GC Kelly: being feminine, fashionable, and modest

[Boogalou]

http://www.generationcedar.com/main/201 ... frump.html

In this post Kelly writes about how women can be feminine, modest, and fashionable all at the same time. Overall, I don't take much issue to the article. If that is what you are striving for in your life you go right ahead. I thought she made a good point for people striving to be "modest" in the fudamental Christian tradition when she said:

All fashions, even those that may be 60 or 70 years behind were once “modern†and therefore could be considered “worldlyâ€. Styles do not make an outfit modest or not.

Which is good. But then,

What I mean by that is, if you are living for the Lord, you’re already quite odd. And that’s OK.

Except, not really. There are about 2.3 billion Christians on this planet, a third of the earth's population, and the single largest religion in the world. This means living for the Lord is quite common and a little mundane. Even more so in the United States, and I would imagine to an even greater extent where Kelly lives. Living for the lord is so not odd that a third of the world does it.

She then goes on to say what she believes scripture says about dressing, instead of pretending she has a direct line to God, which again I think is good.

Why feminine?

Because He has made us male and female, distinctly, and if for no other reason, we should glory in that. Also, there is power in femininity, given to us by God, if we don’t balk at it. Just try it a few days and you’ll notice a difference in treatment by other people.

He didn't make everyone distinctly male and female. Going with her train of thought (that I do not subscribe to) he made people male, female, and everywhere else on a grid. Not everyone falls into a neat binary just because that would be easier and you want them to. I'm not sure what she means when she says there is power in femininity and we need to try it, but I assume she means to dress and act more femininely? I will tell you, when I interact with people that I know I am not treated any differently in pants or a skirt/dress. Maybe by random people on the street, but I don't think about those people when I get dressed. Nor should I.

Why modest?

Because Scripture commands it and a Christian, loving others as she should, would abhor the thought of being a visual stumbling block.

I should have read further before I commended Kelly. Now she is supporting rape culture and the idea that men cannot control their thoughts or actions. She either needs to give men some more credit, or not blame women for actions that are not their own.

Then she goes on to call Mennonite/Amish/FLDS (I can't really tell) dress " attention-grabbing, out-of-date and/or an attempt to mask a woman’s natural beauty". I think that this is unfair. Clothing is all relative. What would be attention grabbing in Yellowknife in January is not on a beach in Florida in July. What is out of date in downtown Toronto is not out of date in Attikokan. It's all relative. Within their own community these women aren't attention grabbing or out of date. And there is such a fine line women tread between not being a stumbling block and not masking their natural beauty. Women just can't win.

Oh and then she talks about grunge. It is modest but not fashionable. It is also not 1991.

[slickcat79]

He didn't make everyone distinctly male and female. Going with her train of thought (that I do not subscribe to) he made people male, female, and everywhere else on a grid. Not everyone falls into a neat binary just because that would be easier and you want them to. I'm not sure what she means when she says there is power in femininity and we need to try it, but I assume she means to dress and act more femininely? I will tell you, when I interact with people that I know I am not treated any differently in pants or a skirt/dress. Maybe by random people on the street, but I don't think about those people when I get dressed. Nor should I.

Even if you were going to buy the idea that god made everyone distinctly male or female, he clearly didn't intend for that difference to be detected by their clothes. Drop Kelly in Israel during biblical times, and she would certainly be attention-grabbing, even in her "feminine, modest" clothes. So how does she know her definition of appropriate clothing is what god wants?

[VooDooChild]

Just another "My way is WAY more holy than yours" post. *Yawn*

[ILoveJellybeans]

I dont see why they can say that because God made people distinctively male or female, means that women have to wear clothes that are very feminine so they dont look like men. I would imagine the basic differences we develop in puberty, like growing facial hair or boobs was what they meant.

I dont see anything wrong with people who dress in a very gender neutral way. They know their gender, and does it really matter whether you do? What are they afraid of-accidentally treating a woman like a human being? Finding someone attractive when they think theyre a woman, but theyre actually a man?

[Roycroft]

I'm not sure that everyone is as distinctly male or female as she would like to imagine. And I'm really not sure why it's such a big deal in the first place.

I don't remember where I read this, but there was a study where a woman sat in a public park with a bundled-up baby whose sex was not readily apparent. When passersby asked about the sex of the baby, she replied that she had no idea because she was only watching the baby for a few minutes as a favor to the mother. Some of the people became so upset about not knowing the baby's sex that they attempted to undress it to find out.

Some people apparently view everyone primarily through the lens of sex/gender, and I can't think of a good reason for doing that.

[treehugger]

I don't remember where I read this, but there was a study where a woman sat in a public park with a bundled-up baby whose sex was not readily apparent. When passersby asked about the sex of the baby, she replied that she had no idea because she was only watching the baby for a few minutes as a favor to the mother. Some of the people became so upset about not knowing the baby's sex that they attempted to undress it to find out.

OMG really? That's kind of depressing. Gender is just another label to slap onto people - and the problem with labels is that they lend themselves so easily to discrimination.

[Lostie]

OMG really? That's kind of depressing. Gender is just another label to slap onto people - and the problem with labels is that they lend themselves so easily to discrimination.

That is really, really disturbing.the fact that these people actually went so far as to try and undress a child that they had never met before makes it even creepier. It makes me think that these people were extreme pedophiles who wanted that information for nefarious means.

[jenny_islander]

I think it's far more likely that they considered masculinity and femininity vital information and suffered a severe cheese error when they couldn't talk about the baby's future gender role. Generally speaking, pedophiles do not attempt to get close to a stranger with a baby by trying to undress the stranger's baby. Sort of defeats the goal of being trusted IYKWIM.

[Shirley MacLaine]

Out-of-date? I wonder what she means by that. I mean, probably just 'so 80s it hurts' but that could be taken to mean no vintage at all? Kelly is so pro-thrift though.

Oh, somehow I skimmed over the bit where she's talking about Amish/Mennonite plain dress. WHATEVER, Kelly still sucks. But seriously, where does she draw the line with 'out of date' clothing?

[Effie]

Haha oh my, I gotta love the commenter who says Kelly's clothing is just as immodest as porn. Originally I thought that person was a troll, but I guess, you just never know with these people.

[MysteryHaggis]

"When in doubt, I ask my husband."

:roll:

Other than that, fairly standard oneupmanship really... I love that Amish/FLDS/delete as appropriate dress is now, apparently, too modest. Oh noez!

[Sobeknofret]

She's getting some interesting pushback on this post, that's for sure. The "modest" examples are stuff I'd wear, and I'm a pretty conservative dresser, with the exception of skirts which I dislike intensely. Her disagreeers are an interesting bunch--wonder what they consider modest?

[Izzybee]

Except, not really. There are about 2.3 billion Christians on this planet, a third of the earth's population, and the single largest religion in the world. This means living for the Lord is quite common and a little mundane. Even more so in the United States, and I would imagine to an even greater extent where Kelly lives. Living for the lord is so not odd that a third of the world does it.

Not to her standards though, I'm sure.