to look or not to look
yesterday i was parking at the Spar and a women caught my eye. she wasn't young, but she was dressed nicely. actually she was looking quite sexy for a woman older than myself. I had a second glance. and she noticed me looking.
I wasn't gawking. just galncing. but she noticed nevertheless. she looked down. carried on walking past the front of my car. looking a little self conscious.
I didn't mean to cause her to feel self-conscious, and yet I felt a little guilty. Should I be "looking" at women in that way?
And then as I drove out of the parking lot, I thought to myself, "but what she was wearing wasn't designed to hide her body. She was wearing clothes that clearly highlighted her appearance!" So then, should I feel guilty that I noticed her. Isn't that exactly what nice clothes are designed to do?
How do we balance these two values: I want to be a respectful person who doesn't embarass people by focussing on their body at the expense of what they have to say/contribute etc. I also sense that our bodies are sexual, beautiful etc... and we want them to express something attractive? I want to affirm a person who looks attractive without embarrassing them...
any thoughts?
I wasn't gawking. just galncing. but she noticed nevertheless. she looked down. carried on walking past the front of my car. looking a little self conscious.
I didn't mean to cause her to feel self-conscious, and yet I felt a little guilty. Should I be "looking" at women in that way?
And then as I drove out of the parking lot, I thought to myself, "but what she was wearing wasn't designed to hide her body. She was wearing clothes that clearly highlighted her appearance!" So then, should I feel guilty that I noticed her. Isn't that exactly what nice clothes are designed to do?
How do we balance these two values: I want to be a respectful person who doesn't embarass people by focussing on their body at the expense of what they have to say/contribute etc. I also sense that our bodies are sexual, beautiful etc... and we want them to express something attractive? I want to affirm a person who looks attractive without embarrassing them...
any thoughts?
posted by barry at
12:03 pm
subscribe to feed
7 Comments:
i'm just glad to have a woman commenting.
thanks celeste.
By
barry, at 6/09/2006 01:52:00 pm
b, if you gave her the sultry look you're giving us in your profile pic, well, then I'm not surprised she scurried away with what seemed to be embarrassment.
Did you notice any white cars with blue lights following you afterwards?
By
Aiden, at 6/12/2006 12:17:00 pm
aiden,
are you avoiding serious questions with the use of humour again? :)
By
barry, at 6/13/2006 01:34:00 pm
Skipping over the banter above...
I can't help but wonder what it says about our society that we worry about looking at a beautiful person because they feel reduced to an "object" or nothing more than a body, but we don't worry that reading a book written by someone, without ever seeing them, is reducing them to nothing more than words, or no more than a mind.
Why is it wrong to appreciate physical beauty but not wrong to appreciate mental, intellectual or artistic beauty?
Is it perhaps that we are not really comfortable in our own flesh? Do we still associate the body with sin and evil? Do we believe that sexuality, physicality and the flesh are opposed to spirituality, faith and God?
Just wondering out loud....
(PS. Celeste, your blouse looks really good on you.... ;-) )
By
John van de Laar, at 6/14/2006 01:45:00 pm
I think, DW, that there are many theologians who are taking another look at how our sexuality and our spirituality interconnect (Matthew Fox is one that I particularly like). The whole gay issue has also raised the wider question of sexual ethics in the church, which is why I welcome the debate it brings.
What I find interesting is that to a large degree sexual ethics in the Western church are not based on the Bible. Our view of sex and gender developed from the kind of sexuality that was preached by church fathers like Augustine, Luther and others. All of these viewed women negatively, viewed sex as sinful (and only necessary for procreation. Why God made procreation and sin - as in sex - so interconnected is something they all battled to understand). They created a theology which separated the body from the spirit (which has strains of Gnosticism in it, even though they would have condemned Gnosticism). Thus, prayer, worship and the spirit were good. Sex, the body and pleasure were bad.
Ultimately this reached its peak in Victorian times, when even table legs had to be covered to prevent any hint of sexuality.
And we wonder why The Da Vinci Code has captured people's imaginations with a vision of a Jesus who was actually a sexual being! The world is longing for a spirituality that is comfortable with -nay, rejoices in - the body in all its fullness, including its sexuality.
And the incarnation is, in my mind, a clear indication that God values the body - otherwise why would he have become flesh?
Again - just my thoughts. This happens to be a hobby-horse of mine, so shut me up if I get too carried away!
By
John van de Laar, at 6/17/2006 11:44:00 am
nope, john. your thoughts are very helpful here. i am coming to terms, to some extent, with the difficulty of our inherited "sexual guilt" theology. Your comments represent what I would veiw as the "good news" we need to hear.
i remember encountering a book by a woman called Sark. She wrote about getting her first vibrator and the amazing pleasure she enjoyed using it for the first time. she also regarded napping as an integral part of a healthy and balanced life.
while this kind of writing jars my history of repression, there's something about the freedom of a person like Sark which seems to reflect light and hope.
i wonder what we might write that would actually give people (us) permission to be a little more free within ourselves?
By
barry, at 6/19/2006 09:54:00 am
I've been out of the loop for a few days, but, gee, I hadn't expected this kind of response to my ramblings. It seems we've hit on an issue that is important to many of us.
I'd love to hear more specific questions around this - is this "looking" thing just a "guy" issue, or do the women among us find themselves looking at the hunks that go past in similar ways?
What is it about beauty that touches and stirs us so? And how, exactly are we stirred?
I think the normal Christian discourse around this goes something like this: To look too longingly/staringly/appreciatively at a woman who is beautiful can only come from lust. And, as Jesus said, to lust after a woman is to commit adultery with her. So, looking is bad. But, is there another way to understand this?
Certainly, from my personal perspective, it is possible to look, enjoy but not lust. I don't feel like every time I see a beautiful woman I only want to have sex with her. I do feel joy at being a witness to her beauty - in similar, but different ways to witnessing a great sunset, a beautiful bird (the feathered kind) or a great piece of art.
Perhaps there's more to what Jesus was saying than meets the eye (or the ear). Not sure if any of this makes sense - just rambling on.
Any thoughts?
BTW "Memories of Bliss" by Jo Ind is an interesting new look at sexuality from a Christian perspective - and she deals with some of these issues.
By
John van de Laar, at 7/10/2006 07:58:00 pm
Post a Comment
<< Home