skip to main |
skip to sidebar
From the
Circe Institute:
I have observed a tendency among some Christians to equate “Christian”
and “biblical” with “old-fashioned.” I once attended a very conservative
Christian conference that had such an extreme view of modesty that many
young women dressed like characters in a Jane Austen novel. In their
homemade empire-waist Regency dresses, they were all quite modestly
attired by today's standards. But the irony was not lost on me: to the
young men of the Regency period, those dresses were hardly quaint and
certainly not without the ability to inspire desire and lust.
Because while principles of modesty may be unchanging, practically
speaking, what behavior and attire titillate is quite culturally
relative. Compared to the stiff, structured dresses of the previous
generation, the free-flowing dresses of the Regency period were alluring
because they clung to a woman’s form. When a woman moved in one of
those dresses, there was much to attract the eye of a man. In fact,
women of this period dampened their dresses before a night out so that
their clothes clung to their forms even more alluringly. That’s right.
Those prim and proper heroines of the Austen era were just as capable of
pushing the limits of modesty as any modern girl.
But there has never been a time when women did not want to attract
the attention of men. And there has never been a time when there wasn’t
conversation about where the line of propriety lies. There was no golden
age of history when everyone agreed on what constituted appropriate,
modest behavior and dress. Even an old fashioned dress can be alluring
and inspire lust in the right circumstances.
Modesty is an issue of the heart, which is not to say that it is not
also an issue of the eyes, hips, and shoulders. But if we fail to get to
the heart of the matter, we will forever be arguing with Scarlet O’Hara
about the appropriate placement of sleeves before noon. And we will get
nowhere. (Read more.)
Share
No comments:
Post a Comment