A Raw Conversation about Modesty and Purity Culture: Sheila Gregoire and Rebecca Lindenbach
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- Sheila Wray Gregoire is the founder of Bare Marriage (baremarriage.com) and the author/co-author of several books, including the great breaking The Great Sex Rescue, which she co-authored with her daughter, Rebecca Lindenbach, my other guest. Rebecca also works for Bare Marriage and is the co-host of the bare marriage podcast. Rebecca and Sheila are coming out with their latest book She Deserves Better: Raising Girls to Resist Toxic Teachings on Sex, Self, and Speaking Up.
If you've enjoyed this content, please subscribe to my channel!
Support Theology in the Raw through Patreon: / theologyintheraw
Or you can support me directly through Venmo: @Preston-Sprinkle-1
Visit my personal website: www.prestonspr...
For questions about faith, sexuality & gender: www.centerforf...
My Facebook public page: www.facebook.c...
My Facebook private page: / preston.sprinkle.7
Twitter: @PrestonSprinkle
Instagram: preston.sprinkle
Respected the healthy tension throughout this discussion. So many times, interviewers just bow down to their guests’ points. I appreciate that Preston kept pushing
Yes to the 'whose responsibility is it' discussion. It is so much more than appropriate clothing, which varies between age and culture (and climate!) and more about entitlement. In Southampton UK some male drivers have a horrible habit of wolf whistling women in hijab - it's very intimidating. Yes to women having a voice, as it ultimately makes us safer.
Wow just watched this, and reading comments I was surprised how much I agreed with Sheila and Rebecca. Preston- that man who listed after that lady is the one who has the problem. NOT THE LADY. It’s not our job to worry about the sick men. The culture has begun to shift with “me too”, the church needs to change. Men need to take responsibility.
Such a powerful and necessary conversation. Thank you so much Sheila and Rebecca!
This was so good! Can’t wait to read She Deserves Better!
It's sooooo good!!!
Refreshed by these challenges to 'conventional' thought and approaches within the Church. Also glad for the openness and welcomed pushbacks. I'll be chewing on these questions and POVs for a long while... and sharing this conversation with my daughters too.
I feel like so many people are shaming Sheila and Rebecca here for speaking confidently and passionately and saying that they’re “yelling.”
I don’t think they showed any disrespect to Preston at all. Did they speak passionately? Sure, because they’re passionate about the topic.
I can’t help but feel if Preston was talking to two men speaking the same way, there wouldn’t nearly be this kind of response in the comments…
Totally agree with you. They weren't yelling at him at all, it was just a passionate conversation.
Amen! I specifically looked for the part where they 'yelled' but all I witnessed were three well-educated people with strong opinions being willing to listen to and challenge each other's view! ❤😂🎉🎉🎉
They better shut up and put their burka back o 😂
Absolutely!
I went to church my whole life and attended Girls' Brigade. Prior to purity culture, I received very little warning that I would experience sexual harassment and I no information at all about women's clothing. Dressing "modestly" doesn't stop sexual assault and it doesn't eliminate sexual harassment, but it does decrease sexual harassment. When I became an adult and started experiencing sexual harassment, I was completely unprepared for it and when I realised that there are outfits that decrease (although doesn't eliminate) sexual harassment, I became very angry that no one had told me.
So, at first I was thankful that Purity Culture taught about sexual harassment and clothing, but then they went overboard telling us to wear men's clothing if we couldn't find "modest" female clothing and wearing prairie dresses and head coverings and skirts over ski pants and scuba diving outfits. They placed the whole onus on women for preventing sexual harassment and none of it on boys. And when someone reprimanded me for wearing an "immodest" outfit, I felt like I had just been objectified. So, I felt like the reprimander had just sexually harassed me.
So, just like the host, I am also confused about how to warn girls that sexual harassment exists and that there are outfits that attract more of it than others without objectifying them, frightening them, or blaming them when sexual harassment happens or placing all the responsibility on girls.
It's unfortunate that the pushback Gregoire and Lindenbach are getting is overlooking a very real problem that needs addressed: The increased cases of vaginismus and pain during intercourse of women who internalize modesty messages. Why has this been overlooked for so long? What can we do to remedy this? Obviously, something in conservative Christian culture isn't working well for women, and we need to address it.
“Conservative Christian Culture?”
What’s that?
@@westyso.cal.8842 It's a shame that we have to label things as we do, but that's modern life. Conservative Christian culture I think most would agree, probably includes the view of women as not being allowed to preach and teach in church, being submissive to their husbands, probably not working outside the home, and possibly homeschooling their children. It also includes requiring women to comply with their husband's sexual demands, and being made to feel that their bodies are a constant temptation to men so they need to cover up. On the extreme end, it might include not using birth control, not providing higher education for men or women, not allowing TV or other media in the home, and strictly limiting the children's interaction with people who aren't in the same faith group. Certainly not everyone would agree with all of that, but that's the gist.
Thank you!
Wow. Go Shelia for pushing back against patriarchal and misogynistic notions of straight male sexual entitlement. I can not believe that he thinks rape is about sex.
41:44 there's a really important point here. There is a lot of "self-help" teaching that specifically pushes the message more generally that as an individual you have the power to control everything around you, and this is a really toxic teaching generally (toxic positivity) because it denies the existence of abuse both at a personal and societal injustice level.
So are we not to wait until marriage? That's where it gets confusing these days.
Gregoire and Lindenbach advocate strongly for a biblical sex ethic, including sex only being within marriage. They just also don’t believe that a lot of church teachings are actually biblical.
😂oh no @prestonsprinkle gave up his age and lack of understanding the younger generation by not knowing "thirst trap" I totally understand, I'm always learning the terms as a 40 yr old who works with early 20s.
Me too! 😂😂😂
Multiple things can be true! I believe both Preston and his guess were correct! I don’t think it is an either or issue! I think that is part of the man’s responsibility… The issue is men aren’t teaching, younger men how to lead well (which can often be defined as strength under controlled, and by bridled by humility). This means that the testosterone coursing through young men’s veins may, in fact make it harder for them to control themselves! This is not an excuse for anything they do. Should they not control themselves, in the same way a social path must still go to prison if they harm someone even know, they have a medical condition that makes them want to harm others… The fall definitely impacted us all! This is also connected to how much we don’t protect women!
How do you protect women from men? Why not control the men?
Let us not dismiss evidence from studies that reveal truth because it may be misinterpreted. We need balance.
Why is dressing a “culturally normal way” our standard for Christian young women. It is both and not either or. Nuance ladies. We can tell them guys sin and it’s not their fault AND that revealing more body will have some some corollary results in terms of unwanted attention. We can teach both and not shame. We can teach gender fairness about purity but not reduce all gender differences just like our non-Christian culture does.
1:11:55 if the question is, what is the functional difference between the two messages... I'd say that we have to acknowledge that men are physically stronger and have high sex drives, therefore, be exceedingly careful about putting yourself in a situation where the guy could overpower a girl. Again, not the girl's fault, at all. But being highly suspicious and having boundaries that are wider than "back of the car making out" in a remote area, I think it might be appropriate to be more protective of oneself. The reality is, the message of "if he doesn't respect your boundaries, get out!" is absolutely appropriate, but at that point, it can be too late at that point for a girl to get to safety.
Just saying men are physically stronger is enough. If the dude is strong enough and feels entitled to sex, it doesn't matter how high or low his sex drive is, he'll assault someone if he feels like it.
It's actually becoming more clear scientifically that men are not that much (if at all) more sexually driven than women.
Women can say no but that does not mean that the man will stop. Their argument does not hold weight in my opinion.
@@paulajames6149 they are arguing that one teaching (telling women to cover up in order to not be raped) actually doesn't work. What does work according to their research is women that stand up for themselves and get themselves out of situations as soon as a man disrespects their boundaries.
What do you find wrong with this? Honest question.
@Paula James it doesn't mean the man will stop. But what they were saying is that a predator is less likely to target women to begin with when they are confident. A shy, self conscious nun is more likely to get targeted than Lara Croft. The latter wears less clothes, but is more confident and intimidating to ill-intentioned men.
Interesting stuff to ponder. I wonder where the dying to self and rights posture of discipleship that Jesus promotes fits in?
These ladies didn’t seem to address this subject according to a biblical world view. It seemed to be more about avoiding shaming girls and women. What happened to the whole idea of biblical modesty and teaching our young women how to conduct themselves in that way. I kept hearing LOTS of excusing females dressing immodestly. We have to teach them that there are boundaries in regard to overexposure, which is also a form of lack of self respect!! I was truly thrown off and confused by this. 🤷🏽♀️
I think the idea is to separate the 2 topics. Modesty is the Bible was usually about not showing off wealth. AND talking about dressing appropriately should never ever be connected with causing another person to sin. Jesus made it clear where the fault lies. If your eye causes you to sin PLUCK IT OUT.
Biblical modesty is not flaunting wealth. Biblically speaking, there's a single verse that mentions modest dress and in direct reference to not showing wealth.
Thanks for saying this. How we dress does send a signal as to our values.
The lack of patience on the ladies' part betrays their unwillingness to hear him out. Men are typically seen as less patieny, but not in this talk.
I hate to admit it, but this was was a cringy listen, and not because of the explicit language about sexuality. I have great respect for Gregoire and Lindenbach. I appreciate the extensive study they’ve done and I trust their data. I can even personally attest to having absorbed some of the shame that they described as a result of purity culture. Still, I left this convo feeling that their position- at least as they represented it here- lacked some balance. I’m having a hard time putting my finger on exactly what bothered me, but I do think the points Preston was making were meaningful, and had they not pushed back on those so quickly, this could have been a more robust and satisfying discussion on what is certainly a tricky subject.
Preston did a poor job of asserting his position because he tries to “have a conversation,” and is overly concerned about coming off too harsh, I suspect.
He is used to just going with the flow and not challenging his guests very much.
He welcomes the free flow of ideas to the degree that he ends up appearing passive rather than confident in his positions.
These “ladies” sensed his weakness right away and leveraged it to their advantage.
@@westyso.cal.8842 I disagree with your characterization of Preston based on what I've viewed of this channel so far. I actually appreciate a host who is respectful of his guests, even when he may disagree. One hardly ever sees that these days. I have no criticism of PS for how he conducted himself in this discussion, though I could see he was conflicted. I'm also not convinced that Gregoire and Lindenbach were conscious of how reactionary they were being at some of his questions. For example, I thought it was unnecessary to push back at the idea of telling a daughter about male testosterone levels. They seemed to be suggesting that this information necessarily comes laden with the message that a girl is responsible for a boy's sex drive. Surely you can talk biology with your kids- girls AND boys- without loading it with undue responsibility or shame. I also think hyper-concern for girls can unintentionally lead to denigration of boys, and I sensed they were veering that way.
I couldn’t help but pick up on a nod to the old “Me Too” idea of “always believe the women” and it’s resulting in “all men are trash” idea.
Conspicuously absent from the conversation was any mention of abstinence until marriage or the establishing boundaries much earlier than the “backseat of a car.”
Regarding PS, he holds to some very unorthodox views and I sense that he’s quite liberal in much of his theology, so I have a difficult time trusting him.
I felt the same way. I disagree with these ladies on many things. Read my comments.
@@westyso.cal.8842 Well, goodness knows what you'd think of my theology, then. I'm egalitarian, wary of Calvinism and I fully sympathize with the voices of "Me Too," many of whom are dear friends. And I assure you that they are far from believing that men are trash. I do applaud your willingness to engage with content that you disagree with. We should all do more of that, lest we devolve into tribalism.
I am surprised the women did not mention any scriptures for their stance or any scriptures about modesty.
Me too! I was waiting the whole podcast for them to land it in Scripture somewhere 😔
The whole point is that passages on “modesty” are really talking about not dressing in such a way as to to flaunt your wealth. They say nothing about lust or covering up.
It is scriptural to test purity teaching by considering its' fruit and to do it analytically. Just because they did't quote chapter and verse doesn't mean that they are not absolutely in keeping with scripture.
@Neal Davis Exactly. Most influential evangelicals construe the biblical writers' use of "modest" to mean "not dressing in a way that will tempt men." That's totally ridiculous. Paul and Peter are very specific, talking about braided hair, wearing gold and pearls and expensive clothes. Biblical modesty means developing the inward self rather than flaunting wealth and decorating the body.
I wonder if the backlash of purity culture is a result of feminism and the oppression of women? I do think some bad came from it but should we throw it all out completely? Not so sure. The method was wrong. I don’t think the message was wrong (they would absolutely disagree). I do think the message does require other components. Therefore, not to be thrown out but to include a more wholistic view.
The 'message' was never the problem. It was how young women received that message. And then internalized it. It matters very little how well-intended your communication is if the other person is unable to benefit from it. Many women mistook the 'purity message' to mean, 'If somebody does something to me, it's my fault because I didn't try hard enough to stop them. I must have done something to get that kind of negative attention.' You end up sending a message of blame to the very people you want to protect.
@@FireflowerDancerBut why blame women and girls for how THEY interpreted and internalized these taxic twisted misogynistic messages?
Just when you thought it couldn't get any stupider. Science says that men and women are basically the same. Okey-dokey.
Biologist here who fundamentally believes sex is binary. Men and women are more the same, than they are different. Sorry their research/findings (which was totally empirically derived) is too much for your intellect.
Men and women are different.
Different nature and different roles. Different callings.
Equally skilled in their various gifting and abilities, and equally needed to serve the body of Christ and find their niche within society.
We’d be foolish not to recognize that and acknowledge it to our own benefit.
Wouldn’t we rather flourish in what makes us unique and capitalize those attributes?
Equal? yes. The same? No.
I agree with a lot of what these ladies Re saying....however am still confused....when a 10, 11, 12 or 13 yr old girl is picking out her clothes, what is she thinking...what pressure is society putting on her....they have not addressed the area of temptation for boys and girls...how to deal with it...these women with all due respect are a little naive regarding chastity, modesty and the cultural influence...I agree with them regarding teaching our young men to always respect their female peers and to teach them to view them like sisters until they sense a more desire for romance...I feel we are closer to our fallen culture than godliness and these ladies are trivialize this...more scripture and less being the cool kids...
"I feel we are closer to our fallen culture than godliness and these ladies are trivialize this..."
How are we 'closer to fallen culture'? And how are Sheila and Becca trivializing anything?
Telling girls that men have the same drives and the same reactions to things, seems well intended, but almost gaslighting. I'd rather know the reality of what is going on behind my back in a coffee shop, so that I can dress the way I want to be perceived, then pretend that my leggings should affect men the same way men's leggings affect me.
May I ask where you’re getting your information about how different men and women are when it comes to being more visual and having extremely higher sex drives?
You are conflating God's design for innate difference in male/female relationships with the wordly idea that sex desire is linked with physical strength and higher levels of aggression. Over and over evidence proves this to be untrue so why are 'we' so unwilling to stop perpetuating it? It just enables idol worship. And it distorts scripture.
The fault & blame discussion is getting bizarre. And I think Preston's questions/pushback are being mischaracterized a bit. As I hear him, he is NOT simply saying, "Women, cover up your body or you'll get raped." I think, however, he is acknowledging multiple issues, of provocative dress PLUS our cultural context interpreting that dress PLUS men tending to be more aggressive and physically stronger PLUS men tending (yes, not always, but generally) having a high sex drive PLUS a couple being in a potentially risky situation (backseat of a car)... all that considered, I can understand why a parent of a daughter (which I am) might pull in all those nuances to explain to my daughter why she might avoid that situation. That isn't necessarily "purity culture" talking... that might just be wisdom.
To the response that such a line of reasoning "blames the woman" for a rape... I'm still not convince by that because of how it stretches the meaning of blame. Let's say I have to drive to get to work through a city, and there is a highway that is notorious for having an occasional reckless driver speeding on it to work. That's most urban roads, by the way, when they aren't gridlocked with traffic. It's the only direct and realistic road to take to get to work. In spite of these known risks, I drive one day and get hit by a reckless driver. I could have added 10 miles and one hour to my commute to avoid the entire city. But would anybody partially "blame" me for the car accident? No, of course not. Because there are millions of variables in any event, and assessing the risk, it's still generally safe to take that road in spite of an occasional idiot. Life is hardly ever without some kind of (at least) minuscule risk. Would I be to blame if my car were overdue for a tire rotation and I had the music on loud while I was driving? Might have been factors in the entire equation for me to veer away from the reckless driver, but no, I'm still not to blame for the accident. The reckless driver is to blame, always. If I drove recklessly as well, then I'd also be blameworthy. But all risk is not necessarily recklessness. It can be quite complex.
And so, by analogy, I certainly think that teaching my daughter to recognize red flags and insist on boundaries is a way of eliminating reckless situations. But I think what Preston was talking about was also helping a young daughter to assess the risks of life. We want to empower our daughters to be wise and understand the risks out there, but not hide in a protective bubble for all of life. And for what it's worth, I'd call myself an egalitarian Christian who sees no gender hierarchy in the gospel.
May I ask if you have listened to/read the stories of assault victims in the communities who were taught to blame themselves. This isn’t hypothetical. They’re sharing the reality for many women who grew up in this.
@@daneesledge1626 Yes, I absolutely have. I run a dinner and community gathering at my church for the homeless and low-income every Friday night, sometimes 100 people come through our doors and most are regular guests. The vast majority of the women that come have been exploited and trafficked. Their stories are complex and heartbreaking, and their backgrounds range from patriarchal Christian upbringing to having nothing to do with any religious background. I have heard plenty of occasions when the woman regretted not "recognizing the red flags and enforcing her boundaries". So to an extent, we might interpret that as her blaming herself for not abiding by Sheila's narrative.
I grew up in the Catholic church, spent some time in Bible belt-style SBC churches, and was a member at James MacDonald's Harvest Bible Chapel for over three years. I know enough about de-toxifying from bad theology and bad anthropology. I still do not see how Preston's points about how young men are usually stronger and more aggressive are "blaming the woman", and I've made my thoughts about blame clear in the original post.
@@joemisek I understand since you do not personally know women who were indoctrinated to blame ourselves in the way Sheila share, we are out here. We exist. Just because you do not know us or want us to stand up and share our stories, does not mean we aren’t here. You have two choices, you can listen to us even if it’s not your experience and you find it hard to believe or you can ignore us. As one of the thousands of women God has used Sheila and her team to learn how to walk in to freedom, I am so thankful that she is using her voice, research and platform to speak us for us.
@@daneesledge1626 I stated pretty explicitly in my previous comment that I do, in fact, personally know women who were indoctrinated, as well as women from a variety of other backgrounds, who have been victims of sexual abuse. And I do not need the reminder that any women from any of these circumstances exist, I dine with them almost every week and work with my church to minister to them however we can. And of course I have the choice to listen or to ignore... but first, I've been following Sheila for probably five years and listened to some of her pods, and I like her content a lot. But "listen" does not equal buying wholesale every idea or claim that someone offers. Everything is still open to discernment. And my original post's points about the meaning of blaming and how parents might prepare young people for the realities of the world... Sheila and Rebecca's arguments in this interview aren't very persuasive to me, for the reasons I gave.
@@joemisek you have that right. And at this point I don’t comment for you but for any other women who are like me and the women that Sheila speaks on behalf of. I’m so very thankful that in this conversation she shared our stories and spoke of how the unhealthy and untrue messages me were taught in church harmed us. Messages that Preston seems to want to advocate for
I call bulls**t. I’m 46, so I grew up in the depths of “purity culture.” I didn’t and don’t feel ashamed of my body or sex. The message that has stayed with me is that my body is beautiful and sacred. All this messaging that women were victimized by purity culture is a sort of social contagion, in my opinion. Women are projecting back and - wanting to be part of the victim hood club - letting the Father of Lies convince them that something nefarious happened. Me? I’m so thankful I was called to be holy. HOLY: SET APART. Romans 12:2 tells us NOT to be conformed to the patterns of this world. These ladies are advocating for exactly that! I tell my daughters that in contrast to how unbelievers function, (ie: she just wants to “exist” 🙄) modesty is a shared responsibility. Of course men are responsible for their own sin, but we can help them carry that burden by considering how we look. I’m disappointed Preston didn’t push back on their rhetoric more.
Anecdotally, I know many women (mostly my wifes friends) who have struggled deeply as a result of purity culture, and vaginismus has been the biggest indicator.
@@AquaticLogic, I’m certainly not saying this isn’t so. I AM saying that this affliction is because of the Enemy. His modus operandi is twisting words and getting us to believe lies. That’s what He did in the garden, and that’s what He does every day. If He can take Creator God’s words and pervert them, how much more will he do this with weak men’s words. The heart behind purity culture was not to condemn, but to encourage young men and women to live in contrast to todays warped sexual values. To step into the frame of victimhood and paint purity culture as oppressor, we’re inadvertently agreeing with the Enemy’s lies. DON’T live in that frame of mind!
Personally, I and many of my friends have been very negatively impacted by purity culture. It's taken a LOT of work to get through some of the damage. There is a lot of good data out there that speaks to what they are saying!
Also, I don't believe in modesty being a "shared responsibility". Lust is a sin against the woman, and it's a result of the man's sinful heart. That's why ankles were so enticing way back when😊
@@abeautifulmoment2714, ah, yes, the ankles = the breasts argument. Sure sign of an NPC.
Sadly, due to Preston being so easily swayed by his open-mindedness, he regularly fails to stand his ground and fix his views firmly upon a solid Biblical foundation.
In this interview he makes a weak attempt to push back by employing his knowledge of biology, but quickly gets bullied back into his corner by the two louder members of the marginalized group.
Preston needs to grow some teeth if he’s going to have a persuasive conversation with the likes of these two.
I agree but I will never listen to someone yelling at me lol
I feel bad for Preston
They weren't yelling, unless women speaking at all is what bothers you.
They never yelled
Where was the yelling???
Preston, you should be listening to yourself and not the advice of these women. God has made you as a man a spiritual leader. You were far more biblically correct about what you could not let go of. 🙏🏼
These ladies would be pouring perfume on themselves while sneering at Jesus for having dirty feet.
If you have a critique, feel free to enter the discussion. If all you have is insults, you add nothing helpful.
That was a critique and a wonderful one
Um what???????
The women who poured out here heart and savings on Jesus was scorned by the men also. Your superior attitude betrays you.
Preston: it is your job to learn to not lust and take your thoughts captive. You must change. The men are responsible for their thought life. And remember men can control themselves.
Wow... my emotions and thoughts are all over the place listening to this. 😃😩😱
Great conversation. More people need to listen to this and truly listen and not be on defense or offense.
Thanks for the discussion.
What was the name of the book for husbands/males? We have the Great Sex Rescue.
The Good Guy’s Guide to Great Sex
“Great Sex Rescue” is for both men and women. And “She Deserves Better” just released this week and goes in to detail about the damage of not only the modesty message but other false doctrines that are pervasive in the church.
Preston, you have a new sub here! What an _amazing_ and articulate podcast that perfectly describes what so many of us women have grown up in! Bravo 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Does anyone know how they chose the 20k women for survey and now the new 7k women for the new book? I heard it was from their social media pool but not sure if that is true and don’t want to make any assumptions.
You don't have to be your husband's personal porn star. Amen!
Made to reflect God's image, not to be someone's plaything ❤
“This is the problem with Christianity; it establishes unrealistic, irrational and immoral criteria by which to live, and then it creates a loophole in which you don’t have to be responsible for those actions.”
-Matt Dillahunty
That's a great human argument. Sounds like something C S Lewis would address in The Pilgrim's Regress.
I love that they're trying to address a lot of the toxic things that does exist as a result of the unhealthy aspects of 'purity' culture...but...there's still some major problems here. The toxic aspects need to be replaced by something that is actually Biblically empowering and not just superficially "empowering". My concern with this is that it's going to end up too far in the other direction and lead women off of another cliff that's just as dangerous. As someone who was addicted to porn for decades and really has had to struggle with my thoughts even after being delivered from porn, I so appreciate it when women dress more modestly... it simply does prove far less of a temptation for me to look. I'm NEVER going to blame them for my shortcomings even if they're wearing the tightest yoga pants imaginable, but it as an expression of love when Christians have other people in mind with how they dress/act. As Paul said, 'We are not our own. We were bought with a price'. What is culturally appropriate does not mean it's always acceptable for people who follow Christ -- men or women. We're supposed to stand out and be set apart, and we can do that without being unhealthy in purity or liberty.
I am glad you have been delivered from porn, but given you still struggle with your thoughts I respectfully suggest that you haven't yet been delivered from the objectification of women.
You say that it is an expression of love when Christians have other people in mind with how they dress and act. Is it loving to objectify a woman? Doesn't she deserve to be treated with respect by virtue of the fact that she bears the image of God, regardless of whether she respects herself?
The reality is that you can never dress to appease everyone. What about the guy with the foot fetish, or hair fetish, or lip fetish? Are we unloving if we don't consider them, too? Are their personal shortcomings any less worthy of being considered than yours?
Jesus came to free us from the burden of our sin, so why are you asking women to carry the burden of yours?
Thing is, when you look at what the Bible advocates, it’s never about other people when it comes to modesty. In fact, biblical modesty has nothing to do with “covering up” but to do with wearing less extravagant clothing. The focus when it comes to modesty is on focusing less on your outer appearance and more on your heart. 1 Peter 3 is an excellent example: women were encouraged to be a witness to their unbelieving husbands by focusing attention on their hearts and not their appearance.
That’s what modesty is about. The issue with purity culture is that it’s put men in God’s place. A woman’s clothing is not your responsibility, it’s her’s and God’s.
Also, I admire your honesty in admitting your struggle with lust. The thing is though, you don’t avoid lust by “not looking.” Looking and noticing is not lusting. Lusting is when you objectify women and *only* view them for their bodies. The way to avoid lust is to remember that a woman, no matter how she dresses, is made in God’s image and worthy in God’s eyes.
@@ilz_y You are correct in that modesty often refers to extravagance in New Testament terms, but that's certainly not all it refers to -- and Biblical context in Old and New Testament shows that clearly. We are indeed talking of issues of the heart in modesty, and the issue here is should a Christian wear something that is clearly meant to be provocative sexually or even otherwise? -“All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor". Now I don't want women or ANYONE to live in a bubble where they don't do anything for fear of offending someone. That's not the heart of that text nor my heart. But if someone is aware a certain outfit is causing multiple siblings in Christ to stumble...what justification do they have to keep wearing it Scripturally? What does that say about their heart? I know people who are recovering alcoholics. When they come and visit, my wife and I put away the alcohol because we don't want them to have a potential stumbling block to their sobriety.
And yes you are technically absolutely right about lust. But I'll be real... 'remembering who they are' does jack. Part of a guys brain can easily switch off and we can get stuck in la la land even temporarily.
It very much is triggered visually in many men. For example, at lust's height in my life, I could go in a grocery store and be totally fine. Pass hundreds of women with no thoughts whatsoever. But if I saw a woman in very tight yoga pants where you could see just about everything, that's when the temptation to take a second look started. Often my best defense was to just start praying for the person (which is still the second best defense. The best defense is to just leave the temptation). But it's kind of like being a recovering alcoholic. It's an unfortunate reality for many men in this hypersexualized culture. It's not an excuse, but it is reality.
@@rachelroelofs9383I think you might have unwittingly misread or overlooked key parts of my post there. I specifically said I do NOT blame women for my shortcomings. And I have no desire to objectify them! I hated all of the lust then, I still hate all of it now, and want to see men free of this garbage. I may be a million miles ahead of where I was, but it's a bit like alcoholism. My eyes and thought life are something I have to surrender to Christ daily, even if I'm no longer tempted by pornography. It's unfortunately not as easy as saying 'just stop it', particularly if certain scenarios are present in someone's life as I had at a young age.
It's totally true we can never be expected to account for everyone's problems! I don't think that's the spirit behind 1 Corinthians 10:23-28 in the least. But what about the ones we know about and can control? Modesty is a heart issue on both sides. If yoga pants, for example, are known to be sexually enticing to a large segment of the population... what's in someone's heart if they continue to wear them in church? Who does it benefit?
It's hilarious now that I have a dad bod, but back in the day when I weas 19 and in good shape, I had some older women who liked to watch me lift things in the warehouse I worked at and invited me to have "drinks". After that I did what I could to do things in other locations as to not to cause more issues. I'm certainly not just referring to women here.
As I said in another reply, if my wife and I have a recovering alcoholic over to visit, we'll remove the alcohol we have out of sight so we don't place stumbling blocks in their way.
I totally get that women have been hurt by the toxic aspects of the purity thing, and there's good reason people have been hurt! Because there's a lot of bad stuff that came with it. But it doesn't mean we overreact in that hurt and go the complete opposite direction with no wisdom.
@@MrLlamajockey At the same time, let's also not conflate alcohol which is separate from yourself and you can put away with a body that you inhabit. I mean sure, I'm not going to walk around in my underwear with guests over, but so many of these modesty messages essentially tell women "your existence is harmful to men"
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! As a part of that generation that was so hurt by what was taught, I am so grateful. I hope Preston really studies this because some of his research seems outdated. He definitely has some bias towards overemphasizing differences that aren’t there. I understand his desire to protect his daughters but I hope he really really listens here. This is so important.
And to me there’s a huge difference between protecting and preparing women. It sounds like they are doing a good job standing up for themselves
The responsibility discussion near the end 1:01 to 1:10 + was initially confusing. I was confused by Preston's confusion, like "What is he trying to say, why is this concept so difficult?" but I finally get what he may have been trying to say. The message to girls : "Don't expect the other person (usually male in this case) to have self-control", which I don't think is putting blame on women, I see it the same as saying "Don't keep your car unlocked and expect someone to not come in your car and steal it, lock your car door and don't keep valuable items on the front seat in view of the window."
ALSO, have you ever experienced your husband excited about sexual activity, but then get ramped up times 100 if you come out in a sexy outfit? That more she’s exposed, the more excited he’ll be. That’s why strip clubs are soooo very successful, because the more exposed a woman’s body is, the more excitement. The subject of safety isn’t the problem. But the whole thing is the female being modest to respect herself and her Lord!! I just feel like I’m missing something.
It is so complicated, and you can easily, easily say the wrong thing. Preston struggled the whole time not to say the wrong thing. There are several different sorts of things you have to say, or not say, to your teens, to your dates, etc. And if you don't say it perfectly, you send a message of shame (unintentionally). How are we going to have the perfect words?
What does Jesus say about lust and looking at temptation? Lust is adultery and pluck out your eye. NEVER did he say cover the girl.
@@juliegathman2923"How are we ever going to have the perfect words?" Easy. You just say, "It's not your fault some people are entitled beasts with no self-control." You say, "The world is bad enough but then on top of that, women have to constantly worry about being perceived as objects." You say, "Remember your image can be something that you control and not give away to strangers." You say, "It's okay to feel sexy sometimes. It's okay to have a big butt. It's ok if you have more cleavage than your friends, you are not a slut."
I hope that helps you, you seemed really concerned about saying the right thing and I don't blame you.
In the situation w your husband and at a strip club the sexual entitlement and expectation make sense bc you and strippers are available for sexual gratification.... when a man has sexual expectations of anyone with an attractive shape, it's disordered. But most men aren't actually visually out of control.... they don't need to to ejaculatenin the bathroom at the water park even tho there's unlimited visible clevag3 and cheeks. The Waterpark isn't exciting bc men didn't bring their sexual entitlement to the Waterpark. But you could be comparatively much more covered in a tight dress and a man who thinks he can access you sexually will drool all over hims3lf. It comes down to what the man is fantasizing the clothes represent, not the actual coverage. If it were about actual body parts and actual coverage then men couldn't be trusted at the water park or beach or a teens cheer camp or around little boys with girlish figures. women are visually aroused as well we just aren't taught entitlement that a man in a speedo wants to be fondled or ogled.
Oh bullshit!!!
Both are not going to want to stop in a makeout situation. So let's not teach our kids that making out is something that unmarried people do, and it's normal. Have some love for yourself and don't take a bite of cake until you are ready - married - to swallow and digest. Don't start something your body wants so badly to finish, habitually tell it no in this situation and so train yourself not to be turned on by something that should turn you on. Yes, there still might come a time when one spouse needs to stop for the other's sake. A back problem, vaginismus, whatever. So do both. Teach to honor "no." And tell them "no" should be said before you get in the back seat.
Yeah that's why I'm glad I fully had thought out things like this for myself. I knew that my body wouldn't want to stop in a "make out" situation, because biology was created to go all in. Not rev the engine and then park!
Now married 5yrs, we have rarely made out without it leading into sex.
I also recognize the vital importance of personal convictions in this topic of life! Everything I did in my dating life and engagement, was my decision. I went completely against my parents preferences, because I was clear in my path. I was hearing from God and I didn't need anyone else involved. (Sounds cocky, but choosing a spouse isn't something to group vote. That's just a fact.)
I found Sheila's old website, shortly after marriage. And I'm happy to say I just celebrated 5 happy hard years. I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for her, and her journey into this fight.
Edit:typo
This take is the problem-- kissing is kissing. Stopping kissing isn't stopping sex, it's stopping kissing. Stopping his repeated sexual advances beyond the kissing is stopping his continued assault and boundary pushing. In your scenario you have defined kissing as a natural greenlight to push for more sexually than what the partner has expressed is wanted. This is rape culture its not acceptable or normal to push boundaries even when someone likes you enough to kiss you.
I disagree with these ladies. I am with Preston on this. You can communicate the realities and generalities of both sexes and still focus on boundaries and respect. It is not one or the other, we can teach both to our kids.
I was sexually abused as a child and I would say most victims will blame themselves no matter their religion, upbringing, and even if they protest and say no (maybe they could have protested more). Even saying no does not always stop someone from abuse/assault.
Also, I found two things missing in this conversation. Young boys are abused as kids and they also wonder if they caused it? And since pornography is such a big problem couldn’t that be a part of boys’ sexual entitlement?
My 14 yr old daughter has always been modest. She naturally does not show skin or want anyone touching her. She is very private with her body. Therefore I have not really talked to her about modesty.
Since I am concerned about the safety of both my daughter and son I talk extensively to them that they are in charge of their bodies. No one can touch them without their consent. They are to never do anything they are uncomfortable with. They can say no to anyone and at anytime.
This goes across the board on all safety measures not just sexuality. We teach them safety skills when with friends, with strangers, with families, at home, outside of the home. Teaching our kids to be wise and take preventative measures never communicates that if something bad happens it is their fault. Of course not. If a crime happens it is never their fault. But we can say these things do happen and we can take precautions, but it is also never a guarantee.
I will at some point read their book but for right now I don’t think it is a causation. Just because we teach girls to be modest as scriptures mention does not directly teach boys to be abusers. All girls/boys/women/men who are abused/assaulted think it is their fault whether it was their dress, something they said, something they did not say, something they drank, something they did, something they did not do, the list goes on. I do think we can teach girls not to dress immodest without shaming their bodies.
And lastly, I disagree with the notion of our girls dressing what is culturally appropriate. We should in no way go with culture in any area. What is culturally appropriate should not be our standard. We should be a light. It is culturally appropriate to post bikini pics on social. It is culturally appropriate to send nudes. It is culturally appropriate to dress the opposite sex.
I appreciate your comments, especially your perspective as a victim of child abuse, which is always heartbreaking to hear. It's obvious you are parenting your son and daughter with a lot of wisdom.
Hi Paula,
I appreciate your commentary. I'd like to push back, particularly in regards to your last bit about culture. I think we do go with culture in many ways. For example, do you take a siesta as the Spaniards do? Do you wear a Burqa like Afghan women do? When you find something cool, do you call it "groovy" as those who grew up in the 1960s would? Do you wear shoes indoors? Do you live with extensive immediate family? Do you bow when meeting someone new or an elder?
The fact of the matter is, everyone goes with culture to a certain extent and there's no problem with that. The issue arises when culture intersects with God and the Bible, and, in those cases, the latter should always be given preference.
Where does the Bible teach girls to cover their bodies to keep men from sinning? I thought Jesus said something about the eye.....
It sounds like you are all about challenging other believers but not the secular culture that we so often get our churchy ideas from. That's what these ladies are doing. Challenging the worldly double standards that give men excuses to hurt women and place blame on these women for someone else being violent enough to assault them. The purity movement inadvertently perpetuates these toxic lies. It might seem unbalanced, but then, so is patriarchy. So if you really want there to be less shame and brokenness around these issues, and less sex crimes, at least amongst believers, you need to re-consider this ideology. Cuz that's what that these ladies are doing, in love.
@@AlgoSparkDude
You need help
There's lots I agree with in what they say, but also, at least some of the time, "low self-esteem" in women can just be a legitimate sense of guilt for the way they've treated men.
???? Can you explain "the way they've treated men"?
The host doesn't think women should wear yoga pants, but in this day and age, what would he want women to wear instead? The only alternative I can see down at the shops are very short "booty" bike pants, so aren't yoga pants preferable to that? A modesty teacher tells girls to wear men's exercise pants instead but that violates God's command in Deuteronomy about men and women wearing clothes that don't belong to their gender and makes women look silly. We would never tell men, "If you can't find long men's shorts, try wearing a woman's skirt instead."
Or does he want women to wear those yoga pants with a skirt over the top, so the women look really different to every other woman exercising and feels embarrassed and gets laughed at. Or should women never exercise they're whole lives because these days, shops aren't selling anything but yoga pants and very short "booty" bike pants.
Right! And what's modest changes every decade though. People under like 40 don't find yoga pants to be a big deal. We can see bathing suits change over time as well. The issue isn't really with how much skin or shape is visible.--- They talked about the amish being raped---
@@Melinda_FeedYourSoul And predators have raped nuns and infants too. A predator will prey on the victims they choose and that's not the victim's fault. Many predators are triggered by vulnerability and are turned off or scared away by self confidence. So I agree with you and both of these well informed women.
28 minutes in and i had to stop. Quite wordly thinking of the guests.
It's like if Gloria Steinham pretended to be a Christian.
Lots of good food for thought and challenging questions from Preston. Disappointed in lack of scripture and or talk about "what God wants for our bodies" by the guests. I was also very turned off when Sheila pushed back against Preston's comments about a girl wearing something revealing as opposed to being in burka, and that one would receive more attention, and she made the comment "if our kids are wearing what is normal in our culture they will still get looks." As if the normalcy of our culture is what should drive believers moral compass for anything especially dress. Overall their rational and responses (or lack thereof) to Preston's thoughtful questions or asks for ways to teach something different and combat "purity culture", were wholly unsatisfying and lacked biblical substance.
The women have lots of research on their side, and the accounts of numerous women who've been harmed by Christianese purity culture. Why do you insist on Bible verses in the face of that? For that matter, what Bible verses are there that tell us exactly what clothes to wear?
And for the record, I didn't find Preston's questions very thoughtful at all. Mostly just regurgitated modern myths (like men having higher sex drives, or being incapable of stopping themselves) for which he probably can't offer a shred of evidence.
As I recall, there's no scripture that nods to how to dress in 2023.
This and the comments are all very interesting. I resonate with some of it and am mystified by other parts. I'm an MK (y'all are immediately stereotyping), and I was exposed to True Love Waits and I Kissed Dating Goodbye. That said, my senior social studies class was called "Contemporary Issues," and we were taught to look at different perspectives on issues including euthanasia, biomedical research, and yes, dating and marriage.
Anybody remember the True Love Waits card you signed promising to not have sex before marriage? I signed it. Was I told that men have a higher sex drive? At some point. I don't remember EVER gaining the impression that that meant I had less control. If anything, the emphasis was on not putting oneself in a compromising position. I can't report what the girls around me absorbed as a metamessage, and I don't know how things went in Christian culture after the turn of the millennium. I just know the focus for me was squarely on me and how I honored God with my choices. (Incidentally, my wife grew up small-town conservative Baptist, and she was surprised to hear of an uproar about purity culture. She was exposed to some very positive attitudes toward married sex. I had to convince her on our honeymoon that...well, I'll just say there is a frequency limit!)
Clearly, these women are addressing a real issue. I just can't relate to it. But it does make me wonder if my daughters have picked up any grungy unintended messages. One of my daughters does tend to blame herself for things, but that's related to life experiences that have nothing to do with sexuality--it's more of a chink in her armor.
Someone mentioned PS's unorthodox views, and I think it's valid to dig deeper on specific Tier 2 &3 issues. But when it comes to sexuality, I'm going to make a plug that he didn't: he and another entity that recognizes problems with "purity culture" has a training video series on Christian sexuality for young people that is absolutely stellar. They have big names and small names on the project, and I'll just say that their theology of sexuality gave me new clarity that I didn't have before, grounding me more solidly in a Biblical view of sex. (If you think you understand it well enough, check it out. It's at christian (hyphen) sexuality dot com