I received a tip from a friend about a Facebook essay encouraging women to not dress likes sluts cause it makes it hard to be a Good Christian Boy:
When a man sees a woman in short shorts/a short skirt (I will define short shorts here as anything that is 4 inches above the knee or more), a man's first thought will not be, "Gee, those are nice shorts sister," his first thought will be 99% of the time, "You have a nice butt and I would like to see it."
When a man sees a girl wearing a cleavage revealing shirt, or a midriff revealing shirt, he is not thinking, "Gee, that's a pretty shirt sister." He is thinking 99% of the time, "Mmm, I really want to see more."While it is helpful of him to prescribe exactly how short is too short, I can't help but think that this essayist has a pretty low opinion of men. I think he's wrong about those percentages too.
Totally unscientifically, I asked a few of my own guy friends - confident, straight men - how often they want to take off the clothes of someone they see in a skirt. For balance, I asked a number of gals I know who are interested in women. Responses averaged at about 40 percent, for both groups. And most people had some sort of caveat:
Not an accurate stat since I haven't been taking careful track; but if by 'take off their skirt' you mean 'find them attractive and would like to get to know them better' you can probably put me at a 40%.
Kind of the same as if I see a guy with a really good hat. (From a bi gal.)I suspect the author is young. This idea that all men can think about is sex is rather immature, in the most basic sense. It's how many people (regardless of gender) feel when they are teenagers - a little crazy, a little overwhelmed by hormones, and a little out of control.
I'm extremely doubtful men feel this way forever. The gentlemen I know seem to be able to handle women's fashion choices without loosing it. Additionally, human civilization didn't collapse into a lustful stupor with the invention of the mini-skirt.
I'm making light of his point, but this writer is really concerned about the issue. He's made this choice about how he wants to live his life and he's struggling to maintain it. I understand that dilemma and I'm not unsympathetic. I've certainly failed at enough New Year's resolutions to relate.
However, here's where it gets worrisome:
We, your brothers, can make sure we aren't looking at porn on the TV, or on the computer, or iPhones, etc. We can avoid the dirty looking magazines in the stores, but what we are unable to control is you, our sisters.(Emphasis mine.) This is the thesis: He can't control the women in his life and he wants to.
When faced with temptation, the writer is able to block parts of society and limit his life so he doesn't have to face it. He choice, fine. But when faced with actual women and the temptation they represent in his mind, he wants to treat them the same way he would treat a naughty magazine. Banish it, control it, put it out of sight.
This is the problem with all such pleas from the Good Christian Boys. They want to dictate the actions of women based on their perceived shortcomings. It relegates women to a lesser class, where our choices should be based on how they make these guys feel. It makes us into purely sexual objects, where just the sight of our skin is something shameful and sinful.
I'm sorry, but that's garbage. Women are not responsible for the the thoughts of Good Christian Boys. Women's bodies are just bodies - bags of protein and fluids - and not some mystical sin-making machines.
If you don't like how my sundress makes you feel, or how those shorts at your church make your mind drift, perhaps it's time for you to re-examine your own life. Fighting human sexuality is going to be a tough battle. If you're not prepared for that, make different choices.
(You can read the full text here. You'll notice I added some punctuation, because the original gave me a headache.)