What Guys Think About Modesty

Strangest/Sweetest Reaction to Dress I’ve Ever Received

It was too precious not to tell.

My oldest daughter and I went for a grocery outing/Hobby Lobby stop yesterday. It’s always so fun for the two of us to get out and chat together.

As we were headed across the parking lot, a gentleman was walking in our direction. (I feel that his race is important to note–he was black–because of the warm, jovial, southern tone in which he spoke that a typical white man doesn’t normally use…it was simply endearing.) He literally stopped in his tracks, looked at us and said,

“Well, praise the Lord, look how nice you look! Are you sisters? (Yessssss!)”

“No, we’re mother and daughter.”

“Look at those smiles! You look so nice…it’s so wonderful! It’s just wonderful!  God bless y’all!”

It really made me think more about my dress and how much our outward appearance speaks (or should?) about us.  We can’t get it backward though–”white washed exteriors with dead men’s bones within”.  But don’t we “speak” with our outward appearance?

Was it the refreshment of simple feminity displayed? (I’m not pretending to be “all femininity”; I don’t always wear skirts and dresses, but more often than not.)

I don’t know.  I do know that once there were clear and obvious distinctions, that women gloried in their femininity, and that even the most feminine-loving of us have grown up in a culture where it doesn’t seem to matter much and we struggle ourselves over appropriate dress.  Lines have definintely been blurred and the blurring defended so vehemently that even talking about dress gets people all bent out of shape.

Still, it was an interesting experience that made me think.

Raising Daughters of Grace, Beauty and Loveliness

Disclaimer (of which the discerning reader may skip):

I tire of disclaimers.  They clutter.  Yet, sometimes I take a walk on the wild side and leave it out.  I guess this post needed one.

Disclaimer #1:  Just because I posted a picture of Jacqueline Kennedy doesn’t mean I consider her a role model.  She is graceful, lovely and charming.  That’s it.

Disclaimer #2:  Regarding the mentioning of the Victorian era:  the words ” improperly elevated” are the disclaimer.

Disclaimer #3:  This is not a dissertation on whether Jane Austen was a feminist.  We like her movies.  And the pretty clothes.  And the dreamy way Jennifer Ehle says, “You puzzle me exceedingly”. The mentioning of other eras is just that–a mentioning in a post primarily meant to encourage ladies to be ladies.

End of disclaimer.

Loveliness.  Grace.  True Beauty.

You recognize it when you see it.  But it’s becoming rare.  The Victorian era has certainly been improperly elevated, and us Jane Austen-lovin’ gals still swoon over over-romanticized ideals, but there is something to be said about the way women of that day carried themselves, dressed and behaved.

The rules weren’t all pomp and circumstance; women were cherished (despite what many believe) and treated like ladies and they played the part.  Being delicate was not a weakness and acting like a female was actually recognized for the power it holds.  Women were comfortable and strong in their femininity and didn’t feel the need to compete with the toughness of the other gender.

Value or De-valued?

In our day, we have clamored our way out of  “female oppression”, roaring all the way.  And it shows.  Read more »

Modesty & The Sin of Bathsheba: One Man’s Appeal

“Your brethren in Christ may be weak, and the devil does all he can do to weaken them further. They’re forced to live in a world where they are continually bombarded with sights, which are designed by the enemy of their souls to weaken their morals and destroy their purity of heart, and must Christian women help the devil to do his work? Must they make themselves a temptation to their brethren, even in the congregation of God?

“Oh that you women could understand the fierce and bitter conflict in the souls of your brethren when you arouse their desires by the careless display of your feminine beauty. Never again would you plead for your right to dress as you please.

The fact is you have no such right. You have no right to destroy by your careless dress, the brother for whom Christ died. “You were bought with a price and are not your own” (see 1 Corinthians 6:20).

You are duty bound to glorify God in your body, to clothe that body not as you will but as God wills, and a little love for the souls of your brethren would remove forever from your heart the desire to dress as you please.”

Article by an anonymous man:  “The Sin of Bathsheba” from Revive Our Hearts with Nancy Leigh Demoss, Modesty:  Does God Really Care What I Wear

Modesty: Is There a Standard?

Modesty is a subject Christians have wrestled with, probably since the beginning.  It’s controversial, and different people, all confessing Christ, often come to distant conclusions about the subject.  One big mistake we make is to assume “modesty” only refers to clothing.  Not so.  But as far as it does include attire, is there a standard?

If we all agree that the Bible says, “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array…” it is fair then to ask the question, “what’s the standard”?

In how many school student handbooks have you read:  “We feel it is important that the students wear appropriate clothing” without a qualification of “appropriate”?

I do not intend to launch a debate about specifics in this post. (I’ve got closed-toed shoe friends, and spaghetti strap friends, both of whom assume their standard is right.)  Suffice it to say, to “love the Lord with all your heart” is to earnestly desire obedience in all of life, reflecting such desire even in our appearance and demeanor.  To “love your neighbor as yourself” reinforces the earnestness with which we should seek to dress modestly.

I must give a hat-tip to our good friend Trey for his provoking words the other night during his family’s visit to our home.  Since then, I’ve concluded that something he said actually paints a pretty good standard for us, even though it includes no specifics about dress.

Trey explained that his father asked him to make two lists from Scripture:  characteristics of a virtuous wife and those opposite her.  In his in-depth study of a virtuous woman, he read (I think from John McArthur) about the root word translated “modesty” in 1 Timothy.

It comes from kosmios, originally taken from “kosmos” (where we get “cosmos” of course), with the literal meaning “to place in order, to arrange”.  He said that the word “kosmos”  is often used in Scripture to describe the  “reflection of the glory of God”.  What a glorious transfer, then, when we understand that a modest woman (dress, behavior, etc.) is to reflect the glory of God!

I don’t know about you, but that standard makes me look at my wardrobe a little differently.  It also makes me consider my speech, my very carriage, my thoughts (which come out of my mouth) my jewelry,  my conversation–all that encompasses being a woman.  To me, using this standard still allows freedom in one’s unique taste and style of clothing, while maintaining a decidedly strong focal point to guide.

I’m thinking of writing the question, “Do I reflect the glory of God” on my mirror.   (Yes, I’m painfully aware that I overuse winkies in my posts.)

Again, we miss it if we think that modesty only refers to dress, and we miss it if we think it doesn’t include dress.

***As a side note, a while back, I posted an interview by Lindsay, Trey’s sister.  You may want to check out the 3-part interview:

What’s a Girl to Do-Part 1

What’s a Girl to Do-Part 2

What’s a Girl to Do-Part 3

(Thank you again, Lindsay, Trey, Bo and Zhenis, for blessing our family with such delicious food and fellowship…and words that provoke!)

Woman as Home Builder: Faithfulness in Modesty

“In the marriage ceremony a woman vows that she will keep herself unto her husband as a woman in all the aspects of womanliness.  She is building a home when her womanliness, her sexuality, is such that not only her husband knows and can safely trust in her, but all the world knows–if they know her at all–that ‘there is a woman who belongs to one man’.

She does not flaunt her womanliness in the eyes of men in a flirtatious manner or in any other way that would cast down the image that she is the faithful wife of one man in all that she is as a woman.

It is so important that we do not say one thing in our vows and another thing in our lives.  It is so important when we have vowed to be faithful to Jesus Christ that in all of our lives bef0re the world we show forth that faithfulness.  If we vow faithfulness to Jesus Christ and do not show it forth, we live a lie.

The woman lies who vows at the marriage altar faithfulness to her husband–to the degree that she exerts her power over other men even in a minor matter, even in an “innocent”, flirtatious manner, even in the manner of her dress that she advertises to other men the peculiar relationships of her womanhood that belong only to her husband; to that extent, I say, she lives a lie.  I say this because it must be said in days like these.  I say it pleadingly, though I say it authoritatively, on the basis of the Word of God;  she who regards this thing in wisdom builds her house; she who disregards this–no matter how outwardly faithful she may be–tears it down with her hands.”      –R.J.  Rushdoony