Spaghetti straps are immodest - why exactly?

Hehe, me again… What’s immodest about a person’s shoulders? :o

I wear spaghetti straps all the time. I don’t get it either:confused:

Cause some guy’s really going to lust after my shoulders? Weird…

Here we go again…

Because it’s exposing as much skin as possible, as close to the breasts as possible. Did you actually READ the responses on the bikini thread that were made by men? Every man that posted stated that YES, all that exposed skin really does incite lustful thoughts, whether they want it to or not. It is just fact. Men are aroused by women who are not covered up. Please go reread those comments, they explain it all very clearly.

mmm… so smooth and complexive…


And if there’s no breast exposure, the problem is…?

What about shorts? What about short sleeve or sleeveless (not spaghetti strap) tops? Strapless prom dresses?

It’s considered immodest because years ago, some man felt that women should cover themselves from head to foot. Even though we have progressed a long way from the notion that no skin should show, it is still considered immodest to reveal your shoulders, because we all know what are below your shoulders, and the shirts that don’t cover your shoulders are the most likely to show off your other features. Basically, it all comes down men not being able to control their hormones. If it was about anything more than men not handling their lust, then they would be accused of immodesty when they wear pants that are so low as to reveal their underwear.

I’m sure some people will disagree with me, but just based on the dress codes that high school enforce, it is obvious that this is true. I can count on one hand the number of times a guy got in trouble for “droppy drawers” like the student handbook said they would. Yet, if a girl wore anything that didn’t go down to her knees, didn’t completely cover her shoulder, or didn’t come right up to her neck, she was in trouble. Mainly, to me, the rules of modesty really are one of the double standards.

Heck some guys are incited by women who dress modestly :wink:

I did read the bikini comments… One guy actually explained that for him the visual symbolism invited him to look at the, to him conspicuous, because fabric-covered, breasts, while the bottoms looked like a triangle, pointing towards the genitals. The others didn’t explain in detail.

They didn’t really say it was because of ‘exposed skin’, period. If any skin anywhere were a problem, we couldn’t go barefoot or without gloves or shave out heads or expose our faces…

I really honestly don’t understand what’s immoral or sexual or exciting about a girl’s shoulders?

Are just spaghetti straps immoral (saw them mentioned on another thread, curious…) or anything sleeveless?

So what’s the difference? Just wear your underwear? :shrug:

I saw a young woman recently who wore a modest skirt and a spaghetti strap top edged in lace. She looked like she had a nightgown on.

I’m sorry - I don’t think spaghetti straps are ever attractive or appropriate. It looks like you are wearing undergarments. There is a reason they are called “camisole” - a word that used to be an undergarment.

So - if you are going to wear a camisole, what difference is there in wearing just your bra? Oh - I see, the camisole covers your belly!!! Well, then, that makes SO much difference!! :rolleyes:


Good grief…did we all fall on the pavement and knock loose our common sense?! There is nothing inherently “immoral” about spaghetti straps, tank tops, sleeveless shirts, shorts, skirts, etc. Clearly any clothing that fits like it was shrink-wrapped to your body or leaves body parts such as breasts, buttocks, cleavage blatently exposed may well be immodest, lack taste, class and propriety. We also dress differently for the occasion–perhaps the spaghetti strap top that seemed perfect for washing the car in the driveway or walking the dog on a hot August afternoon isn’t the same good idea when heading to church or a family dinner at Grandma’s. It’s really not that hard to be stylish, attractive and appropriate with even a minimal expenditure of thought.

I wear either tank tops or spaghetti strap tops all the time in summer with longer (mid-thigh) running shorts. I work from home in the summer and love to get a tan, so most sunny afternoons a person will find me outside wearing a spaghetti strap top to maximize sun exposure. Since I am not into changing clothes multiple times a day, a person will find me doing yardwork, walking my dog, going for a bike ride with my kids, and running to the grocery store to grab dinner items all wearing my spaghetti strap tops.

I am in my 40s. I hardly think anyone is incited to lust after me at this age and after 3 kids (at least one of whom is almost always with me at the store - built in grocery bag carriers;) ).

Modesty is in the eye of the beholder. I really do get the feeling that some people on here think all women should be covered head to toe no matter what the weather.

Edited to add: I do think modesty is important. I don’t think that spaghetti straps incite lust. I do think modesty is cultural, as Litcrit and others here have pointed out.

This is very true. For example, some people believe pants on women are immodest. But a girl in a skirt, even an ankle length skirt, will get more attention from guys than if she were wearing jeans. And some of these guys will have “easier access” thoughts in their minds.

Please… What normal man would want to show his underwear on purpose? That’s a juvenile rebel fashion that doesn’t get a following in polite company. By contrast, in adult settings, male underwear in the open is not generally found acceptable, whereas women not wearing belts, but wearing low-riding trousers, to the point that underwear shows plentifully, is considered normal.

I’m sure some people will disagree with me, but just based on the dress codes that high school enforce, it is obvious that this is true.

If a school allows underwear in plain sight but no spaghetting straps, that’s just weird.

Mainly, to me, the rules of modesty really are one of the double standards.

Possible. But please note that men don’t get the same results from exposing skin than women do. Next, please note that men are generally expected to have their shoulders covered. Further, please note that ladies clothes which omit to cover something generally do it for a flirtacious purpose, if not necessarily a sexual one. Flirtaciousness will not generally be well-received in a school setting or a professional one.

You bring up a good point about men being expected to have their shoulders covered. I can wear a tank top to work (although I’ve never worn spaghetti straps to work), but my male co-worker wore a tank top to work and was asked to cover up.

I don’t think anyone here is saying that burkas should be the law of the land, as they are in Muslim countries. BUT, there is a HUGE area in between that and things that we are talking about here. You don’t have to wear as little as possible just because it’s summer. You can wear a shirt with short sleeves and shorts that cover at least the top half of your thighs, and be dressed both modestly and appropriately for the weather. You can go swimming in a suit that is not low cut in the bust or back, and not cut so high on the hips that your ribs show, as well as 90% of your behind.

None of this is unreasonable, and it maintains modesty. Why does this have to be an either/or thing? There are plenty of things you can wear that are fashionable, cool, and still modest. You don’t have dress either like a 1700 era matron or a streetwalker. The idea is not to go to one extreme or the other.

Why don’t women have enough respect for themselves anymore to cover up? Why do they feel they have to expose every inch of their bodies for every man they pass to see? Why is nothing considered sacred anymore? Your husband should be the only man to see that much of your body. “Giving it away for free” is not the way to get the kind of attention any woman should want. :frowning: I find it so so sad that women are portraying themselves in this way, when they should realize they are children of God, and constantly in His presence.

Just to clafify, I will quote The Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2521 Purity requires modesty, an integral part of temperance. 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. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity.

2522 Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. 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.

2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

I wear spaghetti straps sometimes…never to work or to mass…but to the grocery store, just around the house, getting the mail…to bbq’s with family…etc…I would like to think I dress with class–and to not draw attention to myself in any way that would appear immodest. I don’t consider spaghetti straps to be immodest, but I don’t think they belong in church…or tank tops. That’s just me.

You like these topics, huh, Litcrit?:smiley:

Just to clarify, I wear one piece bathing suits, and I don’t wear spaghetti straps. I just don’t like the out and out villianizing of woman I am seeing in this thread. The world does not begin and end with America and America’s standards of decency. A lot of Americans think breastfeeding is indecent; doesn’t make it so. As Litcrit and other non-Americans have shown, modesty IS different depending on the culture. Let us remember God gave Adam and Eve FIG LEAVES…and the fig leaf probably left Eve’s top exposed. :wink:

Nudity in and of itself is not immodest. Or are we to believe that John Paul erred in having the fig leaves removed from Michaelango’s painting? It is in how you CARRY yourself much more than anything. A woman could be in an a-line, to the floor, long sleeve dress and still be a “sex kitten.” Or she could be topless and be pure.

I can understand to a certain extent a string bikini being immodest. I can NOT understand spaghetti straps in and of themselves being immodest.

I hate spaghetti straps, and not because a shoulder is so exciting. It’s because they let you get burned, then dig like saw cord right into the heart of the burn. I guess if anyone thinks they’re “naughty” it’s because it seems so unlikely anyone’s wearing them for comfort. I see them as a cruel garment myself.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit