# Girls Gone ... Mild: Teens Encouraged to Cover Up



## Equuskia (Dec 16, 2006)

Faith-Based 'Pure Fashion' Program Preaches That Virtues and Modesty Are What's in Vogue


Now, I don't care about the religious aspect of it per se. What bothers me are some of the assumptions made in the article, and these are what I would like to hear your opinion about:

Quote:

"The idea with Pure Fashion is very countercultural," said Brenda Sharman, a life-long model, former Miss Georgia and creator of Pure Fashion. "It takes a girl who is brave and gutsy. ... This is not for the weak and wimpy girl ... to say, 'I'm different, and I'm going to preserve my innocence and virginity,' that's a girl who's radical!"
This seems to go along the same vein of "Today's youth is going down the gutter, they are so lost







" imo

Quote:

"I don't want her to be distracted by men. So I kind of don't want men to look at her at all, not notice her," Tina said. "But I recognize that they will, so I just want to make sure they look at her in the way that I see her, which is pure and beautiful and innocent."
The stereotype of "guys are horny and only look at girls for sex" and how they can't control themselves. Guys don't look at a girl and think "Wow, I wonder if she'll go to the movies or for a walk in the park with me?" They only think "how can I get her in bed/in my backseat?"









And here's the one that burns my hide the most:

Quote:

Sharman drives home the message: Girls who expose too much, risk much more.

"If you are too steamy in your bikini, you will become a part of a statistic," Sharman told a roomful of 40 girls at the Atlanta conference. "By the age of 15, 76 percent of teens are involved in a sexual relationship. What do we expect, really, when so many girls have displayed their bodies to the world? ... For the first time teen girls have the highest gonorrhea rate in the nation, teen boys have the second. Approximately 400,000 teens have abortions every year. And according to UNICEF, half of all new HIV infections occur in young people 15-24."
What exactly is she trying to say? If you dress like a "slut" you're just begging for sex? And really, the message my cynical self took away from this quote was "Since guys can't keep it in their pants, it's up to us girls to dress "modestly" as so not to tempt the menfolk into sex."

Discuss!


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

:::sigh::: Yeah. I mean, I don't think there should be pressure on girls to dress "sexy" or "modestly". It's their sexuality, their bodies, and we should be helping them learn to understand it and make the choices they want to make.

I do tell my daughter sometimes when I think her shirt is especially low cut, because she has a really nice chest and I want to be sure she knows what other people may think when they see it displayed so noticeably... but if she's okay with it, well, her deal. And it doesn't mean that she's a "slut", or "asking for it, or destined to get an STD by age 18... I mean, it's kind of fun to dress looking good. I do it...

And those stats are wack. Wiki quotes Scientific America saying that 70% of 15-17 year old girls stated that they were virgins in a 2002 poll. There are no cites for the articles claims, including the statement that 76% of girls are involved in a sexual relationship by age 15. Admittedly sexual relationship doesn't = intercourse, but that huge of a discrepancy seems like a huge red flag.

And really, I'm not sure we all agree that teen sex is bad. I don't, anyway. Coerced sex is bad, sex when you're not ready is bad, STDs are bad... but sex? No. Kinda fun, really.


----------



## Ldavis24 (Feb 19, 2009)

I had really big boobs from when I was in middle school and no matter what I wore unless it was up to my neck there was a lot of cleavage going on. I didn't try to dress slutty or anything at all, in fact because of all the attention it drew I tended to dress in baggy clothes and sweatshirts were something I wore almost daily just to deflect getting stared at by guys. I guess I would have considered that people thought I dressed slutty because no matter what I wore it was hello boobs!

I find this purity clothing or whatever it is about as reliable as purity rings which is to say a lot of the kids do it to please their parents and then turn around and are having plenty of sex anyway!

I love how she says you will be part of a statistic like you are just begging to be assaulted by a man for not wearing something head to toe


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Hmm, when i was 15 floor-length gypsy skirts were in fashion. They were very flowing, very loose and very long. Showed NOTHING, no leg, no silhouette, nothing. And at 15 i was having a lot of (consensual, protected, monogamous) sex, and could easily hike that skirt up around my hips!

Seriously, we should be teaching kids about self-respect, demanding healthy respect from partners and making good decisions THEY wanted to make, not trying to cover every inch of their flesh lest a male of the species looks at them.


----------



## ollyoxenfree (Jun 11, 2009)

I'm not particularly concerned about immodest dress, although I admit that I don't think it's attractive to see young girls dressed in Bratz-doll-like fashion. I don't worry about modest dress and my dd. I do have a little sympathy for the sentiment behind the quote about men looking at teenage girls.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Equuskia* 

The stereotype of "guys are horny and only look at girls for sex" and how they can't control themselves. Guys don't look at a girl and think "Wow, I wonder if she'll go to the movies or for a walk in the park with me?" They only think "how can I get her in bed/in my backseat?"










My dd is 13 y.o. She is my height, and has a better figure - more developed - than I had when I went to university. Men look at her. A lot. It's automatic - she comes into view and I see men's eyes do an up/down/up again - often stopping at certain parts of her body. It's more than a little disturbing to see her being "checked out" by men in their 20's, 30's, 50's and older. I can't help but feel a little protective at that moment.

So I have a lot of sympathy for a mom who wants a modest dress code. I'm not going to implement one, but I understand the motivation.


----------



## bandgeek (Sep 12, 2006)

I am/was a semi-modest dresser (never wore long skirts, but I didn't generally wear tight clothes and my belly never showed, never showed cleavage, ect) and I had sex at 15. I know girls that showed off their body and waited a lot longer. But in any case, I don't think teens having sex is necessarily a bad thing anyway. They are humans with hormones and if they are responsible, I'm not going to think they are causing problems or out to ruin the "statistics" just because they aren't 18/21/finished with college/married/in love/whatever.

I want my kids to respect themselves and others and only do things they feel good about. So modest clothes/showy clothes, sex/no sex, I just want them to feel good about themselves and do what is right for THEM.

And the idea that boys/men can't control themselves is just horrible.







Sure, most male's thoughts are going to stray, but that doesn't mean they are going rape a girl or even put pressure on her to do something she doesn't want to do. My BF admits to me that he thinks about it constantly. He said one time at work, a customer called and her voice was to die for and yeah, he thought about it. But that doesn't mean he's sleeping around and hell, he doesn't even bug ME (not much anyway) when he wants it and I'm not in the mood. Thinking about sex or visualizing a person naked is not wrong....it's normal! And quite honestly, no amount of clothes is going to keep someone from thinking another person is sexy. If they find them attractive, they find them attractive.


----------



## orangefoot (Oct 8, 2004)

I really don't know where to start with this other than to say that a writer who starts with the premise that all men are sexual fiends and all women are prey is in a pretty disturbed place.


----------



## Equuskia (Dec 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ollyoxenfree* 
I'm not particularly concerned about immodest dress, although I admit that I don't think it's attractive to see young girls dressed in Bratz-doll-like fashion. I don't worry about modest dress and my dd. I do have a little sympathy for the sentiment behind the quote about men looking at teenage girls.

My dd is 13 y.o. She is my height, and has a better figure - more developed - than I had when I went to university. Men look at her. A lot. It's automatic - she comes into view and I see men's eyes do an up/down/up again - often stopping at certain parts of her body. It's more than a little disturbing to see her being "checked out" by men in their 20's, 30's, 50's and older. I can't help but feel a little protective at that moment.

So I have a lot of sympathy for a mom who wants a modest dress code. I'm not going to implement one, but I understand the motivation.

I understand, but girls check out men too. Teachers, the coach, etc. And their thoughts are anything but "pure". And men (and boys) in general don't go around in public "baring flesh". So how can we protect boys and men from the devouring eyes of girls? By covering them up?









And please don't think I'm picking on you. Not at all! It's just the idea in general that, like orangefoot eloquently stated, men are lions just waiting to prey on the innocent little lambs. I think it's demeaning to males and victimizes females.


----------



## ollyoxenfree (Jun 11, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Equuskia* 
I understand, but girls check out men too. Teachers, the coach, etc. And their thoughts are anything but "pure". And men (and boys) in general don't go around in public "baring flesh". So how can we protect boys and men from the devouring eyes of girls? By covering them up?









And please don't think I'm picking on you. Not at all! It's just the idea in general that, like orangefoot eloquently stated, men are lions just waiting to prey on the innocent little lambs. I think it's demeaning to males and victimizes females.

Except there's a serious "ick" factor when an old man is devouring a young girl with his eyes that isn't there when a young girl checks out a boy or man. At least for me there is. There's also an issue with older men having sex with girls - that's why there are statutory rape laws against that kind of sexual activity, but no "Lolita" laws. Now I don't think every man who looks at a girl or women is a lion waiting to prey on her. Modest or immodest dress isn't a particular hang up for me personally. Too many people conflate dress and morality.

I'm just providing my personal experience. Once you see your pubescent child being assessed as a sexual being by someone who is old enough to be her great-grandfather, you might feel a little icky about it too. You also might feel a little sympathy for the parents who instinctively want to cover up the child. It's a protective sheltering response. It may not be effective, but it's instinctive.


----------



## Irishmommy (Nov 19, 2001)

Clicked on the link. Got a popup ad for match.com. I sense some irony there.


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

The wording is disturbing to me as well. Modest dress dosnt prevent perverted thoughts those will happen no matter what a person is wearing or not wearing. Men are not inherently evil like everyone else there are good and bad among them.


----------



## Mama2Jesse (Jan 5, 2009)

Addressing the article itself, not the complex modesty thing...

Yuck, ick, no. How insulting. "Too steamy in your bikini and you will become a statistic!"

Oh, for crying out loud. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!


----------



## chiromamma (Feb 24, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GoBecGo* 
Hmm, when i was 15 floor-length gypsy skirts were in fashion. They were very flowing, very loose and very long. Showed NOTHING, no leg, no silhouette, nothing. And at 15 i was having a lot of (consensual, protected, monogamous) sex, and could easily hike that skirt up around my hips!
Seriously, we should be teaching kids about self-respect, demanding healthy respect from partners and making good decisions THEY wanted to make, not trying to cover every inch of their flesh lest a male of the species looks at them.

Totally agree! I was wearing and doing the same thing at 15.


----------



## Honey693 (May 5, 2008)

I dressed fairly hootchie (booty shorts, skimpy tank tops, etc) and I was a virgin until marriage. So eat that whoever wrote that article.


----------



## aniT (Jun 16, 2004)

Quote:

For the first time teen girls have the highest gonorrhea rate in the nation, teen boys have the second. Approximately 400,000 teens have abortions every year. And according to UNICEF, half of all new HIV infections occur in young people 15-24
These have to be world wide statistics.. that is.. if they aren't being pulled out of their butts in the first place.

The whole thing is disbursing to me. I had sex at 15... I wore nothing but jeans and baggy t-shirts. It has nothing to do with how you dress and to say so shows a lot of ignorance in my opinion.

I think the best thing we can do for our girls is to teach them to respect themselves and to have safe sex if that is what they choose. Because no matter what parents think.. no amount of shaming, yelling or screaming is going to stop them if that is what they want to do.


----------



## caiesmommy (Feb 26, 2007)

I think this is HILARIOUS! I know way to many guys that LOVE nothing more then a woman in a pair of nice fitting jeans and a turtle neck...seriously, guys are going to look no matter what and yeah it maybe "gross" or "unwanted" but it's human nature! I would be interested in seeing TRUE facts connecting the type of clothes a girl wears to if shes having sex..but I know there are no such facts


----------



## SuzyLee (Jan 18, 2008)

I looked at the picture of the "models" and they seemed to be wearing rpetty std. sundresses and cardigans. This just doesn't seem groundbreaking at all, from a fashion standpoint. Maybe I am out of touch but when I was a teen, *most* kids dressed in pretty normal clothes, not in "slutty" stuff from A&F.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

How do we expect our kids to grow into adults with a healthy attitude to sexuality when we give them this whole "sex is bad" vibe?


----------



## MusicianDad (Jun 24, 2008)

My problem with the whole idea layed out in the article in the OP is that women (and girls) are apperently responsable for a man's self control. It's her job to not entice him into looking, as opposed to his job to learn how to control the urge to look. Which is exactly why you get men in their 20's, 30's, 50's etc who can't keep their eyes of certain body parts. Yeah I have the occasional naughty thought, but guess what? I can keep my eyes north of anything appealing in that way when I know such attention is inappropriate (such as not in a night club or when DH is walking around in his undies). It's called self control and it's a great thing to have.

Bugs the crap outta me. DD is _not_ responsable for what the teen and adult men around her do. She is responsable for herself only.

The idea that teens in a physical relationship is always bad irks me too, but less so simply because there are people in every age group who are very much not mature enough to be in a physical relationship with someone.

In our house we are teaching DD to dress in a way that she is comfortable with. She is most comfortable with covering up at the moment, but if that changes we aren't going to beat ourselves up about it. Dh and I know that she is fully capable of telling a guy to growup if he can't look anywhere other then her chest or ass.

The one and only girl I had sex with dressed conservatively and she was younger then 15 when we did it. It was also her idea and involved more then just lust.


----------



## caro113 (Aug 25, 2008)

Well of course a girl in a bikini can become a stat. For unemployment. A few summers ago I did a day camp and there were a few days when we were supposed to take the kids swimming. The only suit I had was a bikini, but I've always been self conscience about my body so I always made sure everything was covered. Well I was young (in college) and the kids were middle schoolers. The leader was a substitute teacher for the school district so all the kids knew her, and didn't like her. Honestly, she was the stereotypical mean sub that no one likes. Anyhow, she went and complained to the woman in charge that I was hanging out of my suit and all the boys were looking, which was crap. Then she kept saying how I was doing this and doing that and eventually the woman in charge got fed up and fired me. The truth was, this leader couldn't handle the fact that the kids liked me better (because I was closer to their age) and probably didn't like I could actually wear a bikini and she couldn't. Ugh.

I really think this article is bogus and seems to be for the people who already believe such things, like how dancing is evil because it entices men and that showing any skin other than arms (no shoulders) is going to give men these feelings and they can't do anything about those feelings because they aren't married and therefore can't even be alone with a woman. It seems like it was written for those mothers so they can take it to their daughters and say "see, this is why we do xyz and you can't do abc".

Furthermore, I know plenty of girls who wore modest clothes and they were always the biggest sluts. I also knew plenty of girls who wore slutty clothes and never had sex in high school. So, agreeing with PPs, I think it's totally unfair to say slutty clothes means the girl is a slut.

Actually, I would say that the modestly dressed girls - even the religious girls - are having more sex and are bigger sluts than the girls wear tight jeans and belly shirts. Look at catholic school girls. Obviously they aren't all running around having oddles of sex with various people, but I knew plenty of guys in highshool who purposely dated girls from the catholic schools because they were easy. And they always seemed to have more pregnant girls in their high school than most of the other schools around. Even one of our local colleges has a bad rap. My father went a catholic co-ed college. It happened to be within 20 minutes of a then all girl catholic college. (they just allowed boys in for the 05-06 school year but the only dormatory they have is on the other side of campus and very few boys go there.) They actually used to call that school ImSMACKulata (pun on the school name) because all the girls were easy. I'm not saying it's right by any means, and maybe that too is just as bad as an assumption, but in my experience, it's the girls who dress "modestly" and go to church that have the most sex with the most people.

This is a bit of digression, but I wonder if this writers attitude has anything to do with halloween costumes. Did you see them this year? They had costumes for children - toddlers! - there were slutty enough that even I wouldn't wear them!! And I must admit, when I see them, I always think "and people wonder why we seem to glorify the idea of sexualizing young girls." I mean, really, is there a different between half those costumes and those disgusting pageants for 3 yos?


----------



## caro113 (Aug 25, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MusicianDad* 
In our house we are teaching DD to dress in a way that she is comfortable with. She is most comfortable with covering up at the moment, but if that changes we aren't going to beat ourselves up about it. Dh and I know that she is fully capable of telling a guy to growup if he can't look anywhere other then her chest or ass..

Thank you!! When I was in highschool I wanted to wear tight clothes as a means of making myself feel better. (I also had self esteem and body image issues.) I wore hip huggers and tight shirts and makeup. I never showed my stomach (because that freaked me out) but I wanted to show off my chest. I liked buying fabric corsettes and wearing them with jeans or baggy pants, depending on my mood. In the summer, I wore bikinis. Then I went through a boy shorts phase because I hated short shorts. Then I went into a skirt and tight pants phase because of college. Then I just went into a whatever is comfortable phase because I was done dealing with all that headache. Right now, I like to wear long skirts and shirts that don't have a cleavage cut. That's what I like right now. And since I'm pregnant and hate maternity pants, I'll be wearing skirts all winter and I'm okay with that. I haven't worn makeup in years and haven't dyed my hair in even more years, except for one experiment after DD was born and I immediately regretted it. I used to be the girl who shaved every two to three days because that's what made me look good. Now I don't shave at all. I've really delved into this whole "natural" phase and I'm quite happy with it. Sure, I could definitely get away with wearing a nice tight bikini at the 4th of July party this summer (4 to 5 weeks after my baby is due) but I won't. Because I don't want to.

I've definitely done a lot of growing up in the just the past few years. I've learned that I don't really need form fitting clothes to make myself feel better about my body. I don't need makeup or razors or hair dye. I don't need to feel embarrassed because I happen to wear a swim suit and it happens to show my stretch marks from pregnancy. Now that's not to say that women who do like to wear form fitting clothes or wear make up or shave haven't grown up. That's what they like and that's fine. But for me, I did those things because I felt that they would make me feel better about myself. And I was wrong. And honestly, I do have to thank MDC for some of that, particularly the stretch marks. One mama on here said a while ago that they were like her battle scars, a physical proof of carrying her child and that it was completely natural so why be embarrassed by it? She really got me thinking and after some deep soul searching, I realized she was right.

Figuring these things out has saved me a lot of stress and a lot of effort and time. I don't need to spend an hour getting ready to go to the store. So what if my hair is a bit messy. Why yes, I am wearing a sweatshirt that's two sizes too big; it's DPs and I like wearing his things. I can wear a tank top with unshaved arm pits; get over it. I really feel that I am more at peace with myself because I was able to figure out what made me comfortable, without worrying about how it effected other people. That's not my problem nor is it my responsibility. I can't control other people, only myself.


----------



## karne (Jul 6, 2005)

I read the article. At first I thought that maybe this was coming out of a place of parents wishing to protect their children. But really, the tone is extremely negative, as in "You are how you dress". I also didn't care at all for the idea that young women can't be trusted to decide how to dress themselves. It just seems the opposite of the messages we wnat to be giving young women. It's very, very shallow. I thouhgt that the interaction between the mom and daughter was sad as well.


----------



## lorijds (Jun 6, 2002)

When my oldest was 11 or so, she really started to get a more womanly figure and started dressing as a teen. Not a teen like the tasteless Brittany Spears look. More like an Urban Outfitters look. Still--skinny jeans, layer tank tops with low-cut shirts, short skirts with tights, that sort of thing.

I really struggled with how to balance instilling pride in her body with a sense of modesty. For me, there *IS* a line somewhere, but I can't quite find that exact point. What I finally discussed with her is that I want her to be proud of her body, she can show it off all she wants, but she has to follow school rules and she cannot dress with the idea of attracting people to her sexually (she is now 14, we had this conversation when she was 12). I just told her, if you want to wear something because it is comfortable, you like it, it expresses something about yourself you want to express, and/or you think you look good in it, go for it. If you want to wear it because it might turn someone on sexually, no. If you feel comfortable wearing it in front of your grandpa, it's cool.

As a consequence, I think she shows more skin than I am comfortable with sometimes (and definitely more skin than her father is comfortable with), but I honestly feel she is dressing for herself and not others. I fully recognize that much of our discomfort is rooted in the feeling of disbelief that our baby is old enough to look like a woman. It's reluctance to acknowledge that she *is* in fact growing up and will someday move on with her life and we will miss this lovely time we are having right now. There is also a loss of control-we used to dress her, buy her clothes, tell her what to wear, basically. Now she is asserting her own will and style, controlling her own body. It's not that we don't want that--it's just that it is new and unexplored territory for us.

If she dressed absolutely horribly, I would probably lay down stricter guidelines. By that I mean something like a thong showing out the back of some jeans cut so low that she'd have to wax to not have her pubic hair showing, accompanied by a short shirt that said something like "You can't be first but you can be next!" on it. And I'd worry more about why she was trying to send that message--the clothes would be more a symptom of a true, big problem rather than the actual problem, you know?

As is, she seems to dress is a manner that exudes confidence, a certain edgy sense of style and taste, as well as a comfort and pride in her body. While sometimes I feel the pants are too tight or the shirt is too low, I don't say anything. I smile, tell her she looks beautiful (because she does), and send her on her way to school. If I am to be completely honest, I would probably dress like that, too, if I had such a beautiful, long-legged, fit body like she has! So I really can't say anything.


----------



## aniT (Jun 16, 2004)

Where do you find jeans that AREN'T low rise??? My 11 year old is moving up to Jr's sizes and I can only find low rise.. I am keeping her in girls as long as possible but she is wearing a 16 so that isn't going to be much longer.

I went to her favorite store for shirts and they only carried low rise.

And yea.. my 16 year old sometimes has a thong showing when she bends over.. but she tends to wear long shirts so it's just a symptom of low rise being the only jeans you can find.


----------



## Ldavis24 (Feb 19, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aniT* 
Where do you find jeans that AREN'T low rise??? My 11 year old is moving up to Jr's sizes and I can only find low rise.. I am keeping her in girls as long as possible but she is wearing a 16 so that isn't going to be much longer.

I went to her favorite store for shirts and they only carried low rise.

And yea.. my 16 year old sometimes has a thong showing when she bends over.. but she tends to wear long shirts so it's just a symptom of low rise being the only jeans you can find.

I have had the misery of no matter what I wear having a butt that somehow enables my underwear to show when I bend over NO MATTER WHAT







It is sooo hard to find a pair of jeans that aren't low rise to the point people can see my butt every time I bend over to pick something up! I know how hard it is, I found a pair of jeans from old navy that are decent though if your 16 year old has that problem


----------



## mbm (Jun 14, 2006)

Do at least try on a few pairs of jeans labeled "low rise". They might not be as bad as you think. Certain Gap and Old Navy "low rise" styles are low enough to fit me and be flattering (I have big hips but a small waist) but are still modest enough that I am comfortable wearing them to work.

Re the original article: I spent my teens in oversized flannel shirts, leggings and Timberland boots because that was the style at the time and we didn't have nearly as many clothing choices as girls today. In a way I am envious because I think of what cute stuff I could have worn back when I was thin enough and young enough to pull it off! But it also seems very difficult for girls (and moms) to navigate so many choices and advertising messages and come up with a style that suits them.


----------



## onelilguysmommy (May 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Equuskia* 
I understand, but girls check out men too. Teachers, the coach, etc. And their thoughts are anything but "pure". And men (and boys) in general don't go around in public "baring flesh". So how can we protect boys and men from the devouring eyes of girls? By covering them up?









And please don't think I'm picking on you. Not at all! It's just the idea in general that, like orangefoot eloquently stated, men are lions just waiting to prey on the innocent little lambs. I think it's demeaning to males and victimizes females.

It's easy. Girls don't want it so there is nothing to protect the poor weak minded menz from!


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

If you find a store with a "tall range" the low rise jeans often have a deeper rise than those in the standard range - you might have to take the legs up but it gives you an extra inch or two coverage in the butt/front. Of course that's no help if you're already in the tall range like me, but still, worth a try?


----------



## MittensKittens (Oct 26, 2008)

After going to the "pure fashion" website, I have to admit to wondering what the average teenager in the US dresses like nowadays, if that is supposed to be modest. I certainly see nothing "radical" about what the girls on the pure fashion website are WEARING, though I didn't much like the article and its emphasis on religion either.


----------



## karne (Jul 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aniT* 
Where do you find jeans that AREN'T low rise??? My 11 year old is moving up to Jr's sizes and I can only find low rise.. I am keeping her in girls as long as possible but she is wearing a 16 so that isn't going to be much longer.

My 11 y/o has the same problem-she needs a juniors 00 or 0 for the length. She's completely uncomfortable with the low rise, even w/ long shirts-have you seen how low some of the jeans are?? Crazy. We've found a couple of Aeropostale pants at consignment that were a bit better, and some Gap, but not much. Old Navy never works for her. It's also really, really hard to find cute skirts to wear with leggings, that aren't super mini's, which bugs me.


----------



## orangefoot (Oct 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mbm* 
I spent my teens in oversized flannel shirts, leggings and Timberland boots because that was the style at the time

Me too except I wore Doc Martens not Timberland! I wear more fitted clothing now than I did as a teen.


----------



## Teenytoona (Jun 13, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ollyoxenfree* 
I'm not particularly concerned about immodest dress, although I admit that I don't think it's attractive to see young girls dressed in Bratz-doll-like fashion. I don't worry about modest dress and my dd. I do have a little sympathy for the sentiment behind the quote about men looking at teenage girls.

My dd is 13 y.o. She is my height, and has a better figure - more developed - than I had when I went to university. Men look at her. A lot. It's automatic - she comes into view and I see men's eyes do an up/down/up again - often stopping at certain parts of her body. It's more than a little disturbing to see her being "checked out" by men in their 20's, 30's, 50's and older. I can't help but feel a little protective at that moment.

So I have a lot of sympathy for a mom who wants a modest dress code. I'm not going to implement one, but I understand the motivation.

True, but the onus shouldn't be on her to prevent a man's interest/action. The onus should be on the man. I think the article comes from the position that the man is the accelerator, woman is the breaks. Plus, as a stepmother of a very attractive now 19 yo, doesn't matter if she's wearing courdoroys and a sweater, if she's good looking, she will be noticed.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *orangefoot* 
I really don't know where to start with this other than to say that a writer who starts with the premise that all men are sexual fiends and all women are prey is in a pretty disturbed place.

Yes!!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MusicianDad* 
My problem with the whole idea layed out in the article in the OP is that women (and girls) are apperently responsable for a man's self control. It's her job to not entice him into looking, as opposed to his job to learn how to control the urge to look. Which is exactly why you get men in their 20's, 30's, 50's etc who can't keep their eyes of certain body parts. Yeah I have the occasional naughty thought, but guess what? I can keep my eyes north of anything appealing in that way when I know such attention is inappropriate (such as not in a night club or when DH is walking around in his undies). It's called self control and it's a great thing to have.

Bugs the crap outta me. DD is _not_ responsable for what the teen and adult men around her do. She is responsable for herself only.

The idea that teens in a physical relationship is always bad irks me too, but less so simply because there are people in every age group who are very much not mature enough to be in a physical relationship with someone.

In our house we are teaching DD to dress in a way that she is comfortable with. She is most comfortable with covering up at the moment, but if that changes we aren't going to beat ourselves up about it. Dh and I know that she is fully capable of telling a guy to growup if he can't look anywhere other then her chest or ass.

The one and only girl I had sex with dressed conservatively and she was younger then 15 when we did it. It was also her idea and involved more then just lust.


Agreed! Why aren't there articles upon articles about how to teach boys (and therefore the men they will grow into) about responsible sexuality?? It's just so much easier to blame the slutty dressed girl.


----------



## crl (May 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ollyoxenfree* 
There's also an issue with older men having sex with girls - that's why there are statutory rape laws against that kind of sexual activity, but no "Lolita" laws. .

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean that only the older person is prosecuted for under-age sex? (Which I believe to be true. The underage person is considered the victim.) Or do you mean that only men are barred from sex with people under the age of consent? Ie, that older women with younger boys are not prosecuted? (Which I do not believe to be true.)

Not that wiki is the ultimate legal source, but for what it's worth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_rape

Catherine


----------



## MusicianDad (Jun 24, 2008)

I think she meant general statutory laws, the gender assignment she gave is simply a result of the pre-programmed idea of "a woman would never do that" showing up. It's something many people, even those who understand that's not the way it is tend to go their first, even if only for a brief moment.


----------



## lorijds (Jun 6, 2002)

Yes, I assume too that she was simply pointing out that there are not laws prosecuting the younger person having sex with an older person, because it is not simply the act of sex that is a crime, but rather the older person is committing a crime by having sex with a person of such extreme youth. Does that make sense?


----------



## crl (May 9, 2004)

Yes, thanks. I just couldn't quite tell if it was a statement about gender or a statement about age.

Catherine


----------



## Smokering (Sep 5, 2007)

Huh.

Yes, reactionary article. The site, though... you know what's funny? A fair few of the people I know at church who are concerned about modest dress would find the clothes in the photos section too revealing. Heck, a few of the necklines are lower than what I prefer to wear. So they're not advocating burqas or anything - none of those clothes would cause me to think "modest" (or "immodest", really; they're just clothes). And though they're not exactly my style, I think they were fairly nice - not frumpy or Lilies of the Fieldish (my apologies to anyone who wears Lilies of the Field)! They don't look "alternative religious", they just look... normal.

I do prefer modest dress, and I will probably set some limits on DD's clothes when she's older. But the article (I didn't investigate the site too deeply) did have a rather odd tone. It was a bit Josh Harrisy, putting a LOT of responsibility on the (clad!) shoulders of girls to prevent the thoughts of men that, in that mindset, are more or less inevitable anyway...


----------



## ollyoxenfree (Jun 11, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lorijds* 
Yes, I assume too that she was simply pointing out that there are not laws prosecuting the younger person having sex with an older person, because it is not simply the act of sex that is a crime, but rather the older person is committing a crime by having sex with a person of such extreme youth. Does that make sense?

Correct. I was responding to a previous poster who noted that girls ogle older men and perhaps the men need to be protected from the girls' staring, based on the flawed logic in the article.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MusicianDad* 
I think she meant general statutory laws, the gender assignment she gave is simply a result of the pre-programmed idea of "a woman would never do that" showing up. It's something many people, even those who understand that's not the way it is tend to go their first, even if only for a brief moment.

I think it was because of the context of the discussion - which has centred on modest dress for females, and the arguments supporting it, the chief one being protection from men. The discussion was about the older male/younger female dynamic. Another poster pointed out that young females also ogle men. Certainly, older women may also be offenders, but I don't think the article suggested the possibility (and I'm not inclined to go back to it, it wasn't good enough for a re-read, lol!). Hence the phrasing - it was in response to a specific scenario







.


----------



## cheery (Jul 29, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IrishMommy*
Clicked on the link. Got a popup ad for match.com. I sense some irony there.









:


----------



## MusicianDad (Jun 24, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ollyoxenfree* 
I think it was because of the context of the discussion - which has centred on modest dress for females, and the arguments supporting it, the chief one being protection from men. The discussion was about the older male/younger female dynamic. Another poster pointed out that young females also ogle men. Certainly, older women may also be offenders, but I don't think the article suggested the possibility (and I'm not inclined to go back to it, it wasn't good enough for a re-read, lol!). Hence the phrasing - it was in response to a specific scenario







.

True, the article focuses on modest dress for female, but there is social programming to think that adult ogling teen/adult in a relationship with teen means the adult is male and the teen is female. For instance if you say ages but no genders, most people will assume by default the older is male and the younger is female.

All it takes for a female to be a cradle robber is being 25 and dating a 21 year old man. But for a man to be a cradle robber she has to be young enough to be his daughter.


----------



## ollyoxenfree (Jun 11, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MusicianDad* 
True, the article focuses on modest dress for female, but there is social programming to think that adult ogling teen/adult in a relationship with teen means the adult is male and the teen is female. For instance if you say ages but no genders, most people will assume by default the older is male and the younger is female.

All it takes for a female to be a cradle robber is being 25 and dating a 21 year old man. But for a man to be a cradle robber she has to be young enough to be his daughter.

Yeah, there is a lot of social programming, and you're probably right about the default assumptions, in most cases. I think it's changing a little bit, with the media coverage of cougars, and a few criminal cases involving female teachers/adolescent boy students. Not that cougars are criminals!!! I'm not confusing them! Just saying there's a trend highlighted in the media about older women/younger men.

Come to think of it, there's probably a lot more acceptance, or even encouragement, these days for the older woman/younger man scenario, as long as they are both consenting adults.


----------



## Mountaingirl79 (Jul 12, 2008)

When I was 15 or so we were all wearing baggy clothes and flannels.







I was completely covered, no legs, no cleavage...nothing...but I was still having sex.









As far as the bikini comment, that is just hard for me to understand...wearing a bikini at the beach is perfectly acceptable at any age, in my mind. Wearing a bikini to say.....the grocery store would be a bit much though...


----------

