# Are you a jealous person?



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.

The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Its hard for me to vote as I once was jealous when I was much younger, but now not much. 

I am not keen on the opposite sex checking my husband out, but he doesn't do things that would invite this anyway. If he needed a lot of female attention and affirmation that would concern me, but I wouldn't have married him anyway.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

BioFury said:


> Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> 
> The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


I'm not jealous when a date or partner gets attention. I get jealous when that date or partner RETURNS the attention.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Lila said:


> I'm not jealous when a date or partner gets attention. I get jealous when that date or partner RETURNS the attention.


Maybe it's not a matter of being jealous. Maybe it's more about knowing what is correct behavior.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Lila said:


> BioFury said:
> 
> 
> > Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> ...


Exactly. The scenario doesn't lend itself to a cut and dried answer.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

LOL! No.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

Lila said:


> I'm not jealous when a date or partner gets attention. I get jealous when that date or partner RETURNS the attention.


I'm not talking about a partner just minding their own business, wearing reasonably modest clothing. They're wearing something revealing - compression shorts, yoga pants, going shirtless/topless... Dressing in a revealing manner is a primary way in which people seek attention and affirmation. So I would consider it a form of returning the attention, in that the attention was solicited, albeit passively.



personofinterest said:


> Exactly. The scenario doesn't lend itself to a cut and dried answer.


I'm open to editing the litmus, if you have a superior format to recommend.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

Diana7 said:


> Its hard for me to vote as I once was jealous when I was much younger, but now not much.
> 
> *I am not keen on the opposite sex checking my husband out*, but he doesn't do things that would invite this anyway. If he needed a lot of female attention and affirmation that would concern me, but I wouldn't have married him anyway.


I would put you in the jealous category. Merely because nothing happens to provoked jealousy, doesn't mean it is absent from within you


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

NextTimeAround said:


> Maybe it's not a matter of being jealous. Maybe it's more about knowing what is correct behavior.





personofinterest said:


> Exactly. The scenario doesn't lend itself to a cut and dried answer.


Yep. I don't even like it when a man I'm with has the wandering eye. HUGE turn off!!


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

BioFury said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not jealous when a date or partner gets attention. I get jealous when that date or partner RETURNS the attention.
> ...


If they are going out of their way to get attention from others, and it's not for my benefit, then yes that's a problem. That's a narcsisst and not someone I want to have in my life. 

Now if they are wearing something or taking something off for MY pleasure (even if in public), I would be ecstatic. 

I think it's all about intent.


----------



## Girl_power (Aug 11, 2018)

I would say that I am jealous. not all the time and not for every situation. But I think a little bit of jealousy is good in a relationship.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally borne of insecurity.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally* borne of insecurity.*


If the idea of losing something doesn't scare you, then it isn't important to you.

Someone who desires my partner is seeking to take what's mine. It's an army outside the walls. You'll forgive me if I close the gates.

I don't understand why people delude themselves into thinking that their relationship with their partner is invulnerable.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

BioFury said:


> If the idea of losing something doesn't scare you, then it isn't important to you.
> 
> Someone who desires my partner is seeking to take what's mine. It's an army outside the walls. You'll forgive me if I close the gates.
> 
> I don't understand why people delude themselves into thinking that their relationship with their partner is invulnerable.


I have an expensive car and sometimes I find people staring at it. I don’t get jealous, I don’t lock it away.
I’ve dated hot women and seen guys staring at them and on occasion trying to hit on them. I didn’t get jealous. I don’t own them and I didn’t ask my dates to dress less provocatively and I expected them to handle any situation that arose appropriately. 
You are showing a lot of insecurities in your posts on this thread. Is your partner out of your league looks wise? Do you have her on a tight leash?
Every woman,especially beautiful ones learn from a young age how to behave when men are hitting on her or just giving her their unwanted attention. As @Lila said if your partner returns the attention then you have a problem. 
Is this happening to you?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

If my wife ever finds someone she prefers to me, I *want* her to leave me for that person. If I'm not the person she wants most, then I'd rather be with someone else. I don't want to be anyone's second choice. 

If she told me tomorrow that she had found someone she wanted more that me, I'd help arrange a fair divorce. No hard feelings. It would be much worse if I found out later that she had been putting up with me all this time. (when my father was very old he told me that he never really loved my mother, but wished he had married a different woman he knew.)






BioFury said:


> If the idea of losing something doesn't scare you, then it isn't important to you.
> 
> Someone who desires my partner is seeking to take what's mine. It's an army outside the walls. You'll forgive me if I close the gates.
> 
> I don't understand why people delude themselves into thinking that their relationship with their partner is invulnerable.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> Lila said:
> 
> 
> > I'm not jealous when a date or partner gets attention. I get jealous when that date or partner RETURNS the attention.
> ...


The underlying and loud and clear message here is that women should not wear revealing clothing. And if they do, they should expect to get hit on and they should expect their spouse to be angry.

What does that sound like to YOU?


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

Andy1001 said:


> I have an expensive car and sometimes I find people staring at it. I don’t get jealous, I don’t lock it away.
> I’ve dated hot women and seen guys staring at them and on occasion trying to hit on them. I didn’t get jealous. I don’t own them and I didn’t ask my dates to dress less provocatively and I expected them to handle any situation that arose appropriately.
> You are showing a lot of insecurities in your posts on this thread. Is your partner out of your league looks wise? Do you have her on a tight leash?
> Every woman,especially beautiful ones learn from a young age how to behave when men are hitting on her or just giving her their unwanted attention. As @Lila said if your partner returns the attention then you have a problem.
> Is this happening to you?


The people appreciating your car, are not car thieves. If they were, I dare say you would experience some insecurity.

I don't have a partner. And, I don't know. I was homeschooled, so I've never had enough social interaction to establish how attractive I am, or am not. But it doesn't really matter in relation to the discussion. Being a perfect 10 doesn't mean your relationships are invulnerable. All it means is that should your current relationship fail, you won't have trouble finding a new partner. And if your market value is the "security" you have in your current relationship, then it's a fraud. It's merely displacing the fear of losing them, with the assurance that you could find someone else if you needed to.

"No, I'm not worried about losing you, or other men trying to take you away from me. Because if it happens, I can find someone else - because I'm hot." 

Not exactly true love.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally* borne of insecurity.*
> ...


It sounds like you have unhealthy views of women, relationships, and control/ownership.

Perhaps you should investigate these ossues.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> If the idea of losing something doesn't scare you, then it isn't important to you.


Oy. My former therapist would have a blast with that statement! I am reminded of the scene from the show Firefly. I'm not so scared of losing something that I am not going to have it. The notion that fear of loss demonstrates importance is about as mentally unhealthy as it is possible to get.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> The people appreciating your car, are not car thieves. If they were, I dare say you would experience some insecurity.
> 
> I don't have a partner. And, I don't know. I was homeschooled, so I've never had enough social interaction to establish how attractive I am, or am not. But it doesn't really matter in relation to the discussion. Being a perfect 10 doesn't mean your relationships are invulnerable. All it means is that should your current relationship fail, you won't have trouble finding a new partner. And if your market value is the "security" you have in your current relationship, then it's a fraud. It's merely displacing the fear of losing them, with the assurance that you could find someone else if you needed to.
> 
> ...


What one does with vulnerability speaks volumes about their confidence and self assurance. Hotness has little to do with it. Guarding is indicative of not valuing oneself much, it seems to me.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> The underlying and loud and clear message here is that women should not wear revealing clothing. And if they do, they should expect to get hit on and they should expect their spouse to be angry.


What DOES one wear to yoga or cycling, I have to wonder. 

The revealing clothing thing is a total red herring. A person who is looking for an excuse to feel threatened OR entitled will find anything short of a hijab revealing.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Not to mention the tone of the OPs comments regarding dress smack of rape victim blaming. It's actually a bit gross.

If I dress sexy FOR MY HUSBAND and some other dude makes a crass remark, my husband certainly wouldn't blame ME. 

Because he's healthy.

And yes, he was cheated on. It's just not how he defines himself the way so many online men seem to.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

BioFury said:


> If the idea of losing something doesn't scare you, then it isn't important to you.
> 
> Someone who desires my partner is seeking to take what's mine. It's an army outside the walls. You'll forgive me if I close the gates.
> 
> I don't understand why people delude themselves into thinking that their relationship with their partner is invulnerable.


Now we have arrived at the title of this thread. Here is the deal. Your relationship does not exist in a vacuum. You are surrounded by people of different genders, orientation, socio-economic power, and so on, in short attracted and attractive people. There is nothing you can do to limit the access to and of those people. What you can do is be the person that your partner desires most. 

Would you not need to be so defensive if you understood that your spouse is not a possession?
Do you still need an answer to your poll?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally borne of insecurity.


I've always had to shake my head at folks who think that jealousy is indicative of love and caring.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

BioFury said:


> The people appreciating your car, are not car thieves. If they were, I dare say you would experience some insecurity.
> 
> I don't have a partner. And, I don't know. I was homeschooled, so I've never had enough social interaction to establish how attractive I am, or am not. But it doesn't really matter in relation to the discussion. Being a perfect 10 doesn't mean your relationships are invulnerable. All it means is that should your current relationship fail, you won't have trouble finding a new partner. And if your market value is the "security" you have in your current relationship, then it's a fraud. It's merely displacing the fear of losing them, with the assurance that you could find someone else if you needed to.
> 
> ...


So what are you suggesting?
I got married last year,do you think I should stop my wife from going to the store in case some handsome bag boy talks her into running off with him?
She works in a gym,my gym. She wears T-shirt’s and sometimes very tight yoga pants. Should I insist she wears a hoodie and loose dungarees instead?
Because I know my value and what I bring to my marriage I don’t get jealous of anyone who may “covet” my wife.She knows I love her and she loves me. 
I say this gently,you may want to seek out some counseling for your own sake. You don’t have a partner and your paranoia means that you don’t trust any woman anyway. This is not a healthy way to live.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally borne of insecurity.
> ...


I know. It's like they've never heard of stalkers and serial killers lolol


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> The underlying and loud and clear message here is that women should not wear revealing clothing. And if they do, they should expect to get hit on and they should expect their spouse to be angry.
> 
> What does that sound like to YOU?


I realize the post could be construed to be exclusively directed at women, merely because their clothing is typically more revealing than men's. But that was not my intent. If the shoe fits...

This isn't really the purpose for the thread, so I'm hesitant to comment on this, but yes, what purpose does revealing clothing serve? It entices sexual interest. Most men's shirts are cut across the throat, while a woman's shirt is cut down towards the middle of her sternum. For what purpose? Better air circulation? Lighter weight? Or to show her breasts?

But, once again, I don't mean to pick on women, and women's clothing isn't the purpose for the thread. If they come out with men's pants that have his nuts hanging out the bottom, I'll say something about that too :grin2:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> I realize the post could be construed to be exclusively directed at women, merely because their clothing is typically more revealing than men's. But that was not my intent. If the shoe fits...
> 
> This isn't really the purpose for the thread, so I'm hesitant to comment on this, but yes, what purpose does revealing clothing serve? It entices sexual interest. Most men's shirts are cut across the throat, while a woman's shirt is cut down towards the middle of her sternum. For what purpose? Better air circulation? Lighter weight? Or to show her breasts?
> 
> But, once again, I don't mean to pick on women, and women's clothing isn't the purpose for the thread. If they come out with men's pants that have his nuts hanging out the bottom, I'll say something about that too :grin2:







I dunno. I just feel like the song fits.

What you call revealing, I don't. Yoga pants? Really? They tend to be GREAT for ... yoga! They are also very comfortable. And if *I* want to look good for *me* Imma gonna.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > The underlying and loud and clear message here is that women should not wear revealing clothing. And if they do, they should expect to get hit on and they should expect their spouse to be angry.
> ...


You just keep proving my point.

Oh, and I wear a size 7 shoe. I also dress pretty modestly outside the house. The good stuff only comes out when it's just hubby and me.

But of course, you aren't biased AT ALL are ya...


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> What DOES one wear to yoga or cycling, I have to wonder.
> 
> The revealing clothing thing is a total red herring. A person who is looking for an excuse to feel threatened OR entitled will find anything short of a hijab revealing.













Practical and safe :smile2:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Tiggy! said:


> Practical and safe :smile2:


BUT. Wait. A headstand in this would NOT be modest OR discreet. Just saying. :wink2:


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

She's hot! :laugh:


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> BUT. Wait. A headstand in this would NOT be modest OR discreet. Just saying. :wink2:


She's got a burkini underneath, of course.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Mr. Nail said:


> Now we have arrived at the title of this thread. Here is the deal. Your relationship does not exist in a vacuum. You are surrounded by people of different genders, orientation, socio-economic power, and so on, in short attracted and attractive people. There is nothing you can do to limit the access to and of those people. What you can do is be the person that your partner desires most.
> 
> Would you not need to be so defensive if you understood that your spouse is not a possession?
> Do you still need an answer to your poll?


Yah, ma dude.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> BUT. Wait. A headstand in this would NOT be modest OR discreet. Just saying. :wink2:













It comes with the matching underwear silly :laugh:

Hot yoga's now free, and cycling and your reputation has never been safer.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> Not to mention the tone of the OPs comments regarding dress smack of rape victim blaming. It's actually a bit gross.


Watch it. You are going into over-sensitive radical feminist land here. Don't you know that the message that women SEND with their attire and behavior is MEANT for that? I mean, really.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Tiggy! said:


> It comes with the matching underwear silly :laugh:
> 
> Hot yoga's now free.


I can't quite wrap my head around down-dog with that waste band.


----------



## Girl_power (Aug 11, 2018)

personofinterest said:


> He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally borne of insecurity.




I disagree. I think a negative emotion can be turned into a positive situation. 
It’s important to know that someone can “take” your spouse away. That you can’t take them for granted. It’s a good reminder. People get too comfortable and lazy in relationships. When I see a girl checking out or flirting with my man, I do get a little jealous... but at the same time I think to myself... I’m going to take him home and remind him why he choose me.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> Tiggy! said:
> 
> 
> > It comes with the matching underwear silly <a href="http://talkaboutmarriage.com/images/TAMarriage_2015/smilies/tango_face_smile_big.png" border="0" alt="" title="Laugh" ></a>
> ...


It's been my experience among certain types that if they are hyper-legalistoc about modesty, they won't do yoga out of fear that they might channel a demon lol


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> What DOES one wear to yoga or cycling, I have to wonder.
> 
> The revealing clothing thing is a total red herring. A person who is looking for an excuse to feel threatened OR entitled will find anything short of a hijab revealing.


This thread is quickly going off the rails, but I'm game.

That's a strawman argument. Implying that anyone who thinks yoga pants, that display the near exact likeness of your nude body, is advocating burkas, is beyond ridiculous.



personofinterest said:


> Not to mention the tone of the OPs comments regarding dress smack of rape victim blaming. It's actually a bit gross.
> 
> If I dress sexy FOR MY HUSBAND and some other dude makes a crass remark, my husband certainly wouldn't blame ME.
> 
> ...


*sigh* I understand that we have the compulsion to dramatize and slightly over-extend positions that we disagree with, but common.

With regard to victim blaming, if I wave my hand in front of an aggressive dog, and it bites, who's fault is it? The dogs. But does the semantics of "who's fault" it is, change the fact that my hand is now torn apart? Would it not make sense, if my goal is to avoid being bitten, to avoid sticking my hand in their faces? Would you also not counsel your children to avoid aggravating aggressive dogs, rather than do so anyway because they "have a right" to do what they want, and it would be the dog fault if they got bitten?

"You have the right to pet whatever dog you want Johnny. And if one of them bites you, it's the dogs problem not yours."


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Girl_power said:


> I disagree. I think a negative emotion can be turned into a positive situation.
> It’s important to know that someone can “take” your spouse away. That you can’t take them for granted. It’s a good reminder. People get too comfortable and lazy in relationships. When I see a girl checking out or flirting with my man, I do get a little jealous... but at the same time I think to myself... I’m going to take him home and remind him why he choose me.


People do all of the things you say. But I think fear of loss is a sad motivation for being a loving human being.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> I can't quite wrap my head around down-dog with that waste band.


You shouldn't be doing that immodest pose in the first place.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think some clarification is needed on "revealing" clothing. I consider clothing worn by my wife in order to be attractive to me to be great, weather or not it happens to be attractive to other men. I consider clothing that make a a woman attractive to be great even if some obnoxious men were to misinterpret her intentions. If my wife were wearing specifically sexual clothing AND specifically attempting to attract the attention of other men, that would be a different issue. To me its the *intent* that counts.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"With regard to victim blaming, if I wave my hand in front of an aggressive dog, and it bites, who's fault is it? "

So wearing a short dress is waving your goods at a rapist.

Got it


You should probably put down the shovel you're digging that hole with.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> NobodySpecial said:
> 
> 
> > What DOES one wear to yoga or cycling, I have to wonder.
> ...


Let me guess. You're a fan of Bill Gothard...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> This thread is quickly going off the rails, but I'm game.
> 
> That's a strawman argument. Implying that anyone who thinks yoga pants, that display the near exact likeness of your nude body, is advocating burkas, is beyond ridiculous.


Well, since that is not what I implied, then I guess your "logic" makes sense... to you! 

What I was saying is that "revealing" is in the eye of the beholder. And what a beholder thinks is such a moving target, thinking you can glean any intent from the wearing is incorrect.



> *sigh* I understand that we have the compulsion to dramatize and slightly over-extend positions that we disagree with, but common.
> 
> With regard to victim blaming, if I wave my hand in front of an aggressive dog, and it bites, who's fault is it? The dogs. But does the semantics of "who's fault" it is, change the fact that my hand is now torn apart? Would it not make sense, if my goal is to avoid being bitten, to avoid sticking my hand in their faces? Would you also not counsel your children to avoid aggravating aggressive dogs, rather than do so anyway because they "have a right" to do what they want, and it would be the dog fault if they got bitten?


And in this, you don't see the history of rape blame all over the place? I wonder if you are even aware?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> Let me guess. You're a fan of Bill Gothard...


Well, I can agree with his debt aversion.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Girl_power said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > He, jealousy isn't healthy. Its immature, controlling, and generally borne of insecurity.
> ...


Without getting specific, I'm not sure you are entirely objective. When someone eyes my husband, I neither get upset with him nor have to resist the urge to scratch her eyes out.

However, when he wears those Jean's he bought at Buckle, I guess if a woman beats him down, he should have known better than to wave his nice butt aggressively....or something.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> You should probably put down the shovel you're digging that hole with.


Yeah, I probably should. I just didn't expect that you would extract the first part of my statement, reply to it out of context, and insinuate a meaning I didn't intend.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

BioFury said:


> This thread is quickly going off the rails, but I'm game.
> 
> That's a strawman argument. Implying that anyone who thinks yoga pants, that display the near exact likeness of your nude body, is advocating burkas, is beyond ridiculous.


It's almost as ridiculous as implying wearing yoga pants/wearing compression shorts has anything to do with seeking attention.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > Let me guess. You're a fan of Bill Gothard...
> ...


That's Dave Ramsey. Bill Gothard is scary


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > You should probably put down the shovel you're digging that hole with.
> ...


Oh no....your views are crystal clear.


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

BioFury said:


> ... The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


This question is actually kind of humorous. 

First, if @Emerging Buddhist were to wear something revealing, I'd be shocked...SHOCKED I say! He is very handsome and dresses well (in that clean, pressed, business-casual way), but honestly he's not into "revealing". So the shock would not be what other members of my gender did or did not do--the shock would be "Ummm...wow that's quite the outfit there dear!" :nerd:

Second, if EB did decide to look downright slinky and sexy, how could I possible control what other members of my own gender check or don't check? I mean, if you saw a work of art walking down the street, wouldn't you appreciate it? The dude is fine. If he gussied up and people DIDN'T check him out, I'd be more surprised! 

Finally, how in the world would I know if they are appreciating a well-put-together, striking gentleman or "desiring him as a lover"? Who knows what goes on in other people's heads? I suppose if they did a wolf-whistle or cat-call then we'd know, but even then that's just kind of childish and immature, and I suspect we'd laugh more than get jealous about it. But let's assume some lovely lady REALLY turned her head and started drooling, and it was OBVIOUS she was in some seriously deep lust. Ummm...that's all about her, not my SO. 

I guess I'm just not all that jealous. And yet, I can tell ya this: if someone at work was making moves on him, and periodically attempting to text or call after hours (that kind of thing), I do believe I'd somehow make sure she was fully aware he is VERY taken and she can move along now.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"I guess I'm just not all that jealous. And yet, I can tell ya this: if someone at work was making moves on him, and periodically attempting to text or call after hours (that kind of thing), I do believe I'd somehow make sure she was fully aware he is VERY taken and she can move along now. "

I hear ya girl!


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Wow, this thread went differently than I expected. Can't say I'm surprised though. 

My wife wears yoga pants all the time because she thinks they are comfortable. She's not trying to gain anyone's attention. Not even mine. This idea that a woman can't dress how she likes to dress because that means she's attempting to gain attention isn't true 100% of the time. Sure, there's some ladies who might do it for attention. There's probably many more who dress in ways that makes them feel good about themselves and that's what really matters to them. Looking in the mirror and feeling good about how you look isn't the same thing as looking in the mirror and thinking "this will get me attention" even if the end result of attention you receive is the same. 

Now, the side effect is some dudes looking. I don't care personally. The other side effect is I might be a little more handsy with her booty than if she's wearing jeans or a skirt or something. 

To be honest, it makes me feel good. Its not like I want her dressing super revealing to boost my ego or anything of the sort. Parading her around like a show dog or something. Thats gross! But if I see some guy do a double take, it's kind of funny, and yeah, it does kind of feel good for me. Neither of us seek this, but when it happens, it certainly doesn't make me feel angry. I would never tell my wife what to wear. 


You have a pretty disgusting idea of why women do things and dress the way they want. A good example I give is nails. 1 in 100,000 men maybe care what your nails look like. Women get their nails done because they like how it looks and it makes them feel cute. It's not for men. What makes you think anything else would be that different?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> 
> 
> 
> The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?



I welcome it...’Look but don’t touch’ works for me. What’s wrong with admiring beauty?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> I'm not talking about a partner just minding their own business, wearing reasonably modest clothing. They're wearing something revealing - compression shorts, yoga pants, going shirtless/topless... Dressing in a revealing manner is a primary way in which people seek attention and affirmation. So I would consider it a form of returning the attention, in that the attention was solicited, albeit passively.



My wife doesn’t do that...Not deliberately at least anyway. She says she’s uncomfortable with any kind of attention. We once were travelling in a Muslim country and she was wearing a new white dress which was kinda seethrough, for some reason. She was completely unaware of it. She also was wearing white underwear/g string so under specific light, everything was kinda see through all the way...I haven’t noticed it at first, it was only after a long queue of men began to build up behind her that she started asking me what’s going on. I made the usual un-PC joke that perhaps it’s unusual to have a woman on streets walking around without a plastic bag...It was only after I started taking photos that I noticed what’s happening. She was so embarrassed she hasn’t worn a dress for the next three years (and basically demanded to put her in a burka right away...).
I thought it was kinda hot for a short while. But I’m weird.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

uhtred said:


> If my wife ever finds someone she prefers to me, I *want* her to leave me for that person. If I'm not the person she wants most, then I'd rather be with someone else. I don't want to be anyone's second choice.
> 
> 
> 
> If she told me tomorrow that she had found someone she wanted more that me, I'd help arrange a fair divorce. No hard feelings. It would be much worse if I found out later that she had been putting up with me all this time. (when my father was very old he told me that he never really loved my mother, but wished he had married a different woman he knew.)




I think I understand the gist of your post but you do realise there is ALWAYS somebody more suitable than you or me for our wives. Just because they (perhaps) haven’t encountered them, it doesn’t mean they don’t exist...It’s simple probability. You’d otherwise have to believe in ‘there’s only one soul mate for everyone out there’ non sense. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> That's Dave Ramsey. Bill Gothard is scary


I read a short snip about him. He is, also, debt averse, apparently. I was joking about the one good thing, I guess?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> It sounds like you have unhealthy views of women, relationships, and control/ownership.
> 
> Perhaps you should investigate these ossues.




Haha, i love it how everyone likes to play Sigmund Freud here 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> If they come out with men's pants that have his nuts hanging out the bottom, I'll say something about that too :grin2:



Is that sexy though? 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

BioFury said:


> I would put you in the jealous category. Merely because nothing happens to provoked jealousy, doesn't mean it is absent from within you


Jealousy is pretty normal when/is your partner flirts, or does all they can to get opposite sex attention or when someone of the opposite sex is wanting that sort of attention from your spouse. Its how most of us are wired and its so that we can act to protect our marriage.
Its when its out of control or happens for no reason the problems come.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

InMyPrime said:


> I think I understand the gist of your post but you do realise there is ALWAYS somebody more suitable than you or me for our wives. Just because they (perhaps) haven’t encountered them, it doesn’t mean they don’t exist...It’s simple probability. You’d otherwise have to believe in ‘there’s only one soul mate for everyone out there’ non sense.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe when we first met, but not anymore. Nobody else has spent 12 years married to my wife learning and growing to be better for ourselves and each other with the design being to strengthen our relationship. So, no. I don't think there is anyone better for my wife anymore. Plenty of better men than me I'm sure. Idk about better for my wife. There's no better woman for me I can tell you that much.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> This thread is quickly going off the rails, but I'm game.
> 
> That's a strawman argument. Implying that anyone who thinks yoga pants, that display the near exact likeness of your nude body, is advocating burkas, is beyond ridiculous.



Actually I think yoga pants probably flatter a female body...Once they come off, gravity takes over and everything collapses into a singularity and onto the floor... 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

How did this turn into another rape thread? What’s wrong with you people? 

One incident I will never forget. I was once going back home on the tube and it was quite late. There was a young-ish woman sitting opposite of me in a short skirt and she kept smiling at me which I found a bit creepy. She then lifted both her legs up, took off her underwear and placed it next to me. Then got up and got out at the next stop...To this day, I have no idea what the meaning of it was. But if I had to guess, I think she probably needed the bathroom really urgently and presumably didn’t want to waste any time.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> Oy. My former therapist would have a blast with that statement! I am reminded of the scene from the show Firefly. I'm not so scared of losing something that I am not going to have it. The notion that fear of loss demonstrates importance is about as mentally unhealthy as it is possible to get.


Fear of loss demonstrates importance to the individual. Though that isn't to say that anyone who cares for something, will always be scared of losing it. Merely that if someone cares for something, and it is then in some way threatened, they will be scared/concerned, depending upon their ability to combat the threat.



Mr. Nail said:


> Now we have arrived at the title of this thread. Here is the deal. Your relationship does not exist in a vacuum. You are surrounded by people of different genders, orientation, socio-economic power, and so on, in short attracted and attractive people. There is nothing you can do to limit the access to and of those people. What you can do is be the person that your partner desires most.
> 
> Would you not need to be so defensive if you understood that your spouse is not a possession?
> Do you still need an answer to your poll?


Well, this thread was genuinely meant to just be a poll. But then someone made a comment, and I responded.

I don't have a spouse, or a partner - I'm single. But I don't understand what you mean by being less defensive if I understood my theoretical spouse is not a possession. Is your thought process that if you don't consider them "yours", you won't be attached, and therefore won't care if someone else tries to take them? 



Andy1001 said:


> So what are you suggesting?
> I got married last year,do you think I should stop my wife from going to the store in case some handsome bag boy talks her into running off with him?
> She works in a gym,my gym. She wears T-shirt’s and sometimes very tight yoga pants. Should I insist she wears a hoodie and loose dungarees instead?
> Because I know my value and what I bring to my marriage I don’t get jealous of anyone who may “covet” my wife.She knows I love her and she loves me.
> I say this gently,you may want to seek out some counseling for your own sake. You don’t have a partner and your paranoia means that you don’t trust any woman anyway. This is not a healthy way to live.


Why do you think I'm paranoid? The whole yoga pants thing was completely secondary to the point of the thread. I wasn't trying to make a statement about modesty. I just needed an example of clothing that's revealing, and it came to mind for obvious reasons.

With regard to being jealous, would it not make you angry if someone were to intentionally walk into your bathroom when your wife is naked? There's little chance of him stealing her away from you, but you would be upset nonetheless would you not?

You're a man, so I don't need to tell you that when men see your wife in yoga pants, they starting thinking about her naked. So if a man walking in on your wife naked bothers you, why would them seeing her 70% naked, and imagining the rest, not also bother you?

I get that you can't stop people from thinking of your wife naked, but it would seem to me, that you would want to avoid it as much as reasonably possible. Which, at least in my opinion, would include not wearing clothes that don't conceal anything at all.



NobodySpecial said:


> What you call revealing, I don't. Yoga pants? Really? They tend to be GREAT for ... yoga! They are also very comfortable. And if *I* want to look good for *me* Imma gonna.


Does them being great for yoga have a bearing on whether they are revealing? I never said they weren't comfortable.

With regard to looking good for you, I personally believe the "I dress well for myself" thing, is a load of rubbish. If you were alone on a deserted island, would you care what you looked like? Would you spend... any time at all, making sure your hair was perfect, or even looked good, before going to sit on the deserted beach by yourself?



NobodySpecial said:


> Well, since that is not what I implied, then I guess your "logic" makes sense... to you!
> 
> What I was saying is that "revealing" is in the eye of the beholder. And what a beholder thinks is such a moving target, thinking you can glean any intent from the wearing is incorrect.


I must have misunderstood you then.

To an extent, but not to the degree of yoga pants. I don't think there's anyone alive that would say they conceal (the inverse of reveal) a woman's butt, as well as the rest of her lower body.



NobodySpecial said:


> And in this, you don't see the history of rape blame all over the place? I wonder if you are even aware?


I can't say I'm familiar with any victim blame propaganda. But sharing ideas with them doesn't make me a victim blamer.

My thoughts are me simply being reasonable. If I wish to avoid being bitten by dogs, then I should probably avoid putting my hand in their faces. Are you saying that thought process is stupid?

Yes, ultimately it's the dog's fault I was bitten, but does that make my hand any less of a ruin? I can't control what the dog will and won't do, I can only control myself. And since I would like to avoid being ravaged by a dog, I naturally arrive at the conclusion that I should keep my hands away from their mouths.

Do you not agree with that logic?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Yes, its unlikely that out of billions of people my wife and I found the absolute best person in the world for each other. OTOH, I think it is very unlikely that either of us would find someone that we recognize as better. If it were to happen though - then I am OK with her going off with some person who was really better for her than me. Much better that, than to have to compete with the fantasy of someone who might have been.

Remember that that other person would at the same time have to recognize my wife as being a great match for them. So the probability is actually extremely low. 

We are both pretty mature rational people. We understand that its easy to find someone who *seems* attractive in various ways - but that that attraction isn't real because all of the missing information is filled in out of fantasy, not reality. 

So I have no problem if my wife sees a hot waiter at a restaurant. She isn't going to leave me for, or have an affair with some random guy. 









InMyPrime said:


> I think I understand the gist of your post but you do realise there is ALWAYS somebody more suitable than you or me for our wives. Just because they (perhaps) haven’t encountered them, it doesn’t mean they don’t exist...It’s simple probability. You’d otherwise have to believe in ‘there’s only one soul mate for everyone out there’ non sense.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

BioFury said:


> This thread is quickly going off the rails, but I'm game.
> 
> That's a strawman argument. Implying that anyone who thinks yoga pants, that display the near exact likeness of your nude body, is advocating burkas, is beyond ridiculous.
> 
> ...


Like you I think that the highly predictable comment suggesting that women should all wear burkas if the subject of how we dress comes up is so stupid. 

Most women are not daft and are well aware of what to wear to get male attention. Many love, and for what ever reason seem to need that attention to feel good about themselves it seems. Same with some men who build up their muscles and go round with sleeveless t shirts or no top and love that female attention. 

I have always avoided some types of clothes because I don't want that attention and don't need it to feel ok about myself. The only man I want that sort of attention from is my husband. I save the sexy stuff for him. :wink2:
My mum always dressed nicely and modestly, I do and my daughters do, I love that they think that is important in this day and age when its so common to see women dressing in a sexualised way. 

My husband is like me only even more so, he honestly cares nothing about what others think of how he looks, women included.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

OP, you have SERIOUS issues with your views about women, modesty, and victim-blaming. I mean, it screams like a neon sign.

I would also guess you have serious control issues.

Again I ask, are you a Bill Githard fan?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Diana7 said:


> BioFury said:
> 
> 
> > This thread is quickly going off the rails, but I'm game.
> ...


Now I KNOW Duana has to know about Bill Githard lol


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Whenever I read this stuff, I pray the people writing it never have a daughter who is assaulted.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> Now I KNOW Duana has to know about Bill Githard lol


Never heard of him.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> Whenever I read this stuff, I pray the people writing it never have a daughter who is assaulted.


Why?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> Fear of loss demonstrates importance to the individual. Though that isn't to say that anyone who cares for something, will always be scared of losing it. Merely that if someone cares for something, and it is then in some way threatened, they will be scared/concerned, depending upon their ability to combat the threat.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First you say you can't control another man's thoughts. Then you follow it up with a solution of controlling a woman in an attempt to control another man's thoughts. 

How about this solution, instead of trying to control everyone else, become undeniable to your woman. You are only controlling yourself, the only thing you have any control over. Be the best man you can be for her. The chips will fall where they may after that, but more often then not they will land in your favor as a result of focussing on what you can control. Trying to control a woman, well, that might work for very few women for a very short time. Its not a long term recipe for success.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> First you say you can't control another man's thoughts. Then you follow it up with a solution of controlling a woman in an attempt to control another man's thoughts.
> 
> How about this solution, instead of trying to control everyone else, become undeniable to your woman. You are only controlling yourself, the only thing you have any control over. Be the best man you can be for her. The chips will fall where they may after that, but more often then not they will land in your favor as a result of focussing on what you can control. Trying to control a woman, well, that might work for very few women for a very short time. Its not a long term recipe for success.


That's why you marry someone who shares your views on this and other subjects. I see the importance of dressing in a fairly modest way, and my husband loves that I do. So no control involved. Both happy. :smile2:


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> OP, you have SERIOUS issues with your views about women, modesty, and victim-blaming. I mean, it screams like a neon sign.
> 
> I would also guess you have serious control issues.
> 
> Again I ask, are you a Bill Githard fan?


I haven't the slightest who Bill Githard is.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

InMyPrime said:


> Is that sexy though?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Definitely not :grin2:


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> First you say you can't control another man's thoughts. Then you follow it up with a solution of controlling a woman in an attempt to control another man's thoughts.
> 
> How about this solution, instead of trying to control everyone else, become undeniable to your woman. You are only controlling yourself, the only thing you have any control over. Be the best man you can be for her. The chips will fall where they may after that, but more often then not they will land in your favor as a result of focussing on what you can control. Trying to control a woman, well, that might work for very few women for a very short time. Its not a long term recipe for success.


I hear what you're saying, but I think there's some misunderstanding going on, caused by our different social circles. I would not be with a woman who dressed in a sexually provocative way in public. So there will be no "controlling" going on. The women I'm interested in, don't offer their bodies to the general public for visual consumption. The women I'm around don't live in yoga pants and bikinis.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> I hear what you're saying, but I think there's some misunderstanding going on



What’s going on is that some people get a weird kick out of extrapolating and then bashing. Probably because they remind them of their ex. It’s kinda tiresome.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

InMyPrime said:


> What’s going on is that some people get a weird kick out of extrapolating and then bashing. Probably because they remind them of their ex. It’s kinda tiresome.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah, I feel like I've subjected myself to some type of feminist holy war. My points were completely ignored, while they just bashed me for trying to take away their yoga pants, and insinuating that people are responsible for the circumstances they choose to put themselves in.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> That's why you marry someone who shares your views on this and other subjects. I see the importance of dressing in a fairly modest way, and my husband loves that I do. So no control involved. Both happy. :smile2:


Yeah, but that doesn't mean other guys won't ever envision bending you over the gas station counter as they stand behind you in line. 

Scrubs probably aren't seen as the most flattering attire, but they sure as heck turn me on. 

I'm terms of how you dress, it's probably more about comfort. If you feel the most comfortable dressing more conservatively, thats all that should matter. My wife likes yoga pants and t-shirts. When we go out for a nice dinner, she loves a sleek long sexy dress and high heels. When she feels good about herself, she carries herself more confidently, which is the sexiest thing to both men and women.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Yeah, but that doesn't mean other guys won't ever envision bending you over the gas station counter as they stand behind you in line.
> 
> Scrubs probably aren't seen as the most flattering attire, but they sure as heck turn me on.
> 
> I'm terms of how you dress, it's probably more about comfort. If you feel the most comfortable dressing more conservatively, thats all that should matter. My wife likes yoga pants and t-shirts. When we go out for a nice dinner, she loves a sleek long sexy dress and high heels. When she feels good about herself, she carries herself more confidently, which is the sexiest thing to both men and women.


There's a fundamental difference in perspective at work in this thread. I believe that clothes are meant to cover our bodies. The obvious reason for this, is to curb sexual desire.

Society at large, and various respondents, believe that clothes are meant to tease all the people who can't have your main course.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Scrubs probably aren't seen as the most flattering attire, but they sure as heck turn me on.


Is this because your wife is a nurse? I don't ever think of scrubs as sexy, although some people do look very good in them. Nurses' uniforms have gotten less and less sexy over the years, as the strict moral codes expected of nurses has gone down. Kind of a strange phenomenon.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> I hear what you're saying, but I think there's some misunderstanding going on, caused by our different social circles. I would not be with a woman who dressed in a sexually provocative way in public. So there will be no "controlling" going on. The women I'm interested in, don't offer their bodies to the general public for visual consumption. The women I'm around don't live in yoga pants and bikinis.


You offer your body for visual consumption as soon as you step into the public. You are indirectly insulting women and some men on this forum by suggesting my wife for example wears yoga pants with the sole intent of seeking attention from men. Then you sit there and wonder why you are getting push back and playing the the victim while attacking others at the same time. Pretty ****ing lame.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> There's a fundamental difference in perspective at work in this thread. I believe that clothes are meant to cover our bodies. The obvious reason for this, is to curb sexual desire.
> 
> Society at large, and various respondents, believe that clothes are meant to tease all the people who can't have your main course.



Depends where you live. Sometimes you need clothes to keep you from dying from the cold.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

notmyjamie said:


> Is this because your wife is a nurse? I don't ever think of scrubs as sexy, although some people do look very good in them. Nurses' uniforms have gotten less and less sexy over the years, as the strict moral codes expected of nurses has gone down. Kind of a strange phenomenon.


No, she teaches blind students. That must be why she wears yoga pants huh? Because she wants to get the attention of blind children. ****ing ridiculous.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

InMyPrime said:


> BioFury said:
> 
> 
> > I hear what you're saying, but I think there's some misunderstanding going on
> ...


You're so funny.

When you basically compare wearing a shirt dress with waving aggressively at a dog, inviting it to bite you....you're gonna get oushback.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> InMyPrime said:
> 
> 
> > What’s going on is that some people get a weird kick out of extrapolating and then bashing. Probably because they remind them of their ex. It’s kinda tiresome.
> ...


So you admit that you think a woman.is responsible for her assault if she isn't dressed to your standards.

And if you thi k I'M a radical feminist, that is testament to how skewed YOUR thinking is.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

He has "interesting"standards for women, and he wrote sexual abuse material in which the little girl is asked to examine whether her nightgown is modest enough (it's what Josh Duggars parents used)


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> No, she teaches blind students. That must be why she wears yoga pants huh? Because she wants to get the attention of blind children. ****ing ridiculous.


Well, even blind children will know that yoga pants are awesome. You can feel way more than say, a pair of corduroys will allow. 

:grin2:

ETA: I think I wandered into a disagreement. As a nurse, I really was just curious if your wife is a nurse too. I wasn't trying to imply anything about your wife at all. If I had the bod, I'd wear yoga pants in a hot minute. I do wear scrubs though but something tells me your wife looks much better in hers than I do in mine. @TheDudeLebowski


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Diana7 said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > Whenever I read this stuff, I pray the people writing it never have a daughter who is assaulted.
> ...


Because your first question would probably be to ask what the girl did to "incite" it.

Well, probably not with one's OWN daughter.....just those other tarts who asked for it with their short shorts.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

notmyjamie said:


> Well, even blind children will know that yoga pants are awesome. You can feel way more than say, a pair of corduroys will allow.
> 
> :grin2:
> 
> ETA: I think I wandered into a disagreement. As a nurse, I really was just curious if your wife is a nurse too. I wasn't trying to imply anything about your wife at all. If I had the bod, I'd wear yoga pants in a hot minute. I do wear scrubs though but something tells me your wife looks much better in hers than I do in mine. @TheDudeLebowski


I wasn't talking about you. I'm talking about some guy who thinks the only reason a woman would wear yoga pants is because she's attention seeking. Not surprisingly, that guy is single. Lol


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> notmyjamie said:
> 
> 
> > Well, even blind children will know that yoga pants are awesome. You can feel way more than say, a pair of corduroys will allow.
> ...


I always chuckle at people who are soooooo sure of everyone motives.

Hubby and I went to the shore this weekend. We anchored in a private spot.

I wore a two-piece bathing suit that he bought me. Not for other men. Not for validation. Not to wave my hand aggressively.

But because he bought it for me, and HE makes me feel beautiful. Not the suit - HE makes me feel beautiful.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> So you admit that you think a woman.is responsible for her assault if she isn't dressed to your standards.
> 
> And if you thi k I'M a radical feminist, that is testament to how skewed YOUR thinking is.


Omg. What I _admit_ is that people contribute to their circumstances by the choices they make.

I'm a free citizen of the United States, and as such, I have every right to walk down the worst streets in Los Angeles. Let's say I did, and got shot and killed. Any person with a brain (you for instance) might ask what I was thinking, going into that part of town. Or just that being in the part of town might end badly if I ran into the wrong people. At which point, if I were you, I would then bash you over the head with my victim-defending warhammer, for insinuating that I (the victim!) contributed in any way to what happened.

Geez.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I wasn't talking about you. I'm talking about some guy who thinks the only reason a woman would wear yoga pants is because she's attention seeking. Not surprisingly, that guy is single. Lol


Phew...I was worried I'd offended your lovely wife. I should not have read the thread backwards. Lesson learned. For the record, I have 3 teenage daughters. They all wear yoga pants. They wear them because they are in style. Wearing old corduroys would garner them lots more attention than the yoga pants that everyone else at school is wearing too. My girls are all dancers. They are in amazing shape and it shows. Do the boys check them out? I'm sure they do. But I'm pretty sure they check out all the girls, no matter what they are wearing. Boys and men don't need yoga pants to check out a woman.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

notmyjamie said:


> For the record, I have 3 teenage daughters. They all wear yoga pants. They wear them because they are in style. Wearing old corduroys would garner them lots more attention than the yoga pants that everyone else at school is wearing too. My girls are all dancers. They are in amazing shape and it shows. Do the boys check them out? I'm sure they do. But I'm pretty sure they check out all the girls, no matter what they are wearing. Boys and men don't need yoga pants to check out a woman.


Your daughters would be walking down the hallway naked if that's what was fashionable. Do you see no problem with that?

That's the argument I hear all the time. Some man, somewhere, who likes ankles, will get turned on no matter what I wear, so there's no point in even trying to cover anything.

But, once again, a fundamental difference is at play. I believe our bodies are special, private, and should be covered and protected. While society, and you apparently, believe our bodies are about as consequential as the side of a building, and that having sex is only a bit more significant than ordering a pizza.


----------



## The Middleman (Apr 30, 2012)

I voted “I'm male. I am jealous, and it would bother me.” because I am a jealous husband and I’m actually proud of it.

That being said, if my wife were dressed really sexy and horny guys were checking her out, it wouldn’t bother me, as long as she was not reacting to it and remains totally into me. However, if she was taking an interest in the other guys and started flirting back, then there would not only be a problem, there would be an huge incident to contain. You know, the old mate guarding thing kicking in.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> notmyjamie said:
> 
> 
> > For the record, I have 3 teenage daughters. They all wear yoga pants. They wear them because they are in style. Wearing old corduroys would garner them lots more attention than the yoga pants that everyone else at school is wearing too. My girls are all dancers. They are in amazing shape and it shows. Do the boys check them out? I'm sure they do. But I'm pretty sure they check out all the girls, no matter what they are wearing. Boys and men don't need yoga pants to check out a woman.
> ...


Hahahahahaha

You just keeping making my point for me.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

BioFury said:


> Omg. What I _admit_ is that people contribute to their circumstances by the choices they make.
> 
> I'm a free citizen of the United States, and as such, I have every right to walk down the worst streets in Los Angeles. Let's say I did, and got shot and killed. Any person with a brain (you for instance) might ask what I was thinking, going into that part of town. Or just that being in the part of town might end badly if I ran into the wrong people. At which point, if I were you, I would then bash you over the head with my victim-defending warhammer, for insinuating that I (the victim!) contributed in any way to what happened.
> 
> Geez.


Wouldn't a better comparison be someone robs you because of what you're wearing?


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

Tiggy! said:


> Wouldn't a better comparison be someone robs you because of what you're wearing?


Sure. That might help the people getting bogged down with the example, rather than commenting on the principle being discussed.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> Hahahahahaha
> 
> You just keeping making my point for me.


I'm not sure what your _point_, is. That his daughters should be able to walk down the hallway naked if they want to, and I'm the unhinged control maniac who's trying to stop them?


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

BioFury said:


> Sure. That might help the people getting bogged down with the example, rather than commenting on the principle being discussed.


The getting shot for walking down an ally just doesn't really apply, since no ones discussing walking down dark ally ways or going to potentially dangerous places.

So if you get robbed tomorrow will you be taking some responsibility for it? (the robber really liked your clothes and just HAD to have them).


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

BioFury said:


> Your daughters would be walking down the hallway naked if that's what was fashionable. Do you see no problem with that?
> 
> That's the argument I hear all the time. Some man, somewhere, who likes ankles, will get turned on no matter what I wear, so there's no point in even trying to cover anything.
> 
> But, once again, a fundamental difference is at play. I believe our bodies are special, private, and should be covered and protected. While society, and you apparently, believe our bodies are about as consequential as the side of a building, and that having sex is only a bit more significant than ordering a pizza.


Wow...that's quite the extrapolation. Because my daughters wear yoga pants I think sex is as significant as ordering a pizza? I don't even know where to go with that. 

A) There are lots of other things in fashion right now that my daughters do not wear. They do not show cleavage at all. My oldest has been to 2 proms and she showed no cleavage at either while almost every other girl there was hanging out of her dress. My middle daughter just bought her prom dress and again, absolutely NO cleavage. Same with short skirts. I have seen girls wearing dresses/skirts that are so short they look like shorty negligees. Nope, you won't see my daughters in those. And, they wear dance shorts under all their dresses so if there is a wardrobe malfunction they are still covered. This is not a rule I have to enforce as it's how they want to be as well. 

2)Maybe my girls wear a different kind of yoga pants than what you're talking about but they are completely covered. I make sure their pants are thick enough so you are not able to see through them at all. They also wear proper undergarments. They wear a longer shirt with them as well. They are comfortable pants that cover them up completely. I won't deny that they look very good in them but it's because they are in fabulous shape. They dance 5 days a week. They'd look good in anything. 

C)I take sex very seriously. I have worked hard to teach my daughters that sex is not something you freely give away. I've taught them sharing your body is a huge deal and should only happen when there is love and commitment with their partner. Yoga pants have absolutely no bearing on this whatsoever.

And contrary to what you may think, my daughters are all quite modest actually. Believe me when I say, if walking around nude became the new fashion, they would absolutely not follow that trend. 

I'd love to see what yoga pants look like in your area of the world.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

Tiggy! said:


> The getting shot for walking down an ally just doesn't really apply, since no ones discussing walking down dark ally ways or going to potentially dangerous places.
> 
> So if you get robbed tomorrow will you be taking some responsibility for it (the robber really liked your clothes and just HAD to have them).


Sure, I contributed to his desire for my clothing, by choosing to wear something nice.

In the same way that he contributed to being shot, by choosing to try and rob me. Even though I'm the one who pulled the trigger.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

BioFury said:


> I'm not sure what your _point_, is. That his daughters should be able to walk down the hallway naked if they want to, and I'm the unhinged control maniac who's trying to stop them?



For the record, his daughters are actually her daughters :grin2:


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > Hahahahahaha
> ...


You need professional help. I'm completely serious.

Honestly, you're a little scary.
No one said anything about allowing teenagers being naked.

You are not normal. At all.

And I say this as someone who married as a 26 year old virgin who doesnt wear dresses above the knee without leggings.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

BioFury said:


> Sure, I contributed to his desire for my clothing, by choosing to wear something nice.
> 
> In the same way that he contributed to being shot, by choosing to try and rob me. Even though I'm the one who pulled the trigger.


He had a bigger gun (how do you think he got you to undress).
Do you dress like a hobo to deterrent someone from robbing you?


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

notmyjamie said:


> Wow...that's quite the extrapolation. Because my daughters wear yoga pants I think sex is as significant as ordering a pizza? I don't even know where to go with that.
> 
> A) There are lots of other things in fashion right now that my daughters do not wear. They do not show cleavage at all. My oldest has been to 2 proms and she showed no cleavage at either while almost every other girl there was hanging out of her dress. My middle daughter just bought her prom dress and again, absolutely NO cleavage. Same with short skirts. I have seen girls wearing dresses/skirts that are so short they look like shorty negligees. Nope, you won't see my daughters in those. And, they wear dance shorts under all their dresses so if there is a wardrobe malfunction they are still covered. This is not a rule I have to enforce as it's how they want to be as well.
> 
> ...


You really threw me with the A. 2. C. thing, lol :grin2: People that teach OCD children should totally pull that one >

Yoga pants, regardless of how thick they are, are extremely revealing. But we reached the point in society that showing the exact likeness of your butt to everyone is socially acceptable. It's been done for so long, first by skin-tight jeans, that it's been fully "naturalized", if you will. No one even thinks twice about it.

Surely you see the progression? How women's clothes get smaller and tighter every decade? And how the new generation is raised with the new standard of "modesty"? For instance, would you be comfortable wearing a g-string bikini to the beach? You're old enough to have teenage daughters, so probably not. Why? Because it wasn't the established fashion when you were growing up, and you are therefore not comfortable with it.

Society's standard for what is acceptable to wear, is constantly becoming less and less. So unless one creates and adheres to an immovable standard, walking down the hallway naked is just a matter of time. So yes, your daughters wouldn't walk down the hallway naked if it became a thing next week - because moving people's boundaries takes time. However, if it becomes a thing next week, and your daughter's daughters grow up with everyone walking down the hallway naked, they would do it in a heartbeat. See my point?

With regard to pizza delivery sex, that was unjust of me to lump you in with the rest of society. My apologies.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> You need professional help. I'm completely serious.
> 
> Honestly, you're a little scary.
> No one said anything about allowing teenagers being naked.
> ...


You're right, I'm not normal  

You responded to my post regarding young girls walking down the hallway naked, stating that I was proving your point. Your "point" in this thread has been antagonist to mine, so I could only assume from your post that your position was contrary to mine. Hence my comment. 

But if you would like to clarify what you meant, I'll try to be less scary :wink2:



Tiggy! said:


> He had a bigger gun (how do you think he got you to undress).
> Do you dress like a hobo to deterrent someone from robbing you?


No, but if I chose to wear something really nice, then I would acknowledge the possibility, that had I worn something less expensive, I might not have gotten robbed.

My argument isn't that women should dress more modestly in an effort to avoid rape. I am opposing the thought process that victims of crimes did not contribute to what happened to them, in any way, simply because it would be insensitive to say otherwise.


----------



## CharlieParker (Aug 15, 2012)

Has this thread become a referendum on camel toes? Just asking.

And I love a white clam pizza. (Picture idea)


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

BioFury said:


> *
> No, but if I chose to wear something really nice, then I would acknowledge the possibility, that had I worn something less expensive, I might not have gotten robbed.*
> 
> My argument isn't that women should dress more modestly in an effort to avoid rape. I am opposing the thought process that victims of crimes did not contribute to what happened to them, in any way, simply because it would be insensitive to say otherwise.


Never said you were wearing anything expensive and nice is subjective (just as modesty is subjective).
You were wearing what you saw to be just ever day clothes and went on your merry way, if a robber saw you in your casual top (which he just loved the design and couldn't resist) and this robber-with-a-bigger-gun-than-yours eyes YOU dressed to temp him (what did expect you don't dressed like a hobo), is he correct?


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

BioFury said:


> You really threw me with the A. 2. C. thing, lol :grin2: People that teach OCD children should totally pull that one >
> 
> Stolen directly from the movie Home Alone. Wish I could take credit for thinking of it.
> 
> ...


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

notmyjamie said:


> Stolen directly from the movie Home Alone. Wish I could take credit for thinking of it.
> 
> I do see your point. But, where does the line stop? 300 years ago women couldn't show their ankles. Should we have stopped then? Who decides where that line should be. Also, not everyone is comfortable with new standards. Again, just because many of their classmates wear very revealing, low cut dresses to prom didn't make my daughters comfortable doing the same. My oldest daughter's boyfriend got VERY upset when he looked at her dress too quickly and thought a light colored stomacher was just open and that the dress was very low cut. He frequently expresses his desire to have her continue to wear more modest clothing than her friends. It's part of what attracted her to him. She does not, nor has she ever worn a thong bathing suit. None of my daughters have. So yes, the line moves, but not everyone moves with it.
> 
> Thank you. I think less people are into casual sex than you think. At least in my circles.


If one holds a secular world view, then desire is the only justification one needs. And walking down the hallway naked is perfectly acceptable, for no reason other than the individual wanted to.

On the other hand, if one holds a biblical world view, then one would have to embrace that God never changes. And thus that there are areas of our body that are private, and places that are public, that won't change, regardless of how much time passes. The only people who do not move with the societal line, are those who hold to a moral standard, that's based on something timeless - not their own comfort levels. Because those change with each generation.

Regarding casual sex, I think the statistics are that 90% of people are no longer virgins by the time they're 22. Given that very few people are married at that age, I'd say that casual sex is, unfortunately, quite prolific.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> If one holds a secular world view, then desire is the only justification one needs. And walking down the hallway naked is perfectly acceptable, for no reason other than the individual wanted to.
> 
> On the other hand, if one holds a biblical world view, then one would have to embrace that God never changes. And thus that there are areas of our body that are private, and places that are public, that won't change, regardless of how much time passes. The only people who do not move with the societal line, are those who hold to a moral standard, that's based on something timeless - not their own comfort levels. Because those change with each generation.
> 
> Regarding casual sex, I think the statistics are that 90% of people are no longer virgins by the time they're 22. Given that very few people are married at that age, I'd say that casual sex is, unfortunately, quite prolific.


Biblically speaking, man wasn't clothed at all until sin entered the world. Once it did they became aware of their nakedness and attempted to hide from God. Now that sin had entered, God removed their fig leaves and replaced them with animal skins. Something more permanent. Then it goes on to describe later that nakedness is shameful. So it seems as if biblically, God did change. However, it doesn't go into any detail about the level of nakedness. It talks first in the old Testament about the sexes, and that basically you shouldn't cross dress. So pants are out for ladies now. But wait, were pants even a thing back then for men? Probably not. But thats old Testament anyway, and the new trumps old for Christians. But it doesn't for Jews. So somewhere between the Father and the Son, the rules changed again. Then this...

"women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness" 

So now you can't braid your hair, wear jewelry, or anything that is costly. Of course this is taking what is being said out of context again. The idea is that you shouldn't focus your mind on your attire to project a certain image or status with that clothing. With that said, it was the Church and people within it who put out this idea that men need to wear suits and ties, or slacks and a nice shirt, pressed and proper. Women must wear a dress. Your "Sunday best" as it were. Do you really think people did that for God? No, they did it for status. God doesn't judge by your clothing, but what is in your hearts. 

"1 My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism. 2 Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in filthy old clothes also comes in. 3 If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” 4 have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? 5 Listen, my dear brothers and sisters: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? 6 But you have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7 Are they not the ones who are blaspheming the noble name of him to whom you belong? 8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing right. 9 But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers."

All that, yet the Church basically had a dress code. So much so, that until more recently churches had to advertise for a while to "come as you are" to break away from the sinful nature of the judgement you would receive if you were to show up to church wearning sneakers, a t-shirt, and jeans. Hypocrites, much like yourself, remain in the church. Then try to twist the teachings to fit whatever belief systems you have about what is modest and what isn't. What is Godly attire and what isn't. Its the sin in your own heart, as there's really no scripture talking about specific revealing clothing that I can recall. It's more about clothing being required, but that it's what is in your heart as to why you wear the clothing you're buying. What is your intent? Is it Godly? Or are you basing it on the desires of man?


So, If my wife buys 2 pair of yoga pants for $20, she isn't concerned with the social status those pants would gain her. Basically, if you're buying name brand to show that you can afford it, you are not clothing yourself in a manor that says your actions are for the Lord. Rather, you are focused on the social status you will perceivably gain in the eyes of man. God doesn't care how fancy and expensive your clothes are, but man does. So you are now living for the desires of man, not God. 

Second, if she puts on Yoga pants because they are comfortable and she has no desire to gain any attention, but wears them because she can throw them on and feels comfortable while she sits around, works out, plays with our kids, goes to the store to buy food, teaches blind students how to learn with their disability or how to read Braille, or any basic study any child would learn in school, then she is not breaking any of the commandments, or any scripture put down in the bible. That is YOU placing whatever intent you wish to place on others. That is YOUR sin, not my wife's. 

"Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God."

"For why should my liberty be determined by someone else's conscience?"

Maybe you should read that bible a little more, and practice what you preach there Judas.


----------



## manfromlamancha (Jul 4, 2013)

Lila said:


> I'm not jealous when a date or partner gets attention. I get jealous when that date or partner RETURNS the attention.


Exactly - not sure if that counts as jealousy though!


----------



## manfromlamancha (Jul 4, 2013)

BioFury said:


> I'm not talking about a partner just minding their own business, wearing reasonably modest clothing. They're wearing something revealing - compression shorts, yoga pants, going shirtless/topless... Dressing in a revealing manner is a primary way in which people seek attention and affirmation. So I would consider it a form of returning the attention, in that the attention was solicited, albeit passively.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm open to editing the litmus, if you have a superior format to recommend.


In this case (where my other half is actively seeking out attention in this way) I would be questioning my own values and thinking as to why I am with such a person - long before it gets to acting jealously.


----------



## frusdil (Sep 5, 2013)

As I've said to my husband in the past, I don't care if a woman hits on him or eyes him off, she's nothing to me. I don't care what she does, but I DO care what HE does. And it's not about jealousy, it's about disrespect, it's something I won't tolerate, nor he. If I were to be out somewhere and a man hit on me, my husband knows I can handle myself (I literally knocked a guy out cold years ago when he wouldn't take no for an answer), and would expect me to handle it appropriately.


----------



## manfromlamancha (Jul 4, 2013)

OP I do understand where you are coming from so I am not going to have a go at you.

This is somehow morphing into how women dress. I do not think it is that at all. You call it being jealous. I call it reacting to disrespect and lack of empathy.

Firstly, anyone (not just women) should wear whatever they want to within legality and reason. Tight fitting clothes, bikinis, extremely tight jeans etc. - whatever.

If my spouse wore something revealing which did attract attention AND she returned the attention and went on to continue doing it to get (and return) attention, then this is beyond jealousy. This is disrespect for me and our marriage/relationship. That I would not tolerate.

As it happens, my wife is very attractive and flirty in her mannerisms and always attracts the attention of other men (of all age groups, would you believe!). She has always been this way. However, she never looks at any other men in the same way she looks at me - for some reason she adores me! And she is super sexy no matter what she wears. 

Now I should start by saying there is no way I could control what she wears or does - she is a strong, intelligent, attractive and fiercely independent woman. So I would have my hands full if I tried telling her what to do. Sometimes she does things without knowing they are disrespectful and all I have to do is remind her of that and she fixes it by herself. Else when anyone else ogles her, I am reminded of how lucky I am that she is with me.

Does this make me jealous - yes, a little, but in a healthy way (as somebody here said, a little jealousy is a good thing).

Now on the other hand, you look twice at my Jag and I smasha your face!


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Fear of loss demonstrates importance to the individual. Though that isn't to say that anyone who cares for something, will always be scared of losing it. Merely that if someone cares for something, and it is then in some way threatened, they will be scared/concerned, depending upon their ability to combat the threat.


I have always wondered, even mentioned here, why people feel the need to think their feelings are always the case. The fear response, fight, flight, flee, is not a great motivator for reasoned decisions. My husband is very important to me. He would laugh at that notion challenged after all we have been through! But I don't fear losing him. We've talked a number of times, and at great length, what would happen if it was genuinely better for one of us for us not to be together. We laugh and admit we would face even that together. Starting over domestically would be a PITA. But no, I don't fear losing him.

The only thing I can say I really fear, though it does not walk around with me all day, is the death of my kids. And that is not so much for my own loss, I don't think, though I imagine that plays a role. 



> Well, this thread was genuinely meant to just be a poll. But then someone made a comment, and I responded.


That's what threads do!



> I don't have a spouse, or a partner - I'm single. But I don't understand what you mean by being less defensive if I understood my theoretical spouse is not a possession. Is your thought process that if you don't consider them "yours", you won't be attached, and therefore won't care if someone else tries to take them?


Attachment, commitment and responsibility are not related to ownership. 



> Why do you think I'm paranoid? The whole yoga pants thing was completely secondary to the point of the thread.* I wasn't trying to make a statement about modesty. I just needed an example of clothing that's revealing*, and it came to mind for obvious reasons.


Explain this. You needed to be able to post about immodesty without talking about modesty?



> .....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Your daughters would be walking down the hallway naked if that's what was fashionable. Do you see no problem with that?
> 
> That's the argument I hear all the time. Some man, somewhere, who likes ankles, will get turned on no matter what I wear, so there's no point in even trying to cover anything.
> 
> But, once again, a fundamental difference is at play. *I belie*ve our bodies are special, private, and should be covered and protected. While society, and you apparently, believe our bodies are about as consequential as the side of a building, and that having sex is only a bit more significant than ordering a pizza.


You get to believe that. For YOU. And you only. And any partner you may find who shares that view. Any connection between attire or lack thereof in public and having sex is incredibly scary. Your mind makes me genuinely scared.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Let me guess. You don't believe women should wear pants, makeup, or jewelry. You don't believe they should work outside the home. You don't believe they should cut their hair. You are probably either Church of God or IFB. You also believe the KJV is the only inspired Bible.

I hold a Biblical world view, and I dont blame women for their own assaults.

Question: if a woman entered your church dressed in a way you deemed inappropriately, what would happen to her? And would you blame her for YOUR choice to lust?


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

BioFury said:


> Regarding casual sex, I think the statistics are that 90% of people are no longer virgins by the time they're 22. Given that very few people are married at that age, I'd say that casual sex is, unfortunately, quite prolific.


Well, many don't agree that not waiting until marriage = casual sex. If a couple is committed and exclusive and have been together for awhile before they have sex, I don't consider that casual. The fact is that people are wired to want sex, even if they aren't ready for marriage. I look at my daughter as an example. She and her boyfriend have been together for almost 3 years. They are very committed to each other and very much in love. This is obvious to anyone who spends any time with them. They are also still in college and therefore not in a position to marry yet. Marriage is definitely in their plans though. If they are having sex I would not consider that casual. To me, and to a lot of people I suspect, casual sex is sex without feelings or commitment.

And even 300 years ago people were having sex outside of marriage, of course they were. Methods of quick marriages were developed because couples couldn't wait for the priest to show up to marry them. Handfasting is an example. In handfasting a couple could join hands, declare their love and then live as a married couple for one year with no shame. I don't think this was done so they could sit around the fire and chat each evening. To me, it's the same as a couple who have declared they are exclusive and committed to each other now except most couples now don't put an expiration date on their relationship ahead of time. And many couples had sex until they got caught and then rushed to get married. A baby born out of wedlock was a huge scandal...but if you married 5 minutes before the baby was born, there was no scandal. So premarital sex has been happening since the dawn of time. People were just a lot quieter about their choices back then. So to hold people today to the mythical standards of hundreds of years ago just doesn't work.

Not being a virgin when you marry doesn't automatically mean you're out screwing every Tom, ****, and Harry with abandon.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

The sad thing?

I was a 26 year old virgin when I married, I always check myself before leaving the house (we used to call it the modesty check), I rarely drink and never get drunk, and right now I am mentoring a younger woman as we go through a Kay Arthur Bible Study.

And the OP probably still thinks I'm a sl*t.

Nice guy


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

personofinterest said:


> The sad thing?
> 
> I was a 26 year old virgin when I married, I always check myself before leaving the house (we used to call it the modesty check), I rarely drink and never get drunk, and right now I am mentoring a younger woman as we go through a Kay Arthur Bible Study.
> 
> ...


Well that's your own fault for wearing yoga pants!!! :grin2:


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

notmyjamie said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > The sad thing?
> ...


 The funniest part? I do not own a single pair of yoga pants. When I workout at the gym, I either wear sweatpants and a big baggy T-shirt, or I wear shorts with leggings underneath and a big T-shirt. There is no way anyone is lusting over my body because they can't see it haha.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

personofinterest said:


> The funniest part? I do not own a single pair of yoga pants. When I workout at the gym, I either wear sweatpants and a big baggy T-shirt, or I wear shorts with leggings underneath and a big T-shirt. There is no way anyone is lusting over my body because they can't see it haha.


Well, that's the point. Even in baggy sweats and a t shirt I bet someone is lusting over you. As I said earlier, men don't need yoga pants to lust after a woman. 300 years ago women wore corsets, long skirts, petty coats, etc etc. It took 30 minutes dress in the morning and a good 15 to undress and men still lusted after women. Why? Because we are wired for sex. It's just who we, as humans, are. End of story. 

I have always found it amusing that this God that created everything wired us that way but then handed down this edict that we are not allowed to act on it except for the purpose of procreation. Seems kinds stupid to me. If He is real, he is having a great laugh at all our expense.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Do you people just play your own organ all day long? I think everyone knows what is meant here.
Will a woman dressed in revealing clothes attract more or less male attention?
How does one jump from this to inviting rape and be ok about it?
People need to take a chill pill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

InMyPrime said:


> Do you people just play your own organ all day long? I think everyone knows what is meant here.
> Will a woman dressed in revealing clothes attract more or less male attention?
> How does one jump from this to inviting rape and be ok about it?
> People need to take a chill pill.
> ...


 Read his own words. He compared a woman dressing in a way he deems inappropriate the same thing as a man or anyone waving their arms aggressively at a dog. In other words, if you do that then getting bit is your fault. The implication is clear. The more he good posts, the deeper he digs the hole.

I understand that both of you have a penis, but given your very open minded views on life, I wouldn't think you would be in his camp.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> Read his own words. He compared a woman dressing in a way he deems inappropriate the same thing as a man or anyone waving their arms aggressively at a dog. In other words, if you do that then getting bit is your fault. The implication is clear. The more he good posts, the deeper he digs the hole.
> 
> I understand that both of you have a penis, but given your very open minded views on life, I wouldn't think you would be in his camp.



I’m trying to stay out of ‘camps’ but surely there’s a way to have someone write something without the usual ‘so what you are saying is that women want to be raped?’ It’s just unnecessary.

Regarding jealousy; it’s situation dependant when it’s appropriate and when it isn’t. From what i gather the op currently doesn’t have a partner to be jealous or not jealous about so it’s all hypothetical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

With respect, the problem is not the way countless people responded. The problem is the clear belief system of the original poster.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> With respect, the problem is not the way countless people responded. The problem is the clear belief system of the original poster.















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> There is no way anyone is lusting over my body because they can't see it haha.


That's not true.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > There is no way anyone is lusting over my body because they can't see it haha.
> ...


 Well all I can say is if the only thing at my gym they can find to lust over is a middle aged woman in baggy clothing, no make up, a messy ponytail, and stinky with sweat, they must be pretty desperate or a little weird haha


----------



## attheend02 (Jan 8, 2019)

personofinterest said:


> Well all I can say is if the only thing at my gym they can find to lust over is a middle aged woman in baggy clothing, no make up, a messy ponytail, and stinky with sweat, they must be pretty desperate or a little weird haha


Sounds like the definition of a man.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> Well all I can say is if the only thing at my gym they can find to lust over is a middle aged woman in baggy clothing, no make up, a messy ponytail, and stinky with sweat, they must be pretty desperate or a little weird haha


Or their eyes see you differently than you describe yourself.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Or their eyes see you differently than you describe yourself.


Which honestly makes sense....until you add the OP's implication that even in gym clothing* I *am responsible for the virtue of every man there lol

If one of them attacks me, I guess my sweat was waving my pheromones aggressively lol

\At least that's what Jesus said to the adulterous woman....oh wait....


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Or their eyes see you differently than you describe yourself.



Which eye?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> Which honestly makes sense....until you add the OP's implication that even in gym clothing* I *am responsible for the virtue of every man there lol
> 
> If one of them attacks me, I guess my sweat was waving my pheromones aggressively lol
> 
> \At least that's what Jesus said to the adulterous woman....oh wait....


Exactly. Wonder what the OP thinks about Catholics who have their son's dress nicely before taking them to church. I mean, can't really blame the priests if a boy is all dressed up at church. That's like waving your hand in front of a dogs face. 

How about my sister, assaulted by her step father? Maybe she shouldn't have walked around her own house in shorts. Can't really blame him for being aroused by a child now can we?

How about the high number of sexual assault cases in special needs children? They must have been conscious of their decisions to flaunt their bodies for predators to take notice and want to take advantage of them. 

Any attempt to justify the actions of a sick person is reprehensible. Then further, to try and twist biblical teachings to fit a twisted and sinful belief system makes him no different than a member of westboro.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> The sad thing?
> 
> I was a 26 year old virgin when I married, I always check myself before leaving the house (we used to call it the modesty check), I rarely drink and never get drunk, and right now I am mentoring a younger woman as we go through a Kay Arthur Bible Study.
> 
> ...


Not at all :smile2: I like you. You're reasonable, and give a lot of good advice. I think we've misunderstood each other. I thought I had been pretty clear, but your post below makes it apparent that you haven't understood me at all.



personofinterest said:


> Read his own words. He compared a woman dressing in a way he deems inappropriate the same thing as a man or anyone waving their arms aggressively at a dog. In other words, if you do that then getting bit is your fault. The implication is clear. The more he good posts, the deeper he digs the hole.
> 
> I understand that both of you have a penis, but given your very open minded views on life, I wouldn't think you would be in his camp.


I never said that someone waving their hand in front of a dog, and who then gets bitten, is the one at fault. I very clearly, stated the exact opposite - that the dog was ultimately at fault. I merely pointed out that waving my hand in front of the dog contributed to the outcome.



personofinterest said:


> Which honestly makes sense....until you add the OP's implication that even in gym clothing* I *am responsible for the virtue of every man there lol
> 
> If one of them attacks me, I guess my sweat was waving my pheromones aggressively lol
> 
> \At least that's what Jesus said to the adulterous woman....oh wait....


*sigh* I never said that either POI. I understand if you disagree with me, but it would be a lot more productive if you stopped making my statements into things I never said, or intended, and then persisting that you've understood me perfectly, when I attempt to clarify.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> Not at all :smile2: I like you. You're reasonable, and give a lot of good advice. I think we've misunderstood each other. I thought I had been pretty clear, but your post below makes it apparent that you haven't understood me at all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I understood everything you said the same way she did. I take further offense because I am a man. We should hold other men to a higher standard as men amd 100% accountable for their actions. Its not a woman's job to control the actions of men. Women should be able to wear nothing at all, and men should be able to remain in control themselves against their sinful impulses. The entire point of biblical teachings is about self discipline, not controlling others to make your self discipline easier for you.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

personofinterest said:


> Well all I can say is if the only thing at my gym they can find to lust over is a middle aged woman in baggy clothing, no make up, a messy ponytail, and stinky with sweat, they must be pretty desperate or a little weird haha


A woman taking care of herself, working up a sweat? 

In saying that, I dress conservatively. Walking back to the office, deep in thought about work stuff, a man in his late 40s/early 50s passing by said to me, 'Hi... you look really nice.' I was wearing a flared dress, belted at the waist, with 3/4 sleeve cropped cardigan. I said 'Thanks' ...continued on. Granted, my colleague kindly pointed out afterwards that it was nice of him to give his seeing-eye dog the day off. Yea, yeah.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> I never said that someone waving their hand in front of a dog, and who then gets bitten, is the one at fault. I very clearly, stated the exact opposite - that the dog was ultimately at fault



Actually, one could argue (which I won’t) that while the dog is at fault from our frame of reference, the dog is just being a dog and that’s what dogs do. So retribution against the dog for example would make little sense. However the dog should probably be kept somewhere safe as to not pose further risk to people/other dogs (if it’s unusually vicious).
Now watch someone scream: “oh yeah? Are you trying to normalise pedophilia now?”



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Women should be able to wear nothing at all, and men should be able to remain in control themselves against their sinful impulses.



Definitively. Let’s make that into a universal law: no women are allowed to wear any clothes and men have to control themselves.
I think this is a brilliant idea. I will collect signatures and write to my MP.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

heartsbeating said:


> A woman taking care of herself, working up a sweat?
> 
> 
> 
> In saying that, I dress conservatively. Walking back to the office, deep in thought about work stuff, a man in his late 40s/early 50s passing by said to me, 'Hi... you look really nice.' I was wearing a flared dress, belted at the waist, with 3/4 sleeve cropped cardigan. I said 'Thanks' ...continued on. Granted, my colleague kindly pointed out afterwards that it was nice of him to give his seeing-eye dog the day off. Yea, yeah.



Does this constitute as sexual harassment, invasion of personal space, stalking, assault or rape, under the latest legislations? I forget.
I guess it depends whether he was attractive. (Was he?)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

heartsbeating said:


> A woman taking care of herself, working up a sweat?
> 
> In saying that, I dress conservatively. Walking back to the office, deep in thought about work stuff, a man in his late 40s/early 50s passing by said to me, 'Hi... you look really nice.' I was wearing a flared dress, belted at the waist, with 3/4 sleeve cropped cardigan. I said 'Thanks' ...continued on. Granted, my colleague kindly pointed out afterwards that it was nice of him to give his seeing-eye dog the day off. Yea, yeah.


I probably have a different "radar" too. If I was dressed at work and someone said "You look nice," I would never think of that as flirting. I would think "how nice" and say thank you like you did.

I DO understand that my defensiveness is probably partly informed by the church I went to during those teen years. Guys could wear whatever they want. But girls? Our conservative one-piece swimsuits had to pass inspection before youth camp, and we STILL had to wear dark t-shirts over them. A friend of mine invited her completely unchurched friend to youth camp, hoping that her friend would find faith. The friend brought a two-piece. Not even a bikini. It was like bottoms and a tank top thingy. She wasn't allowed to swim, even with a t-shirt! And we went to Bill Gothard's "Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts" 2-week seminar EVERY summer. I learned that my body was a tool of Satan that was used to defraud poor, defenseless young men.

Yeah.....NO

I chafe at legalism.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

InMyPrime said:


> Does this constitute as sexual harassment, invasion of personal space, stalking, assault or rape, under the latest legislations? I forget.
> I guess it depends whether he was attractive. (Was he?)
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


c'mon now... this thread is haywire enough.

I received it as a compliment. I didn't find him attractive.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

InMyPrime said:


> Definitively. Let’s make that into a universal law: no women are allowed to wear any clothes and men have to control themselves.
> I think this is a brilliant idea. I will collect signatures and write to my MP.
> 
> 
> ...


I am speaking from a biblical context, as he is the one who brought the bible into this discussion to justify his beliefs. As ive pointed out over several different posts now, this guy knows **** about what the bible is teaching him. Yet Judas continues to preach his sermon.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I have a friend (well, I haven't seen her in years, but anyway) who used to minister to prostitutes in a large city. Of course, prostitution was illegal. She didn't wear leather mini-skirts or anything, but she DID wear tighter jeans, a tank or something, etc. If she dressed "nice," the women would think she was a cop. She was sharing her faith and resources with women in need. The idea that she was trying to garner attention or that she was somehow guilty of promoting lust is ridiculous.

Jealousy, to me, is about control at its core. I cannot imagine ever losing my husband. It literally makes me stomach hurt to think about it. But I cannot control circumstances or him. And, spiritually speaking, he does not belong to me. God is allowing me the privilege of being his wife. If we go out, and his jeans look nice enough that a woman checks out his butt, for me to turn my angst onto HIM is unfair and unhealthy. And certainly, if said woman tries to "pick him up," both he and I will make things clear. But I do not need to beat my chest to keep my husband.

Pretty much EVERY person I have ever met with jealousy issues:
1. Is insecure and not as mature emotionally
2. Has control issues
3. Has been betrayed, and they have not healed well enough NOT to hold their current partner responsible for another partner's acts


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I understood everything you said the same way she did. I take further offense because I am a man. We should hold other men to a higher standard as men amd 100% accountable for their actions. Its not a woman's job to control the actions of men. Women should be able to wear nothing at all, and men should be able to remain in control themselves against their sinful impulses. The entire point of biblical teachings is about self discipline, not controlling others to make your self discipline easier for you.


You understanding my statements the same way as she did, doesn't lend itself any more to the accuracy of your perceptions. I am the ultimate authority on what I meant, and I stated that I didn't mean what she said I said/meant. And that's the end of it.

If you would like to explain why you understood me to say that all rape victims are wholly responsible for what happened to them, or that it's a woman's responsibility to make sure all the men around her don't get sexually aroused, then I would be happy to respond. But as I said, I never said any of the above, so you will likely have to extrapolate quite a bit.



InMyPrime said:


> Actually, one could argue (which I won’t) that while the dog is at fault from our frame of reference, the dog is just being a dog and that’s what dogs do. So retribution against the dog for example would make little sense. However the dog should probably be kept somewhere safe as to not pose further risk to people/other dogs (if it’s unusually vicious).
> Now watch someone scream: “oh yeah? Are you trying to normalise pedophilia now?”
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I see the thought process, but men are not animals. Well, they're not suppose to be, anyway. Regardless of how they act, they have ability to say no. Everything they do, is done by choice.

I guess one could argue that a dog may bite by choice, as we have little proof of how their minds work. How much higher reasoning they possess, if any.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I am speaking from a biblical context, as he is the one who brought the bible into this discussion to justify his beliefs. As ive pointed out over several different posts now, this guy knows **** about what the bible is teaching him. Yet Judas continues to preach his sermon.



Biblical context...I will see if I can keep up then: so if nudeness was abolished because Eve sinned (woman at fault, as ‘usual’), so clothes/fig leaves were introduced as the latest fashion line, to cover our shame (even though I am proud of my shame). But since the Jesus event, hasn’t everyone then automatically got atoned for their sins and therefore, doesn’t it mean that we can all go back to being naked? 

Why do I still need to wear a ****ing fig leaf?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I am speaking from a biblical context, as he is the one who brought the bible into this discussion to justify his beliefs. As ive pointed out over several different posts now, this guy knows **** about what the bible is teaching him. Yet Judas continues to preach his sermon.


These are not the foundation for anything I've said in this thread, nor had I thought about them previous to your post (but I fully expect they'll be used as ammo here shortly anyway). But I went and found them just for you. You were saying something about how believers are under no obligation to make other people's self-control more manageable?

1 Corinthians 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.

Romans 14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.

1 Corinthians 8:13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.

Matthew 18:6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. 7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> I have a friend (well, I haven't seen her in years, but anyway) who used to minister to prostitutes in a large city. Of course, prostitution was illegal. She didn't wear leather mini-skirts or anything, but she DID wear tighter jeans, a tank or something, etc. If she dressed "nice," the women would think she was a cop. She was sharing her faith and resources with women in need. The idea that she was trying to garner attention or that she was somehow guilty of promoting lust is ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




So for somebody who gets turned on by other men checking out my wife, does it make me extra secure and super mature? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> These are not the foundation for anything I've said in this thread, nor had I thought about them previous to your post (but I fully expect they'll be used as ammo here shortly anyway). But I went and found them just for you. You were saying something about how believers are under no obligation to make other people's self-control more manageable?
> 
> 1 Corinthians 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
> 
> ...


These are excellent verses. They all also assume a certain level of spiritual maturity, which is why, for example, they couldn't be applied to the friend who went to youth camp. Part of understanding freedom is understanding those principles. It is why even though there really is NO Biblical stand to the idea that everyone who has a glass of wine is sinning, I would never serve or have any alcohol with my in-laws because they are teetotalers. And while I would wear that swimsuit with my husband, I would not ever wear it to a cookout or swim party with a bunch of people around. However, when the people at said pool party who don't understand or practice those beliefs wear a teeny bikini, I do not stand in judgment because it doesn't make sense to expect that they would hold to my beliefs when they don't hold to them.

Our education director at my old church lost a daughter in a car accident. She was not wearing her seatbelt. One of the.....less socially aware members said at the funeral home, "It' too bad she didn't wear her seatbelt. She'd be here if she'd worn her seatbelt."

Yeah....that might have been true, but that isn't something you tell a grieving father. Just like you don't tell a woman traumatized from assault, "well, you caused him to stumble...."

I know you didn't say that, but sometimes in our zeal, we send the wrong message.


BTW, I have heard those "stumbling" verses twisted in some VERY abusive and oppressive ways. Using scripture in context is very important. Very


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> I probably have a different "radar" too. If I was dressed at work and someone said "You look nice," I would never think of that as flirting. I would think "how nice" and say thank you like you did.
> 
> I DO understand that my defensiveness is probably partly informed by the church I went to during those teen years. Guys could wear whatever they want. But girls? Our conservative one-piece swimsuits had to pass inspection before youth camp, and we STILL had to wear dark t-shirts over them. A friend of mine invited her completely unchurched friend to youth camp, hoping that her friend would find faith. The friend brought a two-piece. Not even a bikini. It was like bottoms and a tank top thingy. She wasn't allowed to swim, even with a t-shirt! And we went to Bill Gothard's "Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts" 2-week seminar EVERY summer. I learned that my body was a tool of Satan that was used to defraud poor, defenseless young men.
> 
> ...


So you're projecting all those experiences onto me? Simply because I expressed a logical thought process, that in some way reminds you of some dude called Bill Gothard?



personofinterest said:


> I have a friend (well, I haven't seen her in years, but anyway) who used to minister to prostitutes in a large city. Of course, prostitution was illegal. She didn't wear leather mini-skirts or anything, but she DID wear tighter jeans, a tank or something, etc. If she dressed "nice," the women would think she was a cop. She was sharing her faith and resources with women in need. The idea that she was trying to garner attention or that she was somehow guilty of promoting lust is ridiculous.
> 
> Jealousy, to me, is about control at its core. I cannot imagine ever losing my husband. It literally makes me stomach hurt to think about it. But I cannot control circumstances or him. And, spiritually speaking, he does not belong to me. God is allowing me the privilege of being his wife. If we go out, and his jeans look nice enough that a woman checks out his butt, for me to turn my angst onto HIM is unfair and unhealthy. And certainly, if said woman tries to "pick him up," both he and I will make things clear. But I do not need to beat my chest to keep my husband.
> 
> ...


Jealousy, to me, isn't about fear. I experience jealousy as intense anger. For instance, an ex-girlfriend of mine was in line at the mall one time, and a man behind her touched her butt. I wasn't there, but when she told me what happened, I got very, very angry - jealous. I wasn't afraid of losing her to the random guy, I was enraged that some prick would dare lay hands on my girl.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

InMyPrime said:


> Biblical context...I will see if I can keep up then: so if nudeness was abolished because Eve sinned (woman at fault, as ‘usual’), so clothes/fig leaves were introduced as the latest fashion line, to cover our shame (even though I am proud of my shame). But since the Jesus event, hasn’t everyone then automatically got atoned for their sins and therefore, doesn’t it mean that we can all go back to being naked?
> 
> Why do I still need to wear a ****ing fig leaf?
> 
> ...


I adressed this already. Post 114.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

BioFury said:


> I'm not sure what your _point_, is. That his daughters should be able to walk down the hallway naked if they want to, and I'm the unhinged control maniac who's trying to stop them?


Some schools still have dress codes.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> Jealousy, to me, isn't about fear. I experience jealousy as intense anger. For instance, an ex-girlfriend of mine was in line at the mall one time, and a man behind her touched her butt. I wasn't there, but when she told me what happened, I got very, very angry - jealous. I wasn't afraid of losing her to the random guy, I was enraged that some prick would dare lay hands on my girl.


What was she wearing? I mean, maybe she was asking for it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Sure. That might help the people getting bogged down with the example, rather than commenting on the principle being discussed.


You think it is being bogged down with an example. But it is actually so central to the point, it is disheartening that you don't "get it".


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

notmyjamie said:


> Is this because your wife is a nurse? I don't ever think of scrubs as sexy, although some people do look very good in them. Nurses' uniforms have gotten less and less sexy over the years, as the strict moral codes expected of nurses has gone down. Kind of a strange phenomenon.


I've read it's also because more men are becoming nurses.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

NextTimeAround said:


> I've read it's also because more men are becoming nurses.


I've always had a thing for the "fresh out of bed" look. Hair in a messy pony, minimal if any make-up, scrubs sort of look like pajamas lol. Idk, I just think they are attractive. Some Women like a man in uniform. Who knows why we find certain things attractive.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

NextTimeAround said:


> I've read it's also because more men are becoming nurses.


Are you saying uniforms are less sexy because more men are nurses now? Or that @TheDudeLebowski finds scrubs hot because more guys are wearing them??? :grin2:

The real reason nurses' uniforms have changed over the years is that the nurses' role has evolved and nurses do much more hands on care of patients. Nurses need to be free to move about quickly in an emergency and not be encumbered by their uniform. Dresses and stockings and hats and capes hinder they ability to act quickly and move freely. Also, uniforms must be easy to clean to help with infection control.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I've always had a thing for the "fresh out of bed" look. Hair in a messy pony, minimal if any make-up, scrubs sort of look like pajamas lol. Idk, I just think they are attractive. Some Women like a man in uniform. Who knows why we find certain things attractive.


LOL...I've often said I'm very lucky to be able to go to work in my pajamas. I have to change at work and so at the end of the day I have to change back into regular clothes. It's always a bummer to put jeans back on after wearing comfortable scrubs all day.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Tiggy! said:


> He had a bigger gun (how do you think he got you to undress).
> *Do you dress like a hobo to deterrent someone from robbing you?*


I have been careful when considering jewelry. For example, when i have gone to surgery, I leave my jewelry at home. 

I prefer to avoid problems.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Yeah, I feel like I've subjected myself to some type of feminist holy war. My points were completely ignored, while they just bashed me for trying to take away their yoga pants, and insinuating that people are responsible for the circumstances they choose to put themselves in.


I guess if you wanted to know if people were jealous, you would ask simply, are you jealous.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

That isn't jealousy, that is (very reasonable) anger at someone who groped / assaulted your wife. To me that is an entirely different thing. 

It would be jealousy and not assault if she had encouraged / consented to him doing that. 



BioFury said:


> So you're projecting all those experiences onto me? Simply because I expressed a logical thought process, that in some way reminds you of some dude called Bill Gothard?
> 
> 
> 
> Jealousy, to me, isn't about fear. I experience jealousy as intense anger. For instance, an ex-girlfriend of mine was in line at the mall one time, and a man behind her touched her butt. I wasn't there, but when she told me what happened, I got very, very angry - jealous. I wasn't afraid of losing her to the random guy, I was enraged that some prick would dare lay hands on my girl.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Agreed!

I don't like it as much when someone looks like they are trying very hard to be attractive. 

Just personal preference. 



TheDudeLebowski said:


> I've always had a thing for the "fresh out of bed" look. Hair in a messy pony, minimal if any make-up, scrubs sort of look like pajamas lol. Idk, I just think they are attractive. Some Women like a man in uniform. Who knows why we find certain things attractive.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I consider on of the most important things that makes us human is the ability to NOT act on impulses / instincts. 



InMyPrime said:


> Actually, one could argue (which I won’t) that while the dog is at fault from our frame of reference, the dog is just being a dog and that’s what dogs do. So retribution against the dog for example would make little sense. However the dog should probably be kept somewhere safe as to not pose further risk to people/other dogs (if it’s unusually vicious).
> Now watch someone scream: “oh yeah? Are you trying to normalise pedophilia now?”
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> You really threw me with the A. 2. C. thing, lol :grin2: People that teach OCD children should totally pull that one >
> 
> Yoga pants, regardless of how thick they are, are extremely revealing. But we reached the point in society that showing the exact likeness of your butt to everyone is socially acceptable.
> 
> ...


And, what, exactly is wrong with society not caring what people wear? Really, why SHOULD "society" care what anyone else wears? As for how that impacts jealousy, it is a non-issue. Again, I, personally, don't care how anyone else handles what constitutes jealousy or its causes in their relationship. I might have voice an opinion on it in a thought exercise kind of way, but basically don't care. But conflating dress with sexuality is a topic that has come up in this thread, rightly in my view. I personally think that a person should be able to walk down the street buck naked without risk of violence of any kind, including sexual violence.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

personofinterest said:


> Let me guess. You don't believe women should wear pants, makeup, or jewelry. You don't believe they should work outside the home. You don't believe they should cut their hair. You are probably either Church of God or IFB. You also believe the KJV is the only inspired Bible.
> 
> I hold a Biblical world view, and I dont blame women for their own assaults.
> 
> Question: if a woman entered your church dressed in a way you deemed inappropriately, what would happen to her? And would you blame her for YOUR choice to lust?


If you enter the Sistein chapel or most other Catholic strctures in appropriately dressed, you would be given something to cover yourself or asked to leave.

A friend of my brother's came to my sister's wedding in a track suit. My mother made him leave.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I understood everything you said the same way she did. I take further offense because I am a man. We should hold other men to a higher standard as men amd 100% accountable for their actions. Its not a woman's job to control the actions of men. Women should be able to wear nothing at all, and men should be able to remain in control themselves against their sinful impulses. The entire point of biblical teachings is about self discipline, not controlling others to make your self discipline easier for you.


My husband would be banned pretty much instantly if he participated in this thread.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

uhtred said:


> That isn't jealousy, that is (very reasonable) anger at someone who groped / assaulted your wife. To me that is an entirely different thing.
> 
> It would be jealousy and not assault if she had *encouraged */ _consented _to him doing that.


Bold. NO. Italics yes.


Haaaa. Had to change Yes to underline since quoting italicizes.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

NextTimeAround said:


> Some schools still have dress codes.


Our high school tried to have one. It blew up in the administrators' faces. Why? Because in the policy they actually stated that the purpose of it was to keep young mens' minds on their school work and not have them be distracted by the girls. 

As you might imagine, that caused quite the stramash in our little town. In the end, we ended up with no dress policy.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

NobodySpecial said:


> My husband would be banned pretty much instantly if he participated in this thread.


I've had had to be very careful myself. A mod did me a solid a few months ago when I said how I really felt, edited my post and shot me a warning via PM. Out of respect for them, I've seriously toned down what I would really like to say here.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

notmyjamie said:


> Our high school tried to have one. It blew up in the administrators' faces. Why? Because in the policy they actually stated that the purpose of it was to keep young mens' minds on their school work and not have them be distracted by the girls.
> 
> As you might imagine, that caused quite the stramash in our little town. In the end, we ended up with no dress policy.


MAAAAAN did I get some evil looks when I suggested that the Moms in our teen parent group teach their boys that their attention to their schoolwork is THEIR (the boys) responsibility not the responsibility of girls when they wake up in the morning and are getting dressed. I held my ground, and actually had some Moms thank me for the conversation that continued from there. It was pretty interesting.

Schools don't care about the relative rightness of their decisions. They just want the water to be smooth. Citing that as some kind of reason to view dress codes as a good thing is absurd.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

notmyjamie said:


> Our high school tried to have one. It blew up in the administrators' faces. Why? Because in the policy they actually stated that the purpose of it was to keep young mens' minds on their school work and not have them be distracted by the girls.
> 
> As you might imagine, that caused quite the stramash in our little town. In the end, we ended up with no dress policy.


As an actual educator, I am actually in favor of dress codes for both genders. PC or not, like it or not, etc. some types of clothing ARE a distraction from the learning process and just plain not fit to wear. For example, you can't do your work or take PE very well if you have to constantly use one hand just to hold up your pants. And if I can see "the goods" when you bend over to pick up your pencil - sorry, not school appropriate.

I am a big believer in affordable uniforms because it just takes care of ALL the whining.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> As an actual educator, I am actually in favor of dress codes for both genders. PC or not, like it or not, etc. some types of clothing ARE a distraction from the learning process and just plain not fit to wear. For example, you can't do your work or take PE very well if you have to constantly use one hand just to hold up your pants. And if I can see "the goods" when you bend over to pick up your pencil - sorry, not school appropriate.
> 
> I am a big believer in affordable uniforms because it just takes care of ALL the whining.


I am not dead set against dress codes. I AM dead set against dress codes whose actual rationale is the keep boys from being distracted by girls' shoulders.


ETA - and when the boys' distraction prevents the girls wearing correct clothes for athletics - like leggings - Yah I get pretty pissed.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> These are not the foundation for anything I've said in this thread, nor had I thought about them previous to your post (but I fully expect they'll be used as ammo here shortly anyway). But I went and found them just for you. You were saying something about how believers are under no obligation to make other people's self-control more manageable?
> 
> 1 Corinthians 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak.
> 
> ...



Judas keeps the sermon going...

Again you have no idea what the scripture is teaching you. All these you posted is regarding intent of the offender. Your liberty shouldn't be used to deliberately create a stumbling block for another or to purposefully offend. I'm not going to be taking a giant T-bone and chicken wings to a Vegan bbq. I wouldn't bring a bacond wrapped pork chop to my Muslim friend's home, even though I myself have the religious freedom to eat pork. 

On one hand, you are arguing that your intent is taken out of context. On the other hand, you are arguing that you know the intent of women when they choose to wear specific items of clothing. 

The hypocrites of the church turn a lot of people off of religion entirely. I'm glad I was able to come to terms with this, and able to separate the collective Judas from the actual actual teachings and no longer conflate the two.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> On one hand, you are arguing that your intent is taken out of context. On the other hand, you are arguing that you know the intent of women when they choose to wear specific items of clothing.
> [\quote]
> Dude gets a gold star.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

NobodySpecial said:


> I am not dead set against dress codes. I AM dead set against dress codes whose actual rationale is the keep boys from being distracted by girls' shoulders.


Exactly. The people opposed to the dress code had no problem with some simple standards being set for all students. The problem was that other than boys must wear shirts, the rest of the dress code was for girls and again, it was specifically stated that it was to help young men keep themselves in check and on their studies. 

What kind of message does that send? That it's up to young girls to keep boys from acting in appropriately? How about teaching these young men that THEY are responsible for keeping their mind on their studies. Girls find boys attractive as well, and many a girl has been distracted by a cute boy. Nobody ever tells that boy he's done something wrong. 

So as a consequence of this poorly executed dress code, now there isn't one. And you have many girls walking around like they are at a nightclub. Nobody is noticing the yoga pants anymore because Suzy is walking around in stripper shoes with her breasts falling out and her butt cheeks showing under her skirt. And guess what...on average, the boys grades have not faltered. In fact, most of the boys I know seem to go for the "girl next door" type.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NextTimeAround said:


> Some schools still have dress codes.


In Portland, the main problem with the way kids dress at school is that they wear their pajama pants. Banning pajama pants has happened at some schools. But other schools are like "who cares, at least they are wearing pants".


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think people should be able to wear anything without fear of assault - but then I guess I think people should never fear assault under any conditions.

OTOH I view clothing choice as a form of speech - limited of course by budget and practicality. So I think it is OK to form opinions of someone based on their clothing choices - though you need to be careful you know all of their constraints. Its of course not OK to assault / harass someone reguardless of their clothing (or lack of same).




NobodySpecial said:


> And, what, exactly is wrong with society not caring what people wear? Really, why SHOULD "society" care what anyone else wears? As for how that impacts jealousy, it is a non-issue. Again, I, personally, don't care how anyone else handles what constitutes jealousy or its causes in their relationship. I might have voice an opinion on it in a thought exercise kind of way, but basically don't care. But conflating dress with sexuality is a topic that has come up in this thread, rightly in my view. I personally think that a person should be able to walk down the street buck naked without risk of violence of any kind, including sexual violence.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

uhtred said:


> I think people should be able to wear anything without fear of assault - but then I guess I think people should never fear assault under any conditions.
> 
> OTOH I view clothing choice as a form of speech - limited of course by budget and practicality. So I think it is OK to form opinions of someone based on their clothing choices - though you need to be careful you know all of their constraints. Its of course not OK to assault / harass someone reguardless of their clothing (or lack of same).


Indeed. Form ALL the opinions you want.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

uhtred said:


> I think people should be able to wear anything without fear of assault - but then I guess I think people should never fear assault under any conditions.
> 
> OTOH I view clothing choice as a form of speech - limited of course by budget and practicality. *So I think it is OK to form opinions of someone based on their clothing choices - though you need to be careful you know all of their constraints. * Its of course not OK to assault / harass someone reguardless of their clothing (or lack of same).


I agree, but i also think you need to recognize when you're projecting and what you think may have to do more with your own beliefs and feelings than the person you're looking at.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Tiggy! said:


> I agree, but i also think you need to recognize when you're projecting and what you think may have to do more with your own beliefs and feelings than the person you're looking at.


Oh my this is so true. We assess others' motives, actions, and behaviors through the lens of our own belief system and biases. What is the old adage, your opinion of me often says more about you than it does about me.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> These are excellent verses. They all also assume a certain level of spiritual maturity, which is why, for example, they couldn't be applied to the friend who went to youth camp. Part of understanding freedom is understanding those principles. It is why even though there really is NO Biblical stand to the idea that everyone who has a glass of wine is sinning, I would never serve or have any alcohol with my in-laws because they are teetotalers. And while I would wear that swimsuit with my husband, I would not ever wear it to a cookout or swim party with a bunch of people around. However, when the people at said pool party who don't understand or practice those beliefs wear a teeny bikini, I do not stand in judgment because it doesn't make sense to expect that they would hold to my beliefs when they don't hold to them.
> 
> Our education director at my old church lost a daughter in a car accident. She was not wearing her seatbelt. One of the.....less socially aware members said at the funeral home, "It' too bad she didn't wear her seatbelt. She'd be here if she'd worn her seatbelt."
> 
> ...


Well, my argument is that your friend shouldn't have been there. But given that she was, she should've been held to rules of the governing body. When I am in your house, I follow your rules. I don't get to unplug your refrigerator, and scream at your dogs, merely because I'm in the habit of doing so where I come from.

What's the point in dressing modestly ourselves, if we invite porn stars to do a shoot across the pool from us? Pretty extreme example, but I think you catch my drift.



uhtred said:


> That isn't jealousy, that is (very reasonable) anger at someone who groped / assaulted your wife. To me that is an entirely different thing.
> 
> It would be jealousy and not assault if she had encouraged / consented to him doing that.


Perhaps I don't understand jealousy, but the way I view it, is the feeling that arises when someone crosses your boundaries. When they assert themselves onto your turf, as if it's their own. It's not a fear of loss. It's outrage over someone... profaning that which is holy, lol. Taking something that is yours, and only yours, and attempting to make it theirs, or public property.



NobodySpecial said:


> And, what, exactly is wrong with society not caring what people wear? Really, why SHOULD "society" care what anyone else wears? As for how that impacts jealousy, it is a non-issue. Again, I, personally, don't care how anyone else handles what constitutes jealousy or its causes in their relationship. I might have voice an opinion on it in a thought exercise kind of way, but basically don't care. But conflating dress with sexuality is a topic that has come up in this thread, rightly in my view. I personally think that a person should be able to walk down the street buck naked without risk of violence of any kind, including sexual violence.


Nothing. If you hold a secular world view, then there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing whatever you want. The problem with letting people do whatever they want, is that they do whatever they want. And you then have to scramble to stop them from doing all the bad things they want to do, that you don't want them to.



notmyjamie said:


> Our high school tried to have one. It blew up in the administrators' faces. Why? Because in the policy they actually stated that the purpose of it was to keep young mens' minds on their school work and not have them be distracted by the girls.
> 
> As you might imagine, that caused quite the stramash in our little town. In the end, we ended up with no dress policy.





NobodySpecial said:


> MAAAAAN did I get some evil looks when I suggested that the Moms in our teen parent group teach their boys that their attention to their schoolwork is THEIR (the boys) responsibility not the responsibility of girls when they wake up in the morning and are getting dressed. I held my ground, and actually had some Moms thank me for the conversation that continued from there. It was pretty interesting.
> 
> Schools don't care about the relative rightness of their decisions. They just want the water to be smooth. Citing that as some kind of reason to view dress codes as a good thing is absurd.


Uh huh. So girls should be able to walk around naked, because it's men's problem if they notice? Does that mean I can stand on your front lawn naked, and it's your problem if you don't like it?

I daresay that if the boys started coming to school with their penises hanging out the bottom of their shorts, something would be said about it. Yet you wouldn't find anything at all ridiculous about the school telling the boys to put their shafts back in their pants. But telling girls to keep their breasts and butts in their clothes... the nerve.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Nothing. If you hold a secular world view, then there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing whatever you want. The problem with letting people do whatever they want, is that they do whatever they want. And you then have to scramble to stop them from doing all the bad things they want to do, that you don't want them to.


This is a very real question from a mental health PoV. Why do you want to stop them from doing things? And more importantly, what do you think you ought to "scramble" or act in any way to stop them from doing what they want to do whether you want them to or not? As in, what gives you the goddamn right?





> Uh huh. So girls should be able to walk around naked, because it's men's problem if they notice? Does that mean I can stand on your front lawn naked, and it's your problem if you don't like it?


Pretty much. I am good with that. It is actually funny since public nudity is completely legal where I am.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> This is a very real question from a mental health PoV. Why do you want to stop them from doing things? And more importantly, what do you think you ought to "scramble" or act in any way to stop them from doing what they want to do whether you want them to or not? As in, what gives you the goddamn right?


I don't really care. This whole thread has morphed into something I never intended. But people, I think it was you, or POI, made assertions about my OP, which I stated were not my intent, but that I was open to discussing.

So I'm not here on a hell-bent crusade trying to get you all to throw away your yoga pants. If I were, then @personofinterest 's statement that I need professional help would be accurate, lol. It's just a discussion.



NobodySpecial said:


> Pretty much. I am good with that. It is actually funny since public nudity is completely legal where I am.


Just, wow.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> I don't really care. This whole thread has morphed into something I never intended. But people, I think it was you, or POI, made assertions about my OP, which I stated were not my intent, but that I was open to discussing.
> 
> So I'm not here on a hell-bent crusade trying to get you all to throw away your yoga pants. If I were, then @personofinterest 's statement that I need professional help would be accurate, lol. It's just a discussion.
> 
> ...


A discussion on a fairly important topic, one where you continue to make assertions then say that you did not mean those assertions. A bit weird. But whatever.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

> Well, my argument is that your friend shouldn't have been there. But given that she was, she should've been held to rules of the governing body. When I am in your house, I follow your rules. I don't get to unplug your refrigerator, and scream at your dogs, merely because I'm in the habit of doing so where I come from.
> 
> What's the point in dressing modestly ourselves, if we invite porn stars to do a shoot across the pool from us? Pretty extreme example, but I think you catch my drift.


What are you even talking about? What friend shouldn't have been where???



> Uh huh. So girls should be able to walk around naked, because it's men's problem if they notice? Does that mean I can stand on your front lawn naked, and it's your problem if you don't like it?
> 
> I daresay that if the boys started coming to school with their penises hanging out the bottom of their shorts, something would be said about it. Yet you wouldn't find anything at all ridiculous about the school telling the boys to put their shafts back in their pants. But telling girls to keep their breasts and butts in their clothes... the nerve.


This is why no one takes you seriously. Did anyone advocate girls walking through school halls naked?

You really need to read a little less Leviticus and a little more Matthew 5. Seriously.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Agreed - but it is a complex interaction. People dress with a knowledge of how other people may interpret that. Its complicated. 

Gang style clothing, skin-head clothing, etc - send a message to many people. Other types of clothing can be interpreted in a wider range of ways, but will still be interpreted. 




personofinterest said:


> Oh my this is so true. We assess others' motives, actions, and behaviors through the lens of our own belief system and biases. What is the old adage, your opinion of me often says more about you than it does about me.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> What are you even talking about? What friend shouldn't have been where???


The friend you told me about in your post? The one you invited to camp, and she wasn't allowed to swim because she had on a two piece?




personofinterest said:


> This is why no one takes you seriously. Did anyone advocate girls walking through school halls naked?


Have you read the whole thread? They just did, like one page ago. I think it was... I don't even know who, that said women should be able to walk anywhere buck naked, without being bothered by men. Then, someone else said that it was ridiculous for schools to put a dress code in place that addresses women's revealing clothing. And that if boys are distracted by an eyeful of breasts, or a thong sticking up above a girls jeans, that's their problem.

I then followed up with @NobodySpecial , and asked if that's really what she was saying, and she said yes. Seriously, like, four posts up from this one.


----------



## azimuth (May 15, 2018)

BioFury said:


> Well, my argument is that your friend shouldn't have been there. But given that she was, she should've been held to rules of the governing body. When I am in your house, I follow your rules. I don't get to unplug your refrigerator, and scream at your dogs, merely because I'm in the habit of doing so where I come from.
> 
> What's the point in dressing modestly ourselves, if we invite porn stars to do a shoot across the pool from us? Pretty extreme example, but I think you catch my drift.
> 
> ...



Women are not possessions. You don't own your wife or GF. She can wear what she wants. If someone touches her butt, it's because some guy chose to touch her butt. There were creeps before the invention of yoga pants. Just think of all the dozens of men she saw in public that day who didn't touch her butt. She was not putting herself on display, she was wearing what she wanted. Your last sentence is weird. Girls breasts and butts ARE in their clothes. I've never seen anyone with anything hanging out in public, ever in my whole life.

You were offended that the guy who touched a girls' butt was making her "public property." Telling women what they should and shouldn't wear is the definition of making them public property. You're shaming them for what they choose to wear. I am more offended that you say we should be covered, than if some guy touched my butt. If someone wants to wear yoga pants and flip flops who cares really.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> The friend you told me about in your post? The one you invited to camp, and she wasn't allowed to swim because she had on a two piece?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I said PEOPLE should be able to walk around naked in public. That was me. It even happens to be legal here. I would not raise a big stink if that was not legal. I was driving with my kids when we saw a guy walking down the street buck naked except for sneakers. lol. It was pretty funny. Guess how many people afford themselves of the legal opportunity to run around naked around here? Next to none. 

But school is not public. I mentioned that as well. School is a, rightly, controlled environment for the education of young people. No one said anything about walking around in a thong at school. But the focus of boys' attention span for controlling girls' attire? Hell yeah. That is dead wrong.

Interestingly @Notmyjaimie mentioned that the absence of that kind of dress had done nothing to the boys' grades in her school district.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> Well, my argument is that your friend shouldn't have been there.


Interesting. So a Christian should not invite others into places of worship or attempt to share their faith with them unless they adhear to strict clothing requirements that are put here by man, not God. What part of the bible did you get that view from? Oh that's right, you're simply full of ****. I almost forgot for a second.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

uhtred said:


> Agreed - but it is a complex interaction. People dress with a knowledge of how other people may interpret that. Its complicated.
> 
> Gang style clothing, skin-head clothing, etc - send a message to many people. Other types of clothing can be interpreted in a wider range of ways, but will still be interpreted.


True. There used to be places where you were taking your life into your hands wearing certain colors. It was crazy, but I certainly wouldn't be the one to "protest" the unfairness by intentionally wearing said color.

I am being very old southern lady now, but I wonder if some of this is that we have just stopped teaching the common sense that there is a time and place for things? I mean, it used to kind of be understood that you don't wear Daisy Dukes to your cousin's wedding and you don't wear a suit to help someone with yard work. Okay, I'm being facetious. But it's like we want to "prove" our "power" by being just plain inappropriate and disrespectful. It's not even always a modesty thing. I mean, if my best friend is getting married at 7 in the evening at a cathedral, I am not gonna show up in a tank top and yoga pants. Because ADULT. If I am going to work, unless I dig ditches or something, I am not gonna wear holey jeans and a baby-t. I;m not wearing bermuda shorts and a tank to a job interview (unless it's to work on the beach lol).

Yay, let's be individuals! I am all for that! I'm artsy and creative and all that jazz. But some stuff is just good old fashioned grown up MANNERS.

I was a graduate teaching assistant in my early 20's. The university was VERY Greek. Because I had blond hair, wore preppy clothing, and was friendly, everyone assumed I was a Zeta or Phi Mu. In reality, I was never in any sorority. However, I didn't get all irate at the assumption. I LOOKED like a sorority girl. 

I really don't have an issue with people making logical assumptions. It's when they use those logical assumptions to victim blame that I have an issue.

I also understand that I live IN this world, and there was never going to be a time that this world was going to conform to Biblical standards. The world is not going to act like the Bible. That is Christianity 101. I also understand that the Bible includes things like the end of Matthew 28. So relegating myself to only us-holy-4-and-no-more situations is the antithesis of a Christian worldview.


There is a subset of Christians who only want to hear the fuzzy, warm, hippie Jesus parts of the Bible.

AND then there is another subset of Christians who only want to hear about how awful other people are for sinning and how it is their job to condemn it.

You don't get to choose one or the other, believers 
Then again, it was the Pharisees who had a duck fit over Jesus eating with sinners and talking to that adulterous woman.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

azimuth said:


> Women are not possessions. You don't own your wife or GF.


He doesn't have a wife or GF. Go figure huh? A catch like him? Should be swimming in it. Lmao


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> The friend you told me about in your post? The one you invited to camp, and she wasn't allowed to swim because she had on a two piece?
> 
> .


So my lost friend shouldn't have been at youth camp? So only Christians who wear one pieces get to hear about Jesus?

Sorry, but MY Bible doesn't say we make people clean up their act before we share the gospel. Neither does yours.

You do realize that compared to Christ you are just as vile as the woman who wears low cut dresses, right?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> You do realize that compared to Christ you are just as vile as the woman who wears low cut dresses, right?


I don't think he feels he's comparable to Christ, but he's certainly better than everyone else here. We just don't get it.

I'm not even a Christian really, and I dare say I have a better understanding of the scripture than this one.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

azimuth said:


> Women are not possessions. You don't own your wife or GF. She can wear what she wants.


That's where you're wrong. Were I married, my wife would belong to me. Hence the phrase *my* wife. And sure, while I can't physically force her to wear appropriate clothing, she would not be my wife if I needed to.



NobodySpecial said:


> I said PEOPLE should be able to walk around naked in public. That was me. It even happens to be legal here. I would not raise a big stink if that was not legal. I was driving with my kids when we saw a guy walking down the street buck naked except for sneakers. lol. It was pretty funny. Guess how many people afford themselves of the legal opportunity to run around naked around here? Next to none.
> 
> But school is not public. I mentioned that as well. School is a, rightly, controlled environment for the education of young people. No one said anything about walking around in a thong at school. But the focus of boys' attention span for controlling girls' attire? Hell yeah. That is dead wrong.
> 
> Interestingly @Notmyjaimie mentioned that the absence of that kind of dress had done nothing to the boys' grades in her school district.


According to your standard, how does it being a school change anything? If someone can be naked on your front lawn, who are you to tell them they can't be naked in your kids classroom? 



personofinterest said:


> So my lost friend shouldn't have been at youth camp? So only Christians who wear one pieces get to hear about Jesus?
> 
> Sorry, but MY Bible doesn't say we make people clean up their act before we share the gospel. Neither does yours.
> 
> You do realize that compared to Christ you are just as vile as the woman who wears low cut dresses, right?


You are equating proselytization, with friendship. When the two are not the same.

Mark 2:17 doesn't mean the Messiah was friends with all the prostitutes and murderers. "Hey Anne, how was business this week? Would you like to undress, go swimming, and I'll teach you about God later?"

He states He is calling sinners to repentance, as a doctor heals the sick. Not as their friend, or swimming buddy.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I don't think he feels he's comparable to Christ, but he's certainly better than everyone else here. We just don't get it.
> 
> I'm not even a Christian really, and I dare say I have a better understanding of the scripture than this one.


I'm not sure that is a completely fair assessment. I think a lot of us who grew up in conservative churches forget that we are in just as desperate a need of mercy and grace as the vilest person on earth. If you try to jump from one side of a ravine to the other on your own and don't make it, it doesn't much matter if you missed it by inches or feet. You're still splattered all over the ground.

My, that was a lovely image, wasn't it?

I remember when I turned 18, and this really neat Christian girl I had gotten to know on a mission trip let me borrow her walkman. She had WHITNEY HOUSTON playing in it. WHITNEY HOUSTON I tell ya!! I only listened to Christan music, went to a church that was ANTI secular music (think album burnings). How could someone who I knew was so sincere be listening to....sputter,sputter....THAT??? THEN, in grad school, after being mentored by this amazing godly woman....I babysat her kids, and found WINE in the back of her fridge! The HORROR!!! How could she REALLY love Jesus?????

I then realized that not all of my youth minister's and preacher's requirements and hoops were technically IN the Bible......yeah.

Now I'm a real tart. I go to lunch with Lutherans and Jewish people and.....ATHEISTS at work sometimes. AND I rode on the same boat as a woman wearing a bikini!

I'm basically Mary Magdalene now.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> That's where you're wrong. Were I married, my wife would belong to me. Hence the phrase *my* wife. And sure, while I can't physically force her to wear appropriate clothing, she would not be my wife if I needed to.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your standard, how does it being a school change anything? If someone can be naked on your front lawn, who are you to tell them they can't be naked in your kids classroom?


*I* am not telling them anything. Do you not know how the expectations for schools are determined? Nor that it is fundamentally different than the general public?

The community in which the school resides decides the rules for the educational environment. It works quite well.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> What's the point in dressing modestly ourselves, if we invite porn stars to do a shoot across the pool from us? Pretty extreme example, but I think you catch my drift.


If you don't understand the point of practicing your faith through self control and sacrifice in the presence of sin which exists all around you and within you, then I don't see how it's even possible that you've ever even read the bible. For someone who maintains they are faith driven, I've yet to see you once in this entire discussion make a faith based argument that is also in line with what the bible actually teaches.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> *I* am not telling them anything. Do you not know how the expectations for schools are determined? Nor that it is fundamentally different than the general public?
> 
> The community in which the school resides decides the rules for the educational environment. It works quite well.


Ok, so if I am understanding you correctly, you're alright with a governing body setting rules and restrictions for those beneath them?

So if I was your city councilman you wouldn't find anything wrong with it if I passed an ordinance banning yoga pants in public? Since I would be the leader of the community. Let's even say for arguments sake, that I had the support of all the other counsel members. You'd be totally cool with that?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Ok, so if I am understanding you correctly, you're alright with a governing body setting rules and restrictions for those beneath them?


Within the scope of people they are serving with a mind not to violate the rights of the body governed. So yes.



> So if I was your city councilman you wouldn't find anything wrong with it if I passed an ordinance banning yoga pants in public? Since I would be the leader of the community. Let's even say for arguments sake, that I had the support of all the other counsel members. You'd be totally cool with that?


You think a city councilman is a "leader of the community" and can act in this way? Obviously not per the manner mentioned above in which laws should be made. Do you have a point here?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Bio fury, I have an honest question. If someone wanting to hear about Christ showed up at your church and her skirt was too short or his clothing was to raggedy, would you let them in?


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> Within the scope of people they are serving with a mind not to violate the rights of the body governed. So yes.
> 
> You think a city councilman is a "leader of the community" and can act in this way? Obviously not per the manner mentioned above in which laws should be made. Do you have a point here?


Well, you seem to be ok with the community violating a school-goers rights/desires, by requiring them to wear clothes while in a place of study. But you wouldn't find it acceptable, if that same body, forbid the wearing of yoga pants?



personofinterest said:


> Bio fury, I have an honest question. If someone wanting to hear about Christ showed up at your church and her skirt was too short or his clothing was to raggedy, would you let them in?


That's not really comparable to summer camp. With summer camp, it's a planned event, and those attending are expected to conform to the guidelines set forth by the organizers. If someone is invited in by one of the campers, especially for a specific activity, then would it not make sense for them to be informed of the community rules for that activity beforehand? For instance, if I was a wiccan, and I usually praise satan naked, it would make sense for you to inform me that you wear clothes at your church, and that I will be expected to be clothed as well, when you extend me an invitation.

A random Jane arriving unannounced at church is different, because there is no expectation for them to be aware of the rules before showing up. But in answer to your question, I don't have a perfect solution. What I do know is you can't allow someone to freely engage in activity, in your very midst, that you are teaching is wrong (Mt 18:15). 

What do you think the solution is?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Well, you seem to be ok with the community violating a school-goers rights/desires, by requiring them to wear clothes while in a place of study. But you wouldn't find it acceptable, if* that same body*, forbid the wearing of yoga pants?


So.... what you are saying is that the city counsel governs school rules? I am sorry. I can't help you. You are all over the place.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> I'm not sure that is a completely fair assessment. I think a lot of us who grew up in conservative churches forget that we are in just as desperate a need of mercy and grace as the vilest person on earth. If you try to jump from one side of a ravine to the other on your own and don't make it, it doesn't much matter if you missed it by inches or feet. You're still splattered all over the ground.
> 
> My, that was a lovely image, wasn't it?
> 
> ...


I grew up in small town bible belt Texas in a private Christian school from pre-k through 5th grade. I completely understand the mindset and have seen it. Its one of the many reasons I turned from God for a long time. The hypocrites who preach their version of the truth and are hyper judgemental of others. I'm not a good guy, but I do understand where my faults are, and I do see where the bible is great guide for personal accountability for myself and how to live a more fulfilling life and seek a relationship with God. I don't consider myself a Christian, but I hold many of the lessons in the bible in the highest regard.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> So.... what you are saying is that the city counsel governs school rules? I am sorry. I can't help you. You are all over the place.


Forget the city counsel, it was just a placeholder. Goodness.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> Bio fury, I have an honest question. If someone wanting to hear about Christ showed up at your church and her skirt was too short or his clothing was to raggedy, would you let them in?


If Jesus weren't in heaven right now, he would have a huge headache.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"random Jane arriving unannounced at church is different, because there is no expectation for them to be aware of the rules before showing up. But in answer to your question, I don't have a perfect solution. What I do know is you can't allow someone to freely engage in activity, in your very midst, that you are teaching is wrong (Mt 18:15). "

Uou just said all I need to know. Your dress rules are more important than the gospel.


She me where what a person is wearing disqualifies them? What wrong teaching is she engaged in?

You are not like Jesus.

I see no further reason to engage.


----------



## azimuth (May 15, 2018)

BioFury said:


> That's where you're wrong. Were I married, my wife would belong to me. Hence the phrase *my* wife. And sure, while I can't physically force her to wear appropriate clothing, she would not be my wife if I needed to.


You are very controlling. You're going to have a very hard time finding a woman who'll agree to your demands of how she dresses. In all of my past and current relationship, none of them have ever said that I can't wear yoga pants or a bikini at the beach or a sports bra at the gym. Anytime I looked good they complimented me, not shamed me. I would run so fast from someone who thinks they own me and need to cover up what's theirs. You're not your wife's father, you can't tell her what is appropriate to wear.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > Bio fury, I have an honest question. If someone wanting to hear about Christ showed up at your church and her skirt was too short or his clothing was to raggedy, would you let them in?
> ...


Hes here, and he is grieved


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> "random Jane arriving unannounced at church is different, because there is no expectation for them to be aware of the rules before showing up. But in answer to your question, I don't have a perfect solution. What I do know is you can't *allow *someone to freely engage in activity, in your very midst, that you are teaching is wrong (Mt 18:15). "
> 
> Uou just said all I need to know. Your dress rules are more important than the gospel.
> 
> ...


You know the central theme of this .... "allow". He seems to be hell bent on modifying/*controlling* other people's behavior.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> "random Jane arriving unannounced at church is different, because there is no expectation for them to be aware of the rules before showing up. But in answer to your question, I don't have a perfect solution. What I do know is you can't allow someone to freely engage in activity, in your very midst, that you are teaching is wrong (Mt 18:15). "
> 
> Uou just said all I need to know. Your dress rules are more important than the gospel.
> 
> ...


The gospel *is* rules. You can't preach the keeping of God's rules, while allowing the violation of them at the same time.

The dress code is not mine. If you search in scripture, you can find it yourself. But I agree, further discussion is pointless. Thank you for participating though :smile2:


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

azimuth said:


> You are very controlling. You're going to have a very hard time finding a woman who'll agree to your demands of how she dresses. In all of my past and current relationship, none of them have ever said that I can't wear yoga pants or a bikini at the beach or a sports bra at the gym. Anytime I looked good they complimented me, not shamed me. I would run so fast from someone who thinks they own me and need to cover up what's theirs. You're not your wife's father, you can't tell her what is appropriate to wear.


You're not the kind of woman I'm after. So yes, if I was after women like you, I'd be hard pressed to find anyone.

Fortunately, the women I pursue wear clothes of their own volition.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> The gospel *is* rules.



Wow. Just... wow.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > "random Jane arriving unannounced at church is different, because there is no expectation for them to be aware of the rules before showing up. But in answer to your question, I don't have a perfect solution. What I do know is you can't allow someone to freely engage in activity, in your very midst, that you are teaching is wrong (Mt 18:15). "
> ...


No the gospel is not rules. It is not works. It is the redemptive story of Christ.

And no, There is no verse anywhere in scripture that says people must dress a certain way before they hear the gospel. You need to read James chapter to. In fact, you need to read the majority of The Bible. I am not certain we even have the same saver to be perfectly honest. You are telling me that you would Turn someone away from hearing the gospel because you do not approve of what they are wearing. You sir are no believer. You are a pharisee and you make me physically nauseous


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

azimuth said:


> BioFury said:
> 
> 
> > That's where you're wrong. Were I married, my wife would belong to me. Hence the phrase *my* wife. And sure, while I can't physically force her to wear appropriate clothing, she would not be my wife if I needed to.
> ...


 Unfortunately, in the kind of faith he practices and the kind of church he attends, the spiritual abuse of women is such that most of them do not believe they deserve anything better than what he has to offer.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I just noticed that our not of this world original poster is a watcher of Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones. I would like for you to explain watching that television show in light of your strong convictions here.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> No the gospel is not rules. It is not works. It is the redemptive story of Christ.
> 
> And no, There is no verse anywhere in scripture that says people must dress a certain way before they hear the gospel. You need to read James chapter to. In fact, you need to read the majority of The Bible. I am not certain we even have the same saver to be perfectly honest. You are telling me that you would Turn someone away from hearing the gospel because you do not approve of what they are wearing. You sir are no believer. You are a pharisee and you make me physically nauseous


John 8:11 She said, No man, Master. And the Messiah said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

The gospel is forgiveness of past sins through grace, and the works of removing sin. If it was otherwise, the Messiah would not have instructed those forgiven, to sin no more. What you are describing, is "Neither do I condemn thee, carry on".

And, I didn't say I would turn someone away because of what they were wearing. I stated I didn't have a good solution, and asked for your opinion. While establishing that it's inconsistent, and hypocritical, to teach the adherence to God's commandments, while allowing someone to dress in a lascivious manner.

I also never stated that people needed to be dressed a certain way before they hear the gospel. That is, once again, you projecting. What I said, is that believers are to dress appropriately. And *continuing *to let someone dress inappropriately, would not be proper.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> I just noticed that our not of this world original poster is a watcher of Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones. I would like for you to explain watching that television show in light of your strong convictions here.


His favourite scenes probably involved little finger's brothel.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> John 8:11 She said, No man, Master. And the Messiah said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
> 
> The gospel is forgiveness of past sins through grace, and the works of removing sin. If it was otherwise, the Messiah would not have instructed those forgiven, to sin no more. What you are describing, is "Neither do I condemn thee, carry on".
> 
> ...


Pretty sure it is Messiah and no other who is entitled to judge this way. Not you.


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> I just noticed that our not of this world original poster is a watcher of Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones. I would like for you to explain watching that television show in light of your strong convictions here.


The only thing that distinguishes Game of Thrones from any other movie, is nudity. And I am entirely capable of closing my eyes, or turning away for 30 seconds. Kinda like your mom skipping through the bad part of the movie, only self-regulated. Though you guys may not have experience with the whole mom-editor thing. But, it's a thing.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

So how do you reconcile watching Game of Thrones?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BioFury said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > I just noticed that our not of this world original poster is a watcher of Game of Thrones. Game of Thrones. I would like for you to explain watching that television show in light of your strong convictions here.
> ...


 How does Game of Thrones fulfill philippians 4 verse 8? You are violating the very scripture you claim to believe. Own it.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

We may be using different definitions of jealousy. To me the word implies wishing you had what another person had, or worrying that they will take something you have. I view that as completely different from concern that the other person will cause some sort of harm. 

I am not jealous of a person who harasses my wife, I am angry because they have caused her harm. OTOH I might be jealous if someone clearly more awesome that me flirted with her AND she flirted back. 







BioFury said:


> Well, my argument is that your friend shouldn't have been there. But given that she was, she should've been held to rules of the governing body. When I am in your house, I follow your rules. I don't get to unplug your refrigerator, and scream at your dogs, merely because I'm in the habit of doing so where I come from.
> 
> What's the point in dressing modestly ourselves, if we invite porn stars to do a shoot across the pool from us? Pretty extreme example, but I think you catch my drift.
> 
> ...


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I will go one farther. Talk about marriage is a secular forum filled with worldly and ungodly advice. If you are not supposed to expose yourself to any sin how in the world do you justify being on this forum? Your cafeteria Christianity is not faith.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I am exploring other threads now, and I see on the thread about whether or not someone can get off without porne you are flirting with a poster and asking her to tell you what type of shocking for na graphy she prefers. Tell me how a man of God should be discussing those things? What else will I find when I read your posts?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

BioFury said:


> The gospel *is* rules. You can't preach the keeping of God's rules, while allowing the violation of them at the same time.
> 
> The dress code is not mine. If you search in scripture, you can find it yourself. But I agree, further discussion is pointless. Thank you for participating though :smile2:


Ive searched it, and posted it. No response from you at all.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> 
> The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


So she just gets some nice looks?

Not really. Mrs. C recently had a well healed gentleman trying to get a date with her, telling her about his world travels and really selling himself and I was only mildly annoyed.

I always considered myself jealous in a healthy way but not like your example.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Its a fair question as to whether there should be decency laws. 

I think its OK to have community standards as long as they are not too restrictive. To me this is an aesthetic restriction, not a moral one. Its generally agree that in order to make everyone's life more pleasant, there are restrictions on what an be done with property etc. I think some level or clothing restrictions is OK. I really don't want to ride a crowded subway with a bunch of naked people. 

I set the bar quite high thought - its extremely rare that I see some dressed in a way that I don't think is OK. 




BioFury said:


> Ok, so if I am understanding you correctly, you're alright with a governing body setting rules and restrictions for those beneath them?
> 
> So if I was your city councilman you wouldn't find anything wrong with it if I passed an ordinance banning yoga pants in public? Since I would be the leader of the community. Let's even say for arguments sake, that I had the support of all the other counsel members. You'd be totally cool with that?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"That's why one should only hire escorts. They sell great conversation, and only have sex with you afterward because you're awesome"

And then there is this comment. Very Christ like and biblical


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> I will go one farther. Talk about marriage is a secular forum filled with worldly and ungodly advice. If you are not supposed to expose yourself to any sin how in the world do you justify being on this forum? Your cafeteria Christianity is not faith.





BioFury said:


> I stated I didn't have a good solution, and asked for your opinion. While establishing that it's *inconsistent, and hypocritical, to teach the adherence to God's commandments, while allowing someone to dress in a lascivious manner.*


That was his answer. It just happens to apply to him in many many forms. As it does all of us. However, he was the one that brought faith into this and tried to use it as a club. Problem is, he was a hammer in search of a nail, and failed to find a single one. Still waiting on the scriptures regarding the proper dress code required in order to be a Christian.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Believing in dress codes is hardly the worst failings of Christians.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

I just remembered my wife wore yoga pants and a t-shirt to church the day she got baptized. Maybe God should have intervened and caused her to drown that day.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I just remembered my wife wore yoga pants and a t-shirt to church the day she got baptized. Maybe God should have intervened and caused her to drown that day.


 It may be the I do not understand exactly what yoga pants are. I have a friend that wears what she calls yoga pants, and they are basically sweatpants with wide legs that are not quite as thick as heavy sweat pants. They basically kind of hang off of her and are not tied on her backside at all. I know there are things that are sort of like pants that are tight, but those are and leggings. No normal person wears leggings without a dress for a long long shirt over them. So I'm not really sure what yoga pants actually R lol


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

uhtred said:


> Believing in dress codes is hardly the worst failings of Christians.


I agree. For example, suggesting that its sometimes a womans fault, or that they share a bit of the responsibility for having been raped or sexually assaulted is a lot worse than requiring me to wear a tie in church.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Some yoga pants are tight and thin and provide a fairly detailed copy of the wearer's anatomy. 

Doesn't actually do anything for me, but I can see how they could be sexually enticing to some people.

IMHO women are welcome to wear them if they want. Men are welcome to enjoy the view if they want, but not to comment / harass. 



personofinterest said:


> It may be the I do not understand exactly what yoga pants are. I have a friend that wears what she calls yoga pants, and they are basically sweatpants with wide legs that are not quite as thick as heavy sweat pants. They basically kind of hang off of her and are not tied on her backside at all. I know there are things that are sort of like pants that are tight, but those are and leggings. No normal person wears leggings without a dress for a long long shirt over them. So I'm not really sure what yoga pants actually R lol


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Ewwww yeah..... The tight and thin thing sounds like something you would see on the people of Walmart website lol


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> It may be the I do not understand exactly what yoga pants are. I have a friend that wears what she calls yoga pants, and they are basically sweatpants with wide legs that are not quite as thick as heavy sweat pants. They basically kind of hang off of her and are not tied on her backside at all. I know there are things that are sort of like pants that are tight, but those are and leggings. No normal person wears leggings without a dress for a long long shirt over them. So I'm not really sure what yoga pants actually R lol


She sometimes calls them leggings or tights. You can get them boot cut and flaired or regular skinny. She has different ones. 










That's nearly every day attire. Clearly she's only dressing in those pants because she's fishing for male attention.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I do not see anything immodest about that outfit at all.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

By the way, she is really beautiful


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> I am exploring other threads now, and I see on the thread about whether or not someone can get off without porne you are flirting with a poster and asking her to tell you what type of shocking for na graphy she prefers. Tell me how a man of God should be discussing those things? What else will I find when I read your posts?


for na graphy? graphic fornication?  Don't you love speech to text ??


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> The only thing that distinguishes Game of Thrones from any other movie, is nudity. And I am entirely capable of closing my eyes, or turning away for 30 seconds. Kinda like your mom skipping through the bad part of the movie, only self-regulated. Though you guys may not have experience with the whole mom-editor thing. But, it's a thing.


Well I'll be. Watching murder and mayhem is a-ok. But not nudity.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > I am exploring other threads now, and I see on the thread about whether or not someone can get off without porne you are flirting with a poster and asking her to tell you what type of shocking for na graphy she prefers. Tell me how a man of God should be discussing those things? What else will I find when I read your posts?
> ...


Lolololol


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

BioFury said:


> Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> 
> The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


I'm not really sure why everyone is hammering you and your religion over this. But anyway...

My ex-h used to react very strongly if a man made too much of an effort to talk to me or get his eyes on me or touch me. He was fine with just your average guy taking a look at me, but once they got even a little bit creepy (and he made that determination himself) he would get annoyed and usually just shoot the guy a look which immediately told the guy to back off. 

My ex did not blame this on me or on the men. He said that it's just our nature. We have lust for each other. We aren't trying to be so sexy, we're just drawn that way.

He only blamed it on the man when the man took one step across the line which my ex felt was the creep line. Then he blamed the man because although a man can look and feel lust, he can also control his actions and not be creepy about it.

My ex also did not "allow" me to wear certain things. Although that was really just a little game we played between us (me: "honey, can I wear this shirt tonight or is it too low cut?" him: "the hell if you are walking out the house in that!!! but get over here for a minute and show me up close...") The reality was that he just would not have partnered with me if I insisted on wearing certain clothing. He made this preference known once we started getting more serious about each other. Not while we were dating. So I had the choice and knew what I was getting into. Was I willing to dress more modestly than I normally do in order to partner with this guy? 

The answer was a hell yes!

I mean...I dressed kinda ****ty when we met, so I didn't blame him. I was having fun, loving my body, tearing up the world. But did I really need to dress like that to be happy? And was it even really my style or just what I felt like doing at the time? When I started questioning myself and what it would mean to dress differently "for this guy", I realized I kinda agreed with him and I was looking too ****ty too often in public. It was time to grow up.

But for us this just meant I moved all my ****ty clothes to the sex closet and added them to all the lingerie, props and costumes. I bought more classy and less sassy when I went shopping and made my outside wardrobe much more appropriate.

I still got to wear all my ****ty clothes and the sex clothes whenever I wanted at home and then looked somewhat like a lady in public.

Yet still...I'm positive that what he preferred me to wear and felt "classy" to him would still look ****ty to you. There's a really huge range of what people consider appropriate, especially secular people, but then add in all the different ways different Christians are supposed to dress and dang...really a lot of variation in how much skin is showing on any given day out in public.

People have said to me before that my ex-h must have been unhealthy for his desire to possess me all to himself and not allow other guys to covet me "too much". But I think he just knew himself and was able to articulate what kind of things he wanted and didn't want in a relationship.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Faithful Wife said:


> BioFury said:
> 
> 
> > Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> ...


See, my hubby has opinions too, and I respect him. Dare I say it....I submit to my husband.

But he is a completely different type of authentic Christian man.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> See, my hubby has opinions too, and I respect him. Dare I say it....I submit to my husband.
> 
> But he is a completely different type of authentic Christian man.


I don't really see why your husband, my ex-h, or Bio-Fury are any different. They are all men and they are all entitled to their preferences. I get it that Bio belongs to a certain type of Christianity that has rules and beliefs that your type does not. However, to me, both of you have every right to want what you want in a partner and to follow your God and your biblical teachings how you see fit.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> I am exploring other threads now, and I see on the thread about whether or not someone can get off without porne you are flirting with a poster and asking her to tell you what type of shocking for na graphy she prefers. Tell me how a man of God should be discussing those things? What else will I find when I read your posts?


Well, that's not really fair, as Bio and I have a comraderie and I believe he knew I would not take offense nor did he think I would actually answer the question honestly. We have had some fun banter in the past (as I have also had with numerous others here).

Basically, I just don't bash his religion all the time and we are respectful of each other. That's how the comraderie came to be. There's no more to it than that.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Faithful Wife said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > See, my hubby has opinions too, and I respect him. Dare I say it....I submit to my husband.
> ...


Did your hubby think a scantily clad woman was asking for it? Cause mine doesn't


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Faithful Wife said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > I am exploring other threads now, and I see on the thread about whether or not someone can get off without porne you are flirting with a poster and asking her to tell you what type of shocking for na graphy she prefers. Tell me how a man of God should be discussing those things? What else will I find when I read your posts?
> ...


Except that his probe into your sexual fantasies is not okay according to the Bible he claims to follow.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> I do not see anything immodest about that outfit at all.


She sometimes wears tight jeans or khakis. 










And she is a woman, with a butt. Some guy might look at it. :surprise:

Don't get me started on a man who would allow his daughter to wear a dress like that...

I'm convinced. Time to get some Amish outfits for these women. Then I can tell everyone how much better I am than they are.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> Did your hubby think a scantily clad woman was asking for it? Cause mine doesn't


No, he did not think that. Though I'm not sure Bio actually thinks that either. I think he is just using words that a lot of people don't like.

But I could be wrong.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I know a woman who was brought before the church over this issue. She had VERY large breasts, and though she basically wore shapeless tents, you could still tell she was endowed, therefore she was "defrauding" the men.

It was humiliating for her, and just disgusting of them to do.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> Except that his probe into your sexual fantasies is not okay according to the Bible he claims to follow.


He knew that I would know he was not asking a serious question. I left the "bait" there and knew people would ask. I also assumed people would know I would not answer honestly. I was being cheeky and he was too. I don't think the bible says anything against being cheeky.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not really sure why everyone is hammering you and your religion over this. But anyway...


A person who makes assertions, and then uses something to base the assertion on is often challenged when people disagree with the assertion and/or the basis. It's a discussion group. In a case such as this, the connection between the assertions following the original post about "revealing clothing" followed pretty naturally.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Faithful Wife said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > Did your hubby think a scantily clad woman was asking for it? Cause mine doesn't
> ...


If you've never seen spiritual abuse and the damage uber legalism can do, it's hard to u understand why Bio is so frightening.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> A person who makes assertions, and then uses something to base the assertion on is often challenged when people disagree with the assertion and/or the basis. It's a discussion group. In a case such as this, the connection between the assertions following the original post about "revealing clothing" followed pretty naturally.


Right but Bio is known to belong to this certain religion. And they think these things. Many religions actually think these things. And other members here do as well. They just all have their nuanced variations of it. I don't really understand why any of them should be respected if others should not. Who gets to choose? I don't believe as they do but I agree with their right to believe it and act on it. Bio hasn't said anything on this thread that I haven't read non-religious people saying in other contexts on other threads. It is just his belief. I don't see him as a dangerous person, whereas I do see some of the others here as dangerous saying similar things only under different headings for different reasons (I don't mean anyone on this thread).


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> If you've never seen spiritual abuse and the damage uber legalism can do, it's hard to u understand why Bio is so frightening.


Well right but from the perspective of many atheists, all of the Christians have quite a lot of blood on their hands. So if I'm going to respect your beliefs, why wouldn't I respect his?

I don't share either belief so what's the difference to me?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> No, he did not think that. Though I'm not sure Bio actually thinks that either. I think he is just using *words that a lot of people don't like*.
> 
> But I could be wrong.


Funny thing about words. Especially when strung together in sentences and paragraphs, they convey meaning. Bio has been pretty clear about his meaning while protesting that it isn't. Even buttresses said meaning while protesting... that that is not his meaning. I don't care how anyone chooses to interpret the bible. I left that game long ago. But when conflating attire with messages, a person is entering very dangerous ground, and that is well founded in historical evidence. Attitudes form laws. Scary stuff.

It's sweet that you want everyone to get along and for all the mens to feel all happiness and light. But sometimes a topic is actually important. Too important to assume someone is not saying what they are saying cuz golly gee he probably did not mean that.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Right but Bio is known to belong to this certain religion. And they think these things. Many religions actually think these things. And other members here do as well. They just all have their nuanced variations of it. I don't really understand why any of them should be respected if others should not. Who gets to choose? I don't believe as they do but I agree with their right to believe it and act on it. Bio hasn't said anything on this thread that I haven't read non-religious people saying in other contexts on other threads. It is just his belief. I don't see him as a dangerous person, whereas I do see some of the others here as dangerous saying similar things only under different headings for different reasons (I don't mean anyone on this thread).


I see his ideas as very dangerous. History agrees with me. A person can have every right to any belief they choose. That does not make the belief either respectable or not dangerous.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Faithful Wife said:


> He knew that I would know he was not asking a serious question. I left the "bait" there and knew people would ask. I also assumed people would know I would not answer honestly. I was being cheeky and he was too. I don't think the bible says anything against being cheeky.


It also doesn't say anything about the specifics of dress code in the terms he claims it does. We can read from the same book and do. So he is attempting to make an argument of his own in the name of God. That's pretty offensive. 

Second, this started when he equated a woman being sexually assaulted, to a person waving their hands in front of a dogs face and getting bitten, because of the way a woman chooses to dress. "Can't be surprised if the dog bites you" That's really where this flew off the rails. 

I don't care what your religious or secular belief is regarding your clothing preferences, but that last part is disgusting no matter who you are. Then to claim he holds his religious beliefs and takes them seriously while simultaneously putting even a hint of blame on women for being raped is clearly going to set others off regardless of secular or religious beliefs.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I see his ideas as very dangerous. History agrees with me. A person can have every right to any belief they choose. That does not make the belief either respectable or not dangerous.


I see him as one individual, not as all of the other people who have done harm in the name of Christ or religion. But he and I have bantered here for quite a lot of years and I guess I am factoring in all of the things we have discussed.

In the same way, there are other people here I have a comraderie with who have beliefs that I strongly disagree with.

And then there are the individuals here who I see as dangerous individuals (again, not on this thread). I stay far away from them and do not engage (anymore, I used to but decided it was not worth it).

And then there is the fact that if I said what I actually believe, no one would talk to me at all so....


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> I see him as one individual, not as all of the other people who have done harm in the name of Christ or religion.


But he and I have bantered here for quite a lot of years and I guess I am factoring in all of the things we have discussed.

In the same way, there are other people here I have a comraderie with who have beliefs that I strongly disagree with.

And then there are the individuals here who I see as dangerous individuals (again, not on this thread). I stay far away from them and do not engage (anymore, I used to but decided it was not worth it).

And then there is the fact that if I said what I actually believe, no one would talk to me at all so....[/QUOTE]

We all make our own choices. You value what you value.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> We all make our own choices. You value what you value.


Hmmmm...not sure what choices and what values and who is choosing that you are referring to in this context, but I agree, everyone values what they value and makes their own choices.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Hmmmm...not sure what choices and what values and who is choosing that you are referring to in this context, but I agree, everyone values what they value and makes their own choices.


You value cheerful camaraderie over substance is my take away. So you choose not to read topics or people that you feel are difficult.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> You value cheerful camaraderie over substance is my take away. So you choose not to read topics or people that you feel are difficult.


Oh, gotcha. Though I wouldn't put it that way about myself, I can see why you see it that way.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Faithful Wife said:


> And then there is the fact that if I said what I actually believe, no one would talk to me at all so....


I don't think that is necessarily true. We've had a rough back and forth and I said some regretful things. Never really apologized, but I should and I'm sorry. But I would always welcome any topic you would want to discuss. Even if I don't talk to you for a day or two after while I cool off. :wink2:


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

This became a religious thread?

I'm a little disappointed. The topic was interesting to me.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> This became a religious thread?
> 
> I'm a little disappointed. The topic was interesting to me.


I'm not sure. Bio I think wanted to hear honest responses from other men and women about jealousy. But his religion really skews his views on some things, so it kind of devolved from there as others questioned him about that.

But back on topic anyway...Conan...I have to ask...does your wife have big or small or medium boobs? I have a valid reason for asking. 0


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

BioFury said:


> I'm not talking about a partner just minding their own business, wearing reasonably modest clothing. They're wearing something revealing - compression shorts, yoga pants, going shirtless/topless... Dressing in a revealing manner is a primary way in which people seek attention and affirmation. So I would consider it a form of returning the attention, in that the attention was solicited, albeit passively.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm open to editing the litmus, if you have a superior format to recommend.


Ok. No, I'm not jealous in that framework at all.

Jealousy, in my world, is desiring what is yours. Men are going to lust over my wife regardless of attire or lack of it and I am not responsible or invested in what goes on in someone's mind.

As long as Mrs. C dresses within our agreed upon boundaries, I'm fine.

As long as her tatas are covered around the nips and her vaj and rear crease are covered, I am not uncomfortable.

She dresses far more conservatively than my boundaries so we don't have any problems.

We both get passes thrown our way with regularity regardless of what we wear.

Mrs. Conan actually gets flirted with the most at work while wearing professional attire.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not sure. Bio I think wanted to hear honest responses from other men and women about jealousy. But his religion really skews his views on some things, so it kind of devolved from there as others questioned him about that.
> 
> But back on topic anyway...Conan...I have to ask...does your wife have big or small or medium boobs? I have a valid reason for asking. 0


Ok. She has probably the biggest C cup or smallest D.

She is very petite at 5 foot nothing however so they look kind of striking.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

ConanHub said:


> Ok. She has probably the biggest C cup or smallest D.
> 
> She is very petite at 5 foot nothing however so they look kind of striking.


I'm going to need pics for verification


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Ok. She has probably the biggest C cup or smallest D.
> 
> She is very petite at 5 foot nothing however so they look kind of striking.


You kind of already answered in your next post. You said she does not dress outside of your agreed upon boundaries so it isn't a problem.

Re: your boundaries...do you both agree that she can show cleavage, or not? If so, how much is too much?

Also, remind me, are you a boob guy?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> You kind of already answered in your next post. You said she does not dress outside of your agreed upon boundaries so it isn't a problem.
> 
> Re: your boundaries...do you both agree that she can show cleavage, or not? If so, how much is too much?
> 
> Also, remind me, are you a boob guy?


I'm actually a leg and derriere lover but I love boobs as much as anyone. Who wouldn't?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> You kind of already answered in your next post. You said she does not dress outside of your agreed upon boundaries so it isn't a problem.
> 
> Re: your boundaries...do you both agree that she can show cleavage, or not? If so, how much is too much?
> 
> Also, remind me, are you a boob guy?


She can show as much cleavage as she is comfortable with.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I'm actually a leg and derriere lover but I love boobs as much as anyone. Who wouldn't?


HHmmm....I've actually heard this equivalent answer from non boob men so I'm not too sure. I'm going to guess that no, technically you aren't.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> She can show as much cleavage as she is comfortable with.


Ok so I know you are totally secure in your love, and you are also not jealous.

But in my experience, men who didn't care one way or the other about how much cleavage I'm showing are men who are not boob men (but a lot of them think they are boob men).

Basically, men who are greatly affected by boobs (and therefore, cleavage) know how much my boobs and cleavage can affect some other men (not all). But men who are not that affected by my boobs (compared to true boob men) I've dated have not noticed one way or the other how much cleavage I'm showing, either alone or in public.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I'm going to need pics for verification


I don't know if I did this right but this woman has almost identical breasts.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> HHmmm....I've actually heard this equivalent answer from non boob men so I'm not too sure. I'm going to guess that no, technically you aren't.


I would agree that a woman's ASSets hold my attention more than boobs.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I find this interesting. I can't imagine telling my wife what she can or can't wear. I might let her know what I find attractive, and she may do the same for me, but in any way saying "that is too revealing" seems completely alien to me. 

Its like telling someone not to flirt. To me the problem isn't the flirting, but the desire to flirt in the first place. (where by "flirt" i'm talking about overt sexual suggestions, not casual flirting which is fine).


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I would agree that a woman's ASSets hold my attention more than boobs.


I dated one guy who was a non boob man, and he claimed he was also not a jealous person.

However, he was jealous about some things, just not other things. And in his own opinion, the things he was jealous of were "logical" and things like showing cleavage were "illogical".

But in fact, he simply did not see why boobs would turn other men on as much as they do. That was why he wasn't jealous. He thought it was because he was "above" those other men, but as I said, he was in fact jealous of other things.

(not saying this has anything to do with you)


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> I personally think that a person should be able to walk down the street buck naked without risk of violence of any kind, including sexual violence.



But by encouraging women to walk nekkid on streets you are implicitly encouraging sexual violence! (See what i did there? )



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

ConanHub said:


> I don't know if I did this right but this woman has almost identical breasts.


My wife is much much smaller. I don't have to worry about cleavage haha.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> I dated one guy who was a non boob man, and he claimed he was also not a jealous person.
> 
> However, he was jealous about some things, just not other things. And in his own opinion, the things he was jealous of were "logical" and things like showing cleavage were "illogical".
> 
> ...


I'm not jealous in that sense at all. Men can look till their eyeballs fall out for all I care. They can talk as much as they want as well as long as they aren't jerks.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> Pretty much. I am good with that. It is actually funny since public nudity is completely legal where I am.



Proof with photo or it didn’t happen! 

Question: is it ok to keep calling someone a ‘mental case’ for holding a different view?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

uhtred said:


> Agreed - but it is a complex interaction. People dress with a knowledge of how other people may interpret that. Its complicated.
> 
> 
> 
> Gang style clothing, skin-head clothing, etc - send a message to many people. Other types of clothing can be interpreted in a wider range of ways, but will still be interpreted.



And that’s the exact same thing the OP was saying, just phrased differently...
You see when someone on the street walks around with their tits hanging out in my face, I’m supposed to think about baseball (or polo, in my country). And if instead, I happen to think about full fat milk, by association, this is somehow suddenly insulting. 
It’s just another way to try and control thoughts; what you can or cannot think about.
Why can’t one side simply admit that dressing a certain way doesn’t come without some sort of consequences (whether it’s extra attention, disgust or whatever), without resorting to deliberate obtuseness?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> It may be the I do not understand exactly what yoga pants are.



Over here we call them leggings. And as my ‘property’, she is not allowed to go anywhere without them!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> See, my hubby has opinions too, and I respect him. Dare I say it....I submit to my husband.



So you are his property, but by choice? 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

InMyPrime said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > See, my hubby has opinions too, and I respect him. Dare I say it....I submit to my husband.
> ...


I like to use that word because it is so often misused by angry women lol


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> A person who makes assertions, and then uses something to base the assertion on is often challenged when people disagree with the assertion and/or the basis. It's a discussion group. In a case such as this, the connection between the assertions following the original post about "revealing clothing" followed pretty naturally.



Actually no. For the past few pages it read more like a typical bullying group, rather than discussion group.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> Funny thing about words. Especially when strung together in sentences and paragraphs, they convey meaning. Bio has been pretty clear about his meaning while protesting that it isn't. Even buttresses said meaning while protesting... that that is not his meaning. I don't care how anyone chooses to interpret the bible. I left that game long ago. But when conflating attire with messages, a person is entering very dangerous ground, and that is well founded in historical evidence. Attitudes form laws. Scary stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> It's sweet that you want everyone to get along and for all the mens to feel all happiness and light. But sometimes a topic is actually important. Too important to assume someone is not saying what they are saying cuz golly gee he probably did not mean that.



It is possible to mis-speak, even in writing, and also to mis-phrase something. If you then keep hammering on at something that personally triggered you, as you so often do, without allowing the person clarify what THEY meant, despite the fact that it is them, who spoke those words, then that’s classic bullying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

ConanHub said:


> I don't know if I did this right but this woman has almost identical breasts.




Those breasts look ‘done’ to me. (Also, terrible outfit, sorry. Are we allowed to comment or is this ‘intolerant’?) I presume it’s nobody you know...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> How does Game of Thrones fulfill philippians 4 verse 8? You are violating the very scripture you claim to believe. Own it.


I started this thread because a conversation I had with a friend made me wonder whether there were statistical jealousy differences between men and women. There were no insinuations engineered to spark controversy in the OP, or judgments made about particular clothing styles. I asked if revealing clothes were any issue for you from a jealousy standpoint, leaving it to the individual respondents to determine what clothing that would be. Only after sensing from early responses that my question was too broad, I tried to give some examples (yoga pants, among others).

That's where you, and others, came in and changed the very topic being discussed. You (hereafter used as a collective, and personal pronoun) accused me of insinuating that women who wore yoga pants were responsible for being raped, that it's a woman's responsibility to wear modest burkas, etc. And rather than let your accusations go unchallenged, I responded. Perhaps I shouldn't have, and just requested that you stay on topic. But I chose to let your derailment become the main theme of discussion, because it's a relevant topic, and I enjoy a lively debate.

The reason I call this to remembrance, is because you are now attempting to nail me to a wall about watching Game of Thrones, and labeling me as a hypocrite, as though I self-righteously instigated the discussion about modesty, rape, etc., and did so from atop my pulpit, yelling down on all you filthy, yoga pants wearing heathens, that you're all going to hell. When that isn't what happened. I do tend to be passionate when debating something, so I can't entirely blame you for getting the wrong impression. But it wasn't a holy crusade to "bring you all to repentance", it was just a debate (that I did not start). If I gave offense, then I'm sorry. I never intended to give the impression that I'm better than anyone, beyond reproach, or that I'm holier than thou and have it all figured out.

With regard to your additional accusation about asking Faithful about her pornography preferences (Which she brought up, to be clear. I didn't randomly ask her "Hey, what kind of porn do you watch?") - I was curious. Female sexuality fascinates me. My parents never taught me anything about sex. I don't have anyone but strangers to turn to on the topic, and she seemed open to speaking about it. So I asked.

I will now bow out of this thread. Please feel free to continue the discussion. And once again, I'm sorry to anyone who felt as though I was casting personal judgement on them.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BioFury said:


> I started this thread because a conversation I had with a friend made me wonder whether there were statistical jealousy differences between men and women. There were no insinuations engineered to spark controversy in the OP, or judgments made about particular clothing styles. I asked if revealing clothes were any issue for you from a jealousy standpoint, leaving it to the individual respondents to determine what clothing that would be. Only after sensing from early responses that my question was too broad, I tried to give some examples (yoga pants, among others).
> 
> That's where you, and others, came in and changed the very topic being discussed. You (hereafter used as a collective, and personal pronoun) accused me of insinuating that women who wore yoga pants were responsible for being raped, that it's a woman's responsibility to wear modest burkas, etc. And rather than let your accusations go unchallenged, I responded. Perhaps I shouldn't have, and just requested that you stay on topic. But I chose to let your derailment become the main theme of discussion, because it's a relevant topic, and I enjoy a lively debate.
> 
> ...



Hey you shouldn’t bow out, it’s your thread! You should kick out people who derail or ask a mod to do it.

To bring it back, regarding this:

“I started this thread because a conversation I had with a friend made me wonder whether there were statistical jealousy differences between men and women. “

I don’t think there are statistical differences in terms of numbers between the sexes (anyone can get jealous) or if there are, they wouldn’t be significant.
I do think they may show differently. Men acting insecurely or in a jealous way vs women doing it, will possibly show up differently. It’s also personality-dependant.
When my wife gets jealous, she gets quiet. When I get jealous...I don’t really remember being jealous. Only before we got together. When she was paying more attention to other people and I couldn’t get through to her.
My reaction then was more...’combative’, determined. I used all my energy into establishing a good communication channel with her and making her comfortable talking to me. After I managed to do it, i think things really changed for good and I have never felt that feeling again!





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

One last thing: I think two people play a part when it comes to jealousy, despite what some may say...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

BioFury said:


> Some recent conversations made me wonder if there is a pattern among genders regarding jealousy.
> 
> The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


First, how would I know they are desiring her as a lover? Most cis men will look at cleavage. Sure, if his woman is showing cleavage or whatever(horses hoof  ), men would look at his SO or date. Truly, it's a male thing in my mind. If you want to call him saying anything to someone for looking, yeah, that's jealousy, or he'd not give a damn and anyone could have her anytime she wants. 

What I am saying is, for me, this is not a straight forward question. I think it is some primal need to protect the woman a male's primitive brain thinks is going to bear his children from being inseminated by another male. It's important to the primitive tribe for longevity and strength. I don't think that can be called jealousy. 

Some like to call it jealousy because they want the freedom to mate with any male they find attractive. That is how a primitive woman's brain works. 

So, it is not jealousy for either. It's a rivalry to either have the healthiest woman for procreation, or the most beneficial mate to provide for the mother and child. Jealousy is a social construct that need to be put away. 

My opinions, only.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

InMyPrime said:


> Over here we call them leggings. And as my ‘property’, she is not allowed to go anywhere without them!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's a perfect example of how my wife dresses. Something about that purple color, or colour as you might say, with that dark hair... Tres bien :toast:


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Ok so I know you are totally secure in your love, and you are also not jealous.
> 
> But in my experience, men who didn't care one way or the other about how much cleavage I'm showing are men who are not boob men (but a lot of them think they are boob men).
> 
> Basically, men who are greatly affected by boobs (and therefore, cleavage) know how much my boobs and cleavage can affect some other men (not all). But men who are not that affected by my boobs (compared to true boob men) I've dated have not noticed one way or the other how much cleavage I'm showing, either alone or in public.


P S. Thanks for helping me figure out how to vote on this one.

It looks so far like the menz voters are slightly more jealous than the womenz.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

InMyPrime said:


> One last thing: I think two people play a part when it comes to jealousy, despite what some may say...
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I agree partly. Some men and women are just unreasonably insecure though. I **** talk myself constantly, but sheesh, I can't imagine how much one must feel to be to the point of controlling so much of what their spouse does. I guess I can't imagine how low one's self esteem is to put up with that from a partner either. I'm talking well beyond preference of dress. Its why I can't stay around in the CWI forum. Any point I feel a need to constantly spy, I'm already done with the relationship. No need to even find anything at that point. I get too frustrated reading those threads I just have to stay out of them.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Yeah, but that doesn't mean other guys won't ever envision bending you over the gas station counter as they stand behind you in line.
> 
> Scrubs probably aren't seen as the most flattering attire, but they sure as heck turn me on.
> 
> I'm terms of how you dress, it's probably more about comfort. If you feel the most comfortable dressing more conservatively, thats all that should matter. My wife likes yoga pants and t-shirts. When we go out for a nice dinner, she loves a sleek long sexy dress and high heels. When she feels good about herself, she carries herself more confidently, which is the sexiest thing to both men and women.


I think its good when women can feel good and positive about themselves without having to dress in a certain way.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> I think its good when women can feel good and positive about themselves without having to dress in a certain way.


Me too! I think it's wonderful. It makes a woman instead think about what she feels comfortable in. If a woman feels confident and comfortable dressing conservatively, but also wants to spice it up from time to time and look in the mirror and tell herself "damn I wear this sexy little dress very well" I'm not going to automatically assume she is doing that for anyone else but herself. 

My wife for example, in my eyes is very conservative in style. But once or twice a year, she likes to go all out and get a new sleek dress and some stilettos. After 19 years together, I know it's more for herself as it is for me. I don't think there is anything wrong with that and I can guarantee it has absolutely nothing to do with seeking attention from anyone else. I guess that's why I get a little defensive when it is implied that women only dress a certain way to gain attention. I take it as a bit of an insult to my wife. A guarenteed way to set me off in a hurry.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

personofinterest said:


> By the way, she is really beautiful


Yes she is. You think she's something, you should see her husband! Come down to North Padre in July, you can catch him on the beach wearing a thong Speedo that he purposefully wears to get attention from all the ladies.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Faithful Wife said:
> 
> 
> > I dated one guy who was a non boob man, and he claimed he was also not a jealous person.
> ...


Sigh...yeah.

I’m always a little sad for a woman when her man doesn’t notice her boobs, or notice other men noticing them.

Maybe some women don’t place much value on having their boobs valued, but when that’s the case I just assume she has never had it good from a man who places a high value on her boobs. It’s a whole new world and avenue to sensuality and sexually. For both.

But it’s either there or it isn’t. It can’t be faked. It’s an amenity in a man I won’t go without in a LTR again. (May have to get back with my ex h just to reunite the 4 of us as a family again. I can’t go backwards on this one now that I’ve been there, hee!)

PS...I haven’t found there is a lack of men who are skilled at worshipping ass and legs. But there seems to be a lack of men who worship boobs AND ass and legs. There are lots of leg/ass men who claim to also be boob men, but there are very few who are truly all 3 and have equal lust to all 3. I guess for me, having always loved boobs myself, it continues to surprise me no matter how many men I meet who are into them less than I am.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

BioFury said:


> The litmus test will be your significant other wearing something revealing, and members of your own gender checking them out, and desiring them as a lover. Would it bother you?


It hasn't and doesn't bother me. I've always enjoyed being with sexually and aesthetically pleasing women, who wear clothing that hints at or draws ones eye to what may lay beneath.

When my wife and I started dating she wore some terrific short dresses and skirts with Dr. Martens boots, that left little to the imagination. While today I still enjoy seeing my wife out with plunging neckline dresses sans a bra. Plus sometimes she goes out with light dresses wearing no knickers as well, or wearing lacy ones that reveal what's underneath.

I like her dressed that way because I enjoy looking at her lustfully, while we're out. As to others I don't care. They are welcome to think what they want, they just aren't entitled to touch without her consent.

It also makes it easier for my wife to flash me her pink bits while out and about, while also being able to quickly put those pink bits away before anyone catches us.

I have also had previous partners who have also worn revealing clothing. For example I liked that my ex-wife, often wore cut off jean shorts without undies. Which afforded me plentiful access to her, without her taking them off whenever the mood struck.

Incidentally my wife and I both notice attractive people and enjoy the sight of them, and have no problem with each other enjoying the sight of what we see.

To me, it just isn't a big deal.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

BioFury said:


> Uh huh. So girls should be able to walk around naked, because it's men's problem if they notice? Does that mean I can stand on your front lawn naked, and it's your problem if you don't like it?


I'm fine with public nudity regardless of gender, as is my wife.

If it wasn't for the fact that my wife and I have had a daughter in hospital for most of this year so far. We would have frequented a nudist beach sans clothing earlier this year.

Likewise at home we're fine with nudity as well, plus for many years (with my wife's encouragement) I have been paying adult male and female models, to pose nude for my drawings and paintings. Likewise my wife generously poses for me nude, for the same purposes as well.

Plus through my experience of seeing lots of other nude men and women, it just seems like it's a normal thing to me. At the end of the day, I don't think there is any shame in private or public nudity.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

ConanHub said:


> I would agree that a woman's ASSets hold my attention more than boobs.


 @Faithful Wife

Bums aren't really my thing. Boobs, faces and vulvas are what firmly grab my attention. Of which my wife has a pretty face and an especially splendid pair of breasts.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Me too! I think it's wonderful. It makes a woman instead think about what she feels comfortable in. If a woman feels confident and comfortable dressing conservatively, but also wants to spice it up from time to time and look in the mirror and tell herself "damn I wear this sexy little dress very well" I'm not going to automatically assume she is doing that for anyone else but herself.
> 
> My wife for example, in my eyes is very conservative in style. But once or twice a year, she likes to go all out and get a new sleek dress and some stilettos. After 19 years together, I know it's more for herself as it is for me. I don't think there is anything wrong with that and I can guarantee it has absolutely nothing to do with seeking attention from anyone else. I guess that's why I get a little defensive when it is implied that women only dress a certain way to gain attention. I take it as a bit of an insult to my wife. A guarenteed way to set me off in a hurry.


I am sure your wife does that for the reasons you say, but a lot of people definitely do dress to get opposite sex attention. I think its a sort of power thing.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Faithful Wife said:


> Sigh...yeah.
> 
> I’m always a little sad for a woman when her man doesn’t notice her boobs, or notice other men noticing them.
> 
> ...


I love to have my boobs valued.....by my husband. Not interested in other man valuing them one little bit. Hence I don't show them off.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Diana7 said:


> I love to have my boobs valued.....by my husband. Not interested in other man valuing them one little bit. Hence I don't show them off.



I value wife’s boobs everyday 
And due to inflation, the value just keeps rising providing a very comfortable cushion to live very comfortably, for the whole family 

No, boobs are great. One thing where my instincts sometimes conflict is that I don’t want to come across to her like an infant who is hungry for mummy’s milk all the time...I cannot imagine it is attractive to a woman when she starts confusing her husband with a hungry baby so I try to tread (and knead) carefully there. It would be interesting to know how women manage to separate that aspect (the purposeful aspect of boobs being primarily a feeding machine) vs sexual aspect; those two must be as far apart from each other as possible.

And i also have very adverse reactions towards fake boobs. I have rarely seen a boob job that looks natural. I prefer natural so much more.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

InMyPrime said:


> I value wife’s boobs everyday
> And due to inflation, the value just keeps rising providing a very comfortable cushion to live very comfortably, for the whole family
> 
> No, boobs are great. One thing where my instincts sometimes conflict is that I don’t want to come across to her like an infant who is hungry for mummy’s milk all the time...I cannot imagine it is attractive to a woman when she starts confusing her husband with a hungry baby so I try to tread (and knead) carefully there. It would be interesting to know how women manage to separate that aspect (the purposeful aspect of boobs being primarily a feeding machine) vs sexual aspect; those two must be as far apart from each other as possible.
> ...


Well I am way way past the feeding baby stage so that's not an issue for me. :smile2: 
My husband would hate it if I had fake boobs or any cosmetic surgery for that matter. :surprise:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> But by encouraging women to walk nekkid on streets you are implicitly encouraging sexual violence! (See what i did there? )
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


mmmm. There is quite a big difference to think that such a thing should be possible and to think it is wise to do it. I am pretty sure I did not say the latter. That said, I maintain that the link between nudity and violence is abhorrent. 

I'm sitting here, drinking my coffee, finding it odd that this sentiment is so challenging to grasp. And I guess it is not surprising. Yah, I find that disheartening. I give mad love and respect to @TheDudeLebowski for getting it and being willing to share that view.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> Proof with photo or it didn’t happen!
> 
> Question: is it ok to keep calling someone a ‘mental case’ for holding a different view?
> 
> ...


I was driving down the street when the kids were small. Before I had a cell phone, I think! This guy was walking down the street naked as the day is long... except for sneakers. I can't remember if I mentioned in this thread or not. His external genitalia was flapping from side to side as he marched with determination. My youngest asked, what is he doing Mom? Walking, I said. Why? I really don't know. Maybe he needs to get somewhere? Mom, he is naked! Well, yes, he is.

I did not get a photo. I was driving. Anyway, it is not something you see very often. I don't think most people like walking around naked. In any event, for whatever reason, no one raped him I think, or I would have seen something in the news.

Did I really call someone a mental case? If so, I apologize. But the notion that having a different view makes it a good, moral or even mentally healthy view is a notion that I reject soundly.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> It is possible to mis-speak, even in writing, and also to mis-phrase something. If you then keep hammering on at something that personally triggered you, as you so often do, without allowing the person clarify what THEY meant, despite the fact that it is them, who spoke those words, then that’s classic bullying.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sigh. Of course the assumption is triggering. Good day.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> Forget the city counsel, it was just a placeholder. Goodness.


Well the metaphor fell fairly flat. I don't think you are talking about yoga pants and the city counsel. I AM hoping you offer some insight on what you ARE saying which, apparently, is not what you have said thus far.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> And that’s the exact same thing the OP was saying, just phrased differently...
> You see when someone on the street walks around with their tits hanging out in my face, I’m supposed to think about baseball (or polo, in my country). And if instead, I happen to think about full fat milk, by association, this is somehow suddenly insulting.
> It’s just another way to try and control thoughts; what you can or cannot think about.
> Why can’t one side simply admit that dressing a certain way doesn’t come without some sort of consequences (whether it’s extra attention, disgust or whatever), without resorting to deliberate obtuseness?
> ...


I don't think anyone, even POI whose views on this topic are quite different from mine, say anything to the contrary. I know I have said, think on! The distinction I see is the wearing's attire should be allowed or not allowed AND that one of the consequences is the determine the "message" that the wearer is sending and to whom s/he might be sending it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

BioFury said:


> I started this thread because a conversation I had with a friend made me wonder whether there were statistical jealousy differences between men and women.


In my rather unique extended friend group, men are waaaaaaay more often the more jealous. But then anecdote <> evidence.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> One last thing: I think two people play a part when it comes to jealousy, despite what some may say...
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's an interesting view. I can't say I have seen it. The model I see most frequently is the jealous and the appeaser. It rarely works out as the jealous winds up encouraged to engage in increasingly needless control and the appeaser sets the expectation that more appeasement is in order.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I agree partly. Some men and women are just unreasonably insecure though. I **** talk myself constantly, but sheesh, I can't imagine how much one must feel to be to the point of controlling so much of what their spouse does. I guess I can't imagine how low one's self esteem is to put up with that from a partner either. I'm talking well beyond preference of dress. Its why I can't stay around in the CWI forum. Any point I feel a need to constantly spy, I'm already done with the relationship. No need to even find anything at that point. I get too frustrated reading those threads I just have to stay out of them.


Ha! I am not the only one. I won't lie. I don't think the CWI is very good for many people.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Diana7 said:


> I think its good when women can feel good and positive about themselves without having to dress in a certain way.


A-MEN to this! I think it is GREAT when women and men can decide for themselves what they feel good in!


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> I was driving down the street when the kids were small. Before I had a cell phone, I think! This guy was walking down the street naked as the day is long... except for sneakers. I can't remember if I mentioned in this thread or not. His external genitalia was flapping from side to side as he marched with determination. My youngest asked, what is he doing Mom? Walking, I said. Why? I really don't know. Maybe he needs to get somewhere? Mom, he is naked! Well, yes, he is.


Interesting. Your kid seems to intuitively have a much healthier idea than their parent, in terms of what is normal or what isn't. There goes 'social conditioning' out of the window.

I don't know exactly how your laws are worded, but in UK, where public nudity is NOT an offence, which doesn't mean that everyone can take their junk out and shove them in kids' faces.
The law quite clearly states that: "A person commits an offence if they “intentionally exposes his genitals, and intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress.” Section 66 Sexual Offences Act 2003. 

Your kid was clearly affected by it. This is why I will never understand how a brain of people who claim to be progressive (yet appear either completely misguided or uninformed), works.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> Interesting. Your kid seems to intuitively have a much healthier idea than their parent, in terms of what is normal or what isn't. There goes 'social conditioning' out of the window.


I am not sure what you mean. That it is unusual for people to walk around naked? I think we are both equally aware of it. It certainly wasn't something you see every day. The conversation from there went to the merits of sunscreen and how Dad's choice of boxer briefs made sense.



> I don't know exactly how your laws are worded, but in UK, where public nudity is NOT an offence, which doesn't mean that everyone can take their junk out.
> The law quite clearly states that: "A person commits an offence if they “intentionally exposes his genitals, and intends that someone will see them and be caused alarm or distress.” Section 66 Sexual Offences Act 2003.
> 
> Your kid was clearly affected by it. This is why I will never understand how a brain of people who claim to be progressive (yet appear either completely misguided or uninformed), works.


What do you mean that my kid was clearly affected by it? Both kids commented, continue to comment, about things they see every day. We had longer discussion about why some intersections have yield signs while others have stop signs.

Forgot. I have not read the law, but DH has. He said that one cannot disrobe in public, that you have to leave the house that way. Not sure why that matters. A distinction from flashing and speaking to intent? It is certainly easier to look away if one is so inclined compared to someone opening their coat in your face, I guess.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> That's an interesting view. I can't say I have seen it. The model I see most frequently is the jealous and the appeaser. It rarely works out as the jealous winds up encouraged to engage in increasingly needless control and the appeaser sets the expectation that more appeasement is in order.


There is no 'model' for this: either there is REASON to be jealous, then jealousy is just an effect of a cause. You can then discuss or have an opinion whether those reasons are valid or not even though you may never reach an 'objective' conclusion. It goes back to your (again misguided, IMO) idea that personal feelings arise and exist in a vacuum, ignoring cause and effect.

If my wife dressed in ****ty clothes and enjoyed male attention, there comes a point where my jealousy (if I were a type of husband who would get jealous easily) would perfectly be justified: cause and effect, eg. two people involved.

If I was constantly sharing my thoughts with a bunch of females at the expense of paying attention to my wife, she is perfectly justified to feel jealous too. Again: cause and effect. Feelings rarely exist in a vacuum. And you can't just _choose_ when to apply your standard ('model') which brings me to assault, which you keep bringing up in this thread even though it is a complete red herring and nothing to do with what OP wanted to ask:

Yes, we all want to live in a perfect world where anyone can dress and do how they please but we don't live in that world. Every sane person knows this. There is a VERY big leap that you make (I can only surmise that it is deliberate because it is not the first time) from noticing the fact that there is a link between dressing provocatively and sexual assault and that it is in any way *OK* to assault anyone for dressing provocatively. Again, this is a very bizarre method that you use to put people down.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> There is no 'model' for this:


Perhaps pattern is a better word. The pattern I have observed.



> either there is REASON to be jealous, then jealousy is just an effect of a cause. You can then discuss or have an opinion whether those reasons are valid or not even though you may never reach an 'objective' conclusion. It goes back to your (again misguided, IMO) idea that personal feelings arise and exist in a vacuum, ignoring cause and effect.


Certainly objectionable behavior needs to be discussed! But I can't agree that jealousy is a healthy response. 



> If my wife dressed in ****ty clothes and enjoyed male attention, there comes a point where my jealousy (if I were a type of husband who would get jealous easily) would perfectly be justified: cause and effect, eg. two people involved.


Thanks for explaining.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> Forgot. I have not read the law, but DH has. He said that one cannot disrobe in public, that you have to leave the house that way. Not sure why that matters. A distinction from flashing and speaking to intent? It is certainly easier to look away if one is so inclined compared to someone opening their coat in your face, I guess.


Wow. Just wow.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

Okay I'm going to answer the question from a personal relationship perspective.

I've not known my husband to be jealous. Protective sometimes, but not jealous. It is extremely rare that I'm somewhere that I'd be hit on. Being at a bar for the Xmas party, I was approached. When a few other colleagues joined us, one shared with the others that I'd already been hit on twice. A (male) colleague commented 'Slow night, eh hearts?' I'm certainly not all that... maybe there was something in the water... hubs would say he's not surprised. It wouldn't phase him. 

Me, on the other hand, it's not so much jealousy as having insecure moments despite being relatively confident. When I feel that emotion, I recognize it for what it is... it's about me. He doesn't conduct himself in a way that evokes this. And, it's just certain moments, and not that often. An example, he gave a public speech that was endearing and funny. I was really proud of him. He had people coming up afterwards, one being an attractive woman. I walked up, recognizing that insecure feeling surfacing. Then she introduced us to her wife. My guard instantly went down. Granted, it happens less the older I get. Perhaps the more comfortable I am within my own skin. I also understand people wanting to be around him; so it becomes simultaneously an appreciation of who he is as a person, blended with my own insecurity. And I also recognize it's not the most attractive quality - to him, or myself. I have attempted to analyze myself in those moments with a couple of theories, yet theories don't really get me anywhere, so I do my best to face it for what it is and check myself. Still, it's far and few between.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

NobodySpecial said:


> The distinction I see is the wearing's attire should be allowed or not allowed AND that one of the consequences is the determine the "message" that the wearer is sending and to whom s/he might be sending it.


To me, it seems self-evident that clothing communicates a message. I'm not sure why you would have the quotes there. There are even books and magazines on how to dress to communicate different messages. The power suit, the bohemian outfit, the blue hair or the military buzzcut. (Yes, I am including hairstyle and accessories in this). To suggest that it doesn't is a denial of meaning that I am not comfortable with. To take it to an extreme to illustrate the point, someone who donned a nazi armband and then said "hey, I just throw on whatever seems comfortable when I get up in the morning", is being disingenuous. Attire communicates. 

One question is whether the meaning communicated is what the wearer intended. 

And "allowed or not allowed" is another, slightly different point. We seem to have wandered into what the state or local community allows. The original question was not "do you ALLOW your partner to dress up sexy" but "how do you feel when they do", a question which I like much better. Personally I don't think someone should be "allowing" or "not allowing" their partner to dress a certain way, but if it makes them feel doubts, then they get to feel that way, on a general basis that you're allowed to feel how you feel. 
I voted for "I'm male, and yes it bothers me". That doesn't mean I try to put a stop to it.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

Faithful Wife said:


> Sigh...yeah.
> 
> I’m always a little sad for a woman when her man doesn’t notice her boobs, or notice other men noticing them.
> 
> ...


Consider me in the equal lust to all 3 group. 

It's so natural I can't believe it's not the absolute norm. 

I also believe that a woman dresses sexy for herself, but in that self, is partly to be seen as sexy and desirable by others she'll be around that day or evening, or wherever she's going.

And is def ok.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> She sometimes wears tight jeans or khakis.


She looks lovely!


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Laurentium said:


> To me, it seems self-evident that clothing communicates a message.


Yet often I have heard of messages I was supposedly sending that I had not intended. Who knew.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"That's an interesting view. I can't say I have seen it. The model I see most frequently is the jealous and the appeaser. It rarely works out as the jealous winds up encouraged to engage in increasingly needless control and the appeaser sets the expectation that more appeasement is in order."

This 100 times over


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

NobodySpecial said:


> Yet often I have heard of messages I was supposedly sending that I had not intended. Who knew.


Indeed! :grin2:


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> I am sure your wife does that for the reasons you say, but a lot of people definitely do dress to get opposite sex attention. I think its a sort of power thing.


That may be true of some people but I'm not going to make assumptions. 

Here's another example of why. I live in Texas. Naturally, every woman has some short shorts and tank tops. Every man has a tank top. Its 105° 60% humidity in the summer in Dallas. Now if I walk down the street in a tank top, not muscular, short, not tan lol, there's probably not many people who would assume I'm dressing this way for attention. If a tall, tan, muscular guy is wearing the same thing, some people will assume he's trying to show off his muscle. 

If my wife is in her short shorts and tank, she's not big breasted and has no cleavage, she's petite, has a nice little booty but its not a huge ghetto booty, not many would think she's just trying to show off her body. Its 105° understandable. However, a woman with natural big breasts, and a rather nicely proportioned big booty is wearing the exact same thing, then many more people will think she is only wearing that stuff to get attention. 

Some of it has to do with the body you have. I would venture to say a woman who just so happens to have big breasts is definitely going to get judged much more than my wife sharing the exact same outfit. She would be seen as an attention *****. 

Which leads me to believe there's a lot of judgement just because someone else might be a little more physically attractive than the one placing the judgement. So who is the insecure one in that scenario?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Sigh...yeah.
> 
> I’m always a little sad for a woman when her man doesn’t notice her boobs, or notice other men noticing them.
> 
> ...


Mrs. C doesn't have an inch of her body that is safe from daily gropings and molestation, just to be clear. Her boobs possibly get groped the most because they are usually more easily accessible than other parts.

I have been trying to zero in on the theme of feeling something akin to insecure or threatened by other men ogling my Mrs. and I can't relate.

I am very aware when other men are interested in her and I'm sure they are looking at the same cute attributes I adore.

I do believe your ex had a very special affinity with your twins and was especially aware of the gravity they imposed on the eyes of other men.

I'm a little too programmed for threat assessment to be that marvelously sensitive or aware of the lust going on in others.

As long as Mrs. Conan is safe and isn't being made to feel uncomfortable, I'm fairly oblivious to what is going on in the lusty minds of strangers.

Is your ex doing well? This might sound weird but , at least as far as I can tell from anonymous postings, you seemed more complete, more free, more you when you two were together.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

I absolutely love it when my wife looks sexy!

She likes me to wear sexy stuff as well. She does fit the theme of this thread for being jealous so it is a catch 22 with her.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I absolutely love it when my wife looks sexy!
> 
> She likes me to wear sexy stuff as well. She does fit the theme of this thread for being jealous so it is a catch 22 with her.


So she is somewhat jealous? I’m not sure if I understand you correctly there.

I do understand that you are not jealous. I can hear that coming through in your words. Whereas like you said, you may be on high alert to other types of danger all the time, in ways others are not.

It’s sometimes hard to describe the deal my ex and I had with the clothes and my dressing more modestly “for him”, because I kind of think that my adjusted more modest wardrobe was still possibly more sexy or ****ty (depends on the person judging) than what I imagine you might accept in outer wear for your wife. 

With the exception of cleavage showing of course, which your wife can do freely apparently! Which is good, don’t get me wrong.

It is not so much that my ex had a close relationship with the girls (though that is true), it is that he is a true boob man. There is a difference. It’s not really relevant here though, I was just bantering about it because it is a topic that comes up when I’m dating.

Perhaps the reason I seem less complete than when my ex and I were together is because I don’t have a sex life right now and back then I had a stellar one. Yes, going without a sex life leaves me kind of empty. (He he)

But I’m doing really well overall, just lacking ****, you know?

Ex is doing well also.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

One of the things I have learned as I have broken away from certain things in my past is that as much as I may think I am all-knowing, I do not in fact no other people's motives. If I know them well I may be able to guess well, but I do not know a stranger's motives. If I see a woman who is scantily Dressed, I will notice that she is dressed that way, but I really do not have any way of knowing why she dressed that way based solely on the outfit. Now, if she is dressed that way at a party Chama and she is loud and peacocking and calling a constant attention to herself through her behavior, I can assume that her outfit is part of the way she attracts attention. However, if she is just walking down the street or sitting at a restaurant, I really have no way of knowing that period



Let's change genders. When I was in graduate school, there was a guy in the college group who always came to church in running shorts or cut off jeans, flip flops, and one of an assortment of old graphic T shirts, Mini of which had beer or alcohol slogans on them. This went on for quite a while and till 1 of the staff members and 1 of the deacons went to him and asked him why he dressed that way to go to a house of worship.



It turned out that while he had good enough grades to get some academic scholarships, he did not have the money to pay to live at campus and pay all of his other expenses. His family was poor and he was the 1st one to go to college. He lived in his station wagon, he worked as a bag boy at night at a grocery store, and he could only afford 1 pair of long pants. Those were the pants he wore to work



Wants it was discovered what his situation entailed, he was given Room and board in the spare bedroom of an old couple's house. A real attor who went to the church and managed several campus apartments gave him a job doing maintenance. Another person who owned AA men's clothing store gave him some basic outfits to wear to class and other events. The church rallied around him the entire time he was in school

@BioFury
Imagine how different his life might have become had someone decided it would not be a good idea to allow him in church because alcohol was sinful or his clothing was inappropriate and violated some imaginary Bible verse.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Laurentium said:


> NobodySpecial said:
> 
> 
> > The distinction I see is the wearing's attire should be allowed or not allowed AND that one of the consequences is the determine the "message" that the wearer is sending and to whom s/he might be sending it.
> ...


Blue hair....

It’s interesting how outward appearance may “say” one thing in one area or city and another thing in another. And of course interesting how the same outward appearance can “say” one thing to one person and something else to the person standing right next to them.

I have pink hair. It is common in my city, lots of people have non natural colored hair, including doctors and lawyers, people let their kids (under eight years old) have multi colored hair. So around here, my pink hair says “she’s doing a fairly common fashion thing”. But sometimes when I travel, my pink hair says “she’s probably a druggie and has piercings on her genitals”.

Neither of these messages are what I’m trying to “say”, but I don’t get to decide what other people think I’m saying. It’s always interesting to find out, though.

I dated a guy who is not from my city and who was about 50 at the time. He was into the cool vibe in my city but it was relatively new to him. Anyway, he told me that he thought my hair said I’m basically DTF and a bad girl. I just thought it was funny and knew that if he lived here longer he would find out that lots of people who are not DTF randos have colored hair and it doesn’t mean what he thinks it means. 

I dated another older guy who liked the look and thought it just meant I was fun and “zany” or something. But he did not like it when he would notice other people looking at me as if they were judging me. This would happen when I would visit him in his small suburb town or when we traveled around to other small towns in our state, or at least that’s what he told me. I never noticed it really because I’m just used to having pink hair and that others think what they want about it. He said he could see the difference between people who were looking at my hair just because it was unusual to them, versus the ones who were judging me. I’m like, meh. I get it. These people don’t know what to make of it, that’s ok they don’t need to get it. And maybe I opened their minds a little bit.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> One of the things I have learned as I have broken away from certain things in my past is that as much as I may think I am all-knowing, I do not in fact no other people's motives. If I know them well I may be able to guess well, but I do not know a stranger's motives. If I see a woman who is scantily Dressed, I will notice that she is dressed that way, but I really do not have any way of knowing why she dressed that way based solely on the outfit.


I totally hear that. I learned that kind of the hard way. But I also came to the conclusion that the why is not terribly important. None of my business. My DH has a big problem with Muslim head scarves. I challenge his view that he has any business deciding anything about that person's thinking or believing based on their head scarf.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> Laurentium said:
> 
> 
> > To me, it seems self-evident that clothing communicates a message.
> ...


Oops, I should have told you about the post it note I slapped on your back that says “you know you want me”. My bad!


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Yes @Faithful Wife 

Mrs. Conan is quite jealous! Lol! Sometimes it is cute and other times she is a brat in need of a spankin.

But that is our dynamic and she makes me laugh so hard I cry.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Yes @Faithful Wife
> 
> Mrs. Conan is quite jealous! Lol! Sometimes it is cute and other times she is a brat in need of a spankin.
> 
> But that is our dynamic and she makes me laugh so hard I cry.


Awww...

So do you know the source of her jealousy? I am guessing it comes from her past. Am saying that because I know you’ve never given her reason to be jealous.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> One of the things I have learned as I have broken away from certain things in my past is that as much as I may think I am all-knowing, I do not in fact no other people's motives. If I know them well I may be able to guess well, but I do not know a stranger's motives. If I see a woman who is scantily Dressed, I will notice that she is dressed that way, but I really do not have any way of knowing why she dressed that way based solely on the outfit. Now, if she is dressed that way at a party Chama and she is loud and peacocking and calling a constant attention to herself through her behavior, I can assume that her outfit is part of the way she attracts attention. However, if she is just walking down the street or sitting at a restaurant, I really have no way of knowing that period


I am not sure it's about 'guessing motives'...I don't know how to explain it but it's more instinctual. Maybe some guys learnt that a woman that dresses a certain way is more likely to behave a certain way too; they will most likely have arrived at this from their experience and will try to use it to their advantage.

My wife never dresses provocatively (deliberately). She dresses in a kind of understated way and it's usually me who likes to 'pimp her up' a bit, because she's gorgeous and because there aren't many things she won't look great in. And I never really went for the 'obvious'/provocatively dressed type of woman anyway. Thats' not to say I don't like to look at them: to me they are like beautiful works of art, there to admire but not to approach. And it always amused me and at the same time made me feel sad that there will always be a very predictable reaction from a specific type of guys: as soon as they see a woman like that (or any indication at all that she might be 'free', outgoing and sexual etc), it's like having moths swarm towards a flame in an instant. It's not a bad thing. But I sometimes wonder, whether it's potentially a hassle for a woman to have all these guys crowding her. Perhaps because of this, other guys may be detracted from approaching a woman like this because they wouldn't want to deal with the hassle of getting all the other guys away from her. I dunno, I am just guessing. But I have always been contrarian by nature instinctively anyway and always liked to make my own discoveries, rather than take what there is.

I do like subtlety, then I like to make them my pet project...

Look, everyone makes guesses. Girls will make guesses about guys depending what kind of car they drive (mostly regarding the size and insecurity of their penis...). Or what job they have. People just use stereotypes as a shorthand to navigate life. Sometimes it crosses over into prejudice. Sometimes worse.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I don't think anyone is complaining about "thinking". (if they are, then please say so). At lunch yesterday the woman at the register was both extremely attractive, and wearing a rather thin and low-cut t-shirt. I thought she looked very attractive / hot / sexy. I did not say anything, harass, bother or obviously stare. I'm perfectly aware that if she was intentionally showing off, it wasn't for me.

I don't seen anything wrong with privately appreciating an attractive sexy woman (or man), its in some way *acting* on that where it becomes a problem. 

If someone wears something revealing, I think the consequences should be limited to other people glancing / looking at them more frequently. 




InMyPrime said:


> And that’s the exact same thing the OP was saying, just phrased differently...
> You see when someone on the street walks around with their tits hanging out in my face, I’m supposed to think about baseball (or polo, in my country). And if instead, I happen to think about full fat milk, by association, this is somehow suddenly insulting.
> It’s just another way to try and control thoughts; what you can or cannot think about.
> Why can’t one side simply admit that dressing a certain way doesn’t come without some sort of consequences (whether it’s extra attention, disgust or whatever), without resorting to deliberate obtuseness?
> ...


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Awww...
> 
> So do you know the source of her jealousy? I am guessing it comes from her past. Am saying that because I know you’ve never given her reason to be jealous.


All the men in her past abused, manipulated and cheated on her so that could be a factor.

When we first got together I was not house trained or tame and I didn't think certain behavior was cheating. It was an honest mistake because of my environment.

I didn't believe anything short of touching genitals was cheating and this included naked parties and kissing.

She disabused me of my notion by kicking a hole in our TV.:grin2:

We also had one terrible speed bump about a year into our relationship.

We were fighting every day and, after a truly terrible fight, we decided to call it quits. I promptly went out and got smashed and woke up with a brunette I knew from work.

I felt like cold death when I realized what happened and went back to the future Mrs. C and made up.

It technically wasn't cheating but it felt like it. I had to tell her several years later and even offered to give her an amicable divorce but I asked if she would marry me again.

She cried and said yes. I do not give her reasons in our day to day life but she has always been insecure and I am more confident than is probably healthy. She actually gets hit on a lot harder than me because she isn't as good at redirecting it as I am.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

NobodySpecial said:


> Yet often I have heard of messages I was supposedly sending that I had not intended. Who knew.


Job search guides will leave you thinking that everything you wear sends a clear and present message to the interviewing manager ....... and to anyone else who sees you in the corridor.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

In her late forties, I think my wife still looks terrific.










I like that she still wears dresses without a bra, that draw some attention to her splendid breasts.










Likewise I'm okay with others desiring her, checking her out and seeing what they can.










I also like that she looks great and chooses to be with me.

So I don't see why I need to feel jealous because others may desire her. Especially when we have always shared a tremendously rich sex life. Plus she's always hanging closely onto my arm. Or holding my hand (despite towering over me), and she often flashes me when there is opportunity while we're out as well.

:wink2:

Disclaimer: No nipple was shown in any of these pictures of my wife.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

uhtred said:


> I don't think anyone is complaining about "thinking". (if they are, then please say so). At lunch yesterday the woman at the register was both extremely attractive, and wearing a rather thin and low-cut t-shirt. I thought she looked very attractive / hot / sexy. I did not say anything, harass, bother or obviously stare. I'm perfectly aware that if she was intentionally showing off, it wasn't for me.
> 
> I don't seen anything wrong with privately appreciating an attractive sexy woman (or man), its in some way *acting* on that where it becomes a problem.
> 
> If someone wears something revealing, I think the consequences should be limited to other people glancing / looking at them more frequently.


How can you just _assume_ she wasn't seeking your attention? That's ignorant  

Ok, lets look at this then from another angle. I think we can all agree that there is a %age of women who dress provocatively because they _would_ welcome male attention (in addition to women who don't mind or think about it either way). If we then end up in a world where nobody is allowed to assume anything and ignore that some women would welcome attention, is that a world that those women would welcome?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> How can you just _assume_ she wasn't seeking *your *attention? That's ignorant


Unlikely since she had no way of knowing he would be shopping that day.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

NextTimeAround said:


> Job search guides will leave you thinking that everything you wear sends a clear and present message to the interviewing manager ....... and to anyone else who sees you in the corridor.


It's hard not to conclude you are TRYING not to understand.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > One of the things I have learned as I have broken away from certain things in my past is that as much as I may think I am all-knowing, I do not in fact no other people's motives. If I know them well I may be able to guess well, but I do not know a stranger's motives. If I see a woman who is scantily Dressed, I will notice that she is dressed that way, but I really do not have any way of knowing why she dressed that way based solely on the outfit.
> ...


LOL mine does too. I ask him if he wants to ban ALL religious garb, such as the cross necklace I wear. I also pointed out that there are some Jewish and Christian groups that believe in head covering.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> LOL mine does too. I ask him if he wants to ban ALL religious garb, such as the cross necklace I wear. I also pointed out that there are some Jewish and Christian groups that believe in head covering.


DH has an, in my opinion, irrational dislike of Islam.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

NobodySpecial said:


> It's hard not to conclude you are TRYING not to understand.


What are you trying to convey?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

NextTimeAround said:


> What are you trying to convey?


There is quite a bit of discussion around context. The only context I have spoken of is IN PUBLIC. Enlightened self interest around what one does in different contexts hasn't even been brought up.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

Faithful Wife said:


> Blue hair....
> 
> It’s interesting how outward appearance may “say” one thing in one area or city and another thing in another. And of course interesting how the same outward appearance can “say” one thing to one person and something else to the person standing right next to them.
> 
> ...


Yes, that's it exactly, thank you.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Well, I guess since I go there every week or two its possible she was dressing specifically for me in the hopes that I would show up. :wink2:

Fortunately humans have lots of means of non-verbal communication. If someone IS trying to be attractive to you, there are lots of subtle ways to let you know. If they don't do that its a safe assumption that its for someone else. 

If she flashed me a smile, and said something non work-related, then I would have considered the possibility that she was trying to attract my attention. (though possibly in just a casual fashion, as happens frequently at work).




InMyPrime said:


> How can you just _assume_ she wasn't seeking your attention? That's ignorant
> 
> Ok, lets look at this then from another angle. I think we can all agree that there is a %age of women who dress provocatively because they _would_ welcome male attention (in addition to women who don't mind or think about it either way). If we then end up in a world where nobody is allowed to assume anything and ignore that some women would welcome attention, is that a world that those women would welcome?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

There's a real difference between assuming the sloppy unkempt guy in the job interview isn't going to be a good worker and assuming a woman whose skirt is too short is a sl*t or "asking for it."

People who cannot make that distinction are choosing not to employ critical thinking.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

uhtred said:


> Well, I guess since I go there every week or two its possible she was dressing specifically for me in the hopes that I would show up. :wink2:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I think it’s time to confess to your wife @uhtred 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

uhtred said:


> Fortunately humans have lots of means of non-verbal communication. If someone IS trying to be attractive to you, there are lots of subtle ways to let you know.


I don't like subtle. I just unzip, whip it out and say "eh?" While pointing at it.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Its funny, she'd be fine with that. There was an Italian restaurant we sometimes went to that had a waiter she thought was really attractive. So I'd often suggest we go there so she could oggle the cute waiter..





InMyPrime said:


> I think it’s time to confess to your wife @uhtred
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

I'm just gonna suggest that some of you guys may be spending too damn much time online and not enough trying to wear that out.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

uhtred said:


> Its funny, she'd be fine with that. There was an Italian restaurant we sometimes went to that had a waiter she thought was really attractive. So I'd often suggest we go there so she could oggle the cute waiter..


DH and I sometimes, discreetly, check out other people on the other's behalf. It can be pretty funny. What about that one? WHAT??? HER??? She's fat. Ohhhh but you like them thick. Not THAT thick!


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> That may be true of some people but I'm not going to make assumptions.
> 
> Here's another example of why. I live in Texas. Naturally, every woman has some short shorts and tank tops. Every man has a tank top. Its 105° 60% humidity in the summer in Dallas. Now if I walk down the street in a tank top, not muscular, short, not tan lol, there's probably not many people who would assume I'm dressing this way for attention. If a tall, tan, muscular guy is wearing the same thing, some people will assume he's trying to show off his muscle.
> 
> ...


I had to bow out of this thread as I worked a 12 hour shift yesterday. Just wanted to come back and comment that your family is lovely and your wife is beautiful!! There is nothing wrong with how she dresses!! My daughters wear yoga pants that are just like that. If I ever lose these last 25lbs I'm going to buy some for myself!!

I couldn't possibly like this post more because it is SO true. I have always been a very well endowed woman. I went from nothing to a D cup over the summer at age 14 and it just got worse from there. From the moment I went back to school I was considered a ****. Nobody ever thought that about me before I developed. But once I had big boobs, instant ****. I wondered how I could be a **** when I was a virgin and hadn't even kissed a boy.

I tried everything I could to hide them. Still got accused of dressing inappropriately. I spent most of my youth trying to hide my boobs. Still had guys grabbing them uninvited all the time. And when I complained, I got accused of leading men on and trying to get their attention. This past January I got a breast reduction. I wish now I'd done it 30 years ago. 

Whether we like it or not, people see what they want to see, not what is necessarily there. I'd hate to live in Texas and have to wear a parka because I was in good shape with a nice pair of breasts while the flat chested girl gets to wear whatever she wants and nobody thinks badly of her. Same goes for men.


----------



## the2ofus (Jan 28, 2014)

BioFury said:


> With regard to looking good for you, I personally believe the "I dress well for myself" thing, is a load of rubbish. If you were alone on a deserted island, would you care what you looked like? Would you spend... any time at all, making sure your hair was perfect, or even looked good, before going to sit on the deserted beach by yourself??


 Yes I would, especially if I could see my reflection in the water. I feel better when I can see I've taken care of myself. I dye my gray hairs for me too, I feel like I'm getting to old to keep up with my kids and I still have a few years left, when I don't dye my hair, so I do. I don't care if you see my grays.




BioFury said:


> My thoughts are me simply being reasonable. If I wish to avoid being bitten by dogs, then I should probably avoid putting my hand in their faces. Are you saying that thought process is stupid?
> 
> Yes, ultimately it's the dog's fault I was bitten, but does that make my hand any less of a ruin? I can't control what the dog will and won't do, I can only control myself. And since I would like to avoid being ravaged by a dog, I naturally arrive at the conclusion that I should keep my hands away from their mouths.
> 
> Do you not agree with that logic?


But I wouldn't teach my kids to avoid walking down the street because there might be an aggressive dog nearby who sees you walking as aggression. I want them to live their life. Also would like to know why you have such a low view of men and keep comparing them to dogs.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

I suppose It's time I answered the freaking poll. I'm doing this on the condition that BioFury doesn't come back and tell me my answer is wrong.

I'm not a jealous person. The proof is that my wife wears Yoga pants on most of the days that she isn't going to work (uniform required). She frequently exhibits cleavage, at her size it's hard not to. And most importantly, I don't ***** about it. Mostly I just enjoy it.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> A-MEN to this! I think it is GREAT when women and men can decide for themselves what they feel good in!


I would love it if women felt good no matter what they dressed in and not have to dress a certain way to feel good.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Diana7 said:


> I would love it if women felt good no matter what they dressed in. Just in themselves.


As I said, dressing just in themselves is legal here. Still never seen a taker.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

NobodySpecial said:


> Diana7 said:
> 
> 
> > I would love it if women felt good no matter what they dressed in. Just in themselves.
> ...


Snort


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

BioFury said:


> With regard to victim blaming, if I wave my hand in front of an aggressive dog, and it bites, who's fault is it? The dogs. But does the semantics of "who's fault" it is, change the fact that my hand is now torn apart? Would it not make sense, if my goal is to avoid being bitten, to avoid sticking my hand in their faces? Would you also not counsel your children to avoid aggravating aggressive dogs, rather than do so anyway because they "have a right" to do what they want, and it would be the dog fault if they got bitten?
> 
> "You have the right to pet whatever dog you want Johnny. And if one of them bites you, it's the dogs problem not yours."


This is simply a terrible analogy.

You can't equate a woman wearing whatever is legal in a free society to intentionally aggravating a mean dog.

If someone is too butt stupid to figure out that they don't get to harrassed or assault women, I have the same answer for those wasted bags of skin that I would a rogue dog that attacks people.

You don't make your children hide from public walkways. You make them safe.

How a woman dresses has nothing to do with rape. Just ask the women in burkas being led to their deaths for having the audacity to be raped without a close male relative to watch or save them.

Anyone would have to be less intelligent than cabbage to assault Mrs. Conan with the excuse that she was wearing provocative clothing. I would pay for that excuse to be engraved on their tombstone.

Rapists are at least as intelligent as rogue dogs however because I would kill them as well and they know it.

So if a woman dresses sexy and is alone, a rapist might attack her but not if she is dressed more conservatively?

The only detail a rapist is interested in is weather his target is alone and seems to be a minimal threat.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

notmyjamie said:


> I'd hate to live in Texas and have to wear a parka because I was in good shape with a nice pair of breasts while the flat chested girl gets to wear whatever she wants and nobody thinks badly of her. Same goes for men.


Yeah, its only a problem for me as I have to wear really really long and baggy shorts... To hide everything you know? :liar:


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Yeah, its only a problem for me as I have to wear really really long and baggy shorts... To hide everything you know? :liar:


You could do what I did and get a reduction! :laugh:


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

notmyjamie said:


> You could do what I did and get a reduction! :laugh:


Maybe I should. I got turned down for some jobs because of safety standards. They said it created a tripping hazard.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Maybe I should. I got turned down for some jobs because of safety standards. They said it created a tripping hazard.


You should invent steel reinforced boxers...you'll make a fortune!!!!!


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

NobodySpecial said:


> As I said, dressing just in themselves is legal here. Still never seen a taker.


Feeling good in themselves and not having to dress a certain way to make themselves feel good.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> Feeling good in themselves and not having to dress a certain way to make themselves feel good.


What about feeling good about yourself, and liking the way you dress. Then being called an attention ***** or a **** and accused of having ulterior motives for dressing the way you like to dress? Who's the jerk in that scenario? The woman who feels good about herself and dresses a certain way, or the other person who's trying to tear that woman down for dressing a certain way? Which one would you guess has issues and maybe doesn't always feel good about themself?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

notmyjamie said:


> I couldn't possibly like this post more because it is SO true. I have always been a very well endowed woman. I went from nothing to a D cup over the summer at age 14 and it just got worse from there. From the moment I went back to school I was considered a ****. Nobody ever thought that about me before I developed. But once I had big boobs, instant ****. I wondered how I could be a **** when I was a virgin and hadn't even kissed a boy.


Interesting. I developed big boobs all of a sudden also, and I don't recall people treating me as if that in itself meant I was a ****. But I did suddenly want to cover them up. Which is surprisingly hard to do. I don't really know why I felt that particular modesty, it wasn't due to being shamed or anything. And I love boobs and always appreciated whatever skin others wanted to show me, so I really don't know why me showing my own became something I hesitated about. In every single high school picture, I have a crew neckline or higher on whatever I was wearing. I was not even that aware of attention to my boobs, because they were mostly covered all the time and I just didn't really think about them. Though, if I didn't think about them, why was I covering them up? It is something I still don't really understand, and I still cover them up to this day.

I think I kind of keep them all to myself and only share them with someone who will truly treat them right. I really have no problem with someone looking at me, but mah boobies are not for entertainment, they are for mah man only.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Diana7 said:


> Feeling good in themselves and not having to dress a certain way to make themselves feel good.


Oh. (Seys me pretending I was not good naturedly playing with you a bit.) I am also all for decoration!


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> What about feeling good about yourself, and liking the way you dress. Then being called an attention ***** or a **** and accused of having ulterior motives for dressing the way you like to dress? Who's the jerk in that scenario? The woman who feels good about herself and dresses a certain way, or the other person who's trying to tear that woman down for dressing a certain way? Which one would you guess has issues and maybe doesn't always feel good about themself?


I gave this a lot of thought a few years ago and I do think its quite important how we dress and present ourselves to the world. Its not just about us is it, its about others as well. Mostly we don't really think about why we wear what we do, and what reaction we are seeking(or not). 
I am one of those women who definitely doesn't want attention(except my husbands) and my daughters and DIL are the same. They always look nice but never wear anything provocative, tight, clingy, see though or showing off their cleavage or thighs.
In hot weather for example, I often wear flowy knee length dresses, very feminine, cool, but also quite modest. It helps that my husband finds modesty in women very attractive.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

Diana7 said:


> I gave this a lot of thought a few years ago and I do think its quite important how we dress and present ourselves to the world. Its not just about us is it, its about others as well. Mostly we don't really think about why we wear what we do, and what reaction we are seeking(or not).
> I am one of those women who definitely doesn't want attention(except my husbands) and my daughters and DIL are the same. They always look nice but never wear anything provocative, tight, clingy, see though or showing off their cleavage or thighs.
> In hot weather for example, I often wear flowy knee length dresses, very feminine, cool, but also quite modest. It helps that my husband finds modesty in women very attractive.


Modesty is so subjective though, there's clothes I don't see as immodest that you would and there's what you described wearing others would view as immodest.
Who's idea of modesty gets placated?


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

Diana7 said:


> I gave this a lot of thought a few years ago and I do think its quite important how we dress and present ourselves to the world. Its not just about us is it, its about others as well. Mostly we don't really think about why we wear what we do, and what reaction we are seeking(or not).
> I am one of those women who definitely doesn't want attention(except my husbands) and my daughters and DIL are the same. They always look nice but never wear anything provocative, tight, clingy, see though or showing off their cleavage or thighs.
> In hot weather for example, I often wear flowy knee length dresses, very feminine, cool, but also quite modest. It helps that my husband finds modesty in women very attractive.


Lets turn it around then. The only reason a woman dresses more conservatively is because she doesn't feel good about how she looks. She has self esteem issues regarding her body so she covers it up. If she was more confident in herself and liked the way she looked, she wouldn't be so concerned with modesty. 

See how dumb that makes me sound? What's the difference in that and calling every woman who shows a little skin an attention *****?


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

Faithful Wife said:


> Interesting. I developed big boobs all of a sudden also, and I don't recall people treating me as if that in itself meant I was a ****. But I did suddenly want to cover them up. Which is surprisingly hard to do. I don't really know why I felt that particular modesty, it wasn't due to being shamed or anything. And I love boobs and always appreciated whatever skin others wanted to show me, so I really don't know why me showing my own became something I hesitated about. In every single high school picture, I have a crew neckline or higher on whatever I was wearing. I was not even that aware of attention to my boobs, because they were mostly covered all the time and I just didn't really think about them. Though, if I didn't think about them, why was I covering them up? It is something I still don't really understand, and I still cover them up to this day.
> 
> I think I kind of keep them all to myself and only share them with someone who will truly treat them right. I really have no problem with someone looking at me, but mah boobies are not for entertainment, they are for mah man only.


Wish I'd grown up in your town :laugh: Another girl at school had the same experience as me. Unfortunately, her response to it was to flaunt what she got and by 10th grade she had been with quite a few boys (by her own admission.) 

Ironically, the reduction has also garnered me a lot of attention among the people in my life. Most of it has been very positive but I've gotten a few unwelcome advances. But for the first two months I felt like all anyone looked at when they saw me was my chest...even worse than when they were larger. Had a guy at a party overhear about the surgery and go nuts "that's after the surgery??? God...wish I'd see them before!!!" Drunk ass. 

I keep mine covered up too but I have no man to share em with right now. Maybe someday.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

I have tried a lot of styles and found many that can help conceal a little of my form.

I have been made fun of quite a bit for wearing tight clothes by friends and relatives.

I once got made fun of by an uncle after I officiated his daughter's wedding. I changed out of my suit and into shorts and a t shirt that was comfortable in the heat.

Many were wearing far more revealing outfits than me but my shoulders, chest and arms are much bigger in proportion to my waste than most.

I have to wear XXXlarge size shirts to totally obscure my shape and that looks pretty stupid on my 5'10" frame.

If I ever take off my shirt.....watch out! It is usually open season at that point because the meat, muscle, beef and steroid comments flow freely!

People look like what we look like. Folks just need to get over it.

My youngest son has been ripped with a six pack since age 4.

The problem isn't the outside appearance of others, it is the inside appearance of our own hearts.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Tiggy! said:


> Modesty is so subjective though, there's clothes I don't see as immodest that you would and there's what you described wearing others would view as immodest.
> Who's idea of modesty gets placated?


That's true to an extent, I dress in what I see as modest. So for example, I don't wear very tight fitting clothes, see through clothes, very short shorts/dresses/skirts and I don't show off any cleavage. Mum was the same and I respected her so much. 

I think that most of us would recognise someone who was dressing very immodestly though. 

I find it sad that what prostitutes wore not so long ago is almost normal wear for some people now. To me most women look far more attractive in something very feminine and more modest than clothes that show their cleavage and barely cover their backsides. 
I love the fashions of the 40's and 50's, so stylish, so feminine and yet modest as well.


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

Diana7 said:


> I find it sad that what prostitutes wore not so long ago is almost normal wear for some people now. To me most women look far more attractive in something very feminine and more modest than clothes that show their cleavage and barely cover their backsides.
> I love the fashions of the 40's and 50's, so stylish, so feminine and yet modest as well.


My father used to always joke that he felt bad for prostitutes. "Every time they adopt a style that announces their profession, the young woman take it over and they have to come up with a new style!!" He was joking but it's very true. 

I love the 40's styles a little better than the 50's. Too many housecoats in the 50's :grin2:


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

notmyjamie said:


> My father used to always joke that he felt bad for prostitutes. "Every time they adopt a style that announces their profession, the young woman take it over and they have to come up with a new style!!" He was joking but it's very true.
> 
> I love the 40's styles a little better than the 50's. Too many housecoats in the 50's :grin2:


Yes the 40's were so stylish, despite the war here in the UK, they still managed to look nice. Of course many made their own clothes back then.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

uhtred said:


> Its funny, she'd be fine with that. There was an Italian restaurant we sometimes went to that had a waiter she thought was really attractive. So I'd often suggest we go there so she could oggle the cute waiter..



I don’t get it; she ogles Italian waiters but doesn’t enjoy sexual stuff. So strange.

Perhaps as your next suggestion, you could invite him for a private home ‘dinner’ experience, and when the lights are off, switch places with him quickly so your wife won’t notice who is cooking in her oven. 

See if there’s any difference. Then do the same with the French restaurant and so on. The only way to find out what is really going on, is obviously by process of elimination....



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Diana7 said:
> 
> 
> > I gave this a lot of thought a few years ago and I do think its quite important how we dress and present ourselves to the world. Its not just about us is it, its about others as well. Mostly we don't really think about why we wear what we do, and what reaction we are seeking(or not).
> ...


Thank you. And I dress conservatively! This whole spiritual snobbery thing is disgusting.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

ConanHub said:


> This is simply a terrible analogy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You remind me of this guy 








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> Yeah, its only a problem for me as I have to wear really really long and baggy shorts... To hide everything you know? :liar:



I tend to fold it and hide it in my backpack from behind. Can’t have it dragging around on the ground, too painful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

InMyPrime said:


> You remind me of this guy
> 
> https://youtu.be/DCCfxyy0sc8
> 
> ...


My shoulders are bigger.:wink2:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Diana7 said:


> In hot weather for example, I often wear flowy knee length dresses, very feminine, cool, but also quite modest. It helps that my husband finds modesty in women very attractive.



What if it’s a windy day?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

notmyjamie said:


> but I have no man...



You’d need at least two, at a guess. 

But seriously, it must be a pain being a woman. Some things men just take for granted. (Like walking around without being grabbed all the time).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

She is near aesxual. She doesn't want to have *sex* with the waiter, she just thinks he is very attractive. She thinks I am very attractive. To her finding someone attractive has almost nothing to do with wanting to have sex with them.

She like teen romance stories / movies because there is lot of romance and "attraction" but no actual sex. 

I know its difficult for most people to recognize that attraction and sexual desire are separate. 

I think Maseratis are beautiful cars, but I don't want to have sex with one. 



InMyPrime said:


> I don’t get it; she ogles Italian waiters but doesn’t enjoy sexual stuff. So strange.
> 
> Perhaps as your next suggestion, you could invite him for a private home ‘dinner’ experience, and when the lights are off, switch places with him quickly so your wife won’t notice who is cooking in her oven.
> 
> ...


----------



## notmyjamie (Feb 5, 2019)

InMyPrime said:


> You’d need at least two, at a guess.
> 
> But seriously, it must be a pain being a woman. Some things men just take for granted. (Like walking around without being grabbed all the time).


LOL...I can't wait to get rid of the one I've got...don't want to juggle two!!!! 

I was going to say that being grabbed doesn't happen anymore now that I'm older, but then I remembered my neighbor grabbed me last year at a party. Just reached out and helped himself to a squeeze. I thought our other male neighbor's eyes were going to pop out of his head. Asshat.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

uhtred said:


> She is near aesxual. She doesn't want to have *sex* with the waiter, she just thinks he is very attractive. She thinks I am very attractive. To her finding someone attractive has almost nothing to do with wanting to have sex with them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don’t understand: does she just want to ‘drive’ the Italian waiter then, or park him in her garage...? 

You would admire a car for the purpose of driving it surely?

Try to compete the following sentences:

What a beautiful car, I wish I could give it a test ride.

What a beautiful stud, I wish I could give him a ....

Seems logical no?

There must be *something* that tickles her the right way. I think there are very few truly asexual people and I very much doubt that they ‘ogle’ other people. What would be the point? But I don’t know.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Not really. There are some cars that are very pretty, but wouldn't be my favorite ones to drive. Its still not a good match because I enjoy driving. 

Maybe a Garwood motorboat. It think they are aesthetically pleasing, but I don't enjoy driving motorboats. 

A leopard is beautiful animal, but I don't want to have sex with one, though having a friendly tame one in the house might be sort of cool. 




InMyPrime said:


> I don’t understand: does she just want to ‘drive’ the Italian waiter then, or park him in her garage...?
> 
> You would admire a car for the purpose of driving it surely?
> 
> ...


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

InMyPrime said:


> Diana7 said:
> 
> 
> > In hot weather for example, I often wear flowy knee length dresses, very feminine, cool, but also quite modest. It helps that my husband finds modesty in women very attractive.
> ...


BINGO!

On windy days, a flowy dress can show everyone your backside.

However, I suspect Diana believes wearing, pants, shirts, jewelry, and makeup is a sin. There are several denominations that believe this.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

InMyPrime said:


> uhtred said:
> 
> 
> > She is near aesxual. She doesn't want to have *sex* with the waiter, she just thinks he is very attractive. She thinks I am very attractive. To her finding someone attractive has almost nothing to do with wanting to have sex with them.
> ...


You know.....you don't have to "get it" for it to be real...


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

ConanHub said:


> I have tried a lot of styles and found many that can help conceal a little of my form.
> 
> I have been made fun of quite a bit for wearing tight clothes by friends and relatives.
> 
> ...



I get it for being short and not muscular lol.
With that said, I would call you all that stuff to your face, but you would know I'm joking. No doubt you take the piss out of me about my size, just for laughs. "Nobody would mess with us with Tiny Tim around" haha


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> You know.....you don't have to "get it" for it to be real...




I can’t. I need to understand EVERYTHNING, EVERYTHING You hear me?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

TheDudeLebowski said:


> I get it for being short and not muscular lol.
> With that said, I would call you all that stuff to your face, but you would know I'm joking. No doubt you take the piss out of me about my size, just for laughs. "Nobody would mess with us with Tiny Tim around" haha


The good humor is always welcome. I've had people actually fairly serious when they comment however.

My uncle was annoyed after the wedding that my muscles were showing despite the fact that many were wearing less than me.
My friends all joke about it but it is all good fun with them.:grin2:

Some of the guys talking steroids piss me off because I've never touched that crap, they are usually saying it because they can't or won't get as big as me and I don't want any kids encouraged to try it.

Some steroid comments are obviously just stupid fun and I'm good with it.:wink2:


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

personofinterest said:


> On windy days, a flowy dress can show everyone your backside.


Windy days can be fun.

A couple of years ago, my wife and I were visiting a coastal town. While she was wearing a splendid summer dress that stopped just above the knee, sans any underwear. When the wind caught her dress and to my amusement exposed her bare behind.


----------



## Tiggy! (Sep 9, 2016)

Even Kate Middleton isn't immune to the wind flash


----------

