different?  Are they caused by the same biological and mental processes?  Is the difference situational or is there something more in your understanding?  What in the Bible causes you to believe that women are not prone to lust? 

 

 

 

I would be interested in defining a response to what I actually posted.

 

I have a dictionary for definition and experience to light the slippery slope.

 

How do you define scripture in light of all the excuses the world makes or do you define the world by scripture...I do the latter.

 

The parameters of sin are easily defined by personal reactions to what we do unless our conscience is so seared over we can talk ourselves into absolutely anything.

 

I don't need a 'philosophical' discussion on sin.  I don't need to make diaphanous parameters for hormonal urges vs lust.  What I do need, is a way OUT of that.

 

The point I made, was that there is nothing new in any of these discussions.  They may not have had neutron microscopes when God handed down the 10 commandments from

Mt Sinai but the principals were in place then and they are in place now.

 

Point being that God still offers the same solutions.  Lust does not have to be sexual.  This, is a good working definition IMO:   a passionate or overmastering desire or craving 

[TsukinoRei]

 

 

TR

 

I think you are missing my point.  I did not watch Sex in the City either....I mentioned it as a popular program the run of which portrayed women as lustful as any man

especially the blond woman whatever her name was.  Not the main character.

 

I don't need evidence about female sexuality...I am a female and I'm not dead.  Suffice it to say that IMO,  why compare?  As I stated, unless there has been some sort of

upset in the balance of testosterone,  the majority of it is not going to be found in women.  Exceptions not included because they are exceptions.

 

This is the 21st C...I'm aware of what you are presenting ... I haven't been hiding in a log cabin in the woods somewhere   although from time to time that does appeal to me

 

You have completely ignored the rest of my post to refresh my memory on what I already read.

 

I can read what you posted until my eyes are debilitated.  It's not going to help me change my behavior; it may actually encourage bad behavior.

 

AT any rate, I think this is going off topic and does not really address the op.

 

I'm not interested in all the facts that explain human behavior.  Those facts do not deal with sin but the Bible does......the facts were facts when the Bible was written.....God knew all about them......

 

How do you define lust?  How do you define attraction?  Are they synonyms or intrinsically different?  Are they caused by the same biological and mental processes?  Is the difference situational or is there something more in your understanding?  What in the Bible causes you to believe that women are not prone to lust? 

 

 

 

I would be interested in defining a response to what I actually posted.

 

I have a dictionary for definition and experience to light the slippery slope.

 

How do you define scripture in light of all the excuses the world makes or do you define the world by scripture...I do the latter.

 

The parameters of sin are easily defined by personal reactions to what we do unless our conscience is so seared over we can talk ourselves into absolutely anything.

 

I don't need a 'philosophical' discussion on sin.  I don't need to make diaphanous parameters for hormonal urges vs lust.  What I do need, is a way OUT of that.

 

The point I made, was that there is nothing new in any of these discussions.  They may not have had neutron microscopes when God handed down the 10 commandments from

Mt Sinai but the principals were in place then and they are in place now.

 

Point being that God still offers the same solutions.  Lust does not have to be sexual.  This, is a good working definition IMO:   a passionate or overmastering desire or craving 

 

 

You seem to equate 'natural' with 'not sinful'.  I do not.  The Bible makes it clear that part of the battle is against our own flesh.  What in the Bible causes you to believe that women are not prone to lust? What leads you to believe that men and women should be held to different standards of behaviour toward one another in the prevention of sin?  You speak as though all you are doing is submitting to the final authority of scripture, but you don't point to any scripture.

[other one]

you guys are beginning to make me understand why Islamic societies put women in burkas

[JohnD]

I know that we sometimes come across as blaming women when we are not. The fact of the matter is we cannot help the way we are wired (men and women) but we can help the opposite gender which is essentially what chivalry was.

 

Protocols in place and agreed upon behaviors / manners and attire.