What do you regard as being appropriate dress for women?
#31
(02-26-2021, 12:36 AM)PilgrimMichelangelo Wrote:
(02-25-2021, 09:16 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(02-25-2021, 06:28 PM)ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident Wrote: I know it's all the rage to bash on the 1950s, but I think it's a bit of a strawman.

The 1950s weren't the height of modesty.  They're just the last time the average person's attire could be called modest.  The preceding 194 decades were also pretty modest.

Yeah...those 1950s were so horrible...they weren't teaching kids about sex and mutilating their genitilia like the 2020s!

So glad people with uteruses can now wear dungarees and get their asses kicked in sports by trans-women!

The idealization of the 50's by traditionalists in both traditions, Catholic and Orthodox, and by the anti-tradition of Protestantism is an interesting phenomenon.  Especially since I grew up in a 1950's inspired Baptist household and can tell you it only furthered my own personal Gnosticism. I.e. You learn very quickly to have a public, pure, denounce- every-sin-especially-those-you-fall-into-yourself, judgmental, self-righteous façade, but in private you learn to indulge yourself in all the sins and values you publicly denounce and thus fulfill the desires of the libertine.  Ancient Gnosticism usually ran in these two categories as well, yet we have unified the two in American Religion and public life. It just so happens that nowadays the Libertine side of most people has won out over the Puritan side and has supplanted it (while absorbing the vituperation of the Puritan side) as public morality. 

To idealize and therefore idolize any age as the "golden age" of any particular time in our fallen human history is to deny the very real problems faced by those people who lived it.  Very easily the predominating values of the 1950's could be seen as the Gnostic Puritan side of Post-War America while the 1960's reaction to those values could be seen as the Gnostic Libertine side of that era. 

I recently finished Harold Bloom's The American Religion: The Emergence of the Post Christian Nation, which is highly illuminating regarding our national tendency towards Gnosticism.

Your Gnosticism had nothing to do with the fact that you grew up in the 1950s, but that you grew up in a Baptist household.

There are plenty of people who have the exact same stories in the 80s, 90s, and 00s. Baptist-Protestantism is a religion for hypocrites. I never met a Baptist who wasn't a walking hypocrite Gnostic like you described.
[-] The following 2 users Like austenbosten's post:
  • IudicaMe, PilgrimMichelangelo
Reply
#32
It's rash judgment to assume that everyone who has a disdain for a sin is themselves guilty of that same sin.

Plenty of faithful married folks hate adultery without ever committing it.
[-] The following 2 users Like ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident's post:
  • IudicaMe, jack89
Reply
#33
(02-26-2021, 07:17 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(02-26-2021, 12:36 AM)PilgrimMichelangelo Wrote:
(02-25-2021, 09:16 PM)austenbosten Wrote:
(02-25-2021, 06:28 PM)ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident Wrote: I know it's all the rage to bash on the 1950s, but I think it's a bit of a strawman.

The 1950s weren't the height of modesty.  They're just the last time the average person's attire could be called modest.  The preceding 194 decades were also pretty modest.

Yeah...those 1950s were so horrible...they weren't teaching kids about sex and mutilating their genitilia like the 2020s!

So glad people with uteruses can now wear dungarees and get their asses kicked in sports by trans-women!

The idealization of the 50's by traditionalists in both traditions, Catholic and Orthodox, and by the anti-tradition of Protestantism is an interesting phenomenon.  Especially since I grew up in a 1950's inspired Baptist household and can tell you it only furthered my own personal Gnosticism. I.e. You learn very quickly to have a public, pure, denounce- every-sin-especially-those-you-fall-into-yourself, judgmental, self-righteous façade, but in private you learn to indulge yourself in all the sins and values you publicly denounce and thus fulfill the desires of the libertine.  Ancient Gnosticism usually ran in these two categories as well, yet we have unified the two in American Religion and public life. It just so happens that nowadays the Libertine side of most people has won out over the Puritan side and has supplanted it (while absorbing the vituperation of the Puritan side) as public morality. 

To idealize and therefore idolize any age as the "golden age" of any particular time in our fallen human history is to deny the very real problems faced by those people who lived it.  Very easily the predominating values of the 1950's could be seen as the Gnostic Puritan side of Post-War America while the 1960's reaction to those values could be seen as the Gnostic Libertine side of that era. 

I recently finished Harold Bloom's The American Religion: The Emergence of the Post Christian Nation, which is highly illuminating regarding our national tendency towards Gnosticism.

Your Gnosticism had nothing to do with the fact that you grew up in the 1950s, but that you grew up in a Baptist household.

There are plenty of people who have the exact same stories in the 80s, 90s, and 00s.  Baptist-Protestantism is a religion for hypocrites.  I never met a Baptist who wasn't a walking hypocrite Gnostic like you described.

Hahahahaahahahah I actually laughed out loud at your response, which I agree with by the way. I am a Millenial--a product of the 1990's but I grew up in 1950's modeled and inspired Baptist household, complete with stay at home co-dependent emotional mother and narcissistic patriarchal macho-man self-righteous hypocrite father, whom I struggle daily to love (and forgive). 

I completely agree with your assessment of Baptist-Protestantism, which is a religion of hypocrites par excellence. Thus there was no small freak out when I announced my Baptism in to the Orthodox Church to which reply I got a prescribed Baptist style intervention the night before my Baptism, Chrismation and First Communion...even though I was 21 years old at the time. (And therefore an Adult).

My parents were honestly just trying to do their best with what they had inherited. I was a product of their struggle with inherited religion and adopted social customs outside of the time period we inhabit. After years of sifting through my acquired emotional, mental and spiritual baggage not to mention a nearly two years of professional counseling I can tell you the road remains rocky to just becoming a regular non-judgemental, mentally stable human being, who is not suicidal all the time because of Baptist guilt and crazy notions of WASP style Gnostic arrogance.
"Orthodoxy is not so much a matter of the head. It is something living, and it's of the heart." --Bl. Seraphim of Platina

"Beauty will save the world." --Fyodor Dostoevsky

"You shall know the truth, and it will make you odd." --Flannery O'Connor
[-] The following 1 user Likes PilgrimMichelangelo's post:
  • austenbosten
Reply
#34
I am making it a point to avoid the social customs of the present time period. I will behave like a gentlemen. I will be polite to strangers and I will limit my remarks when I have nothing good to say. And avoid using profanity.

Being Catholic, I have an appropriate level of guilt and shame. Making a good Confession means a good examination of conscience. I can't ignore my conscience.

My parents were good people - not perfect. My mother stayed at home and my dad did what he was supposed to do. It was a normal life.
Reply
#35
(02-02-2021, 10:19 AM)ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident Wrote:
(02-02-2021, 09:48 AM)jack89 Wrote: Modest and dignified behavior is also a must, for woman and men.

Dress standards cut both ways.  For a man, it's less about covering up and more about dressing appropriately to support his ability to get a job and provide.  This means no shorts or casual wear (except when exercising or otherwise necessary for the task at hand), no unkempt/long/extreme hair, no tattoos or excessive jewelry, no ungroomed/untrimmed facial hair, etc.

 Ehhh, I can't say no shorts for men. My father is a very devout Catholic and he wears shorts--basically "dad shorts" that go down to his knees and are not tight. :) Honestly, when it comes to shorts/pants/skirts, I don't have a problem with any of it as long as they're not too tight/too short. My skirts are always at least as long as my longest finger (Catholic school dress code right there), and usually at least knee length. I generally wear only skirts and dresses to Mass, unless we have snow and I have to dig out the car. Then I get out my one pair of dress pants!

A note about skirt length: it depends on your height. I'm not that tall so floor-length skirts or maxis, or even tea length, can make me look like Rosie the Hobbit wearing one of Ewoyn's dresses. :) You don't want to wear clothes that make you look dumpier than you are!
Reply
#36
I don't, usually, give much regard to appropriate standards of dress for women. Maybe because I have no daughters and a wife who is a paragon of humility and modesty. There are enough logs in my own eye, that considering what might be appropriate for some other woman is not the best use of my time. Still, if my wife were to suddenly develop a taste for the immodest, I would know it when I saw it.
"O Charles the Great, we beseech you to make that day arrive soon when society, re-established at its foundations, will cease asking liberty and order from the revolutions."
Prayer to Charlemagne the Great (de confirmatione cultus), by Dom Prosper Guéranger
Reply
#37
(02-02-2021, 10:57 AM)KyPerson Wrote: I work on a college campus and all the women students, and I mean ALL of them wear leggings.
I don't believe that. There are many Muslim women students who wear long dresses or modest Muslim clothing for women.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)