My clothes are church appropriate!

[whatsanenigma]

Most heterosexual guys I know would find a large expanse of exposed bosom distracting, even if it was only because they were thinking "Oh my goodness, mustn't look there!"
(snip for space)
In terms of disrespectful, however, I think that is between an individual and their particular deity.

I think this is especially disrespectful when you are dealing with a pastor of any kind, who really is supposed to be focusing on the religious ceremony, but there is also the element that catholic priests are "married to the church" and not supposed to be thinking that way at all, or even of protestant ministers who are married or in a committed relationship...and some versions of religion go so far as to say that even looking at a woman with lust is to "commit adultery in his heart".

Not that anyone giving communion would think this way on purpose but if even the smallest thought flashed through his mind, I would think it might be very guilt-inducing to someone like that. 

Overall, I don't think tank tops and etcetra are inherently disrespectful, but I do think people need to think very carefully about what they will put on display in different physical postions they might assume, such as when partaking of communion.  And when in doubt, I think people should cover up a bit.

Not that I would automatically condemn anyone who did not, or think they were deliberately upsetting the pastor on purpose, but I wish more people would think in more detail about this.

And on a slightly different note, I think another part of the problem is that so many women think that just because something is a skirt or dress, that makes it "better" for an occasion such as church than any type of pants or slacks.  But the reality is, as a PP mentioned I believe, that sometimes jeans or pants and modest shirts of some kind, are more in the line of what you want to communicate with your clothing in terms of not wanting to show random people "too much" of your body.

Sorry, rambling a bit this morning, it's time for coffee.

[dawbs]

On the flip side of this, the considerations and forethought people here would like parishioners to take would only occur to someone who is 'churched'.
It behooves churches to  be gracious and understanding to guests and not assume that people who walk through the door would know that they're being watched from 'above' (the pulpit and a physical sense, nothing metaphysical here). 

[greencat]

I'm an atheist and I still dress modestly when I have to go to a place of worship for some reason.  It's an important part of etiquette to be appropriately dressed for the occasion or venue. 

[Jocelyn]

Eh, I just don't think tank tops are disrespectful.

Or even distracting.

Well, they can be. I've had students wear tops to class that when they sat down and I stood to lecture, I could see between their breasts and see the skin of their abdomens. Typically, the girls who dressed like that had breast implants, too. (yes, I know when a student is telling everyone about her new breasts, or she leaves for vacation with a minimal bustline and returns with a voluptuous one).  Ditto for seeing whale tail and tramp stamps when they sit in their low-cut pants.
Back when I was doing amateur theater, one of the things I was taught is to never, ever, do something that could  break the concentration of your fellow cast members.  At my church, communicants kneel so that their arms rest comfortably on the altar rail, which is about knee level for the pastor. I've served as communion assistant, so I know that quite a bit can show. As celebrant and assistant, we're supposed to make eye contact with the communicant as we give them the elements...it's not an option to stare off into the distance over their heads. Personally, I'm not hormonally inclined to appreciate the view, but I can see it might be very distracting for those who are.

[Jocelyn]

I'm an atheist and I still dress modestly when I have to go to a place of worship for some reason.  It's an important part of etiquette to be appropriately dressed for the occasion or venue.

If I were invited to the Governor's Mansion, I'd choose an outfit that showed I had respect for his office. How much more should a person want to do for the Lord of the Universe? (if they so believe)
Yes, there have been days where I've said, 'God, this is the best I can do today'. I'm sure He understands, but I'm not sure He approves. As He says, 'My ways are not your ways.' So I'll err on the side of caution.

[greencat]

Err, I think you may have missed my point Jocelyn - which was that I DO NOT believe, but I still dress in an appropriate fashion when going to a place primarily intended for the conduct of religious worship ceremonies, of any kind, because it's the proper thing to do to follow the dress code.

I'm not sure the rest of your response was entirely appropriate?  The forum rules are pretty specific that discussions of religion like that are not germane to the forum.  This thread is about humans passing judgement on others, not anyone's specific or general higher powers doing so.

[Iris]

On the flip side of this, the considerations and forethought people here would like parishioners to take would only occur to someone who is 'churched'.
It behooves churches to  be gracious and understanding to guests and not assume that people who walk through the door would know that they're being watched from 'above' (the pulpit and a physical sense, nothing metaphysical here).

Of course, I would hope that it goes without saying that no-one expects people to psychically know what happens in a church service. I also hope that if people come week after week dressed in hotpants and a tank top they are nonetheless welcomed warmly - after all at least they are THERE ( which is better than me most Sundays).

My post was just addressing the idea that if you bend over in front of a person in a lowcut top they shouldn't or wouldn't be distracted. I don't think that's realistic in any situation really.

[Xandraea]

On the flip side of this, the considerations and forethought people here would like parishioners to take would only occur to someone who is 'churched'.
It behooves churches to  be gracious and understanding to guests and not assume that people who walk through the door would know that they're being watched from 'above' (the pulpit and a physical sense, nothing metaphysical here).

Of course, I would hope that it goes without saying that no-one expects people to psychically know what happens in a church service. I also hope that if people come week after week dressed in hotpants and a tank top they are nonetheless welcomed warmly - after all at least they are THERE ( which is better than me most Sundays).

My post was just addressing the idea that if you bend over in front of a person in a lowcut top they shouldn't or wouldn't be distracted. I don't think that's realistic in any situation really.

Taking this discussion out of the church for a moment, imagine a yoga studio, a (fifty-something?) overweight woman in a low-cut top whose abundant bosom reached nearly her waist while standing, revealing way more than anyone wants to see in public to begin with.  Now, imagine this woman, feet apart, in a forward bend.  Her bosom now reaches for the floor, giving the 13 yr old student behind her a full view of most of the woman's torso and bosom  (Kudos to the child for remaining silent and only expressing her disgust and embarrassment to me after class in the car.  She told me she had to keep her eyes tightly shut to avoid the view, and she didn't get the full benefit of the class because of the distraction).  Some might say "good for her" for showing up to class, even though she clearly did not equip a sports bra or even a bra that contained her at all (I believe she was in an old tank top with a built in "shelf bra", which is merely a bit of elastic around the middle, not made to support that much).  Much to the relief of the rest of the class, this woman didn't come back after that class, and if she had, dressed like that, the instructor would have had to find a discrete way to tell her about more appropriate attire.

I think this debate has less to do with the church and more to do with dressing appropriately for the occasion/venue.  I too, would much rather see someone in clean jeans and a t-shirt, than someone in a "dressy" dress that exposed any part of a body that would be covered by a swimsuit.  The angle of others' viewpoint would be a polite thing to consider as well.

[Drawberry]

I am of the strong opinion that other people's dress is not our business. If a man at church is so enthralled by a woman's breasts that is far from her problem and the man needs to deal with his inability to not ogle at the closest pair of enticing boobies like meat in a butcher shop. It does not matter how the other person is dressed, it's called self-control and we need to learn it. Someone else's body and what is covering it is not our business.

If the situation where one in which an individual was unawares of particular body parts possibly showing or being close there of it would be in the unsuspecting individuals best interests for someone to pull them aside and quietly let them know:

"Oh Francis I just wanted to let you know that your slacks where hanging low at the back when you knelt down and you might need a belt"

"Bianca I just wanted to let you know that your shirt got pulled down when you took your seat, you might need to adjust it'

 
Referring to your student's body with phrases like 'whale tail' and 'tramp stamp' is hurtful, offensive, and grossly inappropriate :\ You are not obligated to enjoy what you see but in a place titled 'etiquette hell' I feel it would be respectful to avoid addressing the general public with 'slut-shaming' monikers because you disapprove of their fashion choices.

[Mental Magpie]

I am of the strong opinion that other people's dress is not our business. If a man at church is so enthralled by a woman's breasts that is far from her problem and the man needs to deal with his inability to not ogle at the closest pair of enticing boobies like meat in a butcher shop. It does not matter how the other person is dressed, it's called self-control and we need to learn it. Someone else's body and what is covering it is not our business.

If the situation where one in which an individual was unawares of particular body parts possibly showing or being close there of it would be in the unsuspecting individuals best interests for someone to pull them aside and quietly let them know:

"Oh Francis I just wanted to let you know that your slacks where hanging low at the back when you knelt down and you might need a belt"

"Bianca I just wanted to let you know that your shirt got pulled down when you took your seat, you might need to adjust it'

 
Referring to your student's body with phrases like 'whale tail' and 'tramp stamp' is hurtful, offensive, and grossly inappropriate :\ You are not obligated to enjoy what you see but in a place titled 'etiquette hell' I feel it would be respectful to avoid addressing the general public with 'slut-shaming' monikers because you disapprove of their fashion choices.

While I agree that tramp stamp is a "slut shaming moniker", how on earth is whale tail?  It describes the shape of something showing...I'm being honest here, I don't see the connection.

[Jones]

I am of the strong opinion that other people's dress is not our business. If a man at church is so enthralled by a woman's breasts that is far from her problem and the man needs to deal with his inability to not ogle at the closest pair of enticing boobies like meat in a butcher shop. It does not matter how the other person is dressed, it's called self-control and we need to learn it. Someone else's body and what is covering it is not our business.

If the situation where one in which an individual was unawares of particular body parts possibly showing or being close there of it would be in the unsuspecting individuals best interests for someone to pull them aside and quietly let them know:

"Oh Francis I just wanted to let you know that your slacks where hanging low at the back when you knelt down and you might need a belt"

"Bianca I just wanted to let you know that your shirt got pulled down when you took your seat, you might need to adjust it'

 
Referring to your student's body with phrases like 'whale tail' and 'tramp stamp' is hurtful, offensive, and grossly inappropriate :\ You are not obligated to enjoy what you see but in a place titled 'etiquette hell' I feel it would be respectful to avoid addressing the general public with 'slut-shaming' monikers because you disapprove of their fashion choices.

While I agree that tramp stamp is a "slut shaming moniker", how on earth is whale tail?  It describes the shape of something showing...I'm being honest here, I don't see the connection.

I'm glad it's not just me who was wondering I've had both before, but the only thing "whale tale" did to me was make me feel fat.

[Yvaine]

I am of the strong opinion that other people's dress is not our business. If a man at church is so enthralled by a woman's breasts that is far from her problem and the man needs to deal with his inability to not ogle at the closest pair of enticing boobies like meat in a butcher shop. It does not matter how the other person is dressed, it's called self-control and we need to learn it. Someone else's body and what is covering it is not our business.

If the situation where one in which an individual was unawares of particular body parts possibly showing or being close there of it would be in the unsuspecting individuals best interests for someone to pull them aside and quietly let them know:

"Oh Francis I just wanted to let you know that your slacks where hanging low at the back when you knelt down and you might need a belt"

"Bianca I just wanted to let you know that your shirt got pulled down when you took your seat, you might need to adjust it'

 
Referring to your student's body with phrases like 'whale tail' and 'tramp stamp' is hurtful, offensive, and grossly inappropriate :\ You are not obligated to enjoy what you see but in a place titled 'etiquette hell' I feel it would be respectful to avoid addressing the general public with 'slut-shaming' monikers because you disapprove of their fashion choices.

While I agree that tramp stamp is a "slut shaming moniker", how on earth is whale tail?  It describes the shape of something showing...I'm being honest here, I don't see the connection.

I'm glad it's not just me who was wondering I've had both before, but the only thing "whale tale" did to me was make me feel fat.

It actually doesn't have anything to do with the size of the bum, though--it describes the shape of a style of underwear.

[Minmom3]

A whale tail is what shows when a persons low rider jeans are riding Really Low, and their thong underpants are simultaneously riding high.  What shows then is a portion of the 'waist' band and the top-most portion of the piece that goes from the front waist band, through the crotch, and up the back to the waist band.  The two pieces of clothing do NOT work together very well, and the back of the pants are pulled down by the fabric of the legs pulling down when the person sits.  Since there is no leg fabric on the thong underwear, the thong sits where it was.  They can also ride up higher than they started when the wearer repeatedly sits and rises, sits and rises, and the thong works its way up the inside of the jeans, finally 'surfacing' and staying there until great garment adjustment is done.  Because the waist band is wider than the crotch piece, and tapered, and frequently sparkly and decorated in some way, and the piece coming up from below is very narrow, it does somewhat have an appearance or shape of a whale tail breaking the surface of the ocean.  Hence the name.  It's not meant to imply fatness at all, that I've ever heard, it's JUST the appearance of the thong above the edge of the jeans. 

When my girls were in Jr and Sr high, many of their classmates 'let' their underwear (only the thongs) ride up to show that they too were cool enough to wear thong underwear, as opposed to bikini underpants, or heaven forbid, granny panties!  They were STYLIN', guys, just too fab for WORDS...  Or, so they thought.  Now that MY girls are all in their 20's, while they all wear the thongs, they all work at NOT letting them show above their pants, and they think that letting them show, or making them show - looks cheap, and unladylike.  Thong underwear, as far as I've been told, derived from the G-strings that strippers wore, so they have, among some people, a taint of that profession about them.

[Jones]

I know what it is, I was just making the joke that the word "whale" in combination with the rear end implies "fat", so it did give me the unreasonable connotation "big butt."

[Outdoor Girl]

I know what it is, I was just making the joke that the word "whale" in combination with the rear end implies "fat", so it did give me the unreasonable connotation "big butt."

And hence, why I would never be caught dead in a pair of Buffalo jeans that were uber popular about 20 years ago.  'With a butt this big, why on earth would I want to wear the word Buffalo across it?'