"...(W)omen who have high views of modesty should also have equally high views of lines of authority and high views of the golden rule."
Is this Nancy Wilson related to Doug Wilson? If so, I can see similar lines of eccentric “federal” thinking. If I am concerned that someone else is sinning, why shouldn’t I personally address them about it? Her premise seems to be that only properly instituted authorities can speak into a person’s life. So the woman has to get her husband to talk to the other lady’s husband…. or maybe even the elders? Or, on the other hand, just stop being around the person? It seems like this would only be more embarrassing, more humiliating, more fussing than just having an honest one-to-one.
1 Thess. 5:14 seems to take a more corporate and personal, rather than authority-structured, approach to such matters.
1 Thess. 5:14 seems to take a more corporate and personal, rather than authority-structured, approach to such matters.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
I commented on her blog, but the gist of it was that her approach overlooked Gal. 6:1 and the role of older ladies as teachers in Titus 2. Of course, the problem is that everyone wants to think that they are spiritually mature enough to teach, rebuke, and correct others, when in fact very few are able to do so in true meekness and with the right motives. Also ignored is the prerequisite of being a good example oneself. The Modesty Police may be dressed in what most would consider modest apparel, but in my experience with this type of woman, she is usually the loudest and most obnoxious woman in the room at any given time, and thus may have been successful at covering her body, but not her brash and inappropriate behavior.
Nancy Wilson is wife of Doug.
While I don’t share the Federal Vision leanings, I do think there is at least some merit to Mrs. Wilson’s perspective here. Consider:
Furthermore, 1 Thes 5:14 is not a blanket principle that applies to every possible objectionable behavior in a church. Admonishment is only part of the process, anyway- Titus 2 also talks about the need to set the pattern and example. Or, would you suggest that if instead of attire, a woman who had somewhat of a sharp tongue or verbal bluntness that bordered on unkindness ought to be openly and constantly admonished by other women?
While I don’t share the Federal Vision leanings, I do think there is at least some merit to Mrs. Wilson’s perspective here. Consider:
But no matter what, the women in the church should not take it upon themselves to be the modesty police, handing out citations to any girls or women whom they feel have crossed the line.
But it can be ineffective and unwise to simply take it upon yourself to address the issue whenever you see it. You certainly need to consider the rhetoric involved. And it is doubly counter-productive if older, unattractive, dumpy women are criticizing the young, attractive women for their immodesty. No matter what the motive, they will come across either as envious or as busy-bodies. There are other, better ways to deal with this.If one applies a “more corporate and personal, rather than authority-structured, approach” to this matter, Charlie, what does it look like? Measuring your neighbor’s hem lengths? I don’t think you are saying that, mind you. One thing that I think Mrs. Wilson gets at when she mentions spending less time with the person is it clarifies how much actual influence you have in that person’s life. If the first word a woman says to another in 6 months is a percieved critical comment on dress, whether it is true or not, it is likely not to be received as well as from someone who has been invested in a relationship with the person, even if they do belong to the same church.
Furthermore, 1 Thes 5:14 is not a blanket principle that applies to every possible objectionable behavior in a church. Admonishment is only part of the process, anyway- Titus 2 also talks about the need to set the pattern and example. Or, would you suggest that if instead of attire, a woman who had somewhat of a sharp tongue or verbal bluntness that bordered on unkindness ought to be openly and constantly admonished by other women?
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
[Greg Linscott] Nancy Wilson is wife of Doug.I certainly agree that the level of closeness you have to another person affects the way you go about it. But I’m reacting to the statement that if your girlfriend dresses immodestly (i don’t know if she meant that as in a dating relationship girlfriend or just as a friend who is a girl), you should turn down her invitations to go to the mall. If she asks why, then explain. That sounds crazy to me. Separate first, then talk if she wants to? That would definitely be perceived as an ultimatum - change the way you dress or I won’t be seen with you in public. I think that would be much more unkind and slap-in-the-face than a frank talk.
While I don’t share the Federal Vision leanings, I do think there is at least some merit to Mrs. Wilson’s perspective here. Consider:But no matter what, the women in the church should not take it upon themselves to be the modesty police, handing out citations to any girls or women whom they feel have crossed the line.But it can be ineffective and unwise to simply take it upon yourself to address the issue whenever you see it. You certainly need to consider the rhetoric involved. And it is doubly counter-productive if older, unattractive, dumpy women are criticizing the young, attractive women for their immodesty. No matter what the motive, they will come across either as envious or as busy-bodies. There are other, better ways to deal with this.If one applies a “more corporate and personal, rather than authority-structured, approach” to this matter, Charlie, what does it look like? Measuring your neighbor’s hem lengths? I don’t think you are saying that, mind you. One thing that I think Mrs. Wilson gets at when she mentions spending less time with the person is it clarifies how much actual influence you have in that person’s life. If the first word a woman says to another in 6 months is a percieved critical comment on dress, whether it is true or not, it is likely not to be received as well as from someone who has been invested in a relationship with the person, even if they do belong to the same church.
Furthermore, 1 Thes 5:14 is not a blanket principle that applies to every possible objectionable behavior in a church. Admonishment is only part of the process, anyway- Titus 2 also talks about the need to set the pattern and example. Or, would you suggest that if instead of attire, a woman who had somewhat of a sharp tongue or verbal bluntness that bordered on unkindness ought to be openly and constantly admonished by other women?
Even in the worst case scenario, where an almost total stranger comes up to your wife and expresses concern about her dress, isn’t that still far less embarrassing than that stranger talking to her husband, her husband complaining to the elders, and the elders contacting you about your wife? Do we need half a dozen people and official authorities to resolve a skirt dispute?
But lets get beyond the particular. Everything in Nancy’s post sounds as if it is an earth-shattering deal to talk to someone about the way they’re dressed. As if confrontation is strange, unusual, and extremely painful. It should be avoided if possible.
I’m thinking about writing an article on this. I don’t know if SI would be interested in publishing it. In a church whose culture is shaped by the gospel, adominition and even rebuke is a normal thing. If I grasp the bad news, I realize I am a far worse sinner in my heart than my worst enemy can see on the outside. I have no reputation to protect or self-image of goodness to maintain. If I grasp the good news, I realize that God is in a process of recreating me after the image of Christ. So, if someone points out to me a way in which I am failing, they are my friend. Rebuke is normal. Yes, it stings a little, but the more it is a part of your culture, the less it hurts. Direct peer-to-peer challenges to Christlikeness were extremely rare in the Fundamentalism in which I grew up (maybe yours was different). It was confrontation by citation or official pronouncement. It was always a big deal. Now, I am surrounded by a group of people who regularly, graciously ask me to examine my words and actions in the light of Scripture. I am thankful for them. You would be surprised (or maybe you wouldn’t) at how often my wife, friends, and church members challenge me about the tone, spirit, or content of my speech. Wounds of love, all of them. So for your lady with the sharp tongue…. yes, yes, yes. Admonish away. In a culture of grace, that’s normal.
Of course, if your church doesn’t have a culture of grace, I wouldn’t recommend it.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
Charlie, when you speak of rebuke and such, your words also seem to allow for other approaches-
As far as the lady with the sharp tongue- admonish away, eh? So, if you overhear a mother getting sharp (in your own immediate estimation) with her young children in the church parking lot, do you stop and admonish right then? Or is there room for judgment to help you know if you should wait until a better time, or maybe even give the parent room to correct the behavior on her own?
It seems to me that Wilson sees immodesty as a concern- but realizes at the same time that there are things we ought to guard against in our own lives as well (especially as she speaks to other ladies here). An eye for the immodesty of others ought to be tempered by humility and a sense of where this falls on the scale of things. To your example:
Furthermore, I don’t think Wilson thinks of the process as you describe it- extremely painful, etc. If anything, I think she sees it as guarding against becoming nitpicky and overly critical of others- which is at least just as much a problem as immodesty is, and perhaps more so. An environment where women do see themselves as “modesty police” may be described by a great many terms- but “culture of grace” wouldn’t be one I’d use.
Now, I am surrounded by a group of people who regularly, graciously ask me to examine my words and actions in the light of Scripture.That process may not always be direct confrontation, Sometimes, it may be a more general challenge, or a leading question that gives you room to reach a conclusion on your own with the aid of the Spirit. Our deviations can be subtle enough where direct confrontation may not be appropriate- for example, has anyone in your culture of grace church recently confronted another for their covetousness? It’s very possible someone is guilty of that, but people just aren’t aware.
As far as the lady with the sharp tongue- admonish away, eh? So, if you overhear a mother getting sharp (in your own immediate estimation) with her young children in the church parking lot, do you stop and admonish right then? Or is there room for judgment to help you know if you should wait until a better time, or maybe even give the parent room to correct the behavior on her own?
It seems to me that Wilson sees immodesty as a concern- but realizes at the same time that there are things we ought to guard against in our own lives as well (especially as she speaks to other ladies here). An eye for the immodesty of others ought to be tempered by humility and a sense of where this falls on the scale of things. To your example:
Even in the worst case scenario, where an almost total stranger comes up to your wife and expresses concern about her dress, isn’t that still far less embarrassing than that stranger talking to her husband, her husband complaining to the elders, and the elders contacting you about your wife? Do we need half a dozen people and official authorities to resolve a skirt dispute?No- and that’s exactly why you go to the husband (or the elders) first. Your judgment might be more sensitive than the circumstances require. The authorities in her life (husband and elders, from your mention) provide a filter by which that is better determined.
Furthermore, I don’t think Wilson thinks of the process as you describe it- extremely painful, etc. If anything, I think she sees it as guarding against becoming nitpicky and overly critical of others- which is at least just as much a problem as immodesty is, and perhaps more so. An environment where women do see themselves as “modesty police” may be described by a great many terms- but “culture of grace” wouldn’t be one I’d use.
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
I agreed with Nancy’s post in that there are those who do have the view that every behavior deemed sinful needs to be addressed immediately- but the application of this principle is usually focused on others and not oneself, which I thought was an important point.
Also, most of the principles of rebuke and confrontation seem to indicate that the person 1) has committed an offense against you personally 2) is overtaken by a sinful habit. This reads to me like consistently sinful and/or unrepentant behavior, not merely ignorance or a temporary lapse in judgment. Ignorance is often addressed when Christians who have input and influence in the lives of others are themselves a good example.
However, I would say something to a lady whose undergarments were inadvertently visible, or if she leaned over and her shirt allowed her upper body to be exposed… that kind of thing, but that isn’t the same as a rebuke. And if I am part of a conversation or situation where something untoward happens, I might say something… but I have found that many folks, when given some time, will come back to apologize later. I’d much rather give folks the opportunity to self-correct, as this is what I want for myself. I’m pretty good about going to people that I feel I may have offended, or when replaying a conversation in my head I think “Oh-oh, on second thought, that didn’t sound so good.” If those around me are too quick to rebuke, then I never get that opportunity to think it through myself and do the right thing.
This brings to mind the time at a church fellowship where some of us ladies were play Dutch Blitz, and we were teaching it to a new member of the church who had recently been saved through our jail ministry. I can’t remember exactly what happened, but the lady called the pastor’s wife a name that used to not be allowed on network television, and then she went white and slapped her hand over her mouth. We all busted up laughing- I don’t care what anyone says- it was hilarious. She obviously knew she’d done wrong and didn’t need a 3 point outline and six verses on sound speech, and she apologized profusely for days afterward. I think our response really encouraged her- weren’t none of us at the table that hadn’t been in her shoes in some respect or other- what she needed was time and compassion, not beaten over the head with what, relatively speaking, was a minor problem in her life. You don’t get upset over a cuss word when the person is trying to get victory over drug and alcohol abuse, KWIM?
Just ordinary fellowship often provides opportunity to discuss these issues- ladies talking about their latest shopping trip, for example, could allow one to talk about how she chooses her clothes, what outfits she rejected and why, etc… without sounding like she’s gone on the lecture circuit. And it may be just the food for thought that a young Christian needs to get her thinking about her choices that affect her appearance.
Also, most of the principles of rebuke and confrontation seem to indicate that the person 1) has committed an offense against you personally 2) is overtaken by a sinful habit. This reads to me like consistently sinful and/or unrepentant behavior, not merely ignorance or a temporary lapse in judgment. Ignorance is often addressed when Christians who have input and influence in the lives of others are themselves a good example.
However, I would say something to a lady whose undergarments were inadvertently visible, or if she leaned over and her shirt allowed her upper body to be exposed… that kind of thing, but that isn’t the same as a rebuke. And if I am part of a conversation or situation where something untoward happens, I might say something… but I have found that many folks, when given some time, will come back to apologize later. I’d much rather give folks the opportunity to self-correct, as this is what I want for myself. I’m pretty good about going to people that I feel I may have offended, or when replaying a conversation in my head I think “Oh-oh, on second thought, that didn’t sound so good.” If those around me are too quick to rebuke, then I never get that opportunity to think it through myself and do the right thing.
This brings to mind the time at a church fellowship where some of us ladies were play Dutch Blitz, and we were teaching it to a new member of the church who had recently been saved through our jail ministry. I can’t remember exactly what happened, but the lady called the pastor’s wife a name that used to not be allowed on network television, and then she went white and slapped her hand over her mouth. We all busted up laughing- I don’t care what anyone says- it was hilarious. She obviously knew she’d done wrong and didn’t need a 3 point outline and six verses on sound speech, and she apologized profusely for days afterward. I think our response really encouraged her- weren’t none of us at the table that hadn’t been in her shoes in some respect or other- what she needed was time and compassion, not beaten over the head with what, relatively speaking, was a minor problem in her life. You don’t get upset over a cuss word when the person is trying to get victory over drug and alcohol abuse, KWIM?
Just ordinary fellowship often provides opportunity to discuss these issues- ladies talking about their latest shopping trip, for example, could allow one to talk about how she chooses her clothes, what outfits she rejected and why, etc… without sounding like she’s gone on the lecture circuit. And it may be just the food for thought that a young Christian needs to get her thinking about her choices that affect her appearance.
[Susan R] Just ordinary fellowship often provides opportunity to discuss these issues- ladies talking about their latest shopping trip, for example, could allow one to talk about how she chooses her clothes, what outfits she rejected and why, etc… without sounding like she’s gone on the lecture circuit. And it may be just the food for thought that a young Christian needs to get her thinking about her choices that affect her appearance.
I agree, and I think, in part, this is where we are dropping the ball. Where are the Titus 2 venues nowadays (not counting one’s own family interaction), apart from a SS class, ladies Bible study, or retreat? We need more of this. It is said that more is “caught than taught” (aka “what does that look like?”)…but if we are too busy to be in one another’s proximity, how is this to take place? :~
"I pray to God this day to make me an extraordinary Christian." --Whitefield http://strengthfortoday.wordpress.com
[Greg Linscott] Charlie, when you speak of rebuke and such, your words also seem to allow for other approachesGreg, my whole response was crafted around two ideas.
1. I don’t see a “chain of authority” in Scripture for addressing my brother/sister about things.
2. Correction with the help of others should be normal. I am ok with people questioning, challenging, and even rebuking my behavior. I’m also free to disagree after I listen.
Yes, by “rebuke” I actually meant a very large variety of approaches. Perhaps “address” is a better word. I used some poor wording, as I certainly don’t mean that I think everyone should nit-pick everyone else’s life or just “speak their minds” as they please. As Susan said, there are times to let things go. There are times for gentle nudges and times for more direct approaches. In a “culture of grace” repentance tends to come fast. It’s very rare for someone around me to need a “sit down.” People do tend to self-correct. They tend to respond to gentle nudges. They want to follow Christ. They don’t view challenges as attacks.
I was tripped up by Nancy’s “modesty police” comment. Here’s where I think the difference is. At my church, many of the congregants did not grow up in Christian schools. They did not attend Christian colleges that acted like overbearing mothers. They are not accustomed to having a “list” of externals which represents godliness. So, the sensitivity to the picayune details isn’t there. There aren’t very many people in my church thinking, “Look at that. Her knee showed. Gasp! No hose!” Now, I know everyone has standards, but the whole ethos of the place is different. If I used the term “modesty police” at BJU for example, everyone there knows what that means because it’s a constant reality. There is a constant undertone that small details about personal appearance (like facial hair) actually communicate great spiritual realities. If you said “modesty police” at my church, I honestly think many people would respond, “Huh? What’s that?” That’s just not one of our issues.
I think this is the breakdown between my culture and Nancy’s, which (from what I know of the Wilsons) is very much into careful parsing of dress, conduct, etc. If a woman in my church addressed another woman about a modesty issue, I’m reasonably sure that there would be a real modesty issue, not just a violation of some sub-cultural “taboo.” I’m also fairly confident that it would be done graciously, and I hope it would be received well. People tend to take rebuke (used loosely) pretty well around here. A “culture of grace” is not measured by the quantity of “rebuke,” but for how it is given and recieved. It is a place in which it is possible to speak into one another’s lives without being the bad guy or an attacker.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
[Greg Linscott] If the first word a woman says to another in 6 months is a percieved critical comment on dress, whether it is true or not, it is likely not to be received as well as from someone who has been invested in a relationship with the person, even if they do belong to the same church.
Missionary in Brazil, author of "The Astonishing Adventures of Missionary Max" Online at: http://www.comingstobrazil.com http://cadernoteologico.wordpress.com
Honestly, her entire post felt “off” to me.
Though that is probably not a surprise to anyone who remembers the http://20.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?t=9853] “Confronting Immodesty” discussion pre-upgrade and my position in it.
Though that is probably not a surprise to anyone who remembers the http://20.sharperiron.org/showthread.php?t=9853] “Confronting Immodesty” discussion pre-upgrade and my position in it.
Let’s say you and your husband have some friends you like to spend time with, but the wife is usually dressed inappropriately. Then you as a couple can agree not to spend time with them anymore. Now when they ask why you don’t like to go out with them anymore, you have an opening to explain it. Or if you have a girlfriend who dresses immodestly, you can do the same thing. Next time she wants to go to the mall, you can say no thanks. And when she asks why, you can explain that it is because of the way she dresses. Of course there is still the danger that you will be written off as jealous or as a fuddy duddy. But at least you have acted prudently and wisely and you waited for your opportunity. After all, you were asked about it.The manipulation of cutting of contact with the idea that the person might ask why so that you can *then* explain that they are being immodest and you don’t want to associate with it… well that is just dysfunctional and crazy-making. Her defense of “at least you have acted prudently and wisely” misses our highest call of acting in love.
I agree, Rachel — that just seemed a weird way to address it. I normally enjoy Mrs. Wilson’s blog, but that just seemed a little off to me, too.
It seems like this came up on the women’s forums a while back, and I don’t think we ever did come up with an ideal solution to it. I do agree that grace and the golden rule are factors as important as modesty, but I don’t think it follows that anyone who says anything to any woman about modesty is being ungracious or a busybody.
For the record, I don’t think I have ever said anything to anyone about modesty except in one instance where a teen girl’s shirt kept coming up, revealing her midriff. Her mom is a friend, and I approached it from the standpoint that, “She probably doesn’t realize this is happening, but whenever she reaches up or moves in a certain way, her shirt comes up,” and the mom was very gracious about it.
I also didn’t agree with this paragraph:
A few years ago, there were teen daughters from one family in the church we were in who consistently had tops that rose above their skirts. One time one of the girls was trying to inch her way out of the pew for some reason during the service. Just as she was in front of one of the men, her shirt came up, exposing a generous amount of bare hip right in front of his face. The poor man’s head jerked back like he’d been slapped. The youth pastor spoke to the teens in general about modesty though no one had a problem with it but these girls and one friend. I don’t know that anyone confronted them directly.The general attitude was that as we preach and teach Scriptural principles and girls/women see it modeled, eventually they catch on, and I have seen that happen time and time again, and I think that’s the best way to approach it. But in the case of these girls, they had been in church all their lives, their parents were fine Christians, pillars of the church, their mom was as modest as could be, but I don’t know if the parents just didn’t see it or didn’t think it was immodest or what. I don’t know what you do in a situation like that.
I also disagreed with this:
But overall in the churches I have been in, I haven’t seen any “modesty police” or “drive-by confrontations.” Where that is the case, then, yes, those attitudes or ways of dealing with people are as problematic as immodesty.
It seems like this came up on the women’s forums a while back, and I don’t think we ever did come up with an ideal solution to it. I do agree that grace and the golden rule are factors as important as modesty, but I don’t think it follows that anyone who says anything to any woman about modesty is being ungracious or a busybody.
For the record, I don’t think I have ever said anything to anyone about modesty except in one instance where a teen girl’s shirt kept coming up, revealing her midriff. Her mom is a friend, and I approached it from the standpoint that, “She probably doesn’t realize this is happening, but whenever she reaches up or moves in a certain way, her shirt comes up,” and the mom was very gracious about it.
I also didn’t agree with this paragraph:
Some women feel they should protect their sons and husbands from seeing immodest women, so they take it upon themselves to shield them from ever seeing anything inappropriate. But this is impossible. Husbands don’t need that kind of protection because it doesn’t work. Sons need to be taught to defend themselves. Mom cannot do this for them.Sons need to be taught to defend themselves? Against immodesty? How does that work? I do have three sons, and I do wish women were more sensitive to the issue for their sakes and the sake of others like them.
A few years ago, there were teen daughters from one family in the church we were in who consistently had tops that rose above their skirts. One time one of the girls was trying to inch her way out of the pew for some reason during the service. Just as she was in front of one of the men, her shirt came up, exposing a generous amount of bare hip right in front of his face. The poor man’s head jerked back like he’d been slapped. The youth pastor spoke to the teens in general about modesty though no one had a problem with it but these girls and one friend. I don’t know that anyone confronted them directly.The general attitude was that as we preach and teach Scriptural principles and girls/women see it modeled, eventually they catch on, and I have seen that happen time and time again, and I think that’s the best way to approach it. But in the case of these girls, they had been in church all their lives, their parents were fine Christians, pillars of the church, their mom was as modest as could be, but I don’t know if the parents just didn’t see it or didn’t think it was immodest or what. I don’t know what you do in a situation like that.
I also disagreed with this:
So if a woman is really indecent, let’s say in church, then you should speak first to your husband or parents about it.If my husband hasn’t noticed someone’s immodesty, I certainly don’t want to point it out to him.And as she talks about taking the husband taking the issue to the elders and pastor — honestly, if it were me, I would much rather a lady say something to me directly than involving all those men in it.
But overall in the churches I have been in, I haven’t seen any “modesty police” or “drive-by confrontations.” Where that is the case, then, yes, those attitudes or ways of dealing with people are as problematic as immodesty.
But overall in the churches I have been in, I haven’t seen any “modesty police” or “drive-by confrontations.” Where that is the case, then, yes, those attitudes or ways of dealing with people are as problematic as immodesty.Barbara’s comment helped gel a thought that was sloshing around unformed in my head.
Almost all (I say almost b/c I haven’t done a line by line verification) of the objections the author gives to direct confrontation involve unChristian attitudes in the confronter and confrontee. Sinful and/or unloving behavior and attitudes are a completely separate issue from confronting immodesty. People who make a habit of drive-by confrontations also need to be lovingly confronted. This was one of the things that felt “off” to me… the idea that some confronters would be sinful and/or some confrontees would blow-off a confrontation due to a poor attitude = confrontation shouldn’t happen.
But in the case of these girls, they had been in church all their lives, their parents were fine Christians, pillars of the church, their mom was as modest as could be, but I don’t know if the parents just didn’t see it or didn’t think it was immodest or what. I don’t know what you do in a situation like that.I just want to address this from the perspective of someone who is fighting a constant battle to get my daughter to dress what I would consider more appropriately. She does wear decent clothing to church (by our standards, however I’m sure some would say that they are NOT modest - e.g. jeans, shorts, tank tops or camis that worn with a coverup), but I often have to stop her short when we are leaving and urge her to go get a cover up or change. She’ll do it, but not always cheerfully. Don’t assume that the parents don’t see or don’t think some clothing is immodest. They could be dealing with much greater issues than just dress, I know we are. I just don’t have the energy to tackle all the issues at once, and the internal ones are MUCH more important than the externals.
We are having frequent conversations about clothing and the message that clothing sends. In fact yesterday we went to the gym. My daughter has a very nice figure, and she was in a tank and shorts (it was over 100 here yesterday, with humidity). Should she have been wearing something looser? Yes. But I used the opportunity to point out to her that the attention she as getting wasn’t necessarily that good. I asked her if she thought that the guys looking at her were ones she would want a relationship with. Her answer? Of course not! So I asked her why she was dressing in such a way as to attract that kind of attention? It made her stop and think, instead of judging her. (Problem is she likes the attention of males because of our past history. Her father left and pays no healthy attention to her, and her stepfather is afraid to interact in such a way that could be misinterpreted. My ex would love to take anything and make a federal case out of it, and I’m afraid he would as is my husband, so he errs on the side of less attention. He does compliment her and tries to build her up, but it’s a delicate balancing act. Wrongly so? Who knows. They (dh and dd) do have a good relationship, but my daughter desperately needs something else that we are unable to give her, so she looks elsewhere. Just an example of the fact that you have no idea what else parents are dealing with when you see how they “let their daughter dress.”)
Sons need to be taught to defend themselves? Against immodesty? How does that work? I do have three sons, and I do wish women were more sensitive to the issue for their sakes and the sake of others like them.
Barbara- this question seems to demonstrate that men are well-nigh incapable of controlling their appetites/lusts/desires/libido/what have you when subjected to immodestly clad women. I am not downplaying the idea that women have no role in remaining modest, particularly Christian women, but in the world we live in today, it is virtually impossible to completely avoid encountering someone not dressed as they ought to be (that would create a temptation). The culture you describe (men visibly recoiling at an incidentally exposed midriff, for example) is not a particularly healthy or recommended means of managing temptation- or else we would have many men with whiplash, given what can be generally seen today.
While men avoiding known temptation is crucial in Scripture, the renewal of our minds is also important. Setting our affections where they ought while crucifying our fleshly lusts and passions are concepts that have definite application to this area. Because let’s face it- if your teenage son gets just about any summer job, he will encounter visual temptation. Virtually any man engaging the public, for that matter, will face temptations at one point or another- and “fleeing” is not always an option. A man must learn self-control- which is what I think Wilson’s overall point was.
BTW- if you want to see some of what her husband talks about when training young men in this area, look at http://books.google.com/books?id=Hg4eWSzkJngC&printsec=frontcover] Future Men around page 135 (the full chapter starts at pg. 133).
Greg Linscott
Marshall, MN
Fantastic article. Superb. This is an area where, unfortunately based on a misinterpretation and misapplication of several portions of God’s text, fundamentalist believe they are entitled to not just comment on the apparel of another but rebuke a person for their apparel in some form or fashion if they are displeased. Wrong.
Discussion