April 14, 2012
-
What Your Immodesty Does To Us
Remember, modesty isn't just about a woman's body. It's about a man's words, your uncle's car and your sister's latest accomplishment. That said, why is not being modest a problem at all? If it's no problem at all, this isn't worth talking about at all, and I'm wasting my time. Let me throw down some text to tell you why it matters.
I don't know why it's stuck with me so long. About 5 years ago, a Xangan who was a Christian went to Puerto Rico on vacation. It was winter in Cleveland, the usual despairing grey skies supplemented by shivers and snowflakes. I was at my desk, and clicked on her post. In one photo, she was in a white bikini. The photo wasn't even that suggestive: top half only, I believe. But what was interesting was what the photo did to me.
I know what you're thinking "Oh, so you got turned on. I know the story. So what's wrong with that? It's not as if you were going to rape her or as if you went out and killed someone. Or are you blaming her?"
But it's not that simple. If immodesty was just about coveting, about desiring something that someone else has, then it's not that difficult. It's just about me and her and my ability to not want things that shouldn't be mine, or to want things that could be mine if I would put myself forward. She's either a possibility or not, right? So either I shouldn't be wanting her if I can't have her, or if I could have her, this should spur me to action as I see what she has to offer.
However, the problem is, it's not that simple. In that moment, I was seized by deep despair. Because none of us is just who we are: we are also symbols, thoughts, and ideas to those around us. The fact was, I despaired of ever having anything so lovely for myself. Her sweet self was womankind, Eden, and I was Adam, barred from the garden as surely as if a spinning flaming sword stood in my path. When there is no hope of fulfilling our desires, and then our dreams are thrust in our faces for a moment, there's a harm done much deeper than mere sexual excitement. It's not as simple as "Watch Ryan Gosling on the big screen then go home and have sex with your husband" when you have no husband and you don't think you'll have one for years. What happens in that immodest moment, in your mind, is darkness and despair, as you see that it seems so easy for everyone else to have what you want but you are shut out, estranged from beauty, separated from accomplishment.
The true harm of immodesty is that it takes something that should be beautiful and appreciated, and tells some of us "This is not for you. I will parade in front of you, I will tease you with my rhythm and rhyme or curves and care, but then I will go away and you will have nothing." To me, this is the true harm of pornography: it leaves its viewers with nothing to hold but faint memory, stolen through the lens of another.
Immodesty is not harm when it is something you can have, when the wife knows the husband who sent her sweet words is coming home, when the man admires the dancers at his college but knows full well that his own girlfriend is more artful than them. The trouble with immodesty is that it takes dreaming and makes it nightmares.
Comments (15)
Great point
It seems there is a slippery slope between what may be labeled modest and what may be labeled immodest. I'm thinking on burqas and habits, hats and scarves, pants and shorts, long-sleeves and short sleeves. Was the girl in the bikini being immodest or was it your perception of what immodesty is?
I love this post because now you've got me thinking on what one considers modest, another may well consider immodest. I understand that that was not the direction you were taking, it is just what I gleaned personally from the article.
A wonderful perspective here. Thank you for phrasing it so well.
@Kellsbella - there is a funny twist to this story that I think you will like. See the post titled "What My Immodesty Might Mean to Me"
@GreekPhysique - I replied there that I thought you should put these posts together.
i stumbled through this blog through the links from one posted on the main page.
i hope my response does not sound disrespectful. your post series is definitely interesting to think about.
why is it that woman's role to be' modest' so as not to 'tease' you in your inability to be with a woman? it seems as if your inability to find and/or win a woman over is a responsibility which rests with you; it isn't her responsibility to make sure that she does not ever do anything which may somehow make you feel inadequate regarding your womanless-ness. i mean, what if we put that same woman in a t-shirt and jeans? would you still see her face and feel the despair? how about if i put that woman in a burqa and let only her eyes be seen so as not to make you feel that way? but then you would see her stunning eyes and feel the same thing. so should i cover her eyes also? would you see the silhouette of a covered woman and be reminded by what you can't have? it seems like this feeling doesn't ever really go away, but that certain things remind you of it more strongly... (probably because of basic biology
)
it seems like immodesty differs from person to person, and the easiest way to fix immodesty is to fix the immodesty in our own heads. immodesty seems to tell some people "you can't have this", but the fact of the matter is that 99.9% of the time, these things are not impossible to attain for those who seem blocked off from it. if you didn't feel entitled to a beautiful woman, or that you somehow are lacking because you do not have one, perhaps you would not have felt this despair.
Or she's just wearing a white bikini because it's hot in Puerto Rico. It seems you have a bunch of blogs going on today about this, but so far I have to say that a woman is not up for grabs just because she is in public. Whatever a woman chooses to wear, doesn't mean the thought should cross your mind (or any man's mind) that she is advertising herself. She is not parading in front of you, enticing you to her, she is just out in public wearing something she chooses to wear. What women wear is not about men. Sure some women may have that mind, but you have no idea what's on her mind when you see her.
Just because she's attractive to you, doesn't mean you get to think... should I go for it or is she taken? She is after all, just a stranger in public (or in this case on a blog). She isn't teasing you, showing you what you don't have or won't have, because she is not yours or his or whatever, she is a person, not an object on display for sale.
@haltija - "if you didn't feel entitled to a beautiful
woman, or that you somehow are lacking because you do not have one,
perhaps you would not have felt this despair."
Exactly, men are not entitled to a beautiful woman. Women aren't objects to be owned. Imagine if we made men walk around naked all the time because a naked man is less attractive than a man in Levi's and a t-shirt to most women. Why is it only a woman's job to save or provide for the needs of men, but men don't owe us the same?
I don't think that truly has anything to do with modesty. It is beauty, beauty which we can let lift our spirits or plunge us into despair--beauty which shows us all the possibilities of the world and leaves us to decide how we will respond. If you would have had her keep secret such photographs for their effect on you, you may as well cloak a mountain to preserve the heart of the legless man who dreams of its heights.
Wasn't quite what i expected from the title, and i think i get what you're trying to explain. Would the definition of the word immodest, as used to describe the woman, change depending on if she wore a white bikini at the beach, or at a grocery store? What about if you were a native in an African desert, or member of tribe in a jungle, where the women and men did not wear much clothing? Just some thoughts that came to me as i read.
@haltija - Thanks for your response, and for mentioning that you did realize that your comments could be taken offensively. I understand that there's a certain slippery slope here to "immodesty." If she had been wearing a t-shirt and jeans and had a flower in her hair, and I had the same feelings, is that her fault? etc. But I also think that perhaps part of my point got lost in translation. We can argue over what is and is not immodest, and the recipient's responsibility not to easily take offense. But all that debate makes no sense unless it is realized that immodest behavior really does harm the people it affects. If there is no real harm that occurs when someone is immodest, then all my other posts were worthless. Does that make sense?
@TiredSoVeryTired - There's a good debate to have about personhood and objectification. I would also note that I wrote a later blog here: http://greekphysique.xanga.com/761472795/what-my-immodesty-might-mean-to-me/ where I explained that she had very virtuous, healthy reasons for dressing that way. Also, I agree that a man too has a certain responsibility. Back in the day when I played a lot of pickup basketball outside, I wouldn't take off my shirt when I got hot because I felt it was unfairly exhibitionistic. Now perhaps you would argue that I should have felt just fine with taking care of myself. But I do believe it goes both ways, and men also have a large responsibility. More, perhaps, given a man's propensity to boast too much.
But out of curiosity, would you agree that certain styles and signals do tend to send a stronger message that one is less a person and more a symbol? Or are there no styles that do this, and styles are neutral? I personally feel that if someone is expressing for themselves and no one else, it's a different story. But let's be honest: don't most people talk and dress with the goal of eliciting a certain reaction from those around them? For such people to then complain that some people react poorly is a bit unfair, I think.
@lanney - Ah, but I will turn the tables on you. If there's a legless man in my circle of friends, don't we owe it to him not to go on and on about our planned hike into the mountains? Are we good people if we constantly bring up the very things he cannot do, within reason?
@an_OM_aly - This is where modesty has a cultural component. Each culture allows a certain amount of bragging, showiness, and seduction as "normal." Certainly, some members of that culture will have a very restrictive perspective. And the culture itself doesn't have to adopt the morals of its most restrictive members. But I do believe there's a status quo point as well.
@GreekPhysique - Within reason, there is the difficulty. No you do not want to thrust it in his face, but I think that hiding it from him or avoiding him because he cannot participate is just as harmful. So there you have to find a balance between behaving naturally and being considerate, and I think that balance is different for each person and instance. It is affected both by culture and by individual personality, so yes modesty is something to consider, but just because something we did affected someone else in a negative manner, I don't think that necessarily means it was wrong or immodest, but simply an unfortunate reaction.
I personally have never been a fan of showing off a lot of skin to all
and sundry. It seems to me, however, that our society is progressing
rapidly in the direction of accepting public nudity. Perhaps someday then the
American man can move beyond his mammary obsession and see a woman just
as clearly no matter what she is or is not wearing.
@GreekPhysique - As people, we should treat others as people. The problem is not there is a person (man or woman) out there who would choose to dress a certain way to elicit a response, the problem is that some people feel they are entitled to think of or treat someone poorly based on how they dress. (I'm speaking of immodest dress for women because it should not be damaging or seen negatively since it only applies to women.)
It is not my job to worry about what I wear in order to make sure you don't make me an object. You shouldn't make a person an object ever! The responsibility lies within ourselves to treat people as people. It simply doesn't matter why someone chooses to be immodest. Life isn't fair. So, if my hot dress makes you think I'm just an object, that's your issue, your sin. Not mine. Maybe it's just 110 degrees outside and I am sick of tired of wearing constricting clothes. Or maybe I don't care if you drool when you see my cleavage because you are not entitled to my tits just because I have them and it's hot and I don't care who sees them.
We cannot control the reactions of others. We can and only should control our own reactions and if our thoughts drift off to make another person an object, the fault is only our own. Everybody should feel free to take our shirts off during a game of basketball in hot weather, not because we wish to show off how hot (sexy) we are, but because we are just damn hot (warm). It's silly to go around assuming every action of a person is meant to say either 1) I'm up for grabs or 2) haha you could never win me.
@GreekPhysique - you said that we should realize that 'immodest behavior really does harm the people it affects.', but i think the real question is- what harm can imposing one's definition of modesty cause? while some claim to suffer because of the immodesty of others, it seems no one bothers to think back to those who would have to suffer to keep you from feeling affected by their "immodesty"- and it all comes back to that great slippery slope of defining the term itself.
looking a little deeper, this somewhat ties to one of your own posts-- it's the immodesty of thought which causes you to suffer: it's your own immodesty which is hurting you, not the immodesty of this woman. your despair was tied into the thought that you somehow felt entitled or worthy to just 'have' a woman/another person, which is a grandly immodest assumption in and of itself... so yes, immodesty can affect us aversely - but it's our own immodesty, not that which we perceive in others.
Comments are closed.