What’s The Real Goal of Modesty? (Or: my own personal poverty project)

Posted on August 8, 2009 by elizabeth

Now that I'm fully committed to not purchasing clothes for myself this year (in order to better help those in need), I've found myself re-examining the topic of feminine modesty. Modesty is a Big Deal in conservative Christian circles.

But I wonder: what if we're missing the point?

What if the point of modesty is NOT to show the world how different/holy/religious we are but to better enable us to clothe the poor?

Clothing, after all, is something of an obsession for humans. We use clothing as language. What we wear tells others what we value and who we are. In fact, we judge others by the clothes they wear.

Instead of relying on clothing to project a certain image–what if Christians decided to dress simply in order to better clothe the needy? What if Christians decided to let their actions (not their clothing) define their image?

When I read conservative Christian blogs, the emphasis on feminine modesty often seems to be about refraining from provocative clothing. And I get that, I do. But I think that perspective also misses the bigger issue: shouldn't dressing modestly be more about freedom from fashion consciousness altogether?

For example, if I give up clothing purchases for an entire year I could use that money to save lives in Africa–or just buy lots of shoes for a struggling single mothers in my own city.

And anyway, isn't the real point of modesty supposed to be a conscious detachment from anyone's definition of fashion? Sometimes I think conservative Christian women are just as guilty of promoting fashion, albeit of the modest kind. I'm not saying this is wrong, per se. I'm just pointing out that, like the secular fashion world, savvy business people have realized there is money to be made in the "Modest Fashion World," too.

Do we obscure the charitable goal of modesty when we turn "Modest Fashion" into business? I think we might.

One of my heroes, Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta, consciously chose to abandon the nun's habit she'd worn during her years as a Loreto sister. Instead, she wore the simple, ordinary dress of an Indian woman: a plain white sari and sandals. Did this kind of ordinary modesty help her better serve the streets of Calcutta? I think so.

What if the real point of modesty is not so much about what we wear as much as it is about how it frees us to help and serve others?

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?

This entry was posted in Poverty Project. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://thewilcoxes.blogspot.com/ Cara

    “Shouldn’t dressing modestly be more about freedom from fashion consciousness altogether?”

    Yes, I think so! This part of your post made me think of those familiar lines from 1 Peter 3:

    “Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.”

    I think that, sometimes, conservative Christian women focus on the “not sexually enticing” definition of the word “modest” to the unfortunate exclusion of the “limited, moderate, not excessive, not expensive” definition. But the verses above seems to indicate more than avoiding clothes that attract undue attention. That may be the “put off” part of the passage; the “put-on” is how we clothe ourselves spiritually. And Scripture stresses that caring for the poor and needy is an essential part of our spiritual life. So you may very well be on to something with your thoughts about replacing spending on self with giving to others. I’m wonderfully provoked by your ideas. Thank you for sharing!

  • http://flourishingmother.blogspot.com Andrea

    Sure, this is another side to the issue. I don’t think it is the only side, though.
    As a Christian woman, I see nothing wrong with being “fashion conscious”. I think when you also err on the side of “modesty fashion”, you are also making a fashion statement, so either side of the coin is not what it is about imo.
    Edith Scaeffer writes about “Clothing” in her book “The Hidden Art of Homemaking”:
    “We must be wiling to go without material things, among them the money to buy all that we want in clothing. We do need to share in this area, and give to other people, too. None of this is negated by realizing that beauty is important, that beauty, artistry, and creativeness can come into the area of clothing.”
    (you really should read that entire chapter–it’s great.)

  • http://www.sustainablemommy.wordpress.com Naomi

    I’ve been lurking here a while, but this post brought me out of the shadows. I grew up home and church-schooled as an Amish Mennonite minister’s daughter, but today I’m a feminist in grad school if that tells you anything about me. :)

    I really appreciate your post because I do agree that “modest fashion” can easily become one more kind of consumerism and objectification of women as “show-pieces.” At the same time, I know how quickly prescribed non-fashions can also become a way of depriving women of even their sexual power and personal expression.

    But as you suggest, being mindful is a good way to approach modesty–whether from a Christian or feminist perspective. Our choices do have implications beyond our own closets and bodies.

  • GrammaMack

    “Shouldn’t dressing modestly be more about freedom from fashion consciousness altogether?” If yes, then what about freedom from using makeup?

  • http://bellwhistlemoon.blogspot/ mary bailey

    I love this take on modesty, EE. As someone who is decidedly not fashion-conscious—and has a BFF who is!—I would love to see more people embrace what you’ve proposed here.

    What you are doing (not buying clothes for a year) is something I should embrace in perhaps not buying books for a year. I’ve always had a dream of having a free book fair for children. I could use book money to fund a mission project like this!

    Thanks, EE. You’re always good at making us think outside the box!

  • http://www.elizabethesther.com Elizabeth Esther

    Naomi: thanks for delurking. I really appreciated your thoughts. As I’m in this clothing-purchase fast, I’m beginning to question the very idea of using clothing as a means by which women are liberated or oppressed.

    My one requirement for clothing is comfort. I need flexibility of movement because this enables me to perform the physical demands of motherhood.

    Yes, I think mindfulness is key. Thank you for sharing.

    Gramma Mack: I rarely wear makeup. Not for any religious reason other than I’m lazy. It just irritates me to have to put on makeup every day. Again, I don’t think it’s a matter of right or wrong but more about being mindful. Thank you for your question.

    Mary Bailey: I love that idea! You should totally go for it! :)

  • Valerie

    I think your key point is the line about letting our actions, not our clothing, define our image. It all comes down to a heart attitude. My personal view is that God doesn’t honestly care about what we wear or whether we love fashion or not. He cares about what is going on in our hearts. I love and adore fashion. I love to check out what is new and stylish, and my personal preference is for quality over quantity. Having said that, I always keep my heart poised towards the Lord when it comes to spending. There are times when there is grace to spend and times when there is not. I think, like anything, if we try to put a ‘rule’ on something which is good – like denying ourselves to give to others – we create religion, not love and are ruled by a law and not by the spirit.

    I love how in our church heaps of people love fashion and clothing and look hip and cool, and heaps couldn’t give a toss and wear the first thing that came to hand. Love it. No one really cares, because I can honestly say most of us try to live by Love, not by appearance.

    You use the word ‘guilty’ when talking about fashion promotion – do you think it is a bad thing? I don’t. Again, if it is something that drives you and motivates you and you use clothing to feel better about yourself, well, that is probably an issue, but fashion in and of itself is neutral, in my opinion. I also think that if we use nice clothes as a way to make ourselves feel better or more superior than other people, that is a problem.

    It is not the object that is moral; it is the heart of the person utilising the object.

    I love that you are doing a clothing fast to help clothe the poor, Elizabeth. There are seasons where I don’t shop and I love it. Fasting is such a good discipline.

  • Rachel

    This is a very thought-provoking post and discussion. I love what Valerie said because I struggle with the guilt of loving clothes and then thinking it’s too superficial a thing to spend that much time on. I think it’s partly my background where it was somewhat looked down upon to love fashion and now, in my thirties I’m just trying to find a balance, which seems to me to be what EE is also doing. I’ll be interested to see where the journey takes you!

    I also came to the conclusion that God doesn’t really care what we wear and that He loves beauty because He made it. So we shouldn’t shun beauty in what we wear and especially in the silhouette of a woman’s body. (My biggest pet peeve about the modesty debate is that woman become frumpy in the name of modesty.)

  • Joanna

    In the last couple of years my friends and I have been having clothing exchanges a couple times a year. We bring gently used clothes that we no longer are wearing and trade with each other. What better way to get new clothes than for free; and then whatever isn’t picked gets sent over to the Salvation Army. I know this isn’t quite what you were talking about, but it’s a great way to get free clothes!

  • http://www.morningstarr.typepad.com Dina

    I’m late to the conversation, as usual it seems these days! I just wanted to add the observation that Mother Teresa chose to put off something that would perhaps label her as a religious outsider for garments that were the common garb of the day and culture that she was in. I think she was aware that though she was not of this world, she still desired to live among it’s people as one of them, the differences only made obvious in her actions rather than by what she wore. Having married into the Indian culture, I know that white saris are often symbolic of death or widows. Perhaps she knew this too and choose to show the world that she was dead to her own ways/culture and willingly chose to adopt another for the sake of it’s people. Adopting the fashion of this world, in modesty (no pun intended ;o), perhaps makes us more approachable and relatable as well.

  • Emily

    I’vs felt similar conviction after reading stuff by the ethicist Peter Singer. One of the ideas that he promotes is that if we were to walk past a child who is drowning and we could easily save them, but it would ruin our shoes, then would saving the child be worth the cost of the shoes? Duh, yes. So the Singer expands that thought- if the cost of the shoes given to an aid organization would save a child’s life by providing them with food/medical care/ etc., then would saving the child’s life be worth the cost of the shoes? Obviously, then the answer is yes, but alas, so few people make the move to give. I think the real challenge in something like the poverty project you describe isn’t NOT buying clothes for a year, but following through on giving that money away and not procrastinating.