What's on your mind?

[bèlla]

The explanation on the Internet seems to be "because they went to college and became liberals".

I can't speak for others on why someone seems to be a "good person" before college, then turns into a liberal while at college. I think if someone decides to adopt those beliefs, were they a good person before?

That's what I've seen but I thought I'd pose the question here. I went to college as did my daughter and we returned levelheaded. But we weren't finding ourselves and are less impressionable. Maybe that's part of it? I remember when she went up to Penn for a debate event and said there were barf bags on the shuttle bus. I told her that wasn't the place for her and she agreed.

Another thing - it irks me when men get upset about these kinds of appearances. They're hung up on a woman's appearance and a woman must have certain beauty standards or they're considered undateable. What happened to looking at someone's insides and finding beauty there?

I'm probably the worst person to ask and it's not because of the fashion stuff. It's because I've heard and seen the truth up close and prefer to be honest. And I'm not distinguishing between saved and unsaved men in my response. Christian men are less likely to be as blunt but that doesn't mean they don't have similar opinions.

A man will always gauge a woman's appearance in ways we don't. Attractiveness matters to them and the degree of importance differs. But there some relative givens overall. A woman's physical stature is more reflective of him than the reverse. Much like a man's success shines favorably on a woman.

For the majority viewing those images it looks like sabotage. To them, they've marred their loveliness and chosen something otherwise in its place. Men aren't oblivious to a woman's innards but he doesn't ignore the packaging the way a woman might. He wants to appreciate her beauty and celebrate it.

Physique can't be separated from the whole. Most aren't expecting someone gorgeous. But softness, femininity and attentiveness to her health are usually a must. There's some wiggle room on weight with a strong caveat. If she's addressing the problem and needs support many will help. But if she believes she's okay as is and wants him to compromise the majority won't.

I've heard every argument against that truth from frustrated women and always remind them they're asking him to change while saying they won't. Body positivity has convinced some they can skirt tradition and be okay. Some can get away with it with similar partners but most will not. The same applies to sexual liberties. Men like sweetness not notches. And they've developed unflattering terms in response.

He'll always want you soft, feminine, attractive and kind hearted. It speaks to his masculinity and arouses his protection. The question isn't whether it's right or wrong but what we're willing to accept. Whenever we color outside the lines there's a price. That might mean less opportunities or a lengthier wait. I think there's easier battles but we must choose for ourselves.

~bella

 

[bèlla]

Now it's more commonplace for teen boys to wear a skirt and get a compliment on it.

That's a nod to androgyny and its being pushed by the industry and entertainment. It's nearly a must for men in the public eye to don one. It's part of the gender agenda as are the arguments about what a woman is or isn't.

I wouldn't let my son wear a skirt or support a man doing the same. It veers too close to sexuality for my tastes and that's honestly the point. And there's the obvious offenses against the Lord.

 

[LoveDivine]

I think it's only normal for men and women to have preferences when it comes to appearance of the opposite gender. We can dress and style ourselves how we prefer, but we have to accept that others may not be attracted to our look.

 

[bèlla]

Just saw this. Wow.

Survey: 42% of Gen Z Diagnosed With a Mental Health Condition

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

That's a nod to androgyny and its being pushed by the industry and entertainment. It's nearly a must for men in the public eye to don one. It's part of the gender agenda as are the arguments about what a woman is or isn't.

I wouldn't let my son wear a skirt or support a man doing the same. It veers too close to sexuality for my tastes and that's honestly the point. And there's the obvious offenses against the Lord.

Personally I'm against wearing skirts and I think it's rather ridiculous to wear one in order to make a statement. If I ever wore one I would deservedly never hear the end of it from my brother and if I'm honest, given my Gaul-like appearance and the hair on my legs, I might be arrested. With that being said, there is a bit of nuance lacking here sorry Bella. I don't know if you are familiar with Pacific islanders but skirts are commonplace within the culture. And I don't know if you've seen some of their blokes but the last thing anyone would do is say that their skirt is girly to their face. Given that I grew up Adventist and had been involved in the Adventist denomination for a while, in which here in NSW Pacific islanders are seemingly becoming the majority, I personally have had more exposure to skirted men (saying that made me laugh irl). The current Pastor (who is a Pacific Islander) in the rural town I grew up in has even worn his skirt on occasion. I don't think that all of it is a nod to androgyny, I think that the increasing globalisation plays a massive part and that some younger blokes see other cultures who wear skirts and think "if they can, why can't I?" and in trying to make themselves stand out from those around them they adopt what they think is a harmless fashion choice, even though within our culture it is not harmless or Biblical. Also irony and purposefully being an idiot can play a part, as evidenced by the pandemic of the combination of mo's and mullets (google Ryan Papenhuyzen) and the abominable "skullet" (google that too) here in Aus. With that being said, wearing a skirt in a Western Cultural context definitely does play with androgyny. I personally agree with Epictetus. He made the point that both men and women should exhibit and emphasise the characteristics of their design. I also believe Paul affirms this reasoning, thereby making it Biblical, when he says that long hair is a shame to men.

I do agree however with the spirit of your point, as the removal of what defines man and woman is a result of a secular worldview. Without a transcendent source for morality (God) there exists no firm moral boundaries and within the default materialism/naturalism of secular society there exists no justification to draw lines between anything that's not physical. For not even logical laws truly exist as truth within their paradigms. Removing God as the basis for why things are means that the basis for what things are falls upon the individual. Doubly so when it comes to the metaphysical.

He'll always want you soft, feminine, attractive and kind hearted. It speaks to his masculinity and arouses his protection.

Also just quickly, this isn't true. Men on average aren't in touch with their desires to this extent and to be honest most are just happy with the fact that you're a woman and don't think past that fact. If however someone is truly ruminating on what they want, I think they on average will desire that which is more in line with their own interests. If a bloke is set on boating, camping and fishing then somebody who is adventurous and shares those characteristics would probably be more attractive to them. For example, there are many women here in Aus who are really outdoorsy and the tom-boy traits would probably be on average more desirable for some of the blokes I know. Also men don't long to protect women; yes it's a latent instinct we have that's displayed in popular media, however, it's not something that we pine for or even really think about.

God bless .

P.s. Regarding the skirt point, kilts are a great example of what is technically a manly skirt lol. However, someone whose culture permits wearing kilts as a manly skirt may still view skirts in general as a woman's thing. The same way trousers/pants were viewed as a barbarian thing to the Romans and were even banned by law at one point by the Emperor Honorius. A lot of what makes something unbiblical in terms of clothing is based upon the culture, even though the core Biblical truths remain the same. That being, going against God and His will for man and woman is sin and our clothing should reflect His design for us; including other aspects like dressing modestly (for both men and women). Whether that's represented by wearing skirts in our Western culture or by some other means in another culture, our clothing needs to reflect God's righteousness and His will. Ultimately the culture and what is appropriate should be conformed to God and His will, however there are little things which make it different in every culture. While some cultures make a fuss over women wearing trousers because they're seen as a man thing (that's a real thing btw), they don't even think twice about it in a frigid climate.

Edit: Sorry for the copious additions and edits, the topic of clothing is incredibly nuanced.

 

[bèlla]

With that being said, there is a bit of nuance lacking here sorry Bella. I don't know if you are familiar with Pacific islanders but skirts are commonplace within the culture.

I specifically noted it was required of men in the public space. You can confirm this by visiting The Vigilant Citizen website. He does a monthly feature with images and symbols and always has some with men cross dressing and their relation to the agenda which is what he addresses. He's also a believer and has reported on American culture for 14 years.

Androgynous clothing isn't a fad. Most fashion schools teach the subject and it's a formal concentration. What you described is cultural this isn't the same. It's debasing, meant to humiliate and blur gender lines. Little Nas X is a good example.

..

If a bloke is set on boating, camping and fishing then somebody who is adventurous and shares those characteristics would probably be more attractive to them. For example, there are many women here in Aus who are really outdoorsy and the tom-boy traits would probably be on average more desirable for some of the blokes I know. Also men don't long to protect women; yes it's a latent instinct we have that's displayed in popular media, however, it's not something that we pine for or even really think about.

But the question was posed by someone in the US. Our cultures are different and most of those conversations are fueled by men in America. They're the most outspoken. There's a reason we have a trad movement and related offshoots. It's a backlash against marital demise, gender wars, wokeism, familial dysfunction, societal decay and other issues.

Soft doesn't mean a barbie doll. You can be feminine and active. @sampa runs and she also shares things that demonstrate her femininity. It comes in different guises.

More importantly, I knew what she meant and wanted to provide a well rounded response rather than focus on one aspect at the expense of others. A hill is easier to climb when low hanging fruit is near. Small wins give us confidence to tackle the harder stuff.

~bella

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

But the question was posed by someone in the US. Our cultures are different and most of those conversations are fueled by men in America. They're the most outspoken. There's a reason we have a trad movement and related offshoots. It's a backlash against marital demise, gender wars, wokeism, familial dysfunction, societal decay and other issues.

Our cultures overlap and what occurs within America definitely impacts my culture too, so just because the cultures differ in some aspects it does not mean that it invalidates the points I made. The pastor I mentioned wore his skirt in a public place and it clashed with our western views as skirts here are seen as distinctly feminine, same as yours. But should he be forced to partake in our culture when his views on clothing have been inherited from his upbringing and are not seen as feminine? This issue impacts more than just America and even if the question was posed by someone in the US it still has relevance to my culture too, given that we're so very similar.

Also given that this issue is Theological in nature and talks about the desires of men and skirts (or gendered clothing) in general, regardless of culture, it's not specific to the US.

Edit: Added clarification

 

[sampa]

.

 

[bèlla]

Our cultures overlap and what occurs within America definitely impacts my culture too, so just because the cultures differ in some aspects it does not mean that it invalidates the points I made. The pastor I mentioned wore his skirt in a public place and it clashed with our western views as skirts here are seen as distinctly feminine, same as yours. But should he be forced to partake in our culture when his views on clothing have been inherited from his upbringing and are not seen as feminine?

My post was concerning the striking differences in the women's appearances and how they're perceived. Under no circumstances would I ever initiate a discussion considering the appropriateness of men in women's clothing. I responded to a comment on men in skirts and why we're seeing it more frequently in America from a professional standpoint and personal note on how I'd respond in that instance.

~bella

 

[bèlla]

To be truthful though, that's how I changed. My appearance was that I wanted to be open to a wider market. And so I started running in 2020 with makeup and earrings. Friends were amazed that I could run in rain mascara free. As I've gotten older, the skin has a lot more unevenness and I've always had slight distractions with my appearance since a young age. I have common polish German features that can be found in this area. These features are attractive though to certain people and some if it could be with familiarity. The closest femininity I can probably attain is Cameron Diaz and Drew Barrymore in the way I carry myself. I don't have that southern sweetness I'd like to have. It doesn't mean I can't try.

There's nothing wrong with that and I included a photo for those reasons. Femininity isn't one-size fits all. While it's depicted in certain guises in society that doesn't invalidate the existence of others. Women are discovering philosophies that address our nuances and aren't wholly reliant on imagery from the fashion and entertainment industry. We're seeing greater diversity and that's important. We don't look the same nor are we built identically.

Enjoy your experiments.

~bella

 

[peaceful-forest]

That's what I've seen but I thought I'd pose the question here. I went to college as did my daughter and we returned levelheaded. But we weren't finding ourselves and are less impressionable. Maybe that's part of it? I remember when she went up to Penn for a debate event and said there were barf bags on the shuttle bus. I told her that wasn't the place for her and she agreed.

I also went to college. Before college, I was a Democrat (but I did not agree with all the beliefs; it was something my parents did and I had always considered them right) and I was not saved. When I was at college, God was nice enough to me to lead me to His Son for salvation and I was eventually saved. I did become a Republican shortly after entering college. But I consider myself apolitical now and have no interest in it.

So it is hard for me to understand when I hear older people talk about how their teen child or teen grandchild was such a good person, went to church, then all the sudden they went to college and became the opposite. In high school, I certainly learned about how Communism was a bad thing, but that was when George W. Bush was President.

 

[bèlla]

I also went to college. Before college, I was a Democrat (but I did not agree with all the beliefs; it was something my parents did and I had always considered them right) and I was not saved. When I was at college, God was nice enough to me to lead me to His Son for salvation and I was eventually saved. I did become a Republican shortly after entering college. But I consider myself apolitical now and have no interest in it.

Faith and character are kinsmen. You may lack the former and manage for a time because character is God breathed. That's why morality can keep you afloat until you know the truth. It's a safety net of sorts.

So it is hard for me to understand when I hear older people talk about how their teen child or teen grandchild was such a good person, went to church, then all the sudden they went to college and became the opposite. In high school, I certainly learned about how Communism was a bad thing, but that was when George W. Bush was President.

They're deceiving themselves and put their faith in familiarity rather than conditioning. You can bring a pet home but it won't behave as you want without instruction. It must be trained and given your standard to comply. Taking it for a walk won't do it nor will a dog park.

Whatever you pour in is what you get in return and the majority occurs in formative years. Primarily between three and twelve. That's the sweet spot and where the foundation is laid. That's where the lessons on faith and familial ethos should be imposed. They're like sponges and more susceptible. It's more likely to stick.

If the we isn't established there's nothing to counter what they see and hear elsewhere. One Sunday a week isn't enough. They spend 30+ hours in school every week. They need daily instruction and weekly reinforcements. But if the church is the lone voice on the Lord it shouldn't surprise them when they go astray. The root is weak if it exists. A lot of them are religious.

I've been a fly on the wall around youth and college groups. They didn't know I was a parent because of my age and didn't censor themselves. For the most part, they sound as worldly as the rest. I wouldn't know they were believers. My daughter left youth group because it wasn't enough. She was hungry and couldn't be fed and went to an adult small group as a teen with her favorite pastor.

It went on for a month before they brought her to the women's ministry and permitted her to stay if I was present because she was underage. She went to Precepts too. But we did things at home. We study and pray together and watch teachings and have deep discussions.

Faith isn't solitary in our home or situational. Everything she's learning she's discovering its application for the next season. We still look at movies and decode them together. Pointing out mistakes and lessons and applying a Christian perspective.

Parents are more hands-off today. They're relying on other things for instruction and they have more secular influences too. If you spend hours on the phone and television you don't have enough Ruach to refute it. One hundred hours in school plus all the rest is a recipe for disaster. You'll have a problem eventually.

I posted this a week ago. This is how we've changed.

In virtually all Victorian households, Sunday or the Sabbath was set aside as a day of worship, rest, and family time. Victorian families were devoted to their Sunday rituals: morning church services followed by the week’s most elaborate dinner, to which the entire extended family was invited, followed by afternoons set aside for wholesome family recreational pursuits ending with evening Bible readings and the singing of hymns.

It was considered one of Mother’s responsibilities to come up with spiritually uplifting and morally edifying pastimes for the entire family. In fact, so widespread was this typical observance of the Sabbath that many women’s periodicals such as Good Housekeeping regularly included columns containing Sabbath activity ideas for mothers who were expected to set aside Sundays for character building and the religious training of children.

I started reading her work when I was younger. I like Bennett's book of virtues and we did character themes every year. I'd choose a topic and address it throughout the year and build on the themes as she matured. She had 10 commandments too. Ten rules she couldn't transgress in our home. Like no running away. no homosexuality, no addictions and so on. I wasn't politically correct. I did the same with suitors, friends, school, work, etc. Everything had a standard.

Parents are more permissive now. Their kids see more and most of it isn't age appropriate. It's important to preserve a child's innocence for the reasons shared. When they encounter adult things without the maturity the other possesses it leaves a seed. The soil is fertile when you're young. The richest it will ever be naturally. Whatever you plant will grow.

If you've ever felt soil that's rich and moist and brimming with life that's what it's like. Children are the same.

~bella

 

[peaceful-forest]

They're deceiving themselves and put their faith in familiarity rather than conditioning...

Yes, I agree that they are deceiving themselves. When that situation happens, I think of the part in 1 John about how there were people falling away from church and practicing ungodliness. The Christians were confused about what was happening and John told them it was because they weren't saved to begin with.

..Whatever you pour in is what you get in return and the majority occurs in formative years. Primarily between three and twelve. That's the sweet spot and where the foundation is laid. That's where the lessons on faith and familial ethos should be imposed. They're like sponges and more susceptible. It's more likely to stick.

If the we isn't established there's nothing to counter what they see and hear elsewhere. One Sunday a week isn't enough. They spend 30+ hours in school every week. They need daily instruction and weekly reinforcements. But if the church is the lone voice on the Lord it shouldn't surprise them when they go astray. The root is weak if it exists...

So true. This is what happened to me. My dad was mostly uninvolved in raising me. My mom dumped the responsibility on church to teach me about Jesus and the Bible. It did not work out like she thought it would.

Then she had sent me to public secular schools instead of Christian schools. I learned many godless things there.

My mom just didn't get it. She seriously thought she could raise a good, Christian child without doing her part by raising me in Christ. And it backfired. The same problem happened concerning the sex talk growing up - she thought she could raise a "good girl" without the sex talk and without talking about God's design for sex. That also backfired on her.

 

[SarahsKnight]

Actually my sleeping is still off due to the way my work schedule was. So I think it safer to spend this day readjusting to being awake during typical day hours, and begin my trip on Friday or Saturday instead. But may i still ask for your prayers for my sake, for whenever I do finally begin this lengthy road trip.

Went 11 hours' distance today, stopping just a little south of Des Moines. You know, I think today might be the first day I ever set foot into Missouri or Iowa.

 

[sampa]

Just saw this. Wow.

Survey: 42% of Gen Z Diagnosed With a Mental Health Condition

My thoughts, it's always been there from prior generations, just not diagnosed, talked about and coping mechanisms were far different then. I would have quite a few labels as a teen trying f I was today. I was a definite mess, I expressed my mental state through creative dress, abstract linguistics, surrounding myself with boys, writing poetry and never letting others figure me out. It was only once I moved out the process of healing and self compensation for the areas I lacked could begin. No psychologist ever helped me. Only one free call through my work, and after the Holy Spirit told me "I am your counselor". It was like a light switch. I still have struggles, but far from my teens.

By the way there was one diagnosis at 19 I saw in a report that makes no sense to me today. I'm think they just threw a label on the report because of an action I took without having a history with me.

Went 11 hours' distance today, stopping just a little south of Des Moines. You know, I think today might be the first day I ever set foot into Missouri or Iowa.

Blessings and protection in your travels. I also pray it's a good time to think and pray.

 

[bèlla]

Yes, I agree that they are deceiving themselves. When that situation happens, I think of the part in 1 John about how there were people falling away from church and practicing ungodliness. The Christians were confused about what was happening and John told them it was because they weren't saved to begin with.

I've been in churches and synagogues and learned a lot. Oftentimes we're told what's true but it's important to weigh those teachings against our thoughts and beliefs and have opportunities to scrutinize our feelings. That's how it's processed. But it's equally important not to have so much instruction that you never learn how to hear from God. You don't know when He's speaking or how to get a word.

This may sound odd but I've come to realize I need my own place of worship. Something built from the ground up that implements the things I've learned and others you can't get elsewhere. A place where prayer warriors are birthed as children. You pour through scripture line by line. Greek and Hebrew are taught. God is not on the clock and breaking bread is our supper.

I want to see gifts and talents in action. All of them. There's a dearth of discernment in the church. He hasn't ceased to bestow it. But maybe we aren't listening. I want deep teachings and true community. Life preparation for marriage, college and careers. A place that prepares you for friendships, relationships and parenting. Lessons on personal development, communication, etiquette and more.

We go to the world for everything and wonder why we don't know His standard.

My mom just didn't get it. She seriously thought she could raise a good, Christian child without doing her part by raising me in Christ. And it backfired. The same problem happened concerning the sex talk growing up - she thought she could raise a "good girl" without the sex talk and without talking about God's design for sex. That also backfired on her.

She wasn't alone in that. My grandparents were involved but never prepared them for marriage. It wasn't discussed. My mother was the same. My father was less permissive but he didn't lead by example. They were good at what they knew but there were holes. I read voraciously growing up and knew I wasn't hearing everything.

But the difference between my approach and theirs is examination. I tore my childhood apart and scrutinized my experiences and their instruction. I kept what worked and retooled it and discarded the rest so I wouldn't repeat their mistakes.

My daughter and I are a lot and night and day. She got everything I didn't and then some. I need to put it down and I'll probably do it when she's married and do yearly precepts on marriage and parenting as a handbook of sorts she can add to and hope her children follow suit.

That's how we're bettered. We pass on our knowledge so the next is more enlightened. If you want to build strong Christians you need greater investment and out of the box approaches. When you tie your legacy to the Lord nothing's impossible.

~bella

 

[bèlla]

My thoughts, it's always been there from prior generations, just not diagnosed, talked about and coping mechanisms were far different then. I would have quite a few labels as a teen trying f I was today. I was a definite mess, I expressed my mental state through creative dress, abstract linguistics, surrounding myself with boys, writing poetry and never letting others figure me out.

I never believed in labels and still don't. I felt we were too complex to define ourselves with a single word or statement. We're more like cornucopias and kaleidoscopes. My parents were countercultural in a lot of ways. It worked for us because we're outgoing extroverts. We might have struggled otherwise. They celebrated our differences and encouraged them. If someone didn't like us they weren't bothered and expected us to feel the same and we did. We weren't sensitive and our feelings weren't easily hurt.

They were believers but that was their mindset and my family is the same. They weren't emotional but very expressive in respect to love and acts of kindness and generosity. We knew we belonged and didn't look for it elsewhere. I saw a lot growing up. Punk, goth, etc. I talked to them. Some were pretty cool. But we didn't hangout. My friends were their own person. We had a lot in common but we weren't identical. I befriended boys and we hung out in groups. But they weren't my bff's or running buddies. Boys were for coupling or friendship. But never as close as girls.

and after the Holy Spirit told me "I am your counselor". It was like a light switch. I still have struggles, but far from my teens.

By the way there was one diagnosis at 19 I saw in a report that makes no sense to me today. I'm think they just threw a label on the report because of an action I took without having a history with me.

I'm glad to hear that. It's better to begin with the Lord and supplement as He instructs. I have mixed thoughts about therapy and the medical field as a whole. I think God should be our starting point and guide us to the professionals He's assigned for the other stuff.

I wouldn't let them diddle with my head and I've encountered my share. Doing something professionally doesn't mean you've got your act together. Most of them are equally challenged in different ways.

~bella

 

[sampa]

We're more like cornucopias and kaleidoscopes. My parents were countercultural in a lot of ways. It worked for us because we're outgoing extroverts. We might have struggled otherwise. They celebrated our differences and encouraged them. If someone didn't like us they weren't bothered and

Sounds like a good upbringing!
And agreed, I was appalled at some of the advice or even dream interpretation with different psychologist. The holy Spirit is amazing. Psychology does have its place, but it was not where the Lord wanted me. Only once did Ieet an announced counselor, but my insurance didn't cover her.

 

[bèlla]

And agreed, I was appalled at some of the advice or even dream interpretation with different psychologist. The holy Spirit is amazing. Psychology does have its place, but it was not where the Lord wanted me. Only once did Ieet an announced counselor, but my insurance didn't cover her.

Only the Lord can interpret dreams. My aunt tries to do it and He allowed her to weigh in once and made me write down what she said verbatim and provided the interpretation a year later. I wrote it down and told her what He said. She was wrong of course. ;-)

Psychologists know God exists. The discipline is man's attempt to solve problems without Him.

I address everything spiritually. You pray it in or pray it out. You want heaven working on your behalf and opposing the things in your path. Children know what adults forget and He advised us to be like them. They ask for everything.

Next time you have a moment suspend your knowledge for an hour. Ask for His advice on everything as you go about your day and see what happens.

~bella

 

[GodDoesListen55]

I wonder if anyone is actually proud of me and not just saying it.