Passing Thoughts

[jackofallgeeks]

Modesty.

Recently, passing through Friends' journals and reading through Friends' Friends' journals, I've stumbled upon the issue of modesty and who's 'responsible.'

That sounds quite awkward.
Who's responsible? Who's responsible for what?

Tori Amos was quoted, "So I wore a slinky red thing, does that mean I should spread?" Tori has such a way with words. The point was, if a girl wears 'immodest' clothes, and some guy has impure thoughts, who's at fault? Surley not the girl, it was argued, because surely she wasn't inviting it, or asking for it, or what have you.

Take a step back. Tori's song is about rape. I'm not touching that subject, and my comment that she "wasn't asking for it" isn't meant to apply there.

That having been said, it takes two to tango. I think it's a commonly accepted belief that men struggle with lust quite a bit. Every two minutes, it's been claimed. The thing of it is that while, yes, men have a responsibility to control themselves, doesn't it also follow that women have a 'responsibility' to not tempt, directly or indirectly? If you're trying to help an addict, you don't wave heroine in front of him. Is it not irresponsible, to some extent, for women to put us into that situation?

-shrugs- Maybe it's just me. You know, I can be odd at times. But still, it seems only reasonable that if a girl's walking around exposed, at least some of the blame is hers. -shrugs-

Comments

[ambereternal.livejournal.com]

Okay, I'm going to start by saying I understand that you're not talking about the issue of rape...That being said, who determines what is and is not inviting. I've been hit on in very inappropriate ways wearing a baggy sweatshirt and crappy jeans. I've been violated in public places on days when I've done absolutely nothing to make myself look good or accentuate my "assets". Yes, there are situations when women dress to kill. And yes, sometimes women go overboard with that...I mean, I've seen women wear things that would make a prostitute cringe. My point is that sometimes it doesn't matter what a woman wears or looks like. Some men are just assholes, and will attempt to take advantage no matter what. Then there are men who deal with the temptation in a responsible and adult way...Those are the good guys. They're few and far between. Some women are just whores, and will do everything they can to get a guy's attention...appropriate or not. Other women are not...Sadly it's the women who are not who often get hurt in these situations.

[otakulk.livejournal.com]

I am just going to wait for the flood of comments to come in on this one before I shoot down everything you just said :P

[thismortalquill.livejournal.com]

You can tell that this commentary was written by a man.

Unless she's a whore or otherwise specifically looking to get laid, the reason a woman gets dressed up is for other women. Men really don't figure into it unless a woman's with a man already and she knows he likes certain things.

My biggest question is "why should there be blame?"

if a girl wears 'immodest' clothes, and some guy has impure thoughts, who's at fault?

Why is there a fault? Impure thoughts are... normal? It's when someone inappropriately acts on those thoughts when "blame" and "fault" come into play.

But assume we're playing by your rules. Or, that is to say, maybe not your rules, but by rules that say immodesty is bad, and so are impure thoughts. In that case, "blame" and "fault" would come into play.

while, yes, men have a responsibility to control themselves, doesn't it also follow that women have a 'responsibility' to not tempt, directly or indirectly?

This attitude is what led to burkas and the ostracization of women in "men's" culture.

But, playing by the outlined rules, let me see, what would I say...

If a woman dresses like a hussy, exposing things, or wearing provocative clothing, then yes, there is some "blame" on her because she is choosing to wear that sort of clothing.

However, it takes very little to prompt an impure thought from a man.

My bottom line? Wearing skimpy clothing might be provocative, but it does not implicitly invite any sort of violation or harassment. And men are prone to "impure thoughts" and they are normal and acceptable as long as they don't share them or act upon them with an unwilling listener or participant.

[bsgnome.livejournal.com]

Well, I must say that, for the most part, I agree with you. But I think the problem you've been having with others is, essentially, a misrepresentation of terms--namely, "modesty".

Now, I don't claim to know all that much about the subject--though I've seen it discussed before, and the exact same kind of discussion came about. Anyhow, "modesty" need be properly defined. Quite frankly, there is no certain mark as to when something is or is not immodest--it's a cultural element, and therefore, prone to acclimation. That is to say, what was immodest a century ago is not necessarily immodest today--case in point: tuxedos. Similarly, it is also affected by environment--what is immodest under given circumstances is not necessarily immodest in another situation. More clearly--immodesty is dressing in such a way that one knows that it will cause others to think . . . "wrongly".

Now, granted, there are men who will hoot and hollar regardless of the way a woman dresses. But, I'd agrue, there are also men who will treat a woman with the utmost respect regardless of the way she dresses. Modesty, however, cannot properly be gauged according to either of these groups, but rather, it should be regarded according to the average. I think that everyone--not just women; not just men--has a responsibility to dress modestly--that is to say, they have a responsibility to dress in such a way that they are certain it would not be their dress that causes others to think "wrongly", but, rather, some depravity on the part of the others.

Now, as for whether or not immodesty is wrong. Well, certainly--for immodesty is an action on the individual's part intended to cause others to think "wrongly". Thinking "wrongly", in turn, causes the others to act in a manner against their better judgment. I, personally, would think it ludicrous to claim that acting against one's better judgment is not wrong--it's called better judgment for a reason.

Kindred

[skreyola.livejournal.com]

I understand exactly from whence you are coming on this, and I agree with you whole-heartedly.
I often wonder why the feminists don't seem to even notice the demystification and objectification of women by women who dress that way... only by men who treat women a certain way. Quite sexist, if you ask me.

I think everyone should dress modestly in public... and I'm speaking of sensual modesty, not some standard of abhorring flashiness, as someone mentioned (re:tuxedo).