# Puritan Swimwear?



## Seb (Jul 16, 2008)

WholesomeWear Styles

I think I've found what my 4 year old Katie will wear to the beach when she gets older.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Jul 16, 2008)

Did Puritans go to the beach?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jul 16, 2008)

Seb said:


> WholesomeWear Styles
> 
> I think I've found what my 4 year old Katie will where to the beach when she gets older.



Just fyi, wholesome swimwear has been the subject of a couple of a recent threads:

http://www.puritanboard.com/425492-post18.html
http://www.puritanboard.com/374502-post32.html

Another site was given by Christopher Reeder yesterday:

http://www.puritanboard.com/438118-post4.html



Presbyterian Deacon said:


> Did Puritans go to the beach?



When I was at Plimoth Plantation, I asked the "Pilgrims" that very question. The answer was, yes, to wash clothes, not to swim.


----------



## Seb (Jul 16, 2008)

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> Just fyi, wholesome swimwear has been the subject of a couple of a recent threads:





Andrew,

If you want to kill this thread, I'd be happy with that.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Jul 16, 2008)

Seb said:


> VirginiaHuguenot said:
> 
> 
> > Just fyi, wholesome swimwear has been the subject of a couple of a recent threads:
> ...



Oh not at all, brother, I don't have the power or inclination to "kill" this thread. Just wanted to let you know about the previous discussions. I think wholesome swimwear is a good concept, btw.


----------



## kvanlaan (Jul 16, 2008)

Steve, as a guy with three daughters, one of whom is but a few years from puberty, I am looking at this seriously as well. For right now, we try to emphasize modest dress in all aspects so that it is not only at the beach that we're freaks (neither are we full-holiness types, again, a balance). There are some that I feel go too far. I don't go for the full wrists to neck and head covering as that one photo, but a happy medium beats body-hugging spandex all hollow. I would love to see this thread develop some; the last time we were at a beach, Esther wore a one-piece, normal swimsuit. But she's a sweet and scrawny ten-year-old. When that starts to change, I don't want her to see Dad radically change gears, I want it to seem like a gradual move to maturity in all things, including how she dresses.

That is all to say: thanks Steve.


----------



## KenPierce (Jul 16, 2008)

Lands End has modest styles that don'[t make people look like Old Order Amish (with apologies to BJU grads who wear bikinis, apparently!)), but more like shorts and a "normal" top that doesn't show cleavage, etc.


----------



## Kim G (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> Lands End has modest styles that don'[t make people look like BJU graduates (with apologies to BJU grads), but more like shorts and a "normal" top that doesn't show cleavage, etc.



I'm sorry, but this really made me laugh. Almost all the girls that I knew at BJU (maybe 85% or so) wear bikinis when they swim. You'll have to say "look like Mennonites" or something like that instead.


----------



## Seb (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> Lands End has modest styles that don'[t make people look like Old Order Amish (with apologies to BJU grads who wear bikinis, apparently!)), but more like shorts and a "normal" top that doesn't show cleavage, etc.


----------



## py3ak (Jul 16, 2008)

Has anyone told the Joneses about their graduates wearing bikinis?


----------



## KenPierce (Jul 16, 2008)

They would have to send a delegation of, ahem, men, to investigate said charges.

I remember, back in the 80's or early 90's, Martin Marty did a PBS program on Christian fundamentalism, (interestingly having a section on Joe Morecraft and Chalcedon Pres), featuring BJU. He had some clips of the class that BJU then had on female modesty.

It wasn't intended to be high comedy, but, alas, it was! The perils of legalism.
Culottes aren't the cure for lust, are they?


----------



## Kim G (Jul 16, 2008)

py3ak said:


> Has anyone told the Joneses about their graduates wearing bikinis?



I'm sure they know, but what can they do? 

I've had conversations with girls who couldn't see why a bikini was immodest. I finally realized that some girls don't WANT modesty, purity, "shamefacedness", a sober spirit, meekness, etc.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 16, 2008)

How does one define "wholesome" and how does that translate to swimwear practically?


----------



## Grace Alone (Jul 16, 2008)

I really like the Lands End suits with little skirts and tank tops even for me! But I'll have to say, I see most Christian teen girls in bikini's in my area. Just another area where you can't tell the Christians from the worldly people.


----------



## KenPierce (Jul 16, 2008)

The danger is almost always in the definition. If we take refuge in legalism, then we end up with silly things, like the jarring disjunction between Hasidic Jewish men and women (at least if I remember NYC right!), or the legalistic offshoots of Methodism where the women can't wear jewelry, but the men wear really expensive watches, etc.

And, the heart being what it is, even the eyes of the burqa-clad woman can become alluring.

What is modest covering for a woman? Maybe a woman would be best at answering that!


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 16, 2008)

As I have gotten older and heavier I have moved from a regular speedo to a Senior's Speedo. 

Actually it is very similar, except it has a 5" wide elastic waistband at the top.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> The danger is almost always in the definition. If we take refuge in legalism, then we end up with silly things, like the jarring disjunction between Hasidic Jewish men and women (at least if I remember NYC right!), or the legalistic offshoots of Methodism where the women can't wear jewelry, but the men wear really expensive watches, etc.
> 
> And, the heart being what it is, even the eyes of the burqa-clad woman can become alluring.
> 
> What is modest covering for a woman? Maybe a woman would be best at answering that!



I agree completely, especially about the burqa-clad woman being alluring. Geishas in Japan are covered from neck to ankle, so the wrists are considered very appealing. As we discussed in a thread last week, modesty is entirely relative, cultural, and contextual. Who's to say what swimwear is "wholesome" and what isn't...


----------



## VictorBravo (Jul 16, 2008)

Nothing less than this (at least in Puget Sound):


----------



## Seb (Jul 16, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> [...] Who's to say what swimwear is "wholesome" and what isn't...



Me...when evaluating my daughter's swimwear. 

I understand, appreciate, and agree with what you're saying about the legalism. But because of where we live (10 minutes from the beach) I see a LOT of very inappropriately dressed women/girls and men at the beach. And sometimes in even Church, but that's a whole different thread.

I don't think I'd have my daughter dress in something as rigid as the suits at the link in my OP, but I know one day (probably sooner than I think) I will have to decide on what is appropriate and wholesome for my *gulp* future teenage daughter to wear.

I'm very thankful to have a wife who dresses modestly and will help me sort through this when the time comes.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 16, 2008)

Seb said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> > [...] Who's to say what swimwear is "wholesome" and what isn't...
> ...



I understand what you're saying completely, and agree 100% that at this point you determine what is modest and what isn't for your daughter. 

I don't mean to be argumentative, but what do you define as "inappropriate" swimwear at the beach. I'm not trying to put you on the spot, just curious what you would consider inappropriate beach attire and why...


----------



## Seb (Jul 16, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> Seb said:
> 
> 
> > ColdSilverMoon said:
> ...



I didn't take it as argumentative at all brother 

It's hard to say what I would consider inappropriate.  

I hate to sound relative-istic (is that even a word?) but I've got a feeling that, when I see my teenage daughter wearing what I think is inappropriate beachwear, I'll know then.

In other words...I'll know it when I see it?


----------



## danmpem (Jul 16, 2008)

A couple years ago, my college group at church went on a retreat to a campground which was only rented out for church retreats (it was run by a Christian family). They were incredibly nice people, but when they told our college director that they had some rules about modesty (the girls' undergarments were showing), they were mocked and laughed at. Not in person, of course; but, many of the members of the college group thought it was completely legalistic of them to even have rules against less-than-modest clothing, that it was a "cultural" thing, and we were just part of a different culture.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Jul 16, 2008)

Seb said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> > Seb said:
> ...



Steve and Mason:

Is it really relative to the cultural practice or does God's word address what is considered nudity and what is not?


----------



## KenPierce (Jul 16, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> KenPierce said:
> 
> 
> > The danger is almost always in the definition. If we take refuge in legalism, then we end up with silly things, like the jarring disjunction between Hasidic Jewish men and women (at least if I remember NYC right!), or the legalistic offshoots of Methodism where the women can't wear jewelry, but the men wear really expensive watches, etc.
> ...



I wouldn't say it's completely cultural. I would, however, admit that it is very difficult. Bare breasts are not alluring in Africa, but are here. But, our mission team to Malawi witnessed a girl beaten in the marketplace for a skirt deemed too short. It may well have been her family who carried out the beating.

So, culture does come to bear somewhat. We can't deny that. But, neither do I want to excuse topless sunbathing, or string bikinis (or speedos for men --yuck!)

Maybe 2 questions might help:

1.) Would I let my teenage daughter wear that?
2.) What if an attractive woman were wearing what my teenage daughter is? Would it be alluring?


----------



## JBaldwin (Jul 16, 2008)

Here is my solution to the problem of swimwear. Don't go to places where there are people all over the place when you swim. My family vacations on the off season, we go to places where there are no or few people, and my girls wear a T-shirt and long shorts when they are not in the water. 

I don't see what the point of being modest is if you are walking around with a bunch of half-naked men and women. 

And by the way, have you ever tried to really swim in with skirt? No problem for wading in the water, but it's impossible to swim.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> I wouldn't say it's completely cultural. I would, however, admit that it is very difficult. Bare breasts are not alluring in Africa, but are here. But, our mission team to Malawi witnessed a girl beaten in the marketplace for a skirt deemed too short. It may well have been her family who carried out the beating.
> 
> So, culture does come to bear somewhat. We can't deny that. But, neither do I want to excuse topless sunbathing, or string bikinis (or speedos for men --yuck!)
> 
> ...



Your criteria are good, but still relative to what you consider alluring - and we all know that is very subjective. 

A personal experience regarding topless sunbathing: on a trip to Spain a few years ago I visited a normal, "family" beach. As is common on many beaches in Europe, about half the women were topless on the beach - all ages were represented from teenagers to seniors. The interesting thing is that the scene was otherwise exactly what it would be on an American beach: people swam in the water, kids played games, kicked soccer balls, etc. There was no gawking or staring, at least not any more than there would be on a standard American beach. It was just like any typical beach in the US, where women do not sunbathe topless. In fact, the scene was probably much like it would be on a beach with only Wholesome Swimwear wearers.

My point is that it is hard to find something wrong with the women sunbathing topless when it was such a "normal" thing to do. In the absence of clear Biblical directive, can we really say it is "wrong?" I'm not sure, but leaning toward the notion that in that culture in the context of a beach, topless sunbathing is acceptable? If I had a daughter, would I want her going topless on a Spanish beach? That's a different story...


----------



## danmpem (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> So, culture does come to bear somewhat. We can't deny that. But, neither do I want to excuse topless sunbathing, or string bikinis (or speedos for men --yuck!)



It took some getting used to when I joined the high school water polo team, but I soon became very comfortable with myself. After a while I realized that only real men wear speedos.


----------



## KenPierce (Jul 16, 2008)

Re the topless beach.

Just because there is no Biblical directive that women shouldn't have bare breasts doesn't mean it isn't wrong.

Sometimes Christian prudence is enough reason. A good friend once said "Some things are so unwise that they become evidently sinful."

Questions:

Would you want a 14-year-old son to go that beach? Regardless of whether you could perceive people "gawking" or staring? Like you said, you wouldn't want your daughter dressed that way.

Why not a completely nude beach?

The Bible says women should adorn themselves modestly. It is hard to see how an exposure of 90% of their flesh is modest.

I don't think that's a cultural thing, but rather a mark of the decline of Christian culture in Europe, and a tribute to the triumph of paganism.

So, does culture play a role? Of course it does. Does that mean the Scriptures are completely silent on it? Absolutely not. Scripture sits in judgment of cultures, and of beaches from Miami to Monaco (hey pretty good alliteration that!).


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jul 16, 2008)

victorbravo said:


> Nothing less than this (at least in Puget Sound):



Yep, Puget sound is coooollllldddd..... brrrrrrrr.....


----------



## matt01 (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> Lands End has modest styles that don't make people look like Old Order Amish (with apologies to BJU grads who wear bikinis, apparently!)), but more like shorts and a "normal" top that doesn't show cleavage, etc.



Some of the modesty suits look ridiculous. Stick with the Lands End outfit.


----------



## KenPierce (Jul 16, 2008)

MrMerlin777 said:


> victorbravo said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing less than this (at least in Puget Sound):
> ...



Wait, we can still tell she's a woman! Cover her face!!! Cover her hair!!!

Put a box around her torso!!!


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> Re the topless beach.
> 
> Just because there is no Biblical directive that women shouldn't have bare breasts doesn't mean it isn't wrong.
> 
> ...



I have a somewhat different take. I would argue we should dress modestly as the Bible says to do, but that culture defines modesty. So, if nudity were the cultural norm on beaches in a given country, I wouldn't really have a problem with it, because it's not immodest to go nude at the beach. The problem with saying the Bible trumps culture with regard to modesty is that point is still determined by individual opinion. What may be immodest to me may not be immodest to you, and vice versa. There is no clear defining line in the Bible, and one could argue nudity is even the "ideal" state. So I think we let culture should define our standards, insomuch as the goal is comfort and practicality rather than lasciviousness. At the topless beach in Spain, the goal wasn't to cause lust, at least not that I could tell. 

Now if I had a son, would I want him going to a "topless" beach in Europe? Likely not if he grew up in the States and wasn't accustomed to it. But if he grew up going to European beaches and saw topless women frequently, I wouldn't have a problem with it necessarily. My father-in-law, who has been a missionary in Spain for 22 years, agrees with this. 

Another point: assuming it is non-sexual in nature, is it wrong to pose nude for an art class?


----------



## VictorBravo (Jul 16, 2008)

KenPierce said:


> MrMerlin777 said:
> 
> 
> > Wait, we can still tell she's a woman! Cover her face!!! Cover her hair!!!
> ...



OK, his and hers FULL body suits:


----------



## Seb (Jul 16, 2008)

victorbravo said:


> KenPierce said:
> 
> 
> > MrMerlin777 said:
> ...



THAT'S IT!!!  

That's what I want for my daughter - Modest, good for strength-training, and doubles as a chastity belt.


----------



## Kim G (Jul 16, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> I have a somewhat different take. I would argue we should dress modestly as the Bible says to do, but that culture defines modesty. So, if nudity were the cultural norm on beaches in a given country, I wouldn't really have a problem with it, because it's not immodest to go nude at the beach. The problem with saying the Bible trumps culture with regard to modesty is that point is still determined by individual opinion. What may be immodest to me may not be immodest to you, and vice versa. There is no clear defining line in the Bible, and one could argue nudity is even the "ideal" state. So I think we let culture should define our standards, insomuch as the goal is comfort and practicality rather than lasciviousness. At the topless beach in Spain, the goal wasn't to cause lust, at least not that I could tell.



A few problems with this.

First of all, "modesty" the way we define it may be cultural. But "shamefacedness" is the other term described for the way women should dress. We are to dress with a sense of shame regarding parts that should not be seen.

Secondly, Adam and Eve were forced to wear clothes by God after they sinned. I don't think we have the right to remove what God has so clearly told us to put on!

Third, there are multiple instances of covering what is considered nudity in the Bible. The priests were forced to wear undergarments to keep from "flashing" the altar they were serving on. God shamed people by exposing their THIGHS, which He called nakedness. There's Noah's son whose line was cursed for seeing his father's nakedness.

Frankly, I can't believe we're even discussing this. Just because we become desensitized to something doesn't mean it's appropriate.

If I see enough gays making out in public does it mean it's okay because it doesn't shock me anymore?

If I hear people taking God's name in vain enough does it mean that it's okay because I'm not shocked when I hear it?

Then WHY is it okay to become so desensitized to nakedness that women can wear nothing but thongs and it's okay for men to look at her naked body?

I won't be posting here again because my blood pressure is sky-rocketing. God keep us from such hardness of heart that blatant lack of shame is considered fine for Christians to tolerate or promote.


----------



## Sonoftheday (Jul 16, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> How does one define "wholesome" and how does that translate to swimwear practically?



Clothing that is a frame for your face is godly, if it is a frame for any other part of your body it is sensual and should be hated. Ive heard Paul Washer say that several times, I think he credits his wife for saying it. I see it as a good rule that my wife and I will impose upon my daughter whether it is swimwear or other clothing.


----------



## Casey (Jul 16, 2008)

I'm not going to wade into this topic (excuse the pun), but wow, it must be hard to swim in a bag like that!!


----------



## kvanlaan (Jul 16, 2008)

The modesty-wear shown is, I am sure, NOT that hard to swim in. When I was beginning my military training, we had to swim in full uniform, and it was not that difficult. The website says that these suits are polyester so they don't hold water - I can't imagine it being that much of an encumberment.

As for letting culture define modesty, I would have to give that a big thumbs down. Where we are now culture-wise and where we will be in sixty years are two differnt planets, judging by history. No thanks. Let the Bible speak on that.



> A personal experience regarding topless sunbathing: on a trip to Spain a few years ago I visited a normal, "family" beach. As is common on many beaches in Europe, about half the women were topless on the beach - all ages were represented from teenagers to seniors. The interesting thing is that the scene was otherwise exactly what it would be on an American beach: people swam in the water, kids played games, kicked soccer balls, etc. There was no gawking or staring, at least not any more than there would be on a standard American beach. It was just like any typical beach in the US, where women do not sunbathe topless. In fact, the scene was probably much like it would be on a beach with only Wholesome Swimwear wearers.
> 
> My point is that it is hard to find something wrong with the women sunbathing topless when it was such a "normal" thing to do. In the absence of clear Biblical directive, can we really say it is "wrong?" I'm not sure, but leaning toward the notion that in that culture in the context of a beach, topless sunbathing is acceptable? If I had a daughter, would I want her going topless on a Spanish beach? That's a different story...



We used to live in Villjoyosa, Alicante province, and I can tell you that in the 1980's anyway, tourist areas (like Benidorm, 20km down the road) allowed topless sunbathing, but where we lived (small fishing village), it would have been discouraged. Also, I clearly remember being on the beach in Benidorm and seeing nasty old men asking topless young ladies (those lying on their backs, not their fronts, go figure) what time it was. Happened repeatedly. So I don't know that it was such a family atmosphere or if it was just the absolute lack of modesty of the bathers in question (yes, about 50% of them) and general apathy with regards to the lack of modesty in that town.


----------



## staythecourse (Jul 16, 2008)

Seb, I would really respect the family that wore that modest apparel at the beach. Everyone else should be ashamed at shamelessly displaying the glory they should hide while these folks would be shining bright in hiding it! Go for it! ( I know I'm a few years erly for that encouragement!)


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 16, 2008)

MrMerlin777 said:


> victorbravo said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing less than this (at least in Puget Sound):
> ...



Definitely. Polar cold.

Years ago I did a kayak trip on PS. A group of us went out, first I was in a double-k, that was fine; after lunch got in one of the singles, immediately rolled over, fell right out next to the beach. The guide took everyone back on shore, build a fire, made sure I was dry, and warm, and then we left.

Embarrassing for me, holding everyone up like that, but I can only assume the leader knew what he was doing.

This was June, btw.


----------



## Scott1 (Jul 17, 2008)

> ColdSilverMoon
> Puritanboard Freshman
> I have a somewhat different take. I would argue we should dress modestly as the Bible says to do, but that culture defines modesty. So, if nudity were the cultural norm on beaches in a given country, I wouldn't really have a problem with it, because it's not immodest to go nude at the beach. The problem with saying the Bible trumps culture with regard to modesty is that point is still determined by individual opinion. What may be immodest to me may not be immodest to you, and vice versa. There is no clear defining line in the Bible, and one could argue nudity is even the "ideal" state. So I think we let culture should define our standards, insomuch as the goal is comfort and practicality rather than lasciviousness. At the topless beach in Spain, the goal wasn't to cause lust, at least not that I could tell



In the midst of all this, you have a valid point- some things that are considered provocative (immodest) in one culture are not necessarily provocative in another. For example, in Chinese culture historically, I understand bare feet were considered this way and have noted even an emphasis on this in Chinese art.

However, where do we go with this as Christians?

There is a shame in nakedness after the fall (see for example, Genesis 2:7). This begins to be restored in marriage, but in God's good but fallen creation it is not restored yet.

Provoking lust is not only a sin by the one who does it, but against another person because it causes another to stumble. In order to protect others, this is determined not by the cultural consensus at that time, or even the intent of the wearer, but whether it in fact provokes lust. This is part of loving our neighbor, and it is a huge part of God's law for us to obey.

God has placed a basic attraction between men and women. Men and women innately know this in every culture, every time period. It is part of the glory of a woman. It leads to procreation, and continuation of the human race. It is used by God to develop godly characteristics such as patience, consideration, etc. between people because men and woman are different from one another in some ways. Nothing at all wrong with that, it is good because God pronounced it good.

The presumed cultural consensus of the moment is, at best, a limited part of the picture. Coram deo, even in the way we dress.


----------



## rescuedbyLove (Jul 21, 2008)

> Another point: assuming it is non-sexual in nature, is it wrong to pose nude for an art class?




Well, maybe it would be okay if it was your _spouse_ who was doing the painting...But even that runs the risk of someone else seeing it. From what I've learned from my reading of Scripture, I think God is pleased with you looking at someone else's nakedness only if you are married to him/her.


----------



## a mere housewife (Jul 21, 2008)

I grew up swimming in coullottes: I never learned to swim. I thought it was me, because I must be too weak, etc. I am probably weaker than most men who can swim in full military garb. But the coullottes dragging through the water had a great deal to do with the fact that I had to take a float anytime I went into the water, or I would tire and start to drown. I agree that the lands end shortsuits are perfectly appropropriate swimwear for women. There are also cover ups to wear out of the water as JBaldwin suggested. These things wouldn't be appropriate at church, but neither would a dress in the water. Again, part of modesty is not standing out and drawing attention, more than is necessary. People may actually notice a girl's body more for being outrageously covered (water will make whatever she wears cling) than if she were more reasonably clad. I always felt shame-faced swimming in my coullottes because I knew, that of all the normally dressed people on the beach, most everyone was looking at _me_. If there's a good reason to put your daughter through that, then do. Otherwise you're actually working against her innate modesty and forcing her to harden herself to no good purpose against drawing attention to her clothes/physical form.

Our dog Zack did a blogpost for his advice column on modest swimwear, which if not very illuminating, ought to get him punished. It probably did.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Jul 21, 2008)

rescuedbyLove said:


> > Another point: assuming it is non-sexual in nature, is it wrong to pose nude for an art class?
> 
> 
> 
> From what I've learned from my reading of Scripture, I think God is pleased with you looking at someone else's nakedness only if you are married to him/her.



Then we must define "nakedness" from scripture.


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 21, 2008)

rescuedbyLove said:


> > Another point: assuming it is non-sexual in nature, is it wrong to pose nude for an art class?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So we shouldn't let doctors and nurses see us naked?


----------



## Mushroom (Jul 21, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> rescuedbyLove said:
> 
> 
> > > Another point: assuming it is non-sexual in nature, is it wrong to pose nude for an art class?
> ...


Well, personally I don't really want to... they usually want to do something that hurts with something that's cold.... wassup with that anyway?


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 21, 2008)

Brad said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> > rescuedbyLove said:
> ...




Seriously...you go to the doctor to feel better, and we end up torturing you even more. Go figure...


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Jul 21, 2008)

Brad said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> > rescuedbyLove said:
> ...


----------



## rescuedbyLove (Jul 22, 2008)

> So we shouldn't let doctors and nurses see us naked?



no, never.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Jul 22, 2008)

sans nom said:


> Some of the modesty suits look ridiculous.



Only because society is now used to seeing anything and everything...so I guess that makes it okay to walk around naked (floss doesn't count as clothing).


I know many families that are going towards this kind of swimwear.


----------



## shelly (Jul 23, 2008)

I've done the swimming in skirts, swimming in cullottes thing and it's no fun. It's hard to keep them up around your waist and hard to keep them down around your legs. It's just misery. I've never inflicted it on my daughters although I do expect them to be able to take off jeans, blow them up and use them for a flotation device.

Lands End has the best suits I've ever seen. Their 2 piece tankini is more modest than most 1 pieces you can find elsewhere.

Culture and swimming? Didn't girls who could swim get burned at the stake for being a witch? I think they needed flame-retardent swimwear; modesty would have come in 2nd place.


----------



## Brother John (Jul 23, 2008)

Kim G said:


> ColdSilverMoon said:
> 
> 
> > I have a somewhat different take. I would argue we should dress modestly as the Bible says to do, but that culture defines modesty. So, if nudity were the cultural norm on beaches in a given country, I wouldn't really have a problem with it, because it's not immodest to go nude at the beach. The problem with saying the Bible trumps culture with regard to modesty is that point is still determined by individual opinion. What may be immodest to me may not be immodest to you, and vice versa. There is no clear defining line in the Bible, and one could argue nudity is even the "ideal" state. So I think we let culture should define our standards, insomuch as the goal is comfort and practicality rather than lasciviousness. At the topless beach in Spain, the goal wasn't to cause lust, at least not that I could tell.
> ...




*Good post Kim.

"The Bible defines culture, cultures do not define the Bible" *


----------



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 23, 2008)

Blev3rd said:


> "The Bible defines culture, cultures do not define the Bible"



Except when the Bible is silent on an issue, such as the "parameters" of modesty. Then it becomes relative and defined culturally...


----------



## bookslover (Jul 23, 2008)

py3ak said:


> Has anyone told the Joneses about their graduates wearing bikinis?



It's probably OK, as long as they're not _Reformed_ bikinis...


----------



## kalawine (Oct 13, 2008)

Ya know, I don't think that "common sense" can necessarily be defined and I don't normally use the term. (At one time it was "common sense" that the world was flat) But I work with some pretty ladies and believe me, my "common sense" tells me when one of them is dressed appropriately or not. 
If I go down the hall, carry on a conversation with them and go back to my office feeling satisfied by a fulfilling conversation with good friends I know that the girls have all dressed "appropriately." 
If I go back to my office and have to spend time in a prayer of repentance for having impure thoughts because of what I have seen (or partially seen ... or almost entirely seen) then at least one of the girls has dressed inappropriately! 
Pardon me if I must compare some of the "What is appropriate?" questions to my boys asking "Is my room clean enough now?" C'mon guys! Sheesh!


----------

