Modesty has been a hot topic in some of
my social circles of late, ever since this video began making the
rounds. Many people, perhaps the majority among my friends, soundly
affirmed the speaker and her commitment to modesty. They decried its
demise in American and Western culture. I can understand that. After
all, modesty seems like a very good and desirable quality. Who
wouldn't want to affirm it?
However, after watching the video I
felt disturbed. When I read this article I found that I agreed with
the author's critiques. Among other things, in the rush to affirm
modesty we miss that the speaker, Jessica Ray, is in fact marketing
to us. She is promoting her line of swimwear and with it an
understanding of what modesty looks like. And that's a significant
problem, because who defines modesty?
Dictionary.com offers three definitions of modesty:
- the quality of being modest; freedom from vanity, boastfulness, etc.
- regard for decency of behavior, speech, dress, etc.
- simplicity, moderation
Most discussion of modesty these days
focuses on the second definition, narrowing it even further to
standards of dress. More specifically, the discussions focus almost
exclusively on standards of dress for women. Those who advocate for a
return to modesty generally have in mind some more conservative
standard of attire, such as a rejection of bikinis, which is Ms.
Rey's particular issue.
Yet the fundamental problem remains:
Who defines what is modest? Standards of modesty change from one
culture to another and within any given culture over a period of
time. What one person considers quite modest might to another person
be extremely immodest. As the author of the blog To Every One That Believeth points out, Ms. Rey's dress in her video would not meet
modesty standards at BYU, although by other standards it is perfectly
modest. Simply covering or exposing skin does not make a woman (or
man) modest or immodest. No matter how one defines modesty, it will
be too much for some and too little for others. Modesty is ultimately
a subjective position. I am free to argue that I like or do not like
a person's attire, but by what right do I proclaim that it is
immodest and project my standard onto the other person? Even more so,
by what right do I judge another person based on what she or he is
wearing? (Let's admit that the conversation really comes down to what
women wear and our judgment of women for that, because few people
seem too concerned about what men are wearing. Guys can go around
topless in many social contexts without fear of being labeled
immodest and immoral, although I and probably many others would much
prefer to not see their bare bellies.)
This leads to a second issue with the
modesty debate. All too often advocates of modesty connect what a
woman wears with what kind of person she is. A woman who wears a
bikini, or bares her shoulders, or arms, or whatever is unacceptable
according to the particular definition of modesty, is “obviously”
a loose, immoral person. This may not always be stated explicitly,
but it underlies much of modesty culture. Let's call this for the
falsehood that it is. What you wear does not define what kind of
person you are, and if others choose to define you based solely on
your attire, then they are the ones in error.
Women are also encouraged to dress
modestly for the sake of protecting their dignity and to avoid
provoking the men around them to lustful thoughts and actions. In
this way women become responsible for the actions of men, rather than
men being responsible for their own actions. In Ms. Rey's video, she
cites a study at Princeton which she uses to argue that men who see
bare female flesh respond mentally in the same way they do to images
of tools. In other words, they objectify women. Putting aside the
significant flaws of the study, one very limited data sample does not
conclusively demonstrate that men naturally respond as animals when
seeing women's skin. When we put the burden on women to not provoke
men by their attire, we say that men cannot be held responsible for
their behavior and that they are incapable of acting differently.
That's a low view of men and an unfair burden to place on women. When
modesty becomes the means by which a woman must protect herself from
inappropriate male behavior, then we have identified the wrong
problem and the wrong solution. The problem is the behavior of men
and the solution is for men to learn to view women as human beings
and treat them accordingly. Instead, modesty allows men to continue
to behave like cretins towards women and blames the women for this
behavior. Something is seriously wrong with this picture.
I find it interesting as well that the
modesty discussion seems to ignore the other two definitions provided
above. A modest person – male or female – should behave without
vanity and boastfulness. A modest person should express simplicity
and moderation. These go far beyond issues of how one dresses to
one's very character. This may express itself in one's attire, but
more significantly it will express itself in one's attitude and
actions. As people of God we should all strive to live without
vanity. We should all avoid boastfulness. Scripture says far more
about these issues than it does about what one wears. And these
standards apply equally to both men and women. I affirm modesty as a
principle, but I cannot accept the way in which it has been hijacked
lately to define a certain type of attire for women. I am working to
see each person as a God-created unique individual and not judge them
by what they are wearing, even if I do not personally find it
tasteful or appealing. Ultimately people should be able to dress
according to a standard that they feel comfortable with, not
according to what someone else says is modest and decent. If you want
to wear a one-piece bathing suit, I wholeheartedly affirm that. But
if you prefer a bikini, than that is your choice as well and it is
not my place to tell you otherwise.
On a final note, as a parent of two
teenage children – one boy, one girl – I do believe that parents
have a right and a responsibility to guide their children in their
choice of clothing. But with that comes a responsibility to educate
them, to help them develop their own identity and the ability to
choose attire that accords with that identity. As parents we play
such a formulative role in helping our children define their
identity. I think a mistaken emphasis on a false standard of modesty
may do more to skew that identity in unhealthy ways than to help them
develop true, healthy modesty. I hope, and based on what I see I
believe, that my wife and I have managed to achieve a decent balance
in this regard.
Danielle, who blogs at From Two to One,
did an excellent series on modesty. You'll find the first article in
the series here.
