Clothing and Lust

[Ernie]

I do not think modesty is meant to stop abusers. It helps those who are trying to follow God not to be bombarded with as much temptation, but I don’t think it does as much against abuse. You are right that people should never justify abuse, and that we should create a culture where it can be reported and not pushed under the rug.

I concur with this.

[Ernie]

I'm going to draw a parallel here and see if the rest of you think this is a legitimate parallel.

Recently it appears that someone stole some cash from me. I'm now thinking twice about where I keep cash. For a chronic cash stealer, it seems the sight of cash can be too much for them. An unconverted thief will keep looking for ways to steal. He will hunt for it. If cash is left lying on the table, a thief will take it, and it may incite him to try to steal even more from that person. So it makes sense for several reasons why we should not put cash on the table in broad site. First, we lose the cash. Secondly, we can incite the person to do further stealing.
This does NOT mean that we are responsible for his stealing, or that we should feel any burden to keep him from stealing or lusting after money.
(And even if we don't put cash on the table, he may still steal from us or harm us in order to get the money.)

The same principles are true if a chronic thief turns to God but still has the inner temptation to steal. Now we have a new reason to not put cash on the table.
3. We don't want to make it harder for this person to get his life turned around and put to death his urge to steal.

If we lay cash on the table and say, "It's his problem not mine if he is tempted," I don't think we are dwelling with him according to knowledge. And we are told not to put stumbling blocks in front of people.

What think ye?

[Grace]

That’s fine. I have no problem with Mennonite specific clothing, as long as it’s not something that we are propping up as a “protection”.

It is not a failsafe protection, but it has been a protection for some people in some situations. Evil men have often admitted that they decided against assaulting modest Christian women because of how they were dressed. I don't know how to say it clearly enough that modest clothing will sometimes protect you, but don't count on it always protecting you.

Modest and even Mennonite specific clothing might not always protect women, but many times I have been in situations that men and (and women) alter their behavior and speech when around me as a Mennonite woman. I have been in conversations where the individual I am speaking with almost left some curse words fly, but then they quickly caught themselves. And I knew the reason why. Hubby had a sub-contractor work for him who was a known notorious womanizer. Yet he considered us as friends. One day he admitted to me that he has "hit on" many women in his lifetime, and that many times he thought about hitting on me, but he knew better. My modest dress, head veiling, and Christian profession, protected me from putting me into an uncomfortable position of being hit on.

[Ernie]

For those (other than Jim) who think that humans have no shared responsibility for what others think or do regarding modesty...

Is this really what you believe, or is it a matter of degrees?

Do you really think that it is fine to wear no clothing at all (in public life) and that the wearer bears no responsibility, or do you think that it is a matter of degrees? i.e. People should wear at least some clothing in public life, but giving attention to covering/concealing nearly all of the body is where it goes overboard in your mind?

[Neto]

I've written about this here before (but possibly it was on MennoDISCUSS) so just in case, I'll repeat this. Once when we had Banawa men out on the missionary center, they told me that two 'bad women' (their way of referring to prostitutes in their language) had stopped them on the road, and tried to talk with them. Our mission center was not close to town, and the likelihood that strangers were walking through there was about nil. So it had to have been two of the missionary ladies. We had a swimming pool on the center, and there were strict rules that forbid two piece bathing suits, tight or skimpy swim shorts for men, and also that no one should walk to the pool in only their swim wear. So these two women were not at all what they appeared to be to the two Banawa men. (I never found out who they were, so it's possible that they were not following the mission guidelines about wearing some sort of gown or dress over their swimsuit. I don't know, but that's what I suspect. EXCEPT that the Banawa also have very strong taboos about men talking to or looking at women who are not their mothers, sisters, daughters, or wives. So just the fact that these women unknowingly violated these cultural mores may have signaled something they never intended.)

So, why do prostitutes dress the way they do? They know something, and they are using that to attract 'business'. It is obvious that Tamar didn't dress that way when she waited for Judah along the path - she was apparently fully veiled, but in some way that signaled 'prostitute'. Or maybe it was in her manner that let him know 'what she was' (although only pretending to be). Maybe by making eye contact in a different way? So 'immoral availability' is communicated in specific cultural ways.

I could ask other questions about clothing styles as well, such as why do men's fashions seldom feature low-cut neck lines, but women's fashion often does? I have heard women say they like to dress 'attractively', but they still don't want to attract the wrong kind of attention. How does that work?

[I think that by choosing modest clothing that is within the person's ideal color match accomplishes that. I often ask my wife "Does this shirt work with these pants?", so I don't have a good sense of that part of this question, but I do 'feel different' in certain colors and patterns. It's not something I really understand, so when they wear out I've saved swatches from shirts that felt right to me, and gave them to my wife for when she's picking out shirts for me. Recently she bought two shirts for me, one that makes me feel sort of like my oldest son (I think because it's his color), and the other has a "feminine feel' to me (not the fabric itself, but the color and pattern). Obviously, she disagrees, so I wear it sometimes, but for some reason that I do not understand I would have never chosen it off of the clothing rack. (I personally buy shirts almost exclusively in second-hand clothing stores, and I just walk through the isle, looking for a color and pattern that I like, then check the size and general condition of it.)]

[Valerie]

I'm going to draw a parallel here and see if the rest of you think this is a legitimate parallel.

Recently it appears that someone stole some cash from me. I'm now thinking twice about where I keep cash. For a chronic cash stealer, it seems the sight of cash can be too much for them. An unconverted thief will keep looking for ways to steal. He will hunt for it. If cash is left lying on the table, a thief will take it, and it may incite him to try to steal even more from that person. So it makes sense for several reasons why we should not put cash on the table in broad site. First, we lose the cash. Secondly, we can incite the person to do further stealing.
This does NOT mean that we are responsible for his stealing, or that we should feel any burden to keep him from stealing or lusting after money.
(And even if we don't put cash on the table, he may still steal from us or harm us in order to get the money.)

The same principles are true if a chronic thief turns to God but still has the inner temptation to steal. Now we have a new reason to not put cash on the table.
3. We don't want to make it harder for this person to get his life turned around and put to death his urge to steal.

If we lay cash on the table and say, "It's his problem not mine if he is tempted," I don't think we are dwelling with him according to knowledge. And we are told not to put stumbling blocks in front of people.

What think ye?

Wholeheartedly Amen that.
Having helped out in that ministry for 5 years where people had all types of “addictions” we had to help them learn how to avoid the temptations lest they fall back into sin. Like take a different route instead of the one by their favorite watering hole. Maybe avoid certain friendships they had in the past. We had both men and one woman addicted to pornography. We had to advise him to even get rid of their computer or have special software put in to control what they could view. The problem is the enemy of our soul, knows our past weaknesses and can come in at any time with temptation in various ways. We need to help our brothers and sisters in the Lord and not make excuses. Why it’s their responsibility to not fall when we can be caring about not stumbling them, which I believe is a responsibility on our part

[anndet92]

Again, such a slap in the face for the many victims of abuse in churches who wore all the right things and were abused and raped by church members. Somehow those stories never make the pulpit.

Its only a slap in the face if you give women the idea they won't be abused if they wear the right clothes.

Wait…I thought we were not supposed to put words in others’ mouths in this forum.

But okay.

I’ve said my piece.

I’m not going to converse further, because it’s pointless at this point.

I didn’t like how I felt last night when I tried to sleep. I’m doing the best I know with the experiences I’ve been through; and I asked God last night that if I’m way off my rocker on this subject that He would be kind enough to show me in His time.

[barnhart]

I have the privilege of living around two ancient culture religious groups and I see the roles and social relationships they have laid out for women and how the visibility of women impact their culture, families and worship. Currently I am bidding on a job making rolling room divider screens to hide women during worship and social functions like feasts. Interestingly this is the progressive solution so that women can be in the building at all, without out it they must stay home. I also see women walking, usually several feet behind their husbands, completely covered with only the eyes exposed.

Both of these groups have grappled with concepts from this thread like lust, purity, relationships between the sexes and found their own solutions. Looking in as an outsider it makes me grateful to be a servant of Jesus and serve a King who has different values. I am grateful for the humility of Jesus to eat with prostitutes and sinners even at a social cost to his reputation. I am grateful for his example of relating redemptively with women from many different backgrounds and maintaining relationships with them. I am grateful for his example of explicitly including women in his teaching and demonstrating they are equally worthy. I am grateful he trusted them with meaningful tasks.

I am grateful he left behind apostles who taught in God's family all women are sisters and mothers. I am grateful they taught that martial sexuality is meant to be mutual and egalitarian (same commands given to both). I am grateful for the example of the early church where it was never a question that men and women could or should worship, sing and serve together even though it was countercultural at the time.

It makes me a little sad if 2,000 years later we can't find ways to receive these gifts and use them to create communities of righteousness as the early church did.

[JohnH]

Again, such a slap in the face for the many victims of abuse in churches who wore all the right things and were abused and raped by church members. Somehow those stories never make the pulpit.

Its only a slap in the face if you give women the idea they won't be abused if they wear the right clothes.

Wait…I thought we were not supposed to put words in others’ mouths in this forum.

But okay.

I’ve said my piece.

I’m not going to converse further, because it’s pointless at this point.

I didn’t like how I felt last night when I tried to sleep. I’m doing the best I know with the experiences I’ve been through; and I asked God last night that if I’m way off my rocker on this subject that He would be kind enough to show me in His time.

Ann,

I think there was a specific problem that only showed up in specific conservative Anabaptist churches that embraced non-Anabaptist teachings about modesty. I blame Val Yoder, Bill Gothard, and a few others for this. They corrupted quite a few institutions.

A number of wildly corrupt and false things were taught:

- following a specific formula will result in teenagers who don’t rebel. (Charity under Denny Kenaston taught this too.)
- modesty provides some “force field” for the wearer, along with apocryphal stories claiming it provided some divine protection
- a bizarre, anti-biblical worldview that a wearer of clothes is always responsible for others who leer at them, and so forth

We now know how corrupt that tree and its fruit is. The answer is to reject these false teachings. They are actually quite nonexistent in the rest of plain Anabaptism. You only find them in transitional, less-conservative Anabaptist groups, plus a handful who allow being influenced by such.

Of course, it would be nice to see these false teachers repent, but I don’t think that will happen. I go to a more conservative church than the one I used to that had been ruined by Bill Gothardism. However, my church has less of an emphasis on “modesty”, and more on not expressing too much pride in dress.

So, for example, men are expected not to be too fashionable, avoid things considered excessively worldly like athletic pants, and wear black shoes to church. Women sewing their own clothing is encouraged but not required. The emphasis is that clothing should convey dignity to the wearer.

Part of protecting our sisters is helping them not fall into things like pride, which includes are clothing but also other areas as well. If we avoid pride, we will end up being modest, too. Of course, we shouldn’t wear indecent clothing, but the answer is to pursue decent clothing that wraps the wearer in dignity.

Now, a separate topic is that sometimes one wants to go out of their way not to get tangled up with quite evil, indecent people. So in parts of the Middle East or India, if a woman doesn’t want to constantly deal with street harassment, certain outfits will lessen that (but not completely eliminate it). That is an indictment on those men’s hearts, though. It is analogous to locking up my car, keeping my wallet close to me, making sure I never leave my laptop unattended, and so forth.

In the family of God, inside church and amongst church members, men shouldn’t be going around raping and abusing girls, regardless of struggles such girls might have with pride, vanity, or immodesty. We have all struggled in those areas from time to time. It is an opportunity for sisterly and pastoral counselling.

[Ernie]

Again, such a slap in the face for the many victims of abuse in churches who wore all the right things and were abused and raped by church members. Somehow those stories never make the pulpit.

Its only a slap in the face if you give women the idea they won't be abused if they wear the right clothes.

Wait…I thought we were not supposed to put words in others’ mouths in this forum.

I was using "you" as a general statement. I was not referring to you as a person. Sorry about the confusion. Here is what I meant to communicate.

IMO, "It's only a slap in the face if someone gives women the idea that they won't be abused if they wear the right clothes."