Head to any local shopping mall. If you’re feeling particularly wild, gaze through the magazines in the check-out isle at Wal-Mart. Watch television for ten minutes, and you’ll see it. The world we live in despises modesty. It makes sense, really. In our “you can’t tell me what to do” culture, in a society where boundaries are broken and pleasure is found in the discomfort of those idly watching, It’s no surprise that a call for constraint is met with varying levels of animosity. You don’t have to scroll very far to see some reminisce of the modesty discourse showing up on your news feed, and I have to say, I’m thrilled to see (in most cases), well-intentioned adults having a discussion, not an argument about a topic so acutely relevant to our current culture. Upon reading both sides of the argument, from ‘do you expect us to wear “a giant ‘Jesus Saves’ T-shirt over our bathing suit?” to “can’t we find some balance here?”, it’s become apparent that some severe misunderstandings have come into play, not just between Jessica Rey and her opposers, but also between us, the people chewing it all over, trying to figure out just how to digest such a meaningful topic. A conversation concerning swimsuits has really caused some weightier issues to float to the top. Who is ultimately responsible for a person’s sin? How do we establish preventative measures without dis-empowering or oppressing those involved? What does “modesty” really mean, and how are we to apply that definition to our lives? Clearly I’m no biblical scholar, and at the risk of talking the topic to death, I think there’s some issues that need to be addressed and mulled over.
The most prevalent, and, I think, probably the most important discussion point regarding the modesty discourse, is the allocation of fault for sin. Jessica Rey, in her speech focusing on the invention and affects of the modern day bikini, reviewed the historical changes of the swim suit (basically, it got smaller…much smaller) and cited a few studies in which upon viewing a woman dressed immodestly, the male brain showed patterns of sexual arousal and emotional detachment (we needed a study to show this?). Her suggestion that women should dress more conservatively in order to assist in the avoidance of such male thought patterns and to cause themselves to be seen as people, rather than objects, is, time and time again, being wrongfully distorted into the message that women are ultimately responsible for sinful male thought patterns. One writer discusses the weight of this sense of responsibility, writing “And I remember trying desperately to cover up the shape of my breasts, which despite all my turtlenecks and layers and crossed arms insisted upon showing up early. When I caught a male classmate’s eye on them, a wave of guilt would rush over me—Oh no, he noticed me! I’ve made him stumble.” I sympathize with her. Puberty is awkward, and i’m sure we all have our fair share of embarrassing, sometimes even hurtful, moments. But that’s not what she’s talking about. No, we don’t need to “hide” or be ashamed of our good and beautiful bodies, and I don’t think that Jessica is suggesting that. Clearly, in the situation mentioned, the writer is not at all responsible for her classmate’s wandering eyes. I think we can all agree that a woman, appropriately and even fashionably dressed, who receives negative male attention, is not at fault for those thoughts. The Bible makes clear that when we stand for judgement, we can’t use the blame game as a cop out. “The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them” Ezekial 18. But we need to make clear the distinction between being responsible for a person’s sin and living in a way that encourages others to sin. The bible is also clear about this: “Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall” 1 Corinthians 8:13. So no, your neighbor’s sin is not your own, but if you knowingly behaved (or dressed) in a way that provoked this sin, then yes, you are held responsible for that action. Men are visual creatures, usually to a much higher degree than women (this is, i think, a lot of the reason why the modesty discussion is focused on women). We can’t and shouldn’t change that. But we should respect it by being aware of what we put in front of them.
Is this a burden? Yes! Welcome to the Christian life. Somehow, somewhere along the lines, we’ve been indoctrinated with this idea that if something is burdensome, if it involves putting other people before ourselves, then it’s oppressive and not required of us. “It’s exhausting, really,” the writer says, “dressing for other people.” But isn’t that what we’re all called to do? Put everyone else, even the sinful, visual, emotionally detached male mind, before ourselves and our wants and our desires? In Mark, Jesus plainly states this concept to his disciples “and he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” Surely, we won’t do a perfect job. Most of us are pretty crappy servants. We mess up. All the time. But that doesn’t mean that we’re free to live (and dress) as we like, having no thought about how our actions, thoughts, and appearance will affect or tempt those around us. No, we’re called to be different, to dress in a way that is both visually and monetarily modest, and to send the message that this body is valuable and it is beautiful, and it is fun to dress, but it is not for everyone’s visual pleasure.
The whole modesty conversation is about so much more than a bathing suit. It’s about switching our focus from “how does this impact me?” to “how will this impact my peers?” It’s not an easy switch to make, but it is a necessary one. Besides, running into those waves with abandonment and body surfing back to the shore is so much easier when it’s not itsy-bitsy;)