The CBE Scroll

Comment by Tami

August 15, 2007 @ 10:04 am

The world will always be a pull to our flesh. The world values certain things in women that are anathema to a Christian walk. It’s just living that walk out when we resist that pull.

But darn it’s hard! It’s hard because there’s a balance between looking ‘good’ to those of the opposite sex and being healthy and taking care of yourself. And that balance is pretty thin.

Comment by JLP

August 15, 2007 @ 10:42 am

Our sex saturated media puts a higher value on women with larger breasts, a smaller waist, larger hips and curvier legs than on a woman with a more boyish figure.

How has this affected the self-esteem of women who do not fit the profile of womanly value the media (and pornography) has created?

Comment by Kate

August 15, 2007 @ 11:05 am

JLP, it seems to me that some media (namely porn – which is mostly marketed to men) puts a lot of emphasis on busty, curvy women, while the fashion industry puts a lot of emphasis on boyish, unusually thin body types. They show us the extremes and we start buying into the idea that the extremes are the norm.

Something I’ve begun to realize in the last few years, though, is that most people aren’t as judgmental as the media. Once we get to know someone, our opinion of them is rarely based on what they look like, but rather on his or her character. But, we continue to project our insecurities about ourselves into other people’s minds. It’s as if we are thinking judge-y thoughts about ourselves and assuming that everyone else is thinking the same things about us. And, as I said, I’ve learned that they probably aren’t.

Obviously, it would be easier if the media were more balanced, but since people watch movies to be entertained, and balance and harmony and normalcy are not very entertaining, that probably won’t happen anytime soon (or ever).

Comment by historyloveralways

August 15, 2007 @ 12:32 pm

When some men go to the beach, they sit and compare women’s body parts to one other. When they do this, they are not setting up the foundation for a realistic relationship with a woman. Joy in a relationship with a woman doesn’t come out of the shape of her body, but in the shape of her heart.

Judging women in this manner makes them feel like their value is in their external features, rather than in their internal features. I think this causes women unnecessary self-esteem issues. Men need to become aware of the effect this is having on women.

My own experience in the Christian community is that even Christian women are being affected by the attitude that their worth is in their external features. This is something the Christian community needs to talk about.

Christian women – are you basing your value to a potential partner on your external features? That’s what I think JLP is getting at.

Comment by JLP

August 15, 2007 @ 1:14 pm

See comment 63541.

Christian women – are you basing your value to a potential partner on your external features? That’s what I think JLP is getting at.

Yes, that is what I’m getting at. In addition, I’ve found over the years that some Christian women are judging themselves by their external features.

In addition, I’ve worked with a lot of men because of the fields I’ve worked in. I’ve heard them talk about women and quite often it consists of judging women by their shape of their bodies. I don’t hear women talk about men in a similar manner.

Comment by leigh

August 15, 2007 @ 4:48 pm

Okay, I’d like to post, because this is so different from my own experience. The way I dressed and why I dressed that way varied through… at least most of high school.

But, in my late teens or early twenties, when I realized that my shape (curvy) was how some men (and women, too, yes, but I was much more aware of the men) would judge me, how they would place a value on me…

I started wearing shapeless clothes – clothes that were many sizes too large for me – hiding my body as best I could.

It’s only recently (and with the assistance of a few good friends) that I’ve begun to wear clothing that even fits me. I find when my body receives attention – to the point of exclusion of the recognition of me as a person – to be painful. I’m still quite self-conscious, and many clothes that are modest yet flattering are foreign to me, to this day.

I didn’t go through anything in particular that led to this. Just growing up with the shape I have, and becoming aware that… the shape was the sum total of my identity, to some.

So that’s another problem I have with the modesty movement. How do we help girls to be self-aware without making them self-conscious in a negative sense?

Of course, in a rather different sense of ‘body shape,’ complementarians judge women as unfit for certain things solely because they have been born into the body of a woman. Speaking of focusing on bodies in a way that is unhealthy…

Comment by JLP

August 15, 2007 @ 5:18 pm

Leigh (see comment 63569), I have the curvy shape also.

I found also that with some people (mostly men), as you say, the shape was the sum total of my identity. It tempted me to want to dress seductively just to get more attention.

Sometimes men would make remarks about my body, comparing it to other’s women and remarking how much better mine was. This really turned me off. It made me feel cheap and helped counteract the desire to dress seductively.

Comment by sally

August 15, 2007 @ 6:21 pm

JLP (see comment 63571), I’m amazed that people would do that! You must have been horrified.

If any man (except my husband) made a comment on my body, I’d give him a dirty look and tell him to speak more appropriately.

Passing personal remarks on anyone’s body is the height of rudeness – unless you are complimenting someone on how well or healthy they look.

Any person (man or woman) should not be commenting on another person’s body to their face or behind their back, unless they have very good reason for it. It’s just plain rude.

Comment by Terri

August 15, 2007 @ 7:00 pm

I believe that girls are born into a world that emphasizes their sexuality at the expense of all their other wonderful, God-given attributes. Men are sexual beings too, but they are not (sexualized) as are women. Women as sex objects, temptresses, etc. are found in all religious and non-religious writings – secular, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Hindu – this is one area where all religions have come to an agreement. This is where all religions converge, great or small, in their hostile attitude toward the feminine. Women are on one hand elevated as the objects of men’s affections while simultaneously being the most likely recipients of men’s violence and hatred.

Young girls (esp. in our day) cannot avoid the message of their sexual potential. It is trumpeted over the airwaves, on television, and is hanging on racks in department stores waiting for some young impressionable girl to come buy and increase her sex appeal.

But, before we blame everything on the secular society, let’s read what a prominent Christian author says about sex. In His Needs, Her Needs, Willard Harley informs us that one of man’s greatest needs is a good-looking wife – an attractive spouse. Harley talks about Nancy, a woman who gained weight after her marriage to Harold. Harold, of course, cannot handle the fact that his wife is not attractive, that he is not proud to be seen with her. In counseling this man, Harley suggests a legal separation. ‘Tell her the separation will remain in effect until she loses her weight.’ Fortunately, Nancy gets motivated and goes on a diet. She loses the weight and Harold can come back. Once again he can be proud to be with her as she fulfills his male need for an attractive spouse. She must feel very secure and happy to have a man who cares about her so deeply and unconditionally!

The world’s influence must have caused Harley to forget that in marriage we promise to live with each other, for better and for worse.

Later in the same chapter, Harley suggests that a woman pay attention to her make-up, pointing out what a disaster it can be if a woman has made herself up nicely and forgotten to tweeze her eyebrows. (How shocking!) He recommends cosmetic surgery for prematurely wrinkled women, although it does have to be repeated every few years (Yikes!) It’s disturbing to see ‘Christian counselors’ suggesting that a man’s ‘needs’ (which are superficial) take precedence over biblical (inward) beauty.

I will leave you with this thought by Dorothy E. Sayers, who wrote in response to men who didn’t like women wearing trousers because it was unattractive: ‘If the trousers do not attract you, so much the worse: for the moment I do not want to attract you. I want to enjoy myself as a human being.’ The world will tell us that how we look to men is of the utmost importance. If we have bought into the world’s image of female beauty, we must divest ourselves of it. There is no satisfaction to be had in a beautiful body; our only contentment is to be found in God.

Comment by JLP

August 15, 2007 @ 8:23 pm

Sally (see comment 63576), I can’t tell you how much I agree with you. And this happened even though I dressed conservatively. I either ignored the men or gave them shocked looks when they did those kinds of things.

I’ve had a couple of Christian men compliment me on dressing modestly. I like that kind of treatment much better.

Comment by Mary

August 16, 2007 @ 7:34 am

Compliments from men for dressing modestly? Perhaps that’s better than compliments (or insults) about body shape, but in my opinion it’s not that much better. It’s still a focus on the body, in this case on what’s not being shown.

What came to mind here was how Jesus modeled the right kind of focus: when a woman praised him by praising his mother for what her body had done for him (given him birth and nursed him), Jesus said that those who are blessed are those who hear the word of God and obey it. I’m not saying that the ‘blessed is the womb… and the breasts… ’ is a compliment about the body, per se. However, I think Jesus’ response shows how we should all be relating to one another: as children of God, walking in faith.

We are not at our best when we comment to a sister (or brother) about the shape of her body, the mode of her attire, or any other physical feature. And, as I hear it from pregnant women, some of the most obnoxious interactions they have are from people at church, who somehow feel free to feel their abdomens, talk about how much weight they’ve gained, and other intrusive things. In churches where women are defined by being wives and mothers, rather than as people of faith, I can imagine this kind of behavior might well be encouraged. Yet, I challenge us to find even one example in the Gospels in which Jesus related to any woman (or man) according to physical attributes or ‘sex roles’ or any other obsession over the differences between men and women. He simply never did so. Instead, he conversed and interacted with them as human beings beloved of God.

I think the ‘baptism’ of patriarchy as though it’s God’s way numbs people to the truth that women are human beings and should be respected as human beings, just as men should be. If that kind of basic respect was Jesus’ way (and it was), what arrogance it is to use gender and/or sexuality as the primary focus of interaction instead! As I see it, that’s one of the rotten fruits of the culturally-accommodated pro-patriarchal church. Women are valued solely or primarily by what their bodies can do, so why wouldn’t a good patriarchalist man focus on women’s bodies? The patriarchalist worldview enables the disrespectful behavior and ‘normalizes’ it, even while it ‘clothes’ it in respectability by preaching ‘modesty’ for Christian women. Women are treated as though they’re juvenile, incapable of discerning the guidance of the Spirit of God in terms of how to live with integrity (including how they dress). I don’t see that the male-centered patriarchal church is any less obsessed with the female body than the sex-obsessed secular culture is. Nearly every day, I see examples of the profound disrespect for women in their writings. I grieve for them, for they destroy their witness to the living Christ all for the sake of idolatry of the obvious: men and women are different. Obsession over such differences is properly experienced in adolescence and should not be enshrined in the church. Jesus had no need of such tactics and neither should we.

Comment by JLP

August 16, 2007 @ 9:41 am

Terri (see comment 63579), you quote William Harley as saying:

Harley talks about Nancy, a woman who gained weight after her marriage to Harold. Harold, of course, cannot handle the fact that his wife is not attractive, that he is not proud to be seen with her. In counseling this man, Harley suggests a legal separation. ‘Tell her the separation will remain in effect until she loses her weight.’

My father was not a Christian until shortly before he died, and yet he was never ashamed of my mother’s being overweight. I am so grateful for my father’s attitude. It was truly Christian, even though he wasn’t a Christian at the time.

Comment by JLP

August 16, 2007 @ 9:49 am

Hi everyone, although I haven’t responded to everyone personally I’ve enjoyed reading every post and appreciated what everyone has had to say. So much important stuff has been said by all of you that I could only respond to a small portion of it.

Comment by pw

August 16, 2007 @ 1:35 pm

I haven’t read Harley’s book, but I have read Ken Nair’s book – I think the title is Discovering the Mind of a Woman – a thoughtful and sensitive read directed to husbands and how husbands can love their wives as God commanded them to. Nair’s take on weight in one situation was that the stress from a neglectful, controlling husband effected cortisol levels for the wife, leading to weight gain. (Cortisol and stress does effect weight gain, impulse control, etc.)

My greater concern regarding body image for women is that this has a direct impact on the eating disorders in our culture – both for overeating and for bulimic/anorexic disorders. (Which, by the way, has a huge overlap with sexual abuse – 85% of women with eating disorders have a history of sexual abuse, but that’s another blog topic.)

Valuing the whole person, regardless of gender, would revolutionize treatment of women and children, minimize victim-blaming and the self-recrimination those with eating disorder experience, and optimize the possibility of all people reaching and achieving their highest potential. What a concept!

Reading back, I’m not sure I’ve stayed consistent with the original blog, but I think the prevalence of eating disorders (which is predominantly diagnosed in women) is tied to the issue of being valued for one’s body shape. This issue has medical and health concerns as well as psychological impact.

Comment by justanotherjane

August 16, 2007 @ 9:03 pm

Oh man, I could write a book on this. Two main thoughts:

1. In many complementarian circles, discussions of the importance of modesty quickly devolves into implying – or directly stating – that women are responsible for men’s reaction to their bodies. This is the same mentality that blames rape victims for what they were wearing or doing. I can’t count the number of times I’ve been told that men can’t help their reactions, so women must be the responsible ones to not provoke their lust (contrary to the Bible’s teachings that we are all responsible for our own lustful thoughts). It enforces the idea that a woman’s body is shameful, dirty, the property of others, or responsible for the violence perpetrated against it. To compound these awful messages, if your body is not the ‘right’ size or shape, you are supposed to be even more ashamed, hopefully enough to, you know – do something about it so you are not so offensive.

2. I feel strongly that the superficial focus on attractiveness has permeated modern Christianity. Women are told that beauty gives them power and worth inside and outside of the church (especially since women are largely seen as ornamental, as things, and as possessions). And obviously, society drills into us that beauty usually comes in only one or two body sizes. In my experience, there is really no difference in the message about beauty whether you are in a Christian community or not – how sad is that?

Furthermore, I’ve noticed that physical beauty and virtue are often conflated. This is obviously true in secular society, but in churches you hear things like ‘She was blessed with such beauty!’ and the implication is that she must be really a good person for God to make her beautiful. (Conversely, if you are considered fat, then it’s assumed you are wearing the sin of gluttony, selfishness, etc. Or, if you just aren’t that pretty, well then maybe you just weren’t that special to God.) This is definitely one of the things that complicated my eating disorder, as, like many others, I felt like I was being a ‘bad person’ when I was getting fat and a ‘good person’ when I was getting thin.

The love of beauty is an addictive poison. It distracts us – both men and women – from seeking our truth worth as God’s children. We should seek to see each other and ourselves through God’s eyes. We should seek humility, not those things that make us feel powerful. We should seek the things that are of value to God, not to men.

Easier said than done, when you go to church and someone asks you with glee if you’ve lost five pounds, or when you’re a supremely dorky teenager and no one wants to talk to you, or when your husband is congratulated on how pretty his wife is as if she is not even a real live person standing right there.

If we know the truth, why don’t we act like it?

Comment by Lori

August 17, 2007 @ 12:56 am

See comment 63579.

But, before we blame everything on the secular society, let’s read what a prominent Christian author says about sex. In His Needs, Her Needs, Willard Harley informs us that one of man’s greatest needs is a good-looking wife – an attractive spouse. Harley talks about Nancy, a woman who gained weight after her marriage to Harold. Harold, of course, cannot handle the fact that his wife is not attractive, that he is not proud to be seen with her. In counseling this man, Harley suggests a legal separation. ‘Tell her the separation will remain in effect until she loses her weight.’ Fortunately, Nancy gets motivated and goes on a diet. She loses the weight and Harold can come back. Once again he can be proud to be with her as she fulfills his male need for an attractive spouse. She must feel very secure and happy to have a man who cares about her so deeply and unconditionally!

The world’s influence must have caused Harley to forget that in marriage we promise to live with each other, for better and for worse.

Later in the same chapter, Harley suggests that a woman pay attention to her make-up, pointing out what a disaster it can be if a woman has made herself up nicely and forgotten to tweeze her eyebrows. (How shocking!) He recommends cosmetic surgery for prematurely wrinkled women, although it does have to be repeated every few years (Yikes!) It’s disturbing to see ‘Christian counselors’ suggesting that a man’s ‘needs’ (which are superficial) take precedence over biblical (inward) beauty.

I have a copy of His Needs, Her Needs, and virtually everything in the above statement is untrue. Just to make sure, I dug out my copy last night and re-read the chapter in question.

In His Needs, Her Needs, Willard Harley informs us that one of man’s greatest needs is a good-looking wife – an attractive spouse.

That’s a distortion. That particular chapter is listed as the third need out of five for men. Nowhere does Harley say it’s one of the greatest.

Harley talks about Nancy, a woman who gained weight after her marriage to Harold. Harold, of course, cannot handle the fact that his wife is not attractive, that he is not proud to be seen with her.

Another distortion. Here’s the actual story:

Nancy confesses that she was desperate to get married. Unfortunately, since she weighed 200 lbs., she wasn’t getting any dates. She went on an intensive diet and exercise program and lost the weight. Once she got married to Harold, however, she thought, ‘At last Prince Charming has come!’ and felt justified sitting around all day, not working, but just eating, watching TV, and getting fat. Harold was disturbed by all this. Harley told her that she needed to not just change her weight, but her attitude.

In counseling this man, Harley suggests a legal separation. ‘Tell her the separation will remain in effect until she loses her weight.’

Absolutely and utterly untrue. Nowhere does Harley say anything like that.

Fortunately, Nancy gets motivated and goes on a diet. She loses the weight and Harold can come back. Once again he can be proud to be with her as she fulfills his male need for an attractive spouse. She must feel very secure and happy to have a man who cares about her so deeply and unconditionally!

200 lbs. is grossly overweight for a woman. Her doctor was probably telling her to lose it, too, but she probably ignored him like she did her husband. My doctor told me I was overweight a few months ago, and ever since then I have working on losing it. That’s partly for me and partly for my husband. By maintaining a healthy weight and lifestyle I am quite possibly (barring any unforeseen accident) prolonging my life so I will have longer to spend with him. Like Nancy, my problem was eating too many sweets. Unlike her, however, I decided not to make excuses and say that everybody had to accept my selfishness. Instead, I did something about it. Here in Britain, with its socialized medicine, experts have said that the huge increases in the levels of obesity among the population are leading to far more related health problems such as heart disease. This, in turn, means everybody has to pay more through taxes to fund the medical system. I imagine it would be roughly the same with American medical insurance. So what you do with your weight not only impacts yourself, but those around you, too. I think it’s selfish to ask the world to excuse your lifestyle so you can do whatever you want, then ask them to endure the consequences without any protest.

Later in the same chapter, Harley suggests that a woman pay attention to her make-up, pointing out what a disaster it can be if a woman has made herself up nicely and forgotten to tweeze her eyebrows. (How shocking!) He recommends cosmetic surgery for prematurely wrinkled women, although it does have to be repeated every few years (Yikes!)

Another major distortion. I just re-read the chapter for a third time and nowhere does Harley say anything about tweezing eyebrows or cosmetic surgery. Nowhere.

It’s disturbing to see ‘Christian counselors’ suggesting that a man’s ‘needs’ (which are superficial) take precedence over biblical (inward) beauty.

And to be quite blunt, I find it highly disturbing that somebody would slander an author by printing things which are untrue about him and by taking statements in his work out context.

As for inward beauty, if you get fat and die of heart disease, then you may be the holiest person on the planet, but your family will still be deprived of your presence, which probably could have been prevented. Both my husband and I have been diagnosed as overweight by our doctor, and we are both trying to shed the pounds, not because of society’s dictates, but because we care about each other.

And while we’re talking about slander, I might as well bring this up. A while back ago somebody on this blog said that James Dobson advocates that women remain in abusive marriages to save their husbands. If he does, then he has performed a 180 degree turn in his thinking. I have several of Dobson’s books, including Love Must Be Tough. In the latter, he talks about spouses who are engaged in destructive behavior but refuse to change. Nowhere does he say that spouses have to stick around and endure it if the behavior is dangerous.

In fact, I used to be a regular listener of his radio show. About three years ago he had a panel of women on who had all escaped from abusive marriages. Some of these women had been told by their pastors to remain in their marriages. Dobson interviewed them and made it abundantly clear that those pastors had been wrong. At the end of the show, he had some guy, a former police officer, who goes around talking to churches about how to recognize domestic abuse. I forgot the man’s name, but his book is also sold by CBE’s bookstore.

If Dobson has changed his views, then I think the author of that post should present some evidence. If they do so, then I will apologize. However, I think it would behoove people in the future to actually investigate the people they are quoting before simply throwing out accusations against them. Doing so only injures the reputation of Christianity and does nothing to foster dialogue with the complementary side.

Comment by Terri

August 17, 2007 @ 5:53 am

Thank you for your response Jane. I am referring to a copy of the book by Williard Harley, His Needs, Her Needs: Building an Affair-Proof Marriage (Old Tappan, N.J.: Revell, 1986), pp. 101-102. I have not misquoted. But what I think has happened to cause this misunderstanding is that you possibly have an updated version. It is possible that Mr. Harley could have changed his perceptions in areas, this often happens when authors update their material. If you have been offended by what I quoted, then I am sincerely sorry, but it was not my quote.

As far as James Dobson is concerned, I listen to his broadcasts often, and even sometimes record them for future reference. One of his last programs that I recorded was for my personal use and its theme was abuse in marriage. The tone of his voice led me to believe that this would be an open discussion about the violence (why the husband abused) in marriage, what it became was a hunting expedition with wife as the target. He continually asked her, ‘What did you do to make him angry enough to hit you?’ If an abused women knew what set their men off don’t you believe that they would stop that action or speech. The problem is that women never know. To be fair, Dobson does admit that there are some husbands that abuse because they are stronger and can, and that these husbands need no motivating factor from their wife. But, as a whole, Dobson left the listeners with the thought that abuse happens because women bait/manipulate men( this would mean that the victim had more power than the victimizer, and I don’t believe that). Dobson is sincere in what he teaches because (he) truly believes in the things he says, but he teaches most often from his own personal experiences and convictions which may or may not be biblical. Biology for Mr. Dobson is cut and dry, your roles are determined by your gender. But, as the argument between nature/nurture continues to this day for him to be dogmatic in this area is presumptuous.

The fact is that Dobson has done some double-talk in the area of relationship/marriage/abuse (as evidenced by what you heard and what I heard) and sometimes it is hard to keep things straight.

Comment by Terri

August 17, 2007 @ 5:54 am

Sorry, my comment was directed to Lori, not Jane.

Comment by Terri

August 17, 2007 @ 8:38 am

If the readers of the post will be patient I would like to (quote) from a very respected author and Christian Counselor, Dr. M. Gay Hubbard, in Women the Misunderstood Majority (1992, Word Publishing).

Chapter 5 ‘The Complexities of Gender Research’ (Internalized Belief System)

‘There is another powerful factor that influences our understanding of gender studies; it is our internalized belief system that leads us to see what we think is there or want to be there. An exercise frequently used in general psychology courses is a good place to begin considering how this difficulty can occur.

Many of us can remember when in our first psychology course we were presented with a figure in which two wavy lines extended from the top to the bottom of an otherwise empty page. In looking at the lines we discovered something. Whether we saw two wavy lines, a picture of a vase, or a picture of two faces looking at each other depended on how we looked at the two wavy lines. In most lectures on perception, students are also given a similar figure in which, depending on how the individual looks at it, there is a beautiful young girl or a wrinkled old woman.

We may have been intrigued by the realization that perception is more than the brains reception of light waves – it is also the brain’s translation of these light waves into meaning. But even more intriguing was the further discovery that the brains translation was something we could influence by choice. We could see what we decided to see – vase or faces – we had a choice.

Gender research often presents us with something like the perception cards – information about which we have to decide what we see. And at that point of decision, it is not just the researcher’s report or the data itself that determines what happens. It is our (belief) about the nature of things – similarities and differences between women and men.’

Dr. Hubbard gives examples of two differing views, one maintained by James Dobson, (she is quoting him but I can easily get the book from the library I have read it.) And, a contrasting view by Anne Fausto-Sterling, biologist (genetic embryologist) which I can access online.

Dobson: ‘Careful research is revealing that the basic differences between the sexes are neurological in origin, rather than being purely cultural as ordinarily presumed… Males and females differ anatomically, sexually, emotionally, psychologically, and bio-chemically, We differ in literally every cell of our bodies, for each sex carries a unique chromosomal pattern… It is my deep conviction (emphasis mine) that each sex displays unique emotional characteristics that are genetically endowed’

Sterling: ‘…for a more complex analysis in which an individual’s capacities emerge from a web of interactions between the biological being and the social environment. Within this web, connecting threads move in both directions. Biology may in some manner condition behavior, but behavior in turn can alter one’s physiology. Furthermore, any particular behavior can have many different causes. This new vision challenges the hunt for fundamental biological causes at its very heart, stating unequivocally that the search itself is based on a false understanding of biology. The question, “What fraction of our behavior is biologically based,” is impossible – even in theory – to answer, and unanswerable questions drop out of the realm of science altogether, entering instead that of philosophy and morality.’

I believe that it is somewhat naive and presumptuous to think that we are not influenced in our beliefs about God, life, the other sex, etc. by varying things not just genetics alone. Dobson effectively takes his notions of biology and spirituality and merges them into one, thus claiming that not only is woman totally opposite, but that this was by God’s design so, who are you to refute that? Example, because I am biologically a woman I will only desire to do those things that are considered (by society) appropriately female because my genetics demand it. A lot of women just don’t fit that small box that has been custom built for them.

In any case, when God gave Adam his helper he did not see something that was opposite or in opposition to him but, to the contrary. ‘This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called woman because she was taken out of man.’

What say ye?

Comment by pw

August 17, 2007 @ 9:28 am

Terri (see comment 63650), it reminds me of a conference where Mary Stuart Van Leeuwen spoke and called us ‘neighboring sex’ rather than ‘opposite sex’ because we are more alike than different and there is more within gender differences than between genders.

Lori (see comment 63633), I agree we have to accurate in our quotes. I disagree with your statement ‘200 lbs. is grossly overweight for a woman’ – it depends. I have a female friend who is 6’4″ – she looks healthy at 200 lbs.

Comment by PS

August 17, 2007 @ 10:13 am

I am amazed at the difference in how I felt about showing my body when I was a teen and the way the girls are nowadays, based on observation and based on my daughters’ clothing. For one thing, everybody was skinnier in those days, so some of these outfits wouldn’t have stayed up. But the tops are guaranteed to say ‘look at my boobs.’ And so, the girls have to spend a lot of money on the right bras. And, the women in business too, I think.

I was tall and skinny. I never had any catcalls in my life. I can’t say that I had a poor body image, however. If I was a teen these days, I probably would feel differently (i.e. not good enough) about my body. I’m just glad that I’m not a teen or in my twenties these days.

Comment by JLP

August 17, 2007 @ 11:00 am

When I was a teenager, a boy walked up to me (I barely knew him) and asked me if I’d ever considered posing for Playboy. I got similar remarks all throughout my younger years, as well as numerous catcalls. I wished that I’d had the wisdom to tell these men that I did not consider these types of behaviors compliments.

I wonder if these men understood that the end effect of all these sexual innuendos was that it helped end any desire I had to dress suggestively.

Comment by JLP

August 17, 2007 @ 11:04 am

Stress is the great driver of obesity. My mom was stressed out due to the illnesses in the family and other things that happened in the family. Back then people weren’t encouraged to go to therapy to handle obesity.

I’m sure my mom was over 200 lbs. But, my dad still loved her. It didn’t appear to affect their relationship at all. If my mom was still alive (both my parents have passed on) I think I would encourage her to go for therapy.

I’m having trouble with my weight these days and it’s due to stress. I now understand the battle my mom went through.

Comment by Terri

August 17, 2007 @ 1:24 pm

Amen to JLP (see comment 63657). I have gone through the whole of my life thin, only to reach my forties and pack on the pounds. In my teenage years I could eat anything I wanted and wear any of the latest styles, never worrying that anything I picked out would not fit (boy has that changed).

I agree that stress is a major contributor to weight gain. My mother started her marriage slightly overweight, but with each child came more and more weight. Like your dad, JLP, my father still loved my mom, it was not how he reacted to her weight gain, but how it made her feel that was the real source of concern that I had for her. Like you said, people just didn’t go to therapy (my mom didn’t) because they were overweight. There had to be some serious physical problems to warrant a trip to the doctor. At this time in my life I am trying to shed those peri-menopausal pounds that I have packed on and its hard, but with the Lord’s help and the right motives (not to be attractive for my husband but for my own physical and mental well-being) I will reach the goal.

Comment by Terri

August 17, 2007 @ 1:40 pm

PW (see comment 63652), I have read the article ‘Promise Keepers: Proof-Text Poker,’ by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen. Her arguments were persuasive (she knows what she is talking about). I wish I could have been at that conference.

I might possibly have one of her teaching tapes. I need to look (I have a big huge trunk with hundreds of tapes – I know I can’t be the only one who collects!).

Comment by Karen

August 17, 2007 @ 9:01 pm

See comment 63633.

200 lbs. is grossly overweight for a woman. Her doctor was probably telling her to lose it, too, but she probably ignored him like she did her husband.

Be careful how you judge people and what you assume their reason for not losing weight is. I doubt very much it’s an issue of not ‘listening’ to their doctor or their husband. I believe the whole reason for this post is to stress the importance of trying to come away from judging people by the external – whether pleasing to the human eye or not – and trying to look beyond and into the person and see the real person. In our human way and with our human eyes we will always find it hard to look at others like Jesus did – with complete acceptance and love, and I might add with much understanding. I doubt that he pulled numbers out of his head and said that if you are within the healthy weight range you are in the club and if you aren’t then too bad – try a little harder – and when you weigh in at an acceptable weight you can then join the club too! Jesus said he came for those who needed a doctor – maybe because they were overweight and had health issues as a result.

I understand that in a perfect world we should all try to be healthy and fit – that might not always look the same for men or women but it has nothing to do with looking good for others but feeling good so that we can function and live our lives to the fullest.
Anyways – I think I’ve made my point – we have a long way to go in the body of Christ before we can accept one another and encourage each other to do well.

This has been a very interesting post!

Comment by Mary

August 18, 2007 @ 2:10 pm

It just goes to show that even those who embrace biblical equality may well, in their hearts, be judging fellow Christians by outward appearance. As someone who’s at a bit of a distance from my ‘healthy weight,’ I’m already aware of the phenomenon. But, just as I would wish to be considered with more grace by my sisters and brothers, so I should extend grace to those who fall into this world’s pattern of interacting based on physical appearance. In Western society, it takes a decided effort not to do that.

Comment by Leslie

August 18, 2007 @ 4:49 pm

I guess as long as we live in this fallen world, we women will struggle with the need to be attractive and desirable to the opposite sex – the struggle between cultivating real beauty (inner character and fruit of the Spirit) and the strong desire to be physically attractive. We do the latter to be desired by men and make other women feel jealous or intimidated, if we really take a look deep down. The best hope we have with our daughters is not to sexualize everything, not to focus on physical beauty, but to cultivate inner qualities… and their fathers play such a key role here. I’m astounded to read about the comments in His Needs, Her Needs. Wow… God help us. And, moms of daughters – you don’t have to always look perfect with your hair and makeup – think of your daughter, teach her acceptance, and play down outer beauty.

Comment by Mary Ann

August 18, 2007 @ 9:18 pm

The obsession over the physical appearance of a woman plagued me for a very long time. The fact that it seemed that men were only attracted to beautiful women – pretty girls – was agonizing to me (especially because the desire to get married was an idol in my heart for many years). For me, it started out mostly because I was born with a birth defect. The stigma of a birth defect haunted me endlessly. I couldn’t get it out of my head that I was a mistake, a manufacturing defect, a booboo. And, it seemed to me that even Christian men were always drawn to the pretty girls only. Aren’t Christian men supposed to look at the heart? I felt so ugly and so undesirable. These thoughts were poison to my soul and spirit… so God took action by crushing the lies and setting me free from being a prisoner to these lies. Thanks to his words of truth, I am no longer insecure about the way I look or aching to be valued by others. (I wrote about it here if you would like to read the story.)

A few years later, God also underscored the importance of inward beauty, being a person of character, through a discovery I found in the book of Ruth (Read about ithere.). Do you realize that all the other women in the Old Testament were described as ‘beautiful,’ but of Ruth, it was said that she was a woman of noble character? And actually, it is Ruth we should rather emulate than these other women. Hooray for the value God gives to us – based on his standard, his redemption, his love.

It’s been a long battle for me to fight off what the world, what our culture, tells us makes us ‘valuable.’ I wish I could tell all my stories here, but I think others are sharing their stories so well already. Thanks, everyone, for sharing.

Comment by JLP

August 21, 2007 @ 12:47 pm

Wow! The views expressed on this blog are awesome. I have enjoyed reading all your comments, they are all so deep and relevant.

Comment by Nee Nee

August 26, 2007 @ 10:36 am

I found it revealing that two comments – 63531 and 63533 – compared a less-curvy body to that of having a ‘boyish figure.’ I, personally, have one of those less-curvy figures. I have never considered myself to have a ‘boyish figure.’

Comment by Christy

August 30, 2007 @ 9:19 am

One’s body shape can also affect ministry opportunities for women. Some argue that if a woman is called to teach or preach she must look ‘good’ (slim, nicely dressed, and attractive). After all, she is representing Christ and shouldn’t bring shame on his name because of her appearance. Also, people (in our visually sensitive society) take attractive people more seriously and we certainly don’t want our body to distract from our message. One woman teacher cautions that if a person is not physically attractive yet feels God is calling her to a public ministry, chances are she is mistaken. Such thinking can cause women to forsake their callings in direct disobedience to Christ. Such a woman may think she is disqualified from ministering until she loses enough weight, wears nicer clothes, and has been given a general make-over. And, if this goal is not quickly attained, she may waste years of her life (or all of it) in trying to meet the presumed necessary conditions before she allows herself to serve God.

I am not advocating ‘ugly’ (we should all strive to take care of our temples as unto the Lord), but we must not allow our appearances to keep us from obeying God. Only he knows how we came to our present condition, whether by sin or by circumstances. Secondly, physical appearance changes (beauty fades), sometimes looking better at certain stages of life than at other times. Our service to God can not be based on something so variable. Thirdly, God’s ways are not ours. He often chooses the seemingly weak and foolish things to confound the world’s wisdom. Jesus himself did not come in a noticeably attractive body. Many of God’s most popular preachers were not pretty people: George Whitefield was cross-eyed, William Wilberforce was only five feet tall, spine curved, bent-necked, squinted from poor eyesight, and sickly; and many more also labored from various ailments and physical handicaps (including being overweight). To judge a fellow Christian by his or her outer appearance can be a dangerous activity before the eyes of God.

I have always struggled with my self-image, not acknowledging my beauty even when it was obvious. (I think part of it was pride. I wasn’t as perfect as I wanted to be so I belittled the vessel that God had formed for me.) With the wear of decades, lots of children, missionary work, and homeschooling, my natural beauty began to fade. The face I stared at in the mirror was haggard, graying, overweight, and developing spots from skin damage. I hadn’t seen it coming. Now I am faced with learning to take better care of myself – which I am still working on while still living in my stressful environment.

Meanwhile, I am gifted as a preacher/teacher who ministers only occasionally in the States (my opportunities have been limited because of my gender), but more so on the mission field. A few years ago I was asked to teach on the basics of the Gospel at a pastors’ conference in one of the capitals of South America. I was excited and terrified. I knew, as a woman, I would be judged more critically and so I tried to become ‘excellent.’ This included losing weight and ‘looking good.’ I set my goals and began working at it. But as the months passed, my goal was not being met as I had expected. Discouragement set in until I felt I was not even worthy to preach or teach. I had failed Christ. I no longer wanted to go.

Eventually, the Lord spoke to my heart. In essence the message was, ‘Yes, you aren’t worthy to preach, not by your own merits. Even if you had reached your weight goal, you are still not worthy.’ I can not earn the right to serve God – that’s called ‘works.’ I serve God because of grace. I serve because Christ makes me worthy. If God calls us to minister, then we are qualified to do it. Improving my appearance is between Jesus and me, something that may or may not be accomplished in a few short months. However, my call to preach the Gospel must continue whether I feel good about my appearance or not. I have found that truth has its own power and authority. Even the ugly feet of those who preach the good news can look beautiful to those who receive it.

Comment by JLP

September 1, 2007 @ 10:11 am

Thank you for your comment Christy (see comment 65127). It’s wonderful.

Comment by Mary

September 2, 2007 @ 8:13 pm

Ditto JLP’s comment (see comment 65599), Christy. Your testimony is a blessing to me.

There’s a real catch-22 about a woman’s appearance. As you noted, Christy, people expect a female leader (not merely in the church) to be fit and reasonably attractive. Yet, some of those who would deny God the prerogative to call and use women in church leadership use as their ‘proof’ of it being ‘ungodly’ the ‘fact’ that men would be ‘distracted’ by a woman’s physical features if she were preaching or teaching. It’s a hoot – totally absurd – until you realize that people are actually serious about it and believe it. (It’s telling that almost none of such people have ever actually been in a room where a woman was preaching or teaching. Those who have generally wonder what the big deal is once they get over the initial ‘strangeness’ of a new experience and hear God’s truth being proclaimed.)

Comment by Carolyn

September 23, 2007 @ 8:16 am

In reading these posts, I wonder what people mean by modest clothing. I used to dress in baggy clothes because I thought they were more modest. However, I realized that I wasn’t really trying not to flaunt myself, but that I didn’t think I was good enough, so I had to hide.

As my self-confidence has grown, I wear things that fit and that look good while still looking professional. I also exercise to make my body as healthy as possible. I think that it is better looking, but should I not do it just so I’m not tempting men?

By the way, I do not get any more inappropriate comments when dressing in clothes that fit and look good.

Comment by boonies

July 25, 2008 @ 9:51 am

i am never ceasing to be amazed at the clueless denial so many women indulge in on boards about physical beauty and such….HINT go to Genesis 2, verse 9 and ask what social influences or Madison Avenue manipulation took place to make GOD create the trees of the field the way He did.
Good for food AND PLEASANT TO THE SIGHT… gee I wonder why men are visual?
God made us that way because HE is that way…He also can look on the heart in a way that humans cannot discern I agrree. But you will never escape the basics of Pre-Fall human nature …pleasant to the sight is a part of the warp and woof of a man, like the need for communication is to a woman…..we both need to adjust to it and enjoy it!

Comment by jlp

July 25, 2008 @ 1:53 pm

I don’t think God created men to value women by the shape of their bodies, I think that came about because men had power over women in the past that allowed them to judge women by superficial standards.

In areas of the world where people wear no clothes the men don’t value women by the shape of their bodies. No, this is not inherent to men. It’s a part of the Western patriarchal tradition of valuing women.

I don’t want men to judge me by the shape of my body but rather by the type of person I am. That’s more important to me than physical appearance.

Comment by CANDYTOOSWEET

July 25, 2008 @ 2:49 pm

Boonies,

Have you ever considered that many men miss out on great love in their life because they choose women based on physical appearance instead of the type of person they are?

Have you ever considered the pain a woman goes through when she sees her husband desiring a woman more attractive than she? Or how a teenage girl feels when she sees boys valuing other girls as more desirable than her because of the shape of their bodies or the prettiness of their faces?

You implied that we should enjoy the fact that men are visual? Why, it’s only caused me more pain than I could possibly write down.

Comment by CANDYTOOSWEET

July 25, 2008 @ 2:52 pm

Boonies,

Unless a woman is a winner in the “attractiveness” in competition with other women, she cannot enjoy the “visual” aspect of men. It will just cause her pain.

Not only that, but why should the value of women be based on their physical appearance, and not that of men. If God created men to be that way, was that fair to women? NO!

Comment by sarah

July 26, 2008 @ 2:41 am

Odd choice of biblical reference…doesn’t seem to prove that males have a divinely ordained visual orientation that must be catered to, especially given that the “pleasing” objects were photosynthesizing rather than seducing, and that their appeal was evident to both sexes (Genesis 3:6, which also shows the danger of putting human desire above God’s priorities). As an artist and art teacher, I am very aware of the power of imagery on all humans with sight. As a woman, I’m aware of the element of visual attraction in romance. As a Christian (with a few years behind me) I also know how incredibly shallow and unbiblical it is to judge a fellow human being based on their outward appearance. Human standards of physical beauty vary; divine standards of beauty don’t. It’s normal for both men and women to gravitate towards attractiveness and status, but it takes maturity to develop deep appreciation for the beauty God enjoys (Proverbs 31:30).

Comment by sarah

July 26, 2008 @ 3:01 am

One thing I’ve noticed: most Christian discussions of “modesty” seem to focus almost entirely on women’s clothes and a sexual context. What about modesty in reference to extravagance and attention seeking…competing for status and “boasting” through material display? It seems that we’ve neglected this aspect, which, as with the word’s more commonly referenced sensual application, isn’t the sole burden of women.

Comment by Liz

July 26, 2008 @ 9:51 am

Boonies..it seems odd to me to compare trees (pleasant to the sight) with men.
I don’t get the connection.

Comment by Sarah

July 26, 2008 @ 3:09 pm

Liz, in boonies’ analogy, wouldn’t women be the ones compared to trees? Might explain my sudden urge to shed leaves all over the lawn…as well as all these squirrels….

Comment by LMcC

July 26, 2008 @ 6:23 pm

Y’all, Boonies was only trolling. Types like that only care about ticking people off and cramming their own ideas down everyone elses’ throats. Boonies couldn’t care less how eloquent and Scripturally correct your rebuttals may be. AFAIC, all he really did was expose himself and what he really thinks of women.

Comment by Liz

July 27, 2008 @ 1:54 am

That’s assuming the writer is a man…better be careful here!

I had wondered why this topic was re-kindled after all this time.

Comment by David

July 27, 2008 @ 8:18 pm

Readers may be interested in this article in an Australian (politically) conservative liberal arts magazine: http://quadrant.org.au/php/article_view.php?article_id=3983. It is entitled ‘The Pornification of Girlhood’ and provides a useful adjunct to the comments on women’s appearance.

Comment by jlp

July 27, 2008 @ 8:22 pm

Thanks David. This is an awesome article!

Comment by David

July 27, 2008 @ 8:27 pm

Boonies quote seems odd in the context; it in no way suggests that only Adam would find it please; in the ET (English translation) it simply seems to say that the trees looked nice, as opposed to ugly…both men and women, in my experience, respond to visual beauty. On the other hand, Boonies might consider Gen 2:23, where the visual does not enter into it, but Adam’s joy is about compatibility and family-ness; which is reflected in the two becoming one flesh: that is, one family.

To suggest that Christian men are subjected against their will to some sort of ‘visual’ orientation is madness beyond madness: bringing the world’s de-humanising values into the church is horrible. Men, who think this way: just consider the hurt you might be doing to sisters who don’t happen to conform to the worldly male view of attractive! Trouble is, popular US culture is superficial and populist and hardly provides a basis for Christian behaviour; rather it should attract outspoken criticism on behalf of the marginalised.

Comment by faith

July 28, 2008 @ 7:20 am

just a thought. It seems that sexualization of women and oppression in other sphers, (home, work and church) seem to increase together.

i think the way we think about women as objects, or needing male control, or supervision or restriction go together.

i don’t know any data to support this, it is just an observation. it’s all part of the same pernicious package.

Another point… i think when women do not have social and intellectual power, they resort to physical beauty as a form of power. suspectability to the whole sexualization thing… is really about seek some kind of power. i wonder if men and women had equal power if the sexualization of women would subside as well.

Comment by Trevor

July 28, 2008 @ 10:10 pm

Yes, I too thank you for the link to that Quadrant article. While it’s pretty heavy reading it underscores the causes for concern for young women growing up in our overly sexualized culture. For most young women there are no outside points of reference to broaden their understanding of what could otherwise be. That’s extremely saddening and we need to find ways to correct that imbalance.

Society tends to park the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff, dealing with the damage done. Not always very effectively. Surely, within the church we at least can offer redemptive strategies that will showcase superior behavioral expectations and alternatives before the event. Let me hasten to add that a great deal needs to be done to encourage young men away from seeing women only as sexual objects. Women are clearly the victims here.

Any movement in this direction would be most encouraging and the article seems to suggest that such movements are not only emerging but gaining momentum. That’s good news. Anything that helps young men and women to resist the extremely unhealthy aspects of sexual expression found to be so rife in our everyday community life are to be applauded.

Comment by CHRISTINA

September 26, 2008 @ 10:17 pm

HI..EVERYONE HERE HAS SOME REAL GOOD
VIEWS ON THIS SUBJECT..IM A VERY CURVY SHAPED WOMAN
AND I NEED SOME SERIOUS HELP…PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS
HARRASING ME ABOUT THE SHAPE OF MY BODY..FIRST OFF
MEN ARE VERY PHYSICALLY ATTRACTED TO ME AND ALWAYS
STARE AT MY BODY..AND PEOPLE HAVE TOLD ME THAT ITS
MY PROBLEM WHEN THEY DO..BECAUSE OF WHAT IM WEARING.
SO..HERE IN AMERICA..A WOMAN WITH A CURVY SHAPE
CANT WEAR CERTAIN CLOTHS BECAUSE MEN ARENT MATURE
ENOUGH TO HANDLE IT? IVE BEEN TOLD THEY ARE MEN..
ITS MY PROBLEM?AND WOMEN ARE EXTREMELY JEALOUS..
IVE BEEN HARRESSED SO BAD ON THE JOB THAT THESE
TWO WOMEN WERE STARVING THESE BABIES IN MY PRIMARY
CARE AT THIS CHILD CARE..MY FAMILY THINKS ITS
MY PROBLEM..IVE BEEN TO COUNSELING..MY SELF-ESTEEM IS
VERY LOW TO WHERE I DONT WANT MEET NEW PEOPLE OR
MAKE NEW FRIENDS..CAUSE SOMEONE ALWAYS HAS A PROBLEM
EXCEPT MAYBE TWO PEOPLE IN MY LIFE..THIS IS A SAD
WORLD WE LIVE IN IF PEOPLE ARE JUDGED ACCORDING TO
THE SHAPE OF THEIR BODY..IM ALWAYS ASKED DO I SLEEP
AROUND..WHY DO YOU WEAR YOUR CLOTHS SO TIGHT IF YOU
DONT SLEEP AROUND? I NEED TO TALK TO NICE PEOPLE
LIKE YOU…

Comment by jlp

September 27, 2008 @ 3:34 pm

I’m overweight now. But when I was younger I wasn’t and I had a very curvy figure. I was constantly being stared at and being approached sexually by men.

I learned to dress modestly to protect myself. Dressing modestly is a way to tell men that you are off limits sexually. They need to understand that just because you have a curvy figure doesn’t mean you you want to sleep with them, and the only way I’ve found to get that across is to dress modestly. Dressing modest is the way to get across the message “THIS BODY IS OFF LIMITS!”

Of course, dressing modestly won’t stop all staring and sexual advances. But it reduces it so that it makes life easier.

In this world women have to protect themselves every way they can.

Comment by faith

September 27, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

Christina, i hear your pain at the way things are and have experience similar things. this is a very wacked out world over-focused on sexuality or abstaining from it–either way it is wacky and one way women are depersonalized.

while you may dress carefully, the unwanted advances and gazes still come. I get that–that is not your fault. it’s really about the ones being inappropriate… you are not bad because you are pretty.

learn to use your voice… ask God for what to say to the ones who are problematic. develop your own sense of style that is modest and reflects you but you don’t have to be a bag lady. Again ask God for help you. tell yourself that you are not responsible for their behavior and that you are bright, intelligent and talented and God has a purpose for you.

Again, you are not bad or causing the problem because of who you are–the men who are obscene need to take responsibility for their actions.

Comment by jlp

September 28, 2008 @ 12:12 pm

What’s difficult Christina – is that in the western world (Europe and North America) some men feel that if a woman dresses with tight or revealing clothes that she is inviting them to look at her body or that she is willing to have sex with them. If you lived in a tribe around the Amazon river where no one where wears clothes you wouldn’t find any men with that attitude. It’s a cultural thing. And unfortunately in our western culture that’s the attitude. It doesn’t mean the woman who wears tight or revealing clothes wants to draw sexual attention to herself or that she is willing to go to bed with any man who wants her, but that is the perception of some men in our culture. That’s why dressing modestly protects you (partially), because it sends a signal to men that you don’t want sexual attention.

In our society young women are encouraged to wear tight and revealing clothes. Women who do are praised and glorified. But the negative side of this is the unwanted staring, touching and sexual advances that the young women receive as a result of this.

Comment by jlp

September 28, 2008 @ 12:51 pm

Another thing Christina – our culture encourages men to be sexual predators. As a result females, especially young ones have to do everything they can to protect themselves. Protect yourself every way you can sexually, whether by dress or or by safety measures or by disassociating yourself from sexually aggressive men. It’s an unfortunate (and sinful) part of life.

Comment by candytoosweet

September 28, 2008 @ 2:33 pm

As long as our culture equates less clothing with sexual availability, men without sexual morals will pester women with sexual advances. It’s not a question of maturity, it’s a question of having morals. Or perhaps having morals is a sign of having maturity.

Comment by jeanneclare

September 25, 2011 @ 1:03 pm

Well, here’s what I’m dealing with. Though my father has been dead for over 20 years, I remember him looking at other women fairly often. When I was 21, while we were driving in the car, he asked me to tell my sister-in-law, who was very pretty (and my age), that he thought she was beautiful. “Would you do that for me?” He asked. I felt enraged. What kind of a thing is that to say to your daughter? To this day, I don’t know if I said to him “why don’t you tell my mother she’s beautiful?” or if I just seethed in silence. Actually, I do remember telling him that she had had two abortions and a bout with syphillis, which was true. He then asked me if she might need someone to talk to–whatever the hell that meant. I asked him, “why?” He was a cop, not a psychologist. He didn’t feel the need to answer my question. He just used silence as if to indicate my comments were never heard or never had any weight. When I was in my 20s, he asked me “see if you can get your mother to lose weight.”

Even though he was involved in the Charismatic renewal for 15 years, was part of a prayer group, never missed church on Sunday, religious statues, crucifixes, and prayer cards everywhere in the home, my memories of him are of someone who was creepy, who looked at woman as if they were only supposed to be physically attractive; that determines her value. Not very Christlike in my opinion.

I’m 50 years old, and this still bothers me.

Comment by Liz

September 25, 2011 @ 10:36 pm

Hi JeanneClare

Thank you for sharing your story. Sadly, it is not an isolated case and it is not unusual that it would still bother you. So much of this sort of thinking permeates many churches and individuals’ lives and people don’t realise how ungodly it is and what long-lasting effects it has.

May it help you to know that there are many who do not share that kind of reasoning and attitude towards women and hopefully you have met some men who are not so pre-occupied with how women look and see the real person inside.

It is stories like yours which keep us going with trying to help people see things differently. A few statements can damage a person for a long time. It is always better to read what God has said about the people he has created (women and men) and keep reminding ourselves how precious we are to him.