Fundie Fashion Test

[Sprocket]

http://www.secretkeepergirl.com/Truth_or_Bare.aspx

Fundie Fashion Test (note, it's only for girls) --

The second test reads in part: If you are in a skirt, sit in a chair with your legs crossed. Now what do you see in the mirror? Now pretend it's your Grandpa! [ew, I'd rather not!] If you see undies or lots of thigh, your shorts or skirt is too high.

[Minerva]

http://www.secretkeepergirl.com/Truth_or_Bare.aspx

Fundie Fashion Test (note, it's only for girls) --

The second test reads in part: If you are in a skirt, sit in a chair with your legs crossed. Now what do you see in the mirror? Now pretend it's your Grandpa! [ew, I'd rather not!] If you see undies or lots of thigh, your shorts or skirt is too high.

The fuck is this website? "Bellies are intoxicating"???

[kpmom]

I didn't realize until a few questions in that this was for *preteen* girls (somehow I missed the pictures). Bad enough for teens, but preteens??? Wow, way to make young girls, who are probably already worried about the coming changes in their bodies, even more self conscious.

If I had a daughter, no way would she be reading this.

[0KidsAndHappy]

"It all depends on whether God has chosen foryou to begin to grow breasts or not. Maybe you can have your mom take this test!"

:lol:

[2xx1xy1JD]

Ugggh.

The sad thing is that I would use similar tests and standards with my kids, but wouldn't ever refer to that website because the wording is so gross.

Really, the "does your belly show when you raise your hands" test IS one that I use, but I'd never in a million years talk about bellies being intoxicating or something that they need to "save" for one man. I just say that some areas are designed to be private, and it's inappropriate to expose their bellies in public. Period. It has nothing to do with how attractive a body part is - my son isn't going shirtless either unless he's at a pool, and I don't think that men with hairy potbellies are particularly "intoxicating" (although some may be intoxicated). I also teach that their bodies are for THEM - not for a future man.

No, I don't need them to visualize their grandfathers - who are decent men - as pervs looking up their skirts.

I just failed the tight shirt test - although to be fair, I wear tight shells underneath jackets for court. The "girls" are not small and a loose top would look like a tent.

[currywurst]

I looked at that website. Maybe I am just not as perverted as your typical fundie, but I do not see anything immodest about a prepubescent girl exposing part of her belly or even her undies. She's a little girl! Heck, when I was a little girl I used to run around our property without a shirt on all the time. Who cares? I was a LITTLE GIRL.

[ellerigby]

If this site was for teens, it would still be pretty gross, but the fact that it's for preteens!??! The pictures of the girls on this site are sooooo young! Like the previous poster said, some of the standards are fine (such as no belly shirts or visible underwear in public), but the site is horribly worded and the reasoning behind the standards is awful!

[freejoytoo]

It disgusts me that this is aimed at preteens. I don't think it would be much better if it was for teenagers but you shouldn't be telling eleven-year-olds that they are immodest and might 'intoxicate' men with their bellies. Yuck. And double yuck at it being 'reserved for your husband'.

[DarkAnts]

Ugggh.

The sad thing is that I would use similar tests and standards with my kids, but wouldn't ever refer to that website because the wording is so gross.

Really, the "does your belly show when you raise your hands" test IS one that I use, but I'd never in a million years talk about bellies being intoxicating or something that they need to "save" for one man. I just say that some areas are designed to be private, and it's inappropriate to expose their bellies in public. Period. It has nothing to do with how attractive a body part is - my son isn't going shirtless either unless he's at a pool, and I don't think that men with hairy potbellies are particularly "intoxicating" (although some may be intoxicated). I also teach that their bodies are for THEM - not for a future man.

No, I don't need them to visualize their grandfathers - who are decent men - as pervs looking up their skirts.

I just failed the tight shirt test - although to be fair, I wear tight shells underneath jackets for court. The "girls" are not small and a loose top would look like a tent.

Agreed, I think many parents use similar tests. Their wording about men is ridiculous. They make it sound like all men are perverts that want to molest young girls. I am sorry, but I dont see how that will help girls create positive body images.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I looked at that website. Maybe I am just not as perverted as your typical fundie, but I do not see anything immodest about a prepubescent girl exposing part of her belly or even her undies. She's a little girl! Heck, when I was a little girl I used to run around our property without a shirt on all the time. Who cares? I was a LITTLE GIRL.

In our family, we decided to put certain standards in place WITHOUT regard to whether there was anything to show. I made it clear to the kids that these were OUR house rules (and in some cases, school rules), and that other families could legitimately draw the line elsewhere.

My thinking was that I wanted to have the standards in place BEFORE there was any issue so that (1) they would always been used to the rules by the time it mattered, and (2) so that puberty - already an awkward time - wasn't associated with even more weirdness and sudden restrictions. I didn't want to say Girl 1, who is skinny, could show her belly, but Girl 2, who is plumper, could not. I didn't want to say that Girl 1, who was flat, could wear tank tops but Girl 2, who started filling out when she was only 5, could not. I don't care about babies and toddlers, but once my kids were old enough to dress themselves, we used some guidelines.

I also don't tend to use the word "modest". It's just appropriate or inappropriate, and they also learn that the setting matters.

[Sola]

The fuck is this website? "Bellies are intoxicating"???

I am pretty sure that the sight of my belly, complete with stretch marks and various surgery scars, is anything BUT intoxicating!

[takers401]

The wording is horrible (no, I don't care to think about my dead Grandpa looking at my crotch, thankyouverymuch!) but I think that the intent of teaching a girl (or boy!) to cover her butt, wear appropriate sized clothing, and not fall into the 'I must sexualize myself at an early age to attract boys' mentality is a good thing.

[RR88]

Bellies are intoxicating? The belly of a redheaded 9-year-old is INTOXICATING? Oy.

[ADoyle90815]

Agreed, I think many parents use similar tests. Their wording about men is ridiculous. They make it sound like all men are perverts that want to molest young girls. I am sorry, but I dont see how that will help girls create positive body images.

This. It also implies that if a girl is molested, it's somehow her fault because of the way she dressed.

[Sola]

Bellies are intoxicating? The belly of a redheaded 9-year-old is INTOXICATING? Oy.

Well that will teach me to open fundie websites while my daughter is around.

*opens website*

*Little Miss Sola spies pink, girly, website*

"Oooh what's that mummy?"

*closes website quickly*

"Not a website that I ever want you going to sweetheart"

[CanadianHippie]

The second test reads in part: If you are in a skirt, sit in a chair with your legs crossed. Now what do you see in the mirror? Now pretend it's your Grandpa! [ew, I'd rather not!] If you see undies or lots of thigh, your shorts or skirt is too high.

Madness, only hussies cross their legs! [/sarcasm]

Ok, when my grandma was teaching me to sit properly in a skirt she told me that she was taught only loose women crossed their legs, modest women crossed their ankles. Now since I don't wear shorts or skirts, I don't even have to worry about showing too much thigh. And fundies say pants on women is immodest... :roll:

The whole thing is sick. Pre-teen girls should only be "intoxicating" to pre-teen boys. If grandpa gets turned on by a 10 year old girls thigh, he has problems and should never be near said 10 year old girls.

[currywurst]

Oddly enough, even though my family had the attitude of "it's just the human body," me and my sisters all dressed modestly as teens and continue to do so as adults. In fact, I do not think one of my sisters, who is 35, has ever worn make-up in her entire life. We easily made the transition from being half-naked feral kids into well-covered teens. I think that is because no one sexualized our childhoods by talking about saving something for a future husband. We were just allowed to be kids.

[Artemis]

'Bellies are intoxicating'

Yeah, way to put ideas into kids' heads. And what a paedophile magnet that site is with all that prurient focus on pubescence.

Now is it possible to comment, I wonder?

[currywurst]

BTW, a little girl does not need to responsible for her own modest dress. Her parents buy her clothes. Let them worry about it. Let a little girl enjoy her childhood without making her self-conscious about being too "sexy."

[2xx1xy1JD]

While I've snarked plenty at her parenting before, I actually thought That Wife's blog post on modesty here wasn't bad:

thatwifeblog.com/2012/04/12/modesty-and-the-middle-class/#more-13824

[DarkAnts]

This. It also implies that if a girl is molested, it's somehow her fault because of the way she dressed.

Agreed. I find it disturbing that they are talking about a how sexy a little girls body is to adult men. I think that the people who write this sort are messed up in the head. I would even go so far as to say they are bordering on being pedophiles.

Edit: Girls that age should learn which clothing fits them and which clothing dose not. Modesty talk can center around making sure your clothing covers the same areas as your swimsuit. They could have easily done this with that website without going into sexual terms.

[currywurst]

Agreed. I find it disturbing that they are talking about a how sexy a little girls body is to adult men. I think that the people who write this sort are messed up in the head. I would even go so far as to say they are bordering on being pedophiles.

I suspect that too. I am always disturbed by how obsessed these fundies are with the bodies and "sexuality" of little girls. You do not need to go into all the sex stuff with them - just buy them clothes that keep them covered. I rarely see little girls who are not dressed modestly anyway. In fact, I rarely see adult women who are not dressed modestly. I rarely see a woman in a belly shirt, mini skirt, or hot pants. No really. Most women are perfectly well covered and decently dressed. Even all those sinners who have not given their lives over to Jesus somehow manage to control their urge to sexual tempt poor men and cover themselves. It's amazing.

[JMarie]

They spelled clavicle wrong. Am I being nitpicky? Yes, but so are they.

[Dinorah]

Some of the "rules" make sense (eg don't show underwear or too much belly) but the fact it's aimed at little girls is really sick, esp. with such an emphasis on sexuality.

And shouldn't there be something for boys too? About say, not showing your boxers coming out of your pants, for instance?

[ladypuglover]

I can't see the site, my kitty headship must be blocking me from the site. Then again he doesn't care if I were to choose to walk around naked as long as he gets fed and petted.