Modesty: what's the point?

[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.

 

 

[Credo in Deum]

Does dressing modestly stop 100% of rapes? No. Do security systems stop 100% of robberies? No. Does this mean these things are therefore not important in preventing such actions? No. 

Modesty is important for men and women.  It is about glorifying God and having reverence for oneself and ones neighbor as being made in the image of God.  With humility and common sense I'm sure it's not hard to practice modesty even in a society that likes to paint immodesty as "self-expression."  I think the best question we can all ask ourselves when it comes to buying clothes for public use is, "does this item of clothing show that I am precious to God and made in His Image? Does this item show that God is important to me and that I care about the eternal destiny of my neighbor?"  If you can't say yes to those questions then don't buy it.   

 

[Lilllabettt]

Yeah. We don't blame people when burglars break into their house. We don't say "well did you have a security system? Did you lock your doors? No? Then you were asking for it. You deserved it. You invited people to rob you."

But it is 100% legit to advise people: look, it's a good idea to get a security system. You probably want to lock your doors. There are bad guys out there. And if the neighborhood is bad enough someone might justly accuse you of being irresponsible for not taking those steps.

But even if you are irresponsible, throw caution to the wind, leave your front door wide open, etc. It is still not your fault that bad people come and steal from you.

[Maggyie]

There's no evidence though, that "modest dressing" stops crimes from being committed. There just isn't. Literally the idea that clothing triggers rape is not evidence based. It's an old wives tale at this point. Rape is often not about sexual arousal but about power, humiliation, revenge. Usually a crime of opportunity not passion.

Whereas we do know that security systems reduce the likelihood of a breakin. 

Edited August 25, 2015 by Maggyie

[Seven77]

There's no evidence though, that "modest dressing" stops crimes from being committed. There just isn't. Literally the idea that clothing triggers rape is not evidence based. It's an old wives tale at this point. Rape is often not about sexual arousal but about power, humiliation, revenge. Usually a crime of opportunity not passion.

Whereas we do know that security systems reduce the likelihood of a breakin. 

Who is saying that "clothing triggers rape"? That article isn't---at least in my reading. Maybe i have problems with reading comprehension.

[Lilllabettt]

There's no evidence though, that "modest dressing" stops crimes from being committed. There just isn't. Literally the idea that clothing triggers rape is not evidence based. It's an old wives tale at this point. Rape is often not about sexual arousal but about power, humiliation, revenge. Usually a crime of opportunity not passion.

Whereas we do know that security systems reduce the likelihood of a breakin. 

 

Do you disagree with what I said, that even a pig will hesitate to disrespect a nun, while only gentlemen show respect to prostitutes?

If you would like to design a controlled, longitudinal study of women, dress patterns, and sexual assault prevalence, have at it. And good luck. Empiricism can only take you so far.

 

Rapists do not bother with evaluating whether a woman is interested in sex. They do not factor it in. But most sexual assaulters do not think of what they do as rape or sexual assault.

A woman dressed in skimpy clothes is broadcasting a message that she is trying to attract a sexual partner. It's not very different from an animal showing off plumage. Supposedly the bigger the display, the more interest -- or so it happens in the animal kingdom.

Here's what happens next. 

Male pig sees her on the street.

Male pig says to himself: Clearly this woman is interested in having a sexual experience. Really interested.

Male pig thinks: Why not with me? Anyone who is looking for sex would want to have it with me.

Male pig: Hey, baby

... and so it begins. Probably the male pig will ask her "why you so sexy" and the woman will end up in tears because she was approached on the street by an aroused stranger when all she wanted was to go to the nail salon.

My personal experience has been that this kind of thing will happen regardless of what I am wearing.

But to take the extreme example to prove a point: it does not happen as much to nuns. And that is because their clothing broadcasts an identity that says "I am not interested in a sexual partner"

So the corollary is: it is a bad idea to wear clothing which broadcasts the identity that says: I am very interested in a sexual partner. Very interested. VERY INTERESTED.

 

Edited August 25, 2015 by Lilllabettt

[Maggyie]

 

Do you disagree with what I said, that even a pig will hesitate to disrespect a nun, while only gentlemen show respect to prostitutes?

If you would like to design a controlled, longitudinal study of women, dress patterns, and sexual assault prevalence, have at it. And good luck. Empiricism can only take you so far.

 

Rapists do not bother with evaluating whether a woman is interested in sex. They do not factor it in. But most sexual assaulters do not think of what they do as rape or sexual assault.

A woman dressed in skimpy clothes is broadcasting a message that she is trying to attract a sexual partner. It's not very different from an animal showing off plumage. Supposedly the bigger the display, the more interest -- or so it happens in the animal kingdom.

Here's what happens next. 

Male pig sees her on the street.

Male pig says to himself: Clearly this woman is interested in having a sexual experience. Really interested.

Male pig thinks: Why not with me? Anyone who is looking for sex would want to have it with me.

Male pig: Hey, baby

... and so it begins. Probably the male pig will ask her "why you so sexy" and the woman will end up in tears because she was approached on the street by an aroused stranger when all she wanted was to go to the nail salon.

My personal experience has been that this kind of thing will happen regardless of what I am wearing.

But to take the extreme example to prove a point: it does not happen as much to nuns. And that is because their clothing broadcasts an identity that says "I am not interested in a sexual partner"

So the corollary is: it is a bad idea to wear clothing which broadcasts the identity that says: I am very interested in a sexual partner. Very interested. VERY INTERESTED.

 

that's not how rape happens though... Guys who rape are not picking out women on the street. That kind of rape is actually quite rare. It's usually 2 people who know each other who are alone together where the opportunity presents itself. If nuns hung out with men a lot they would be at equal risk of rape, however instead they are mostly around other women and are rarely alone with a man. They also aren't usually in a situation where drugs or alcohol are being used (another actual risk factor). 

[Gabriela]

This article have such a low idea of men, it's frightening. In a way, it is the same way of thinking than some radical feminist. 
 

Have you ever been frustrated by the way men treat women and wondered what could be done to restore a sense of respect? If so, the solution is closer to you than you realize" While our culture treat women like object and like to represent men (in movies, books) like pigs, most of the men that I know treat women with respect and dignity. Men are grown-up and able to control themself. 

"Whether a woman realizes it or not, the way she dresses has an extraordinary ability to help shape a man into a gentleman or into a beast." This is very close to the "she was raped because her skirt was too short". Again, the men that I see around me are not "a gentleman or a beast" because of how the women around them dress, but because of education, politeness, and own characters. 

In order to appreciate the influence that women have on men, females must first realize that males are very visual creatures. This is partly because of how their minds work, but it is also because women possess great beauty. In fact, nothing on earth approaches the beauty of women." So, women are not visual creatures ? Men have no great beauty ? You know, women can be attracted to men because of their beauty too. 

Because the beauty of the woman can be intoxicating to a man, he may find it difficult to see beyond it. " Again, are men so stupid ? Are they so controlled my hormones ? 

Modern culture tells women, “If your body is so great, show yourself!” The woman who understands her worth resists such an invitation and replies, “Because of my value, I veil myself. My body was not given to me for the sake of exposing it to you. If I show too much, I wouldn’t be revealing my true worth to you. I’d be distracting you from what matters most." This look like the testimony of muslim women on why she chooses to wear niqab. 

Therefore, the men who frustrate or upset you by whistling or making crude remarks need you to realize your own dignity as a daughter of God" Any man who make crude remarks need an education. Same things for women who judge men bodies by crude remarks. Seriously. 

Btw, while I agree on the fact that our culture sexualize women, let's not forget that our cultures also : 
a) Sexualize A LOT men, with impossible standard to reach for them, causing many men to have a bad body image 
b) Deshumanize men a lot, when they represent them (by movies, books), like pigs obsessed by sex. Here's a comic who speak about it with humor : http://www.collegehumor.com/post/7030066/guys-in-movies-vs-real-life 

Instead of this, I prefer this testimonies by Elizabeth Esther (who was raised by fundamentalist baptist - long skirt, etc... and then later converted to catholicism). I copy the extract that interest me : 
 

My three older kids are working through their second year of faith formation in our Catholic parish. Last week, they came home with a packet about physical, symbolic and internal boundaries. As I flipped through the worksheets, I saw the word MODESTY and my heart froze. I could feel thoseold purity culture ideas rearing their shame-y, blame-y heads. But then I read the definition. And I got all happy because here, read it for yourselves:

Modesty: The virtue that respects, honors and protects privacy: the quality of avoiding extremes of emotion, action, dress and language. Modesty respects my boundaries and the boundaries of others.

What a well-rounded, WHOLE-PERSON approach to understanding the virtue of modesty! This is a perfect example of why I love Catholicism--the theology isn't compartmentalized; meaning,modesty isn't exclusively about manner of dress but about the WHOLE WAY we live our lives.

The Catholic understanding of modesty is that it encompasses ALL we do.

In purity culture, modesty was exclusively about sexuality; more specifically, female sexuality.

But the true modesty goes far, far beyond that. It's about how we speak, how we act and it's about avoiding extremes. Modesty is about moderation, respect for my boundaries and the boundaries of others. It's about avoiding excess.

Couldn't we say, then, that all Christians are called to live modestly? I mean, if modesty is a virtue, it's not just for women. But how often do you ever hear Christians speaking about men being modest?

How often do we speak about modesty in regards to how we eat, how we spend our money, the kind of car we drive, the kind of house we live in?

http://www.elizabethesther.com/archives/2013/10/modesty-doesnt-live-in-a-multi-million-dollar-mansion.html 

This is what modest is for me. It's not ONLY about how we dress. It's about how we eat : eating too little is bad, and eating too much is bad too. "Avoiding extremes of action, dress and language" is very counter-cultural. 

You make great posts, Nada.

This part of the article is absolutely true. btw, what do you have against Muslims? 

Where the thing goes wrong is in suggesting that the way a woman dresses determines whether a particular man will be a gentleman to her. No. A real gentleman will speak to female prostitutes, strippers, drug addicts, thieves, etc. as kindly, gently, and with as much respect as he does his own wife or mother. That is  the gentleman test. Any man will treat a nun with respect, but only a true gentleman shows respect to infamous women. 

 

Also a great point.

To be completely honest, my first thought on seeing the title of this thread was, "Another modesty thread on Phatmass: what's the point?"

Exactly what I thought. And I didn't bother reading the article.

[Era Might]

Modesty and maturity go together. A person who is a prude or squeamish about the body is not mature, any more than a person who has no self-respect. We shouldn't mistake piousness for virtue. Some people cover up because they are ashamed of their body, some people sleep around because their hearts are too big. Obviously, when you're at a bar at a certain time in a certain way (drunk, half-naked, whatever) you know what you're trying to get into. Make good decisions and discipline yourself..modesty is a fruit of that.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Era Might

[PhuturePriest]

Very silly article. A woman can't teach a man how to treat women through her dress. It simply doesnt work. That has to be taught by other men. That's why fathers are so important! 

Modest dress also doesn't protect one from mistreatment. Many women dress far more modestly than you, MLF, in the middle east; and yet rape, sexual assault and a profound lack of dignity for women are very common there. Why, because the men are taught to behave that way by their fathers...

modesty does not mean ugly. Unfortunately many women who attempt to dress modestly wear very plain, homely clothing in dark colors. They don't go shopping and carefully choose their clothes to look as lovely and attractive as possible. You could argue from the same principles that this is quite sinful since such clothing disfigures the image of woman's glorious body. It is like putting the tabernacle in a burlap sack. Yes God veils what is precious but he covers it with splendor. 

I think you undervalue the lessons women can teach men, and vice-versa. 

You also forget that actions speak louder than words. I'm not saying modesty is the way to fix all the problems in the world, but it is important and does a world of good for many reasons.

[Credo in Deum]

There's no evidence though, that "modest dressing" stops crimes from being committed. There just isn't. Literally the idea that clothing triggers rape is not evidence based. It's an old wives tale at this point. Rape is often not about sexual arousal but about power, humiliation, revenge. Usually a crime of opportunity not passion.

Whereas we do know that security systems reduce the likelihood of a breakin. 

LOL! Of course there is no evidence to prove that modest clothing will prevent a sexual assault. This is because no one can document what a person would have done but didn't do, and no person with half a brain is going to admit they were thinking about sexuality assaulting someone or were triggered to sexually assault someone but didn't, based on how they're dressed.   

Edited August 25, 2015 by Credo in Deum