Dignity in the Skin

Modesty is a big thing – in this age and every age, it seems.  The expectations have changed over time; fashions have changed.  But one thing has not changed, and that is the capacity of busybodies to criticize and belittle those people who are not dressed respectably.

I have written briefly about modesty before, but I would like to address a particular issue that has many criticisms and has caused much confusion and bitterness.  And this issue, I am proud to announce, is the bikini.

There are several arguments against the bikini and I am sympathetic to all of them.  However, I do not agree with the conclusion, based on these arguments, that the bikini is inherently detrimental to the dignity of women and the purity of men.  I assure you, though, that I have reasons for this, reasons that I will do my best to explain.

I would like to refer you to this article, which, I have heard, made its rounds on social media some time ago.  Called "The Bikini Question," guest blogger Rachel Clark attempts to convince girls (and has done well accomplishing this goal from what I hear) that they should never wear bikinis.  Her first reason is that she is "making a sacrifice for the guys" around her.  This is well-intentioned and I am very glad that she is able to sacrifice herself in such a manner; but this mindset is incorrect.

Let me first, however, establish that girls do indeed have more self-knowledge than we are sometimes led to believe.  What I mean is that girls almost always know when a hem or a v is going to attract special attention.  They may not know that they are deserving of so much more than this type of attention; they may not know that there is so much more – but they know full well when their attire is a little scanty.  If they did not, they would not be able to do it intentionally.  Women that seek to be modest don't necessarily need to have strict dress rules given them; to an extent, what to wear comes down to common sense.

An essential idea behind modesty: women should not dress to look sexy.  They are theoretically dressing to look appetizing, if you will, to the menfolk.  But I personally think that women shouldn't have the mindset that they are dressing for men, period.  I think that, contrary to what some people realize, women should dress for themselves.  They should dress according to their personality and to encourage, within themselves, self-respect and a proper realization of their dignity.  Dressing to be sexy is dressing "for men."  But if only women were taught to dress in accordance with their dignity, which is unchanging, rather than to dress for men, other women, or anything besides their true identity.  And girls have an important and difficult task respecting their own bodies; they ought to focus on protecting their own opinion of themselves through their attire, and with that down, they can sacrifice for other people with other gestures.

This does not address all the hangups related to modesty, but it is an important concept to understand.  Even without it, however, many are more concerned that women have the responsibility to look out for the man, to protect his imagination.  As Rachel Clark wrote:

"I’ve heard the excuse, Guys just have an imagination, it’s not a girl’s problem. Frankly, I think that’s stupid. Part of it is our problem. The way we dress impacts those around us, especially guys. I don’t really want a guy to look at me and notice me for my butt, upper thighs, or chest. I’d rather him notice my smile or God-loving personality. Well sure, you say, that’s all fine and good, but guys should be able to control their imagination and look beyond our bodies. That’s true, they should control it. But it’s important for girls to help them as they try and do so."

She's right.  "Guys just have an imagination; it's not a girl's problem," is a very sad excuse, and not just for the reasons Rachel Clark has pointed out, although she's mostly right.  The Holy Fool at The Holy Fool put it this way:

" … there exists a false stereotype which claims that men are, as a general rule, grimier, more carnal, and more predisposed to lust than any woman could ever be. The problem with this “chocolate cake” mindset, this “boys will be boys” mindset, this “Women should help men because men can’t help themselves” thought process is that it is damaging to the entire male gender. Sure, it might be a little easier for men to feign chastity if everyone around them is enabling and catering to their weakness. But in addition to stripping men of any moral responsibility, it also strips them of the nobility and well-deserved pride that comes with achieving continence for themselves. It forces men into a negative, self-hating stereotype which ensures that, no matter how much self-mastery they obtain, they will always feel gross or lecherous. On a personal note, I actually know of certain boys who have doubted their own masculinity when they don’t have major issues with lust, so potent is the stereotype that to be masculine is to be lustful. This is just one example which illustrates that negative stereotypes which belittle a gender – however well-intentioned – hurt everyone."  ["The Bikini Question: a Rebuttal"]

The thing is that, although our generally broken society has helped many men and boys to see a woman and define her incorrectly (and vice versa), I have often found that the real world is not quite like a sitcom, where everyone sees someone new and automatically chalks them up to their sex appeal.  That is, certainly, a problem – I won't deny that.  But it is not the case that all men, each and every one of them, is subjected against their will to carnal lust every time they see a woman who is scantily clad.  Will they experience some level of arousal?  Maybe; but that in itself is not a sin or even unhealthy.*  And truly consider a moment: what is "scantily clad"?

Rather than focusing on the (literally) surface details, the root of the problem is that so many people don't know that they aren't objects to be used and that no one else is either (which is a concept at the root of many issues, not just lust).  Furthermore, fantasies are something a person consents to.  Sudden ideas, images – those can't always be helped.  But fantasies, lusting after a person – yep, they can.  All due to the incredible gift of free will, a person chooses.  (Admittedly, the choice is not easy or easily followed.)

Where is this leading us?  I will explain, in a special post next week, in part two.

* see http://theholyfool.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-bikini-question-rebuttal.html if you'd like more information