Just recently I read this blog http://earthtourist.org/2013/07/05/modesty-misunderstood/ by Travis Klassen. His viewpoint was not brand new to me, though it was not what I was taught growing up. The fact that it was coming from a man was new to me. The idea that a man’s lustful thoughts are the responsibility of the man, and not the women he is lusting after, is something that has come to make sense to me, but again was not how I was raised – by my parents or the church. Anytime a women has posted this viewpoint I feel like she is too often dismissed as looking for an excuse to dress “inappropriately.”
A few days after reading that blog, my devotions fell in Job – specifically Job 31. Verse 1 says, “I made a covenant with my eyes not to look lustfully at a girl.” It really stuck me that Job said he would not look lustfully at a girl, he did NOT say he would not look at a girl.
We demean men into mindless animals when we except that they could not look at an attractive woman without being reduced to something with no self control and completely bound by a sexual instinct. Can a man look at a woman and lust – yes. Can a man look at a women and not lust – yes.
We tell men to avert their eyes from women so as to avoid lustful thoughts. But what if they learned to look at women and not lust? Are they going to be attracted to some women – yes, because God made us to find certain things attractive about others but that doesn’t mean it has to go further. By all means if you are looking at a women and find yourself having lustful issues and need to “bounce your eyes” please do so. I am a woman and I have done so. I have also been guilty of lusting at times. It all depends on the self control that I use or don’t use over my own thoughts. Where am I allowing them to go? Am I looking at this attractive man as someone God made that is appealing to me but I will only allow my thoughts to think on him as a brother or am I letting my thoughts go to places they should not? Why is the expectation different for men? I don’t believe it should be.
Men are strong – in body and in spirit. They are fully capable of viewing women – even scantily clad women as sisters. I know because I have brought men with me to porn shows with www.xxxchurch.com to hand out Bibles to porn stars. They tell them that Jesus loves them and they look them in the eye to show respect and that they are more, so much more than just a physical body. Why can’t we raise our young men to do this? Why can’t we instil in men that they are more than just lustful desires that are beyond their control?
Amanda Carrasco 
Comments on: "Look At Women" (1)
I agree that men are responsible for where they let their thoughts go, totally. But Christians are also responsible, in our freedom as believers, to consider the weaknesses of our brothers and sisters and what it is that triggers them to sin. Paul talks extensively about this issue. I think Paul would acknowledge what you are saying, but I think he is also aware, as a man, that men can be weak when it comes to the eyes, and that is one of the reasons why he asks his sisters to dress as modestly as possible. Yes, if men were perfect, they should be able to look at a woman without lust, and we should encourage our culture to be one where men can look at women’s attractive features without it turning into lust. However, there should be an acknowledgement as well of the sinful nature that still exists in all of us and those things that might trigger someone into lustful thoughts.