Modesty: what's the point?

[beatitude]

I got whistled at whilst 8 months pregnant. And other times while wearing clothes that fully covered me.

Street harassment has a lot more to do with power than it has to do with attraction. There are men who know that they can bully women in the street and make them feel uncomfortable, and they thrive on it. Others just feel entitled to pass commentary on women's bodies. This is why women of all ages, shapes, and sizes get harassed, no matter what they're wearing, and it's why the harassment isn't always even superficially 'complimentary'. Articles like this one never seem to deal with all those shouts of "You're too ugly to rape!" and "Frigid b*tch!" that form the other side of the coin. If only women weren't taught that they can somehow alter the situation by dressing differently then maybe we would be able to focus more on the real problem.

[Seven77]

I think that the article makes good points. Maybe the problem lies in the approach or wording.

[Ice_nine]

I hate the world.

[Seven77]

I hate the world.

?

[Ice_nine]

also where's the evidence for the "men are more visual" carp? What does that even mean?

[Seven77]

Apparently there have been studies using something called fMRI that suggest that males are very visual creatures.

[beatitude]

also where's the evidence for the "men are more visual" carp? What does that even mean?

It means that they are so overcome by the sight of kneecaps that they just can't help themselves, so we have a feminine duty to protect them. This handy skirt length guide should show you what to do.

I didn't write the article. I said it made some good points that is all, doesn't mean it is perfect. For my own part I believe men's choices are their own - though I also believe its basic charity not to provide temptation especially as its hard enough for good Christian guys as it is. The St Thomas comment I made was about me and my own discernment. 

You introduced it as "pretty good" and asked for thoughts. I gave you my thoughts: it's rape apologia and I'm disgusted that it would be promoted on a Catholic site. You don't seem to have any conception of how hurtful and damaging that article would be to a victim of assault - and assault is very common, so many survivors will have read about how wild animals come running to the immodestly dressed women. Basic charity for them doesn't even get a look-in; it's all about the men. In fact, you don't even need to be a survivor of sexual assault to be harmed by that article; it's enough to be a female who wants to believe that her dignity isn't determined by her skirt length.

You evidently see it as mainly a good article with maybe one or two minor flaws, and it's not. It's poisonous. This is not simply a question of a different point of view.

[Ice_nine]

Apparently there have been studies using something called fMRI that suggest that males are very visual creatures.

Again, I ask, what does this mean? That men are more sexually aroused by visual stimuli than are women? I've not seen one study that says that, so where are they? I know men are better at some visuospatial tasks but that's not what we're getting at here, but the "males are more visual," which doesn't even make sense as a stand-alone statement, has no evidence that I'm aware of and I'm GUESSING that there are studies which have been misconstrued by popular media and then passed along as cultural folklore.

If anyone has access to a database and wants to dig these up go ahead but until then I'm not buying it..

[Seven77]

It means that they are so overcome by the sight of kneecaps that they just can't help themselves, so we have a feminine duty to protect them. This handy skirt length guide should show you what to do.

You introduced it as "pretty good" and asked for thoughts. I gave you my thoughts: it's rape apologia and I'm disgusted that it would be promoted on a Catholic site. You don't seem to have any conception of how hurtful and damaging that article would be to a victim of assault - and assault is very common, so many survivors will have read about how wild animals come running to the immodestly dressed women. Basic charity for them doesn't even get a look-in; it's all about the men. In fact, you don't even need to be a survivor of sexual assault to be harmed by that article; it's enough to be a female who wants to believe that her dignity isn't determined by her skirt length.

You evidently see it as mainly a good article with maybe one or two minor flaws, and it's not. It's poisonous. This is not simply a question of a different point of view.

The fact that the article focuses on men, even when addressing women seems troubling for sure. And I think that you are right---it doesn't take assult victims into consideration.

Again, I ask, what does this mean? That men are more sexually aroused by visual stimuli than are women? I've not seen one study that says that, so where are they? I know men are better at some visuospatial tasks but that's not what we're getting at here, but the "males are more visual," which doesn't even make sense as a stand-alone statement, has no evidence that I'm aware of and I'm GUESSING that there are studies which have been misconstrued by popular media and then passed along as cultural folklore.

If anyone has access to a database and wants to dig these up go ahead but until then I'm not buying it..

 Frankly, I don't feel comfortable with posting it here but I will message you 2 studies right now…

[MarysLittleFlower]

Ok this will be my last post here. Hopefully this would be a response to all the points..

I'm not condoning rape or blaming women for rape.

When I said the article made good points, I was referring to other points  - one was posted by Lilllabettt on the last page.

I also said the article isn't perfect, for example the part about the men could have been phrased better and been more clear. It's not like I'm debating and saying women are to blame for rape.

No one is saying that "men can't help themselves" - surely there are not only two options to choose from: thinking that men can't help themselves, or thinking that things like skirt length don't matter at all. What about the third option that men are responsible for their choices but it's charitable to help each other to sanctity by limiting temptations? and yes its' true that showing more skin provides more temptations. It doesn't mean that the men aren't responsible for assault - because a regular guy wouldn't assault in this case, he would maybe struggle with lustful thoughts. A guy who would assault has more issues like maybe anger or hatred. I actually took a psychology course about criminal psychology and we studied about rapists. So I'm not ignorant about WHY they rape.

Lastly, no one is saying that skirt length determines a woman's dignity: human dignity is inherent, HOWEVER - we can dress in a way that reflects our dignity which we already have, or we can dress in a sexualized way as if we're only a body.

If there are disagreements with the article, that's fine, but the thing is - no one here is saying that women are responsible for rape. If we all agree on that point, can we maybe move on to other points in the article? it was those other points that lead me to call it a "pretty good article". There was more there than just this.

Edited August 25, 2015 by MarysLittleFlower

[Ice_nine]

 

 Frankly, I don't feel comfortable with posting it here but I will message you 2 studies right now…

cool

[DJMitch]

I have just read this article, having flicked through this thread and been taken aback by some of the comments to the effect that the article was blaming women for being raped, and other such more or less insane nonsense.  The article simply recommends dressing modesty, and points out that women who dress immodestly are tempting men to sin, which, of course, they are.  This does not mean that men who look at them are going to assault them.  Men are more visual than women, as has been demonstrated a thousand times and which I had believed to be common knowledge.  If one cannot make statements of fact without people accusing the person making the statement of "blaming the victim", then telling plain truths is evidently going to become very difficult.

[Archaeology cat]

Street harassment has a lot more to do with power than it has to do with attraction. There are men who know that they can bully women in the street and make them feel uncomfortable, and they thrive on it. Others just feel entitled to pass commentary on women's bodies. This is why women of all ages, shapes, and sizes get harassed, no matter what they're wearing, and it's why the harassment isn't always even superficially 'complimentary'. Articles like this one never seem to deal with all those shouts of "You're too ugly to rape!" and "Frigid b*tch!" that form the other side of the coin. If only women weren't taught that they can somehow alter the situation by dressing differently then maybe we would be able to focus more on the real problem.

Agreed

[Maggyie]

I have just read this article, having flicked through this thread and been taken aback by some of the comments to the effect that the article was blaming women for being raped, and other such more or less insane nonsense.  The article simply recommends dressing modesty, and points out that women who dress immodestly are tempting men to sin, which, of course, they are.  This does not mean that men who look at them are going to assault them.  Men are more visual than women, as has been demonstrated a thousand times and which I had believed to be common knowledge.  If one cannot make statements of fact without people accusing the person making the statement of "blaming the victim", then telling plain truths is evidently going to become very difficult.

the trouble is "men are visual creatures" is a meaningless cliche. If biologically true, what does that have to do with a woman's practicing modesty? After all if we wish to spare our brothers any temptation, a burka accomplishes this much better than long skirts and tops.

but it's not so, we practice modesty to glorify God and his creation. And imo the extreme forms like a burka do not glorify because they make his creation invisible. 

And men must dress to glorify God as well! Modesty is not a virtue for women only and there are many men who struggle with immodesty. When these articles focus on women and the supposed control over men they have, it reveals the author is still infected with the belief that modesty is really about control of the female sex. 

[Lilllabettt]

the trouble is "men are visual creatures" is a meaningless cliche. If biologically true, what does that have to do with a woman's practicing modesty? After all if we wish to spare our brothers any temptation, a burka accomplishes this much better than long skirts and tops.

but it's not so, we practice modesty to glorify God and his creation. And imo the extreme forms like a burka do not glorify because they make his creation invisible. 

And men must dress to glorify God as well! Modesty is not a virtue for women only and there are many men who struggle with immodesty. When these articles focus on women and the supposed control over men they have, it reveals the author is still infected with the belief that modesty is really about control of the female sex. 

You people need to lay off the Muslims.

Burqa's can be very beautiful and fashionable. In Iran there is a whole aesthetic built around women revealing gorgeous, expertly made-up eyes with the rest of the female form an alluring mystery.  And guess what, many men and women find this beautiful and attractive. And yes, some men find it sexually arousing.

Which is to say that women are not responsible for every sexual urge men feel---  because women, period, are sexually appealing to normal men, no matter what they are wearing.

That being said. Most men, even the pigs among them, will respect someone who looks like they may be a nun. Only the gentleman among them will respect a woman who is dressed in her culture's prostitute costume. There is a reason for that. The nun's clothes tell men, pigs and gentlemen alike, that she will not be used for sex. The woman dressed in the prostitute costume tells men, pigs and gentlemen alike, that she will consider such an arrangement.

That is reason enough for me to support counseling women away from skimpy clothes. The fact that clothes broadcast our identity to the world. Maybe it is not our fault if some people get the wrong message about who we are, what we will accept, etc., based on what we wear. But while we are busy worrying about where to assign blame for people getting the wrong idea about us, some of the people who have gotten the wrong idea turn out to be pigs who will use it as a pretext to be disrespectful to us.