So - Modesty...a rather hot topic, no?
Well...let me sum up how you should dress in only seven words.
Dress to be attractive, but not provocative.
Someone...not sure who, could have been Marilyn Monroe, or Edith Head or some totally different person (the Internets disagree) once said A Dress Should Be Tight Enough to Show You're A Woman, but Loose Enough to Prove You're A Lady.
Kinda along those same lines, right?
Anyway, then the question comes up....where does the line fall, when it comes to provocative dress.
I propose that the answer to that question depends on two factors
1). The intent of the person wearing the clothing.
2). The intent of the person designing/manufacturing/sewing the clothing.
Some clothing is designed with the intent to be provocative. Like this,
Or a super low cut shirt with a deep, deep, deep v-neck that goes down to the belly button.
Or a pair of yoga pants with the words "hot stuff" printed on the butt.
And, some clothing is worn with the intent to be provocative. But, since this is a family friendly blog, I'm not going to show you a picture of that. I think you know what I'm talking about.
But, everything else, there is a lot of gray area. And, really, I think it's depends on the intent of the wearer and their body type. Things like tank tops, leggings, sleeveless shirt, short skirts....look totally different on different people. For example. a person who is smaller chested is better able to "pull off" a tank top than someone who is more well-endowed (such as me).
And someone (like me) who is well-endowed and always carrying around a toddler that has a tendency to pull on the front of your shirt may have a tendency to show a bit more than wanted thanks to the tugging toddler, and that is okay, because nothings says not provocative like a baby pulling on you. I try to wear clothes that cover more, but I'm not going to sweat it, if it happens. I once read a blog post/comments where the writer and reader were afraid to wear knee-length "swingy" skirts because the chance gust of wind could come along and blow things up. Who cares, says I. Not that we shouldn't try to keep ourselves covered, but I'm not going to go around worrying about chance gusts of wind.
Furthermore, context also matters.
Something like this is totally appropriate for the beach and totally inappropriate for church.
Now, let's look at what the Catholic Church teaches us about modesty.
“2522 Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.
2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.
2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.”
I love how the catechism talks about the purpose of modesty....that it protects the dignity of the person.
I also love how it talks about modesty being discreet. Because modesty is more than just about how much skin is showing. I think one could also be immodest if they are totally covered but dress in such wild, unusual way that their goal is to draw undue attention to themselves. There is of course, nothing wrong with expressing your personal taste or individuality, but there is something wrong with always dressing with the purpose of
everyone look at me.
Notice, however, that it says that the forms of modesty vary from culture to culture. I really started to question my preconceived notions about modesty when we moved to Florida. Because, in many ways, Florida is a different culture than New England. What is appropriate in a climate where it is 95 degrees and 10000% humidity for most of the year is going to be different from what is appropriate in a climate where it rarely gets above 85. It just is. An article of clothing which would be considered provacative in New England, would not necessarily be considered so in Florida.
I think this is also important to keep in mind when you have people who think all women should go back to dressing the way they did in the 1800's and cover up any possible clue they are a woman by wearing long, high-necked, shapeless clothes. We don't live in the 1800's..and what was considered provocative back then is considered totally normal now.
Modesty is an important value to have and teach our children...but I do see one problem with the so-called "modesty culture" which I think is totally different from the church's teaching on modesty.
Let's take this video, put out by some fairly talented boys from the Mormon church.
However, I take issue with the line Girl, I Need Your Modesty.
In Christopher West's book,
The Theology of the Body for Beginners he talks about "negative purity" and "positive purity." Negative purity prevents the sin of lust by
not looking, by so-called
custody of the eyes. And, that is good, and that why we need to protect our dignity by dressing modesty. But, he says we should go beyond that, that being able to look
without lust is the higher virtue and what we should be striving for,
The problem with a lot of "modesty culture" as I see it, is that it teaches boys that they are helpless and turn into lust-driven fools at the sight of too much skin, so those temptress girls need to be covered up. But, the thing is, people generally act the way you expect them to. Tell a child they are stupid or bad and they will act stupid and bad. Tell a boy that he is a slave to his hormones and he will become a slave to his hormones. We can do better than that. We HAVE to do better than that. In our sex-crazed, pornographic culture, the "don't look" doesn't cut it anymore, unless you never leave your house and never get on the Internet. We need to teach our girls to dress modestly to protect their dignity and value, and we need to teach our boys to see the dignity and value of the girls no matter what they are wearing.
Another issue I have with this above video (not to pick on the Mormons or anything) is the line
Virtue is so beautiful.
Yes, virtue is beautiful, but again, it seems to imply that a girl's value and dignity is dependent on the way she dresses and if she meets this guys standard of "modesty". As though girls who don't meet this guys standards are not beautiful, and don't have dignity. Even worse, as though as long as a girl meets his standards of modesty, she is virtuous, even if she is also lazy, unkind and dishonest. Virtue is not dependent on what you wear, but rather how you act and treat others.
Yes, we have to respect human nature being what it is. But, we aren't animals. We aren't a slave to our hormones and passions. We have to be prudent and decent and discreet and wise, but we can't just say "oh, I can't help myself so every girl around needs to cover up." Modesty is a two way street..and it's not just up to the girls.
So..now that we've covered the "not provocative part"...what about the "be attractive part." No, I don't think this means we have to wear a ballgown and a tiara every day. But, I do think it means we should at least make an effort to dress in clothes that are well-kept, clean, flattering and fit well. Hopefully I meet that, at least some of the time. You can judge for yourself today.
Ignore the bad hair and the crazy kids.
