Lori Alexander: 63: Teacher of Foolishness

[delphinium65]

Sensual?  Isn't that defeating the purpose of modesty in LoriLand?  

[polecat]

Oh yes, the modesty of the 1950s, lol. 

Surely Lori wouldn't complain about these nicely dressed young women? 

 

 

[SuperNova]

16 hours ago, Lgirlrocks said:

I don’t have any kids. I am not yet married. But I don’t understand a wife serving her husband before the kids. At any family even kids eat first. Mom, dad, or an older person (teenager plus), makes a plate for the younger kids and anyone who can’t make their own plate. This was my grandma when she was alive because she walked with a walker. Then adults all serve themselves. My parents always served everyone at once unless it was placed on the table then we passed the food around. 

When kids are too young to take care of themselves shouldn’t they be taken care of before the spouse? And why do wives need to serve their husbands? I get being nice and all but most men don’t want that. 

For some people it's cultural. Not that I agree with it. On my father's side, I had family members who would sit the men first, no women, no children. Every woman stood behind her man's chair in case he needed anything. When the men's meal was over, the women and children would have dinner and wait on themselves. My mom didn't cotton to that and would sit us down with the men. My father was mortified but didn't say a word.

You can see this in Fools Rush In with Selma Hayek and that guy from Friends. I recently saw it for the first time and there is a dinner scene where all the men are sitting around a table while the women serve. No one stood behind chairs though. The next scene is the women eating by themselves in the kitchen.

[Alisamer]

If everyone dressed the way Lori says she would "love", she would hate it. For one, because she herself doesn't dress that way and would be looked at as "immodest", and also because she is not happy unless there's something to complain about. That's completely ignoring the fact that her idea of utopia never actually existed.

If all women were covered neck to knees and elbows, she'd start going on about exposed ankles and wrists. And of course if everyone wore the full black burqa, she'd complain about their shoes or something.

No low cut tops - unless you're Lori. No nail polish - except when Lori is on vacation in Door County. No schooling kids outside the home - except for Lori's kids. No wearing leggings - unless you are Lori and also wearing a lumberjack shirt. No alcohol - except when Lori and Ken are out to eat for dinner. No trusting doctors - unless Lori needs a cyberknife procedure for her brain tumor. If her leghumpers would sit down for an hour or two and read back through her entire blog, they'd understand what a liar and fraud she is.

Lori is only happy when she is able to put other people down. The more she hurts and belittles people, the better she likes it. She is a deeply unpleasant, unhappy person, and I feel bad for her family who have to deal with her.

She's also really not smart.

[Frog99]

I guess Lori and her minions would have a fit if they showed up at my church on any given Sunday. I can just imagine the articles Lori would write about them and the resulting comments about confronting them, etc. 

We have a very large college age group that attends- they take up 3-4 pews typically. And they are dressed in a variety of ways- some in jeans, some in dress pants, some in skirts (sometimes quite short), and some in leggings (with or without longer shirts). But they are there- actively participating in worship, listening intently to the sermon (often taking notes), and many of them help within the various ministries.

They come as they are, with what they have. And as far as I’m concerned, that’s how we approach God.

Also- Sean Cantu, I know you are feeling jilted as your (beautiful) wife is no longer with you. And you have some need for power and control and authority (probably out of a need to restore your state of homeostasis- maybe you could sit in the pain and actually learn something). If I bothered my husband with this sort of nonsense, he would be annoyed. But then again, I married a man, not Cartman who demands authority. 

Spoiler

 

[Loveday]

36 minutes ago, polecat said:

Hell, they wore makeup on their nipples to make them more noticeable, lol. 

 

And Regency ladies dampened their already thin, light skirts so they'd cling to the legs. 

 

[Imrlgoddess]

56 minutes ago, SuperNova said:

You can see this in Fools Rush In with Selma Hayek and that guy from Friends. I recently saw it for the first time and there is a dinner scene where all the men are sitting around a table while the women serve. No one stood behind chairs though. The next scene is the women eating by themselves in the kitchen.

That's how my mom and other ladies talk about it down here.  The women would cook and serve the men at the dining table and once they were all set, the women would go eat separately in the kitchen.  One of my co-workers said they even had separate meals.  She doesn't eat gumbo because in her mind it's "a man's meal".  She said when they made gumbo, the men would eat in the dining room and the women would have their own stew or whatever in the kitchen.  

Growing up for me:  All the meals were prepared and then transferred onto serving dishes and the table was laid out.  We all sat together and served ourselves around the table, breakfast, dinner, and sometimes lunch.  For simple weekend lunch my mom make his food and bring it to him, I rarely saw my father do anything in the kitchen.  Moving from north Louisiana to south Louisiana, seeing men cook was one of the biggest shocks for me.  I grew up kind of believing men couldn't or didn't cook.  They grilled or did large outdoor type things, not Sunday dinner.  

[kmachete14]

I never get the modesty talk because unless you are wearing a burqua there's always SOMETHING that is going to reveal that yes, you are a woman, with breasts, a butt, a small waist, cute shoulders, a collarbone, neck, hair, eyes, "Dainty" toes, or whatever the taboo thing is at the moment. 

I have big boobs, so if I wear a high-neck, long dress, with no waist cinching, I look I like a potato with my whole body sticking out as a far as my boobs do. I'm sure my husband / Gothard wouldn't be "pleased" by that unfeminine appearance! 

Women that did wear dart-bras, girdles, cinched waists, heels, and swirly skirts in the 60s weren't just trying to be modest or classy. They knew they looked damn good in them!! They literally were mimicking an hour glass shape!

Looking "Lovely," "Demure," "Feminine," "youthful," etc. is just fundie speak for no skin is showing, but I can still tell you've got a hot body under there! So hypocritical. 

[ViolaSebastian]

You have to hand it to Lori to manage to get ahold of a photo of Rio de Janeiro with two blonde white ladies at the front and center, and almost exclusively white dudes surrounding them. Given her recent influx of white supremacist fans, one has to wonder if this was intentional.

[Sarah92]

Whelp I'm home sick today which sucks but it is what it is. I'm no historian but I can't really recall any era in European history that didn't involve emphasizing some part of the woman's body, at least within those wealthy enough to dress "fashionably".  Small waists, large bums, breasts etc. even in the modest Victorian era women's figures were emphasized. Lori probably thinks that men have always been such modest creatures and doesn't know what a codpiece is/was. 

[klein_roeschen]

1 hour ago, Loveday said:

And Regency ladies dampened their already thin, light skirts so they'd cling to the legs. 

 

For 19th century fashion, the regency era was pretty easy on the women. No tons of underwear and no heavy fabrics. That changed in later decades. I read somewhere that a typically outfit for an middle to upper class woman could weight up to 30 lb, with 10 lb alone on the underwear. Can you imagine wearing these on a fairly warm spring day, let alone in summer heat? And while I enjoy looking at these gorgeous period dresses, I would never wear it. Having my mobility restricted with a large hoop skirt or a bustle, no way. It's no incidence that the fashion changed greatly after the WWI, with lots of women working in men's jobs.

[livinglongerthanyou]

2 hours ago, delphinium65 said:

Sensual?  Isn't that defeating the purpose of modesty in LoriLand?  

This guy is very odd. He gives me the "it puts the lotion on its skin" type of vibe.

[older than allosaurs]

2 hours ago, Imrlgoddess said:

  Moving from north Louisiana to south Louisiana, seeing men cook was one of the biggest shocks for me.  I grew up kind of believing men couldn't or didn't cook.  They grilled or did large outdoor type things, not Sunday dinner.  

We were in Lafayette a couple of years ago, talking about local cultures with our AirB&B hosts, both of whom were from there and one of whom was Cajun. We asked what you would say to a Cajun man if you really wanted to insult him. He said #1 would be "you can't cook" and #2 would be "you can't dance." I like those priorities.

Both my husband and I used to teach at schools with substantial Coast Salish tribal populations. My husband heard two boys in a heated argument, and one's parting shot was "You can't fish!"

 

[Lgirlrocks]

What does the Bible say about modesty: 

1 Samuel 16: 7 But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”

1 Timothy 2:9 likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10 but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.

2 Peter 1:5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith iwith virtue,5 and virtue jwith knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control kwith steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness lwith brotherly affection, and brotherly affection mwith love. 8 For if these qualities6 are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or nunfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

how much should we cover according to the Bible?

Exodus 28:42 And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:

biblical modesty is about attitude not what we wear. Christians are to set themselves apart in how they dress but the Bible doesn’t say anything about the length of clothes. 

 

 

[Frog99]

Because it’s International Women’s Day, I thought it apropos to share this: https://www.amightygirl.com/blog?p=23086

 

[refugee]

5 hours ago, danvillebelle said:

Just have to share that a mutual acquaintance who is both an MD and immune-compromised stepped in to my aforementioned crunchy mama's ridiculous anti-vaxx thread and SHUT THAT SHIT DOWN WITH THE MOST EPIC MIKE DROP I'VE SEEN.  I shouted out loud YOU GO GIRL!

Carry on. 

Wish this person would visit the thread I’ve been enduring. 

[usmcmom]

Well, Lori; go ahead and dress this way. You don't have to wait for others to adhere to your sense of "modesty." Just go ahead and do it. Or is it just not that important to you? Maybe just something to bitch about? 

[Pammy]

46 minutes ago, Lgirlrocks said:

What does the Bible say about modesty: 

1 Samuel 16: 7 But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”

1 Timothy 2:9 likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, 10 but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works.

2 Peter 1:5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith iwith virtue,5 and virtue jwith knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control kwith steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness lwith brotherly affection, and brotherly affection mwith love. 8 For if these qualities6 are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or nunfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

how much should we cover according to the Bible?

Exodus 28:42 And thou shalt make them linen breeches to cover their nakedness; from the loins even unto the thighs they shall reach:

biblical modesty is about attitude not what we wear. Christians are to set themselves apart in how they dress but the Bible doesn’t say anything about the length of clothes. 

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by attitude -- but the New Testament instructions about modesty are about *wealth* and *status*. In the community of Christ, believers are forbidden to use their clothes (or how the family clothes their women) to draw attention to their class -- especially if they were of superior social status. (The cultural markers about 'who deserves more respect' were considered to interfere with the Christian mandate to respect everyone as equals -- and with the necessity of choosing church leadership by virtue, not by worldly status.)

[Lgirlrocks]

@Pammy

It’s more of a mind set and how you show yourself to others yourself. If you are flawnting the things you have that others don’t thats not modest. 

[Lisafer]

3 hours ago, kmachete14 said:

I never get the modesty talk because unless you are wearing a burqua there's always SOMETHING that is going to reveal that yes, you are a woman, with breasts, a butt, a small waist, cute shoulders, a collarbone, neck, hair, eyes, "Dainty" toes, or whatever the taboo thing is at the moment. 

And if you're in a burqa, you still might have bare feet and hands...my brother was in Afghanistan and said when they were doing talks with people in the villages, you had to be careful not to look down at the feet of the Afghani women, as it was considered very inappropriate. So I imagine a woman could still take advantage of pretty toes or fingers, possibly jewelry or henna designs depending on the situation. Or voice, body movement, etc. 

Never underestimate the ability of humans to advertise their sexual attractiveness, no matter what they're wearing! 

PS:  while checking up on some of my comments here, I found myself on a rather questionable Islamic fundamentalist site. Between that and Googling Faithful Word Baptist Church and assorted hate groups, I'm going to get myself on some kind of government list at some point...

[delphinium65]

8 minutes ago, Lgirlrocks said:

@Pammy

It’s more of a mind set and how you show yourself to others yourself. If you are flawnting the things you have that others don’t thats not modest. 

Like showing off home renovations before followers who can barely keep a roof over their heads, or bragging about only eating organic and slathering on gobs of butter in front of people who have empty refrigerators and hungry children?  Not all about thong bikinis and leggings like Lori thinks?  I am shocked, I say, SHOCKED!      

[Hisey]

4 hours ago, ViolaSebastian said:

You have to hand it to Lori to manage to get ahold of a photo of Rio de Janeiro with two blonde white ladies at the front and center, and almost exclusively white dudes surrounding them. Given her recent influx of white supremacist fans, one has to wonder if this was intentional.

I've noticed she almost never posts pictures of women of color. Doesn't it matter if they are modest? ARe they all so modest she doesn't need to reprove them? Or perhaps they are not real people to her, since she only sees them as servants, so it doesn't really matter to her?

[Lgirlrocks]

35 minutes ago, Hisey said:

I've noticed she almost never posts pictures of women of color. Doesn't it matter if they are modest? ARe they all so modest she doesn't need to reprove them? Or perhaps they are not real people to her, since she only sees them as servants, so it doesn't really matter to her?

She post babies of color to further her abortion agenda. Wonder what that says about her?

[Red Hair, Black Dress]

My parish has a number Nigerian families.  The women usually attend Mass in gorgeous ankle length dresses in beautiful bright patterned fabric, sort of like muumuus, with matching wrapped and tied headpieces.

They are beautiful and modest, But you can still tell they are women by the dress' square neckline, not low cut but definitely showing off a delicate collarbone and forearms (short sleeve dresses).

What would Lori say?  Too much neck showing? Forearms arms are defrauding? Glimpse of ankle is too too much?  Although Lori's navy deep v-neck (nearly to her waist) shirt seems perfectly fine... if you're Lori, If anyone else wore it she'd be a jezebel prostitute

[Briefly]

6 hours ago, Frog99 said:

I guess Lori and her minions would have a fit if they showed up at my church on any given Sunday. I can just imagine the articles Lori would write about them and the resulting comments about confronting them, etc. 

We have a very large college age group that attends- they take up 3-4 pews typically. And they are dressed in a variety of ways- some in jeans, some in dress pants, some in skirts (sometimes quite short), and some in leggings (with or without longer shirts). But they are there- actively participating in worship, listening intently to the sermon (often taking notes), and many of them help within the various ministries.

They come as they are, with what they have. And as far as I’m concerned, that’s how we approach God.

I like to dress nicely for Church.  I generally wear jeans and golf shirts or pull over shirts to work.  I work in an office but not a stuffy one and I frequently have to do things like clean out old files, etc., that would be impossible in a dress, skirt or even nice slacks.  So I like to wear a dress or skirt & blouse to church, and I also have a few nice cardigan type sweaters as well as some shawls I've crocheted.  Mr. Briefly usually wears a suit and tie.  And anybody else can wear what they want, because I am not the fashion police!