Quote:
Originally Posted by TimV  Quote: |
I'm wondering whether it's any better to be a male in a bodybuilding show than it is for a woman to be in the swimsuit issue of Sports Illustrated. I wouldn't want my little sister, if I had one, nor my fiance, perusing those pictures.
| It's one of the differences between boys and girls. Women may find certain body types attractive, but there generally isn't the overwhelming hormonal response we guys feel when we see a skimpily clad nice looking female. And if it's immoral for bodybuilders to don those types of pants then what do you do with swimmers? | Who says it's one of the differences between boys and girls? Empirical investigation? I've read enough books on lust to know that it's not a male problem. In fact it's almost funny how some of them have made the point of pointing this out. 
Also, I'm not talking about pants, I'm talking about tiny skin-tight spandex briefs that leave little to the imagination. Normal swimsuits don't put one's package on display (sorry if that needs to be moderated). And I didn't say that it was inherently immoral. I questioned whether it's expedient to flaunt pictures on the internet, and whether you would want your daughter to see them.
__________________
Davidius
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics
This may explain the old adage about Baptists being Methodists with shoes, and Presbyterians being Baptists who can read. To round out the adage, Lutherans might qualify as Presbyterians who drink to excess, and Episcopalians as Lutherans who know when to say when. - D.G. Hart
|