Posted on 08/15/2016 6:54:47 AM PDT by Salvation
One of the less edifying aspects of the Summer Olympics in Rio is the attire of the women’s beach volleyball players from Western countries. Most of the women wear a tiny bikini with the bottom being especially tiny. (I do not show a picture here because I deem it immodest to do so. Instead, I show a picture of some of the men, whose attire I mention below.)
Frankly, playing volleyball in a tiny bikini seems quite unnecessary. I would argue that it detracts from the sport because it distracts from the sport. The attention doesn’t seem to be drawn to the ball, shall we say. I would further argue that the attire encourages the focus not even on the women, but on certain aspects of the women’s bodies.
I can understand that swimmers (male and female) wear tight and sometimes abbreviated swimsuits to lessen drag in the water. Gymnasts, too, often wear brief and/or tight clothing to improve their performance and maximize the mobility of their limbs. The clothing is thus at least somewhat performance related.
But I can see no performance enhancement brought about by the wearing of tiny bikinis. Some will point out that the bikini top in question acts as a sports bra. Fine, but men wear supportive attire, too; but they do so under their shorts, not out in the open.
The Egyptian women’s beach volleyball player shown in the above photo illustrates that it is possible to compete quite well without wearing a bikini. One could argue that having short sleeves and shorter leg coverings might be cooler for the players. The impact on performance of wearing the hijab is debatable, but it is worn tucked in and did not seem to bother the women who wore it. These women played and competed well in a sport that is relatively new to their country and region.
Men’s beach volleyball attire also illustrates that near nudity is not required to play the sport well. The men do not play wearing tiny swimwear. They wear ample shorts along with t-shirts or tank tops.
I realize that each time the question of modesty has come up on this blog there are some readers who want to dismiss such discussions and emphasize the right of people to dress as they please. They believe that any sexual temptation aroused is almost wholly the fault of the viewer, not the one wearing the attire.
Modesty should avoid excessively burdening people. It seeks a middle ground wherein the one who dresses and the other who sees share responsibility. The one wearing the attire should not be burdened with difficult requirements, nor should the viewer be burdened by facing undue temptation. Mutual charity and concern are the goals.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of modesty as protecting the mystery, chastity, and dignity of the human person.
Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. … Modesty protects the intimate center of the person. It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden. It is ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. … Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet (CCC 2521-2522).
As always, comments are appreciated, but I have found in the past that discussions about modesty are often difficult to have in a way that is helpful or charitable. Reasonable people may differ on the details of modesty. Modesty does involve a range of options, influenced by circumstances and the sensibilities of cultures. I have articulated here that I see no need for tiny bikinis in this sport and that I think more modest attire is important. If you disagree, please explain the relationship you see of the brief bikini to the sport, considering that men in general and women from other cultures who compete do not see the need to wear so little. If you agree, please remember in your comments that the imputation of motives to individuals is a sketchy and usually uncharitable thing to do. Everyone, please use care when commenting.
These women are ALREADY being modest.
They are wearing TWICE what is typically worn at the beach by 99.9% of women who aren’t fat.
This is BEACH volleyball after all. The sand, the sun and the swimsuit are all part of the sport
Click the Getty links.
You’re right. Avert your eyes.
Or words to that effect.
You do know that Christianity has always considered modesty in dress a virtue, do you not?
I guess none of them are interested in the virtue of modesty which leads to the virtue of chastity.
How far they have fallen.
Thank YOU for pointing out the fault in Msgr. Pope’s thinking. Speaking of Victorian Vapors, the English insisted that the marble statue, Michaelangelo’s David’s private parts be covered with a fig leaf before it could be exhibited at the Great Exposition of 1851. It seems there are those who wish to return to that era of constriction on women’s lives. One good thing that came our of World War One was the end of women’s whale bone corsets. The whale bone was needed for wounded soldiers and other military uses. Time marches on but there are still those who would rather go back to the past.
The big picture is so often lost by nit-picking meddlers.
It’s called a cassock — not a dress.
Let’s not forget the Crimson Cardinals.
I believe strongly in the separation of church and beach . . .
As a volleyball player in my youth (who very much prefers the indoor game to the beach game), I suggest the good father might want to try playing a beach event in heat before coming to conclusions. The more clothes you wear on the beach the more the sand sticks to you and that is NOT a comfortable feeling when you are playing.
Trust me, the PLAYERS are not thinking about their sex appeal while playing.
Bravo!!!
The good Msgr is far from an *idiot*.
He raises a valid point about the double standards applied to men and women.
Now, while you may well enjoy watching the beach volleyball, one has to wonder why you do? Is it because of the sport itself? Or because of watching the mostly nude women?
Which validates his point.
Jesus told us that men who look lustfully at a woman have already committed adultery with her in their hearts.
Dressing in a way so as to cause men more difficultly in the sexual temptation department is irresponsible on the part of the woman.
Women can dress classy and attractively without looking like sluts.
Actually, it first started in America.
But, it did not take long to spread to many countries, including Brazil.
That actually validates his point, doesn’t it?
And do you really think the Egyptian’s clothing was either comfortable or aided in their endeavors? Sorry, I’ve worn too many uniforms in sport to buy that lie.
I have NOT watched even one single minute of the Olympics.
The world is in a state now where, if a person be FILTHY,
let them be filthy STILL (or unbothered). The Olympics is
dead to me; and the filthy conditions there are symbolic
of what it is.
They are essentially butt-naked, true, but when presented with a rockhard derriere that wouldn't be out of place on a fit dude, I'm just not tempted...Not that I watch beach volleyball, or any olympics, anyway.
They could wear more just for the sake of human dignity, but I sure could have done without the muslim players' getups being presented as any less offensive, albeit for the opposite reason.
It’s not just an opinion. It’s natural law. And I see many comments on this page firmly on the side agasint natural law.
The natural law being that immodesty in dress leads to debauchery in action, and debasement of human beings.
Exactly what I expected. There is a medium between extreme immodesty and mohammedan repression. There is plenty of room between the two extremes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.