Modesty Part 2

In the last few days I have come across a really good blog that shows some sewing skills and draping skills. The lady who blogs uses vintage design (mostly from the 50's) for all the outfits she sews.

Her post on a recent project seems to have sparked a lot of interest in a discussion / commenting of modesty in general. So, her post on modesty is seen from a feminist point of view and does not take into account that the survey she slates are not commands, but statements that men / boys reacted to. I think the most revealing results are the open questions that the boys / men answered which show the actual heart of Christian men and their struggles.

The one criticism that came through strongly on the sewing blog comment section,  was that women were not asked the same questions as well as questions about men's attire. I think that is a valid point, but when we think about it, women will dress modestly if men don't accept immodesty as a standard and vice versa.

What I read recently in Dr James Dobson's book "Bringing up Girls" is that girls think they are in control when they get the attention of the boys and then sleep with them, because they feel loved. However, the cycle continues if this happens more than once and the more it happens, the less loved the girl feels. The reason for this is, the boys get what they want without commitment and girls get nothing except pain. Dr Dobson makes the point that this is the worst form of male power, even though girls think that they actually are empowered.

Gertie confuses modesty with morality and religious superiority. This is something even Christians do. We can come across as being more spiritual, more moral or even show our superiority by the way we act, but in essence that is not the main point. Gertie argues that modesty is linked to religion and culture and she is correct, but at the end of the day, the question remains: Are we more moral when we can dress the way we want and even go without or entice men's minds to lust after us? Is modesty only one-sided and placed as an oppression on women? I have addressed this issue before.

I think Gertie misses the point of modesty in general - it's not only women who need to dress modestly to protect the visual minds of men, but also men need to dress modestly to curb the imaginations of their female friends. It goes both ways and mutual respect is at the heart of it - "love your neighbour as yourself" and "treat every older woman as if she were your mother and every younger woman as if she were your sister". No wonder that Gertie finds the underlying ideas disturbing, partly I think because they are religious in nature and partly because only men took part in the survey. I think her last point:

[...] that doesn't give any of us the right to demean other women for choosing to show more skin. And, above all, we deserve respectful treatment from men no matter how we're dressed.

 is on judgmental attitudes in all of us. As Christians we need to be really careful of that no matter whether it is on dress styles or on beliefs or on lifestyles.

Blue

Second-last post in the series "All the colours of the Rainbow"
We all have had the blues, right? Funny how blue in the English language is associated with feeling depressed or "down", when blue skies imply sunshine and a happy day.
Being of German descent, I cannot resist giving the meaning for being blue in German: drunk. The Afrikaans combines the two states into "dronkverdriet" (drunken depression), but does not associate that state of affairs with being blue.

There is a German kiddies song that goes:

Blau, blau, blau sind alle

   meine Kleider,

Blau, blau, blau ist alles, was ich hab.

Darum lieb ich alles, was so blau ist,

Weil mein Schatz ein Seemann,

   Seemann ist. 

Blue, blue, blue are all

   my clothes

Blue, blue, blue is all that I have

So I love anything that's blue

because my love is a sailor,

   a sailor.

On a more serious note: the sky above is blue, and sometimes the lakes and rivers reflect the blueness to then also be drawn / photographed as blue. (Case in point - pictures taken from deviantart profile: alexandru1988 - go to his profile for some awe inspiring work)

In the Bible, blue and scarlet are often used in conjunction. I have discussed this already in the post on scarlet and actually noticed that scarlet, purple and blue are mentioned as one and the same colour, or at least quite close to each other in shade and intensity. I think, that there is quite a difference between what we would call indigo (purplish blue - think denim) and blue and scarlet (reddish), but in biblical times the shades probably depended on the kinds of dye and the concentration used in the solution. Also, perhaps how much the fabric was "bleached" in the sun or eventually worn - time fades the colours and leaves a redder tint rather than a blue one.

The point remains though, that scarlet, blue and indigo (purple) are all royal colours and were extremely expensive. In the references given you will see that blue and scarlet are mentioned in the garments of the priests as well, setting them apart from the rest of the population. Mostly fine linen was used to be dyed in these colours, making the priestly garments even more expensive.

Finally, as Christians, we are called to be a "royal priesthood" (1 Peter 2:9) and in that sense set apart for service to God, showing by our dress that we belong to him by not conforming to the world. This does not mean we are to be dressed in scarlet and indigo, but that we show by our differences that we belong to someone else.

Modesty

After the book review, I felt I needed to do a post on modesty, since there seems to be a confusion (even amongst Christians) what that entails. I could say that it is "anything that does not offend someone else", but what does that look like? Mostly it is culture related. For example, in most African cultures it is unacceptable for a woman to (a) wear pants and (b) expose her knees when wearing a skirt.

So, what does modesty really look like in a society where states of undress are acceptable and leave nothing for the imagination?

My thinking centres on the following passage: (Romans 14:13-23)

¹³Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. ¹⁴As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. ¹⁵If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. ¹⁶Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. ¹⁷For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, ¹⁸because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.
 ¹⁹Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. ²⁰Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. ²¹It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.
 ²²So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. ²³But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

 Now, for those of you who are confused why I chose this passage - here is my thinking...
Firstly, let me say that I do not equate eating and drinking with wearing clothes as a disputable matter (Romans14:1), but the principle of not being a stumbling block to fellow brothers (and sister) still applies.
Secondly, in the 21st century, what we see as acceptable in one country might not be acceptable in another and this continues to be an issue, especially for missionaries who want to make a stand for Christ.

Down to the nitty-gritty:
According to the Mormons (The Church of Jesus Christ and the Latter-day Saints) Modesty is:

Modesty is an attitude of propriety and decency in dress, grooming, language, and behavior. If we are modest, we do not draw undue attention to ourselves. Instead, we seek to "honor God with your [our] body." (1 Corinthians 6:20b)

Two very helpful sites explain the concept - the first discusses guidelines for men and women and the second is partly a discussion of a book and partly really helpful biblical passages.

Now for the visual people.... Pictures taken from the Pure Fashion website

 Picture 1 - Critique: I like the lady's outfit, but two things bother me: 1) the buttons down the front, which, when walking can pop off and 2) the skirt is a bit tight and does not lend itself to walking very well.

Picture2: I like both outfits very much, but for an African context the skirt may be too short. This may be quite conservative in the United States, but still quite daring in other parts of the world.

Picture 3: this is more like it.

Picture 4: I really like this one too. The layered look works very well and the drooped hem of the skirt is a nice change.

Picture 5: also very nice - pants are 3/4 and perhaps not everyone's cup of tea - acceptable in Western countries, but again, not all over the world.

I have not come across anything for the African market (local stores), but the rest of the world thinks that we are quite conservative anyway. Still, the changes are quite obvious to me when I reflect on the 80's and compare them to today's fashions. Apart from dropped waistlines on skirts and pants, the tops and skirts get shorter and shorter and most clothing got tighter.

If we continue to apply the principle of not being a stumbling block to others, we are going to do fine as long as we can critically examine our outfits ourselves, or ask others to help us with it if we don't feel we can exercise our own judgment.