Modesty is about more than skin
(Inspired by this post by the always clever Ruby)
When I was fourteen I went on a short-term missions trip to Mexico, a place I would later live. All of the people going on the trip were given a short pamphlet with guidelines about modesty in dress, what things to pack, a few social expectations and warnings about behavior. These things went like “women should wear skirts that hang past the knee or loose fitting pants, sleeveless shirts and bell sleeves should not be worn.” Also, “always sample all food given to you by a hostess, and do not refuse refreshments as this is percieved as rejection of your host and hostess.”
I can remember sitting down with my father and having a long talk about all of the expectations. I knew from previous groups that went down that the women of the churches we’d be attending often dressed in ways that Americans would percieve as slutty. So why hold ourselves to such a high standard? Was it really wrong for a woman to wear shorts or a bell sleeve? The heat would be unbearable, couldn’t we dress in a way that we would feel comfortable?
Well, my father patiently explained, we were going into this venture as the people who were supposed to bring wisdom, support, and godliness. Thus we were already being held to a much higher standard, and we had to flee from even the shade of the possible perception of unholiness. Everything we did or said would be carefully analyzed, and anything that might become a barrier to understanding had to be abolished. If our beautiful young women were dressed in a way that all the boys could think about was their breasts, it would be a barrier. If someone unintentionally snubbed one of our hostesses and hurt her feelings, it would be a barrier. If someone drank alcohol or smoked on church property, it would be a barrier.
And thus I learned about changing my own standards for the sake of people I cared about. Because it was a real sacrifice for me to put aside my angsty teenage “you have to accept me the way that I am even in the black lace and vampire red lipstick” attitude and instead to come across as a nice little Mennonite girl for that week. But in doing so, I learned a lesson about modesty that was perhaps not the one my father was trying to teach all of us womenfolk.
I learned that modesty is not in the clothing, but in the attitude. There were forty year old Mexican Mamas with five babies in tow who dressed in ways that would make a stripper blushed, but even so there was nothing in their portment that spoke of sex. Their attitude, their words, their openness, their lack of shame, all of it spoke of a kind of modesty that can’t come from dress. In the same way there were teenage girls who were covered from chin to wrist to toe and oozed sexuality. The way they sat, the way they talked, the brazen way they met your eyes, everything about it said, “I’m here, I’m ready, I am NOT so innocent”.
And the response to those girls by the boys around them showed that no matter how thick and loose the fabric over a girl’s womanly parts is, boys will lust. Because the lust isn’t just a response to how much skin is showing, it’s a response to all of those undefinable signals that say that if two people are alone in a dark place, naughty things will happen.
Thoughts? Additions? Disagreement? Log it in the comments.
cbrunette replied:
Usually I see this argument of “modesty is more than skin coverage” to get out of covering skin. In the same way, I have yet to meet a girl who wore clothing from chin to ankle who acting brazenly. In fact, I hardly know of any girls (or women) who dress modestly in that fashion, so to see a slutty fully-covered female is a real foreign object. Catholic School Girl jokes aside.
The Bible does connect modesty with sobriety and shamefacedness (you know the verse). If there is a lack of shame of nakedness, then there is a lack of modesty. Can’t divorce the two. Going back to the garden is not completely possible in this version of Earth.
Hope this kick-starts the discussion.
~Anna
June 9, 2008 at 8:02 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
Anna, I think it depends on what culture someone comes from, and the attitudes toward the body, shame, nudity, sexual morality (and much more) in any give culture.
Your equation seems far too simple for that, and I don’t believe it’s true.
June 9, 2008 at 9:00 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
PS.: I don’t mean to be rude, but I wouldn’t be surprised if Lindsey decided to moderate comments from now on in. Nor would I blame her for turning that setting to “on.”
June 9, 2008 at 9:02 pm. Permalink.
amberfireinus replied:
Lindsey, I am one of those women who oozes sexuality. I can’t help it, it is simply who I am. Having the figure that I do, doesn’t really allow me much in the way of clothing that is of more modest means. If I wear that stuff, I look really frumpy. Its an either or thing. No in between ground.
I am a conservative person by nature. Because of my career and life and my life path I have had to learn to be appropriate in all settings and learn to be modest as my soul will allow. You are right, it isn’t all about the dress.
I never wear things that one would consider “hoochy”. My clothing is always classic and elegant. However again, my figure lends itself to filling those clothes out in a certain way.
When I was in the Middle East, I wore long skirts, blouses with sleeves and underblouses for modesty. But even then I “stuck out”. Smiling at strangers there on the street is considered immodest. How could I possibly hide my joy to be in such an amazing place?
I think that modesty and sexuality aren’t necessarily the same thing. Like you said, its the presence of the person.
I do try and tone it down often times when I am in a situation of women who are competitive. Nothing sucks more than getting caught up in that ego game. I often will remain completely quiet and still so that I don’t draw attention to myself so that others can have the spotlight.
Interesting subject….
June 10, 2008 at 5:53 am. Permalink.
SanityFound replied:
First things first… wow! Great post!
It brings to mind the saying although it is related perhaps to a different meaning “Mutton dressed up as lamb”. I couldn’t agree more that modesty has more to do with attitude than the outer garments or even make up for that matter. In recruitment field I got to experience this on a daily basis. Applicants would come for interviews all dressed up in expensive suits, polished nails, done up to the “T” only to have their true personality come out either in words or body language. Clothing and “outer image” can only do so much to cover certain things up.
Like Amber I to had the experience in the Middle East, I was literally covered from head to toe, my hair covered, hands in gloves. My biggest problem to was that I was friendly and a smiler, this apparently was a signal in their culture that I was available and erm “free”. I learnt quickly what their interpretation of modesty was and I adopted it very fast.
Where ever we are be it country, city or just another’s home we must always be open to the different set of rules, those that are not spoken.
Again fabulous post!
June 10, 2008 at 10:14 am. Permalink.
cbrunette replied:
e2tc, No rudeness taken…and my comment was let through, even if you did not agree with it.
We are discussing on two levels here: one of culture and one of an outside, though culturally informing, standard. One shifts constantly and one is interpreted with some context towards tradition across cultures.
To point on your playing field, even with men in New Guinea tribes, to go around without the gourd would be nakedness…and they would be ashamed.
Cheers ~A.
June 10, 2008 at 3:01 pm. Permalink.
littletiger replied:
Lindsey – what an interesting discussion you’ve started. I’ve lived in a couple of different cultures – in Japan, modesty was very similar to what it is here in the US. However, in Kenya, the people where I lived felt that you were immodest if you showed your legs from the knees up – but didn’t care if your breasts showed.
As a Peace Corps Volunteer in Kenya, I learned very quickly that if I didn’t dress “modestly” then it interfered with my ability to do my job and help the kids at my school. And as much as I wanted to wear shorts (I lived in a tropical rainforest) I had to adopt the lifestyle of the people I was living with. It was also a way of showing respect for the culture and acknowledging that I was willing for a time to put aside my own preferences to live as they do. It allowed me to form deep relationships that might not have happened if I wasn’t respectful of their cultural norms.
June 10, 2008 at 5:17 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
Anna, I feel that I misspoke, though statements like “I have yet to meet a girl who wore clothing from chin to ankle who acting brazenly” are… well, let’s just say that it’s more than possible to act brazenly no matter what one is – or isn’t – wearing.
The way I saw your opening comment – and please let me know if I was misinterpreting what you said – was that Lindsey’s points weren’t valid.
It’s so easy to misread people when doing text-only communication. I’ve done it more than a few times, so if that’s the case here, my apologies!
June 10, 2008 at 5:52 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
If there is a lack of shame of nakedness, then there is a lack of modesty. Can’t divorce the two.
with respect, I’m not at all sure that the issue is so clear-cut, or simple. (As Lindsey and others have pointed out.)
June 10, 2008 at 5:53 pm. Permalink.
M54 replied:
Since this blog is a “Christian” blog I believe we need to do our best to determine what it is that God, Himself, has said.
It matters not what culture we live in or visit or the shape of our body, etc.. If we do ANYTHING that causes our brother/sister to enter into sin, we ourself have sinned. It doesn’t matter if what we did was sin or not. If what we have done (or are participating in) causes our brother/sister to sin then “it’s on us.”
Of course that’s a paraphrase.
I find it interesting that most of the posts (regardless of the category) are what we think, etc. and not what God has said on any specific subject.
Maybe this post will be “moderated” as my last one was.
June 10, 2008 at 8:41 pm. Permalink.
Lindsey replied:
M54: I agree, we shouldn’t do anything that causes our brother to stumble, which is why I myself do not dress in a way that is sexual unless I am alone with my husband.
And as for the fact that my blog is primarily intellectual rather than scripture based… well, I’ve found that people who want scriptural meditations have many, many blogs that they can read. There is an excess of Christian writing in both blogs and online Christian magazines as well as online Bible study services.
This blog is meant to be an apologetic blog not only to Christians, but to people who believe in God but aren’t churched as well as for unbelievers who simply want to understand the Christian mindset. I deliberately avoid chapter and verse Bible quoting because it is a turn-off to some people, and I want this blog to be one that any kind of person can feel comfortable reading.
I also often say “I think” or “in my opinion” rather than “God says” because I don’t feel that I ought to speak on God’s behalf.
As for your last post being moderated, I’m not sure what you mean. I have never deleted one of your posts, and the last comment I remember you making on my blog (3 days ago?) I actually responded to.
June 10, 2008 at 9:07 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
M54, I’m not sure I understand why culture (in other words, different cultures and their standards) would necessarily be in conflict with God’s word.
After all, there aren’t any point-by-point dress codes in the NT… what is truly modest in one place can be (and often is) viewed as provocative in another.
We may not be able, in and of ourselves, to be all things to all people, but… when in Rome, right? (Like Paul said.)
June 10, 2008 at 9:15 pm. Permalink.
M54 replied:
Lindsay; I replied to your post about going into places where the unchurched are and speaking like them, ect. Some guy said (basically) that he agreed with you and that is why God came to Earth as man to hang out with man where man is. Completely paraphrased here.
e2tc; exactly right. Romans may not be succeptable to the same “fallings” as say Hindues or vice versa.
June 10, 2008 at 9:30 pm. Permalink.
Red Wine Gums replied:
It’s interesting. I think it comes down to the attitude of the person in question. I was involved in dance for a while and had women jumping on me; dancing hip to hip and also found myself giving pointers on bellydance routines. It didn’t cause me to stumble. If anything it caused me to grow in my faith because it made me realise I wasn’t completely beholden to my hormones and could do things that I derived enjoyment from without worrying.
For a lot of men their walk can be defined by that single issue of sexual purity. They’re fine once they don’t screw up. Particularly younger single men can often be stuck between a rock and a hard place as regards masturbation. Being at the highest point of their libido with a lot of mixed messages out there.
An issue with me has being the opposite. Not that I’ve done it on a physical level but on an emotional one I’ve gotten myself into a few situations I didn’t want to end up in. Can one be an emotional slut for instance?
Not that it’s been mentioned so far but the idea of pre-marital fidelity is a good idea going about it the wrong way. That’s often touted in modesty circles and sort of annoys me when it is
June 11, 2008 at 12:14 am. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
Red Wine, women have problems with the things you’ve mentioned, too…
and M54, gotcha!
June 11, 2008 at 2:09 am. Permalink.
Red Wine Gums replied:
@e2tc
Oh definitely but that’s often overlooked in conventional conversations around the issue which is the whole problem really. Rather than a honest discussion guys are told to bounce their eyes and think of broccolli while girls are told not to show too much neck.
June 11, 2008 at 12:54 pm. Permalink.
Lindsey replied:
You know, I think it’s interesting that in discussions of modesty and what modesty means and “not causing your brother to stumble” we often neglect to talk about emotional modesty and the fact that some men and women tend to be… hm… *ahem* Emotionally Brazen which can lead to immodest friendships. I had a few friendships that radically changed after I got married, because snuggling on the couch watching chick flicks and eating brownies with another man just seemed… well, immodest. Not that it was sexually or even intimate in a way that betrayed my marriage, it was just emotionally brazen.
June 11, 2008 at 1:00 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
LOL, Lindsey – and right you are!
June 11, 2008 at 4:31 pm. Permalink.
Ruby replied:
Thanks for the link back.
You make a lot of good points, especially about the attitude of modesty. I can’t remember if I said it in my blog post or not, but in Hawai’i, EVERYONE wears bikinis to the beach, and nobody cares. People who wear 1-piece bathing suits stick out like sore thumbs. It’s just not the culture. (Surfers wear rash guards or bikinis – still not one piece suits, though.) So I think we have to evaluate the culture, the attitude, and our own personal feelings about the issue. it’s funny because I hear a lot of people say “bikinis = the devil,” but it’s so completely strange to see someone not wearing one, that it’s the people who are more “covered” that are the ones drawing all of the attention. I don’t know if that makes sense or not, but it’s something to think about.
June 11, 2008 at 8:23 pm. Permalink.
e2tc replied:
It does to me – equally true in Brazil!
June 11, 2008 at 8:49 pm. Permalink.
Phew is it another one? « SanityFound’s Rambling’s replied:
[...] me. Her post on Self Mutilation, Self Hatred and Suicide blew me away only to be followed by Modesty is about more than skin has really stuck with me. Go read her first chapter of the book she’s writing, one day I hope [...]
June 14, 2008 at 2:45 pm. Permalink.