Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Perry** · 08-08-2012, 11:35 PM

A fundy friend posted this article on Facebook

http://www.crosswalk.com/family/singles/...tters.html

I read some of the article and felt sick. I can't read it all. I read the first few paragraphs and can't make it to the next page.

The thumbnail for the article on Facebook said this: "How fair is it for you to dress however you want to dress, and it's up to us men to deal however we can with the sin it causes us?"

This is what I commented:

" I have to say that I disagree with this article. Sure, women should be careful about what they wear. But men should too. Honestly, this article makes men sound like a bunch of dogs that aren't able to control their thought life and give in to lust at every opportunity. Self-control is a virtue that EVERYONE should practice, not just women. Many guys are respectful of women enough that they aren't obsessing over what they are or aren't wearing. And also, women lust after men too. I don't see why a woman should have to walk around on eggshells in order to keep some perverted man from thinking sexual thoughts about her. Instead, the man should wonder why he sees a woman as a sex object and not as a human being that deserves respect and dignity. This article blames the woman for the man's sin, not the man himself."

Nobody else has commented yet.

Stuff like this makes me so mad Angry

Michelle M · 08-09-2012, 01:05 AM

Perry, I love your response. It's perfect. That mindset did so much damage to me. I also felt the article was patronizing in tone.

On a side note, I hate it when people get confused between 'practicing modesty' and 'The Modesty Doctrine'. Practicing modesty is a personal choice, as well as a subjective one. Most women know that the way they dress will affect how they are treated in the world, and that different types of clothing are appropriate in different situations, so they dress accordingly. It's common sense, it's balanced, and it's not about judging anyone. And everyone is responsible for their own behavior regardless of how anyone is dressed. That's normal.

The Modesty Doctrine is not. When modesty turns into a doctrine it reeks of legalism, it heaps shame, guilt, fear, and body issues onto women, it teaches men they are animals, and it shuns those who don't practice it. That's what that thumbnail question says to me. And my answer to the thumbnail question is, "Yes, grown men, it IS up to you to deal with your own sin." Sheesh.

I bring up the difference because it seems every time the conversation comes up in the blogs I visit, someone always gets the two confused.

lucrezaborgia · 08-09-2012, 01:05 AM

I posted this:

"Oh look, yet another article on how women need to be modest. Let me act in shock and surprise because no one has ever told me any of this before. *yawn*

Riddle me this...in certain societies that don't wear clothing, they certainly don't feel that they are being immodest by not wearing western clothing. Yet the first thing missionaries do is force them to cover up. This leads me to believe that the whole modesty thing is a social construct. Modesty is a state of mind, not of clothing.

You want to be original? Write an article on how men need to be modest and how they need to stop sexualizing everything about women. Oh wait...that would mean men would have to worry about how they look and think instead of laying the blame on women.

By the way, when you pepper your statements with "but", that means "forget everything I said before I said 'but', now here is what I really think!" Try re-writing this article without using a single "but" and you will see how much of a controlling ass you sound like."

Michelle M · 08-09-2012, 01:08 AM

(08-09-2012 01:05 AM)lucrezaborgia Wrote: Modesty is a state of mind, not of clothing.

Totally agree.

lucrezaborgia · 08-09-2012, 01:16 AM

Call me crazy, but I don't instantly think sexual thoughts when I see naked flesh. Do the people who write articles like this realize that, generally speaking, they have been socially conditioned to react certain ways? That when you focus on clothing while trying to claim that looks don't matter that you are still focusing on clothing and looks?

**Mominator** · 08-09-2012, 02:34 AM

(08-08-2012 11:35 PM)Perry Wrote: A fundy friend posted this article on Facebook

http://www.crosswalk.com/family/singles/...tters.html

I read some of the article and felt sick. I can't read it all. I read the first few paragraphs and can't make it to the next page.

The thumbnail for the article on Facebook said this: "How fair is it for you to dress however you want to dress, and it's up to us men to deal however we can with the sin it causes us?"

This is what I commented:

" I have to say that I disagree with this article. Sure, women should be careful about what they wear. But men should too. Honestly, this article makes men sound like a bunch of dogs that aren't able to control their thought life and give in to lust at every opportunity. Self-control is a virtue that EVERYONE should practice, not just women. Many guys are respectful of women enough that they aren't obsessing over what they are or aren't wearing. And also, women lust after men too. I don't see why a woman should have to walk around on eggshells in order to keep some perverted man from thinking sexual thoughts about her. Instead, the man should wonder why he sees a woman as a sex object and not as a human being that deserves respect and dignity. This article blames the woman for the man's sin, not the man himself."

Nobody else has commented yet.

Stuff like this makes me so mad

That is well said Perry!

Historian · 08-09-2012, 03:49 AM

I see there's an "editor's note" now at the beginning. Did they add that since your post?

I never ran into anything like this till the ridiculous Bob Jones dormitory meetings once or twice a semester. I remember one in particular where we were read a pathetic part of a letter by some lust-crazed boy from the other side of campus, begging the dean of women to ban something–I think it was knit shirts–because he couldn't control himself. Then they banned knit shirts.

It was the first time in my life I'd run across this type of sinful foolishness, and I think I was very lucky to have not gotten in any trouble for first laughing out loud and then discussing openly how ridiculous it was that anything the little Nazi Clothes-Check Chicks at BJU (who were always lurking near the dorms, dying to gain Spiritual Points by catching someone wearing anything they could deem "uncheckable") would let go by anything that any normal man with even a modicum of self-control (not to mention someone claiming to be led by the Spirit of God) could possibly legitimately find enticing.*

This article is more of the same. You're completely right, Perry. Obviously what a woman wears does matter, and any woman who deliberately dresses provocatively is absolutely sinning. But this guy isn't writing about that.

And then there's just stupid stuff, like this:

"We’re now into the dog days of summer, and this year, the styles for women seem to rely less and less on fabric and more and more on exposed flesh. After all, the less we wear, the more comfortable we feel in the heat. We get it. If we could get away with wearing shorts and tank tops to church, we would. "

Has this man never watched television? Is he not aware that these supposedly new styles are exactly the same styles that have been worn since my mother was in college?

Or like this:

"On the beach, of course, things are somewhat different, even though relative modesty should still be a virtue."

I'm sorry, HOW are things different on the beach again? "Relative modesty" is plenty for the beach, but not sufficient for other places? And men are less sexually charged when they're half-dressed at the beach, with half-dressed women parading around all about them–then they are in CHURCH?!
What kind of a church is this person attending?

And that's not really what Proverbs 11:22 means.

This all boils down, in my opinion, to approaching this problem backwards. Yes, modesty is important for everyone. If a woman or a man is not modest, the real problem is that he or she is sinning against the Lord's commands and against the image of God that he/she is: not that some man (or woman) is tempted to sin. That's what should be preached against: sinning against God. Not this foolish attempt to blame women for men's sins: foolish and pointless. Even if every Christian woman in the world covered herself up from head to toe tomorrow, it would make almost no dent in the temptations that men face on every side, every moment of every day, at work, on tv, in the mall, in the grocery store, at the beach, etc. So not only is this blaming women for men's sin, not only is it making men the goal of women instead of God, it's nonsensical and pointless to boot.

*This sentence brought to you by Fruit by the Foot Roll-Ups: extra-long fun for extra long friends!

lucrezaborgia · 08-09-2012, 04:28 AM

(08-09-2012 03:49 AM)Historian Wrote: Obviously what a woman wears does matter, and any woman who deliberately dresses provocatively is absolutely sinning.

What is provocative tho? Who decides that?

Historian · (This post was last modified: 08-09-2012 06:09 AM by Historian.)

(08-09-2012 04:28 AM)lucrezaborgia Wrote:
(08-09-2012 03:49 AM)Historian Wrote: Obviously what a woman wears does matter, and any woman who deliberately dresses provocatively is absolutely sinning.

What is provocative tho? Who decides that?

I meant that the woman (or man) herself/himself needs to repent. If he/she is dressing in a fashion he/she knows and intends to tempt others with, that is sin. That's what I meant by "provocatively": dressing in a manner designed to provoke. I realize now that's also fundy code for "anything I don't happen to personally think is ok."

Outside of him/her, personally, it is certainly always going to be a judgment call. Churches and their leadership may have to say something at some point–personally I've never in 36 years been in a church where anyone felt the need to say anything to anyone, though. People disagreed for sure about where the line was, but acknowledge the right of others to make their own decisions before God, and their own personal responsibility to control their own selves.

And if anything does have to be said, it ought to be presented as a sin before God, not a sin against "me."

dramaturge · 08-09-2012, 08:32 AM

Nice response, Perry.

Another thing that really irritates me is that men who think this way don't ever worry about what they wear since the entire mindset that surrounds "OMG women are responsible for men's thoughts whargarble" is usually completely intertwined with the myth that women aren't interested in good-looking men and shirtless or barely dressed men are never appealing to women. The whole thing is really dehumanizing to women. Blech blech blech.