A Modesty Question

[AnnoDomini]

Difficulty treating women with respect is an expression of his personality.

Difficulty in 'keeping his thoughts pure'. (Though there were a few boys commenting on the rebelution's modesty survey who admitted to respecting 'immodest women' less than those who met their standards of modesty.)

Basically my family is saying 'it's being considerate of men to refrain from wearing garments that are generally found to be 'sexy' or showing/emphasizing parts popularly appealing to men. We women should be considerate of our brothers in Christ and not tempt them more than we have to by just existing'.

I still don't know quite what to say to this.

[StarrieEyedKat]

Do men have the same responsibility towards women? Should they refrain from showing off well sculpted arms, legs or chests, lest we be defrauded by them? Because damn, a man's finely built arms can send me into a dirty minded swoon more often than not.

Also, no matter what your mother or sister may say, it is still not a woman's responsibility to dress in a way that "protects" the man. Besides, every man is different, what one will find frumpy another will find sexy.

[AnnoDomini]

They would say, it's not our responsibility to 'protect' them, that ultimately it's up to them to control their thoughts, but that it sure is considerate of them to not wear tight/revealing clothing--and the flip side is that not doing so would be inconsiderate.

[Happy_Anabaptist]

Do men have the same responsibility towards women? Should they refrain from showing off well sculpted arms, legs or chests, lest we be defrauded by them? Because damn, a man's finely built arms can send me into a dirty minded swoon more often than not.

Also, no matter what your mother or sister may say, it is still not a woman's responsibility to dress in a way that "protects" the man. Besides, every man is different, what one will find frumpy another will find sexy.

Yes, they do have the same responsibility.

[StarrieEyedKat]

I guess I just don't get it. I enjoy seeing people in clothing that flatters them, both male and female. I might not like seeing tons of skin, but I'm certainly not going to say people shouldn't dress that way simply to please me. One should dress for themselves and only for themselves. If skin tight tops and short skirts make you feel comfortable and good, then go for it, other people's preference should have 0 impact on how you dress.

[Shirley MacLaine]

It's taught that men's weakness is sight (so women should dress modestly) and women's weakness is touch (so that men should never touch a woman.)

Right-o, because I looooooove being touched by strange men.

[jaelh]

They would say, it's not our responsibility to 'protect' them, that ultimately it's up to them to control their thoughts, but that it sure is considerate of them to not wear tight/revealing clothing--and the flip side is that not doing so would be inconsiderate.

I think one response might be is that it's a constantly shifting game - what is modest is entirely contextual. "Not Tight/revealing" means... what, exactly? What if one man found lose clothing alluring? What is Lots of men did? What about men that find our hair alluring? Should we cover that too, out of courtesy? Who determines this particular standard? Who constitutes a reasonable judge? The very conservative man? The 'man on the street'? The teenage boy? And should be measure ourselves by the standards of the highly sexed man? The asexual? The man who is highly visually stimulated, or he that isn't stimulated by sight at all?

Anyway. You get the picture. If a Saudi man who is used to only seeing covered women says he finds women's eyes attractive and alluring, is it inconsiderate of her to not cover her eyes? And if that'd be unreasonable, why so? Your family says "tight and revealing", but if it's about what is alluring to men then it's a much (much!) more subjective than "tight and revealing". Are they willing to set their dress standards to that of the men around them, no matter what it is?

[Constance Vigilance]

Difficulty in 'keeping his thoughts pure'. (Though there were a few boys commenting on the rebelution's modesty survey who admitted to respecting 'immodest women' less than those who met their standards of modesty.)

Basically my family is saying 'it's being considerate of men to refrain from wearing garments that are generally found to be 'sexy' or showing/emphasizing parts popularly appealing to men. We women should be considerate of our brothers in Christ and not tempt them more than we have to by just existing'.

I still don't know quite what to say to this.

But why do I have to keep his thoughts pure for him? I don't.

Fundy women have to 'keep sweet' no matter what horrific conditions they're living in. No one says to fundie men "You know, maybe if you watched the children tonight/did the dishes/did the laundry for 12, it would be easier for your wife to keep her thoughts pure of sadness, despair, anger, and feeling overwhelmed". No one cares about fundie women's thoughts. They are up to fundie women to control. No one cares about lightening their incredible burden. It is just how things are and they have to deal with it. But if a fundie man sees a woman in a dress above the knee it is a STUMBLING BLOCK BEFORE HIM!!!11!!!

Fuck all of that shit, and that horrible double standard. Fuck it.

[Constance Vigilance]

Also, "women aren't stimulated by sight". Laughed forever. The music video for My Heart Will Go On came on tv last night and I was unable to function as a human the whole time Kate Winslet was on screen. I literally stopped talking mid-sentence and couldn't be reached til it was over. :D

[annalena]

I hadn't heard touch. I have heard quite a few times that thought and emotions are a woman's problem, so romance novels are a woman's porn. I think porn is a woman's porn, but whatever.

Okay, 1. I am not to control ANYONE's thoughts, for heaven's sake. People shall think whatever they want to think. As long as they think "Man, I'd really like to do her" when they see a hot girl, may it be it. Different story when those thoughts turn into actions..

2. I have read more than once that fundie girls should refrain from romance novels, so they do not expect too much of their future husband. While teen girls can be can be prone to hope for boyfriends after some movie or celeb ideal, it's really scary how these girls are being taught to basically expect nothing of all of their future husbands. Whenever I read a post in a fundie blog about „Your husband isn't the way you would like him to be?“, the bottom line is the wife needs to work on herself. I have never once read one that said: „Well, maybe... just maybe... he's an asshole.“

3. I hate, hate, hate, disgust being touched by random people.

[AnnoDomini]

The only reason that the Twilight franchise is so successful is because Jacob looks really hot without a shirt. I'm sure that it would still have some following even if he always wore a shirt or if they picked less attractive actors (Edward is pretty hot too even though he always wears a shirt and his make-up is so pale), but it wouldn't be quite as big.

Heh heh heh. If you're into Pattinson and don't mind the ashen vampire makeup, there is one part near the end of New Moon...

[Boltingmadonna]

Ditto on the hate for being randomly touched. If a man who is not in my family touches me without my permission, my first impulse is to punch him in the face. I don't do it--usually--because I am a reasonable human being with self-control. But are there one million pompous sermons out there about how men should not touch Bolting, to make it easier for her to restrain her violent impulses? No, there are not. Nobody gives a damn about making life easier for me, sob, sob. I'm just expected to control my own feelings. Imagine that.

I am unlike fundies in that I don't think it's wrong to have random sexual thoughts. In fact, it's part of the joy of life. But you keep them to yourself and don't make other people uncomfortable, duh. Fundies also think that Women Are Sex. Teh Sexxaaay is just stuck all over us like glue. And it's ebil!!!1! So it's only right for us to cover ourselves so the icky sexxayness doesn't rub off on poor innocent men. Again, I disagree. Women are not walking mobile sex units. We are people. Sex is something we do if we want, not something that is inherent in us like white on rice.

I tried to explain it to a male friend once by saying "Just because you see a hamburger on someone's plate and it looks tasty, that doesn't mean you get to pick it up and take a bite." And I am under no obligation to cover my hamburger so hungry men are not tormented by it. I get to eat it when I want and share it IF I want. And nobody would think it was "nice" of me to cover my food in public. They'd think it was nuts. And I think it's nuts to tell women to cover our bodies.

[annalena]

Hahaha :D I am actually more than tempted whenever I am really hungry and a plate with fries is carried by next to me. Just one or two, no one would notice...

[Peas n carrots]

Modesty standards are situational too. When I go swim laps, the wholesomesuits are extremely impractical. Cycling in anything but skintight clothing ( like serious road cycling) is highly impractical....I don't exactly want billowing cloth slowing me down or getting stuck in my bike's gears. The fundies would clutch their bibles if they saw what I wore when I run in the summer...it's not to be immodest, it's because it's practical and I don't want to overheat and die.

But I don't wear skin tight, minimalist clothing when I go to work. It's situational.

My other comment is modest does not mean frumpy. I have some super trendy cute outfits that would like fall within modestly guidelines that are not Jean skirts or frumpers. But why do they choose to look so frumpy?

[bananacat]

Yes, they do have the same responsibility.

Then why are men allowed to wear pants? It's like a giant arrow pointing to his crotch! Also, one of the sexiest things about anyone is their smile. Does this mean that both men and women need to hide their faces?

[Peas n carrots]

Then why are men allowed to wear pants? It's like a giant arrow pointing to his crotch! Also, one of the sexiest things about anyone is their smile. Does this mean that both men and women need to hide their faces?

Lol!

At my work there is a super hot guy who just recently was rehired after being laid off a few years ago. There is a group of us women who have the hots for him, and we are all married. But he is our eye candy, so we say. It makes the work day a bit more bearable.

We call him the Italian Stallion, as he looks like a young, hot Sylvester Stallone. And he has a super Italian name as well that rolls loft the tongue rather nicely...

Nom

[bananacat]

Modesty standards are situational too. When I go swim laps, the wholesomesuits are extremely impractical. Cycling in anything but skintight clothing ( like serious road cycling) is highly impractical....I don't exactly want billowing cloth slowing me down or getting stuck in my bike's gears. The fundies would clutch their bibles if they saw what I wore when I run in the summer...it's not to be immodest, it's because it's practical and I don't want to overheat and die.

But I don't wear skin tight, minimalist clothing when I go to work. It's situational.

My other comment is modest does not mean frumpy. I have some super trendy cute outfits that would like fall within modestly guidelines that are not Jean skirts or frumpers. But why do they choose to look so frumpy?

A big part of modesty is to use it as a tool to prevent women from having power or living full lives. Pants for women started to catch on when bicycles became popular, and the time it was it was a big outrage that women were choosing to wear pants instead of just giving up bikes and staying closer to home (much harder to go long distances when you have to walk compared to a bike). The modest clothes that fundies wear would not be considered modest in a lot of times in places. The reason that women are held to stricter standards than men is less about being sexually enticing and more about isolating them from the rest of world by making it harder for them to simply fit in. It harder for a woman to escape a horrible lifestyle when she'll stand out like a sore thumb everywhere she goes. It's also much harder to run away and hide from an abusive husband or father. And these ridiculous costumes are also meant to make them feel like the outside world is hostile towards them.

And forcing these double standards on children really limits their activities. Girls can't just play and be free when they're forced to wear dresses AND punished severely for letting anything show. And if they can't really play actively, then they might as well just cook and clean and care for siblings because they can't do much else.

[buddingmedievalist]

Modesty standards are situational too. When I go swim laps, the wholesomesuits are extremely impractical. Cycling in anything but skintight clothing ( like serious road cycling) is highly impractical....I don't exactly want billowing cloth slowing me down or getting stuck in my bike's gears. The fundies would clutch their bibles if they saw what I wore when I run in the summer...it's not to be immodest, it's because it's practical and I don't want to overheat and die.

But I don't wear skin tight, minimalist clothing when I go to work. It's situational.

My other comment is modest does not mean frumpy. I have some super trendy cute outfits that would like fall within modestly guidelines that are not Jean skirts or frumpers. But why do they choose to look so frumpy?

My parents always emphasized being dressed appropriately for the situation. Right now, I'm working as a grad TA, and because I'm not that much older than my students, I tend to wear clothes that make me look older/classroom appropriate (skirts below my knees, higher necklines, etc). So when they run into me on the street or going to my own classes and I'm in jeans and a t-shirt that's lower cut than I wear to teach, they act like I'm a different person (I literally got stopped in the stairwell going to one of the classes I'm taking the other day by a student who said "Hey! Ms. L-----! Where are you going? Cause, like, you look like a student or something". Well, yes, that would be the student part of grad student). So yes, for me, it's all about dressing for the occasion

[CynicMom]

You are only being considerate of men by dressing modestly if you assume that:

1. you can prevent them from having lustful thoughts

2. lustful thoughts are bad

The other FJingerites have done a good job of attacking #1, but what about #2? There's NOTHING wrong with thinking someone looks good! It's a natural thing that doesn't represent infidelity or sin. Also, if a guy is a bad sort who doesn't respect women unless they're dressed modestly then it's better to dress IMmodestly so you can screen these guys out.

Edited to add: 1 2 3 4 Lustful thoughts are great you know! 5 6 7 8 Cause hot guys are really great!

[kb2]

Difficulty in 'keeping his thoughts pure'. (Though there were a few boys commenting on the rebelution's modesty survey who admitted to respecting 'immodest women' less than those who met their standards of modesty.)

Basically my family is saying 'it's being considerate of men to refrain from wearing garments that are generally found to be 'sexy' or showing/emphasizing parts popularly appealing to men. We women should be considerate of our brothers in Christ and not tempt them more than we have to by just existing'.

I still don't know quite what to say to this.

I think of "keeping his thoughts pure" and "treating women with respect" as being one and the same. If he has difficulty keeping his thoughts pure, that's an issue with his personality. I mean, great if you cover up your boobs enough and it works to not turn a guy on. Other women will still be around with their boobs somewhat visible (assuming that's a problem). So this guy is having harmful thoughts no matter what you do, but they won't be against you if you "consider" him? How considerate.

ETA: I don't think that my point could "win" the argument with your family. They would just say that every woman should cover up, and when that happens men won't have bad thoughts and unicorns will fart rainbows, and don't you love rainbows so why not do your little part by covering up? Or something. I just wanted to complain some more.

[AnnoDomini]

Fundy boys are taught to become very uncomfortable at the sight of immodesty.

[Constance Vigilance]

Fundy boys are taught to become very uncomfortable at the sight of immodesty.

Sometimes when you swallow the hateful bullshit whole there are consequences. *shrug* Not my problem, not any other woman's problem.

[debrand]

Fundy boys are taught to become very uncomfortable at the sight of immodesty.

You are just going to run in circles with your family, Annno. I've had these types of conversations before and they never go anywhere. The problem isn't modesty but their overall view of women and sex. In their minds, women don't' control their own sexuality. Men do. They can sugarcoat it all they want but that is the basis of their problem. Because they think that men are sexually stimulated more easily than women(I don't agree), women must change their habits to protect men. It's the man's feelings that are important.

I wish that I knew how to change their thinking but I've discovered that people really ingrained in this type of thinking will get very negative about changing.

[O Latin]

You are only being considerate of men by dressing modestly if you assume that:

1. you can prevent them from having lustful thoughts

2. lustful thoughts are bad

The other FJingerites have done a good job of attacking #1, but what about #2? There's NOTHING wrong with thinking someone looks good! It's a natural thing that doesn't represent infidelity or sin. Also, if a guy is a bad sort who doesn't respect women unless they're dressed modestly then it's better to dress IMmodestly so you can screen these guys out.

Edited to add: 1 2 3 4 Lustful thoughts are great you know! 5 6 7 8 Cause hot guys are really great!

This is what I don't understand. Obviously if you are fundie guys chatting up girls is a problem, but in the real world, I don't see what is wrong with a guy approaching a girl he thinks is good-looking. If she's not interested or already has a boyfriend or whatever she'll make that clear and they both move on. Yes, men are responsible for their own thoughts and actions, but some of the responses here make it sound like any guy who even talks to a girl is automatically a creep.

[AnnoDomini]

Sometimes when you swallow the hateful bullshit whole there are consequences. *shrug* Not my problem, not any other woman's problem.

Yes of course. This was going back to what we were protecting the fundy boys from. Lustful/disrespectful thoughts or impulse control is a common misconception; discomfort is what women are expected to protect men from. :roll: