“Modesty” Is About a Lot More Than a Long Skirt


In a year where anti-choicers seemed determined to demonstrate the anti-woman and anti-sex roots of their hostility to a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy—even while still offering lame, unbelievable claims of caring for “life”—the Value Voters Summit is positioned to remove all doubt that conservatives in America only care about restricting reproductive rights because they fear women’s liberation and want to control women’s lives and bodies. Indeed, things got off to a nice start when Think Progress got hold of a pamphlet that was being distributed at the summit called “Modesty Matters.”

The pamphlet lays out an old argument consistently found in patriarchal societies worldwide, even if they technically have different religions: Lust is bad. Men feel lust, something women presumably don’t, which is why they don’t understand and have to be told. But even though lust is a male emotion, it’s not really the fault of men! Men simply cannot be held responsible in any situation where there’s a woman available to blame. So, women are responsible for the thoughts inside men’s heads, which we control by wearing “immodest” clothes. Thus, it’s women’s responsibility to suppress men’s lust by wearing long skirts and shapeless clothes.

There’s so much wrong with this argument that it’s really hard to know where to start. Men can control themselves. Lust in and of itself isn’t wrong, and there’s definitely nothing wrong with someone taking some alone time to relieve strong feelings of lust that can’t or won’t be reciprocated. Lust isn’t a male-only emotion, and women understand it just fine. Even if you assume that lust is naughty and women should take responsibility for men’s thoughts, there’s no evidence whatsoever that draping women in more cloth suppresses feelings of lust; on the contrary, men just re-orient their understanding of normal, so that instead of a glimpse of upper thigh, just a glimpse of an ankle does it for them.

What’s interesting is that neither of these arguments for or against mandatory modesty mentions “life,” the supposed concern of conservative Christians who pass laws controlling female sexuality by attacking reproductive rights. Even the most strained Christian rationalizer who has convinced him or herself that merely looking at a birth control pill causes spontaneous miscarriages of nine-month pregnancies isn’t crass enough (yet) to argue that a man’s stray glance at a woman’s legs in a miniskirt takes any kind of “life.”

I suppose if you’re really straining, you could argue that inspiring unreciprocated lust in men leads to the death of billions of potential people currently called “sperm,” but so far conservatives have demonstrated a distinct reluctance to extend their “potential people=actual people” argument beyond women’s bodies onto men’s bodies. Anyway, if you did embrace that argument, it would be very difficult indeed to hold women criminally responsible for male masturbation, so for now it’s simply a matter of holding women morally responsible for what men do in their private time with thoughts that exist only in their heads.

Clearly, the common thread running through everything from trying to shame women out of wearing clothes that make them feel attractive to trying to cut women off from contraception coverage they’ve paid for to passing intrusive restrictions on abortion rights is this strong desire conservatives have to control women’s bodies. And, of course, a belief that women’s bodies and identities can be reduced to their sexual functions.

One of the best parts from this pamphlet is how, even when being less obtuse about their fear of female sexuality than conservatives usually are, the authors still had to toss out dishonest arguments.

My men’s bible study group talks frequently about controlling our lust, thoughts, and eyes. Yes the problem and responsibility are ours, but is it really reasonable for the women of the church to make it THIS difficult for us?

Realizing that the argument that what happens in men’s heads is women’s responsibility sounds a little unreasonable and misogynist, they swear that the ultimate responsibility belongs to men. Except that, if they actually believed that, the pamphlet would be written for men and would address topics like learning not to leer and realizing that all women have breasts and thus you should moderate your response appropriately. The fact that the pamphlet is aimed at women and not men makes it clear that it’s women who are considered the responsible ones, and all claims otherwise are just the usual Christian right deflection and dishonesty.

And what becomes clear is that all these so-called concerns about “immodesty” are really just an angle to pressure women to accept a second class status.

All women, whether married of single, are to model femininity in their various relationships, by exhibiting a distinctive modesty, responsiveness, and gentleness of spirit.

Modesty: Hiding yourself and avoiding clothes you find appealing, trying your best to be invisible. Responsiveness: Giving men attention and smiles they demand, no matter how miserable it makes you to do so. Gentleness: Giving up the urge to fight for yourself, instead just giving in and submitting. Women exist, in their eyes, to serve and to be invisible when they can’t be of direct use to men. Reproductive rights and sexual autonomy threaten that view of women, because these things suggest that instead of a servant class, women are people just like men, instead of creatures put on earth to serve men.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with contact director of communications Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

Follow Amanda Marcotte on twitter: @amandamarcotte

  • blissed

    they fear women’s liberation and want to control women’s lives and bodies.”


    Has anyone bothered to ask “they” if that is what they fear and want? If so, did they say yes?


    Women exist, in their eyes, to serve and to be invisible when they can’t be of direct use to men. 


    Is that what they said!? wow 


    fear of female sexuality”


    Is that why a man overcomes his fear with alcohol when fulfilling his role as “liberation agent” during a one-night-stand “boundary discovering via penis” “grow as a woman via penis” session?  Or is that fear expressed by the universal preference to avoid sexually prolific women for commitment?

  • jennifer-starr

    Has anyone bothered to ask “they” if that is what they fear and want?


    When someone goes around with the peculiar  and archaic notion that women must cover up every part of their body and eschew attractiveness so as not to ’cause men to stumble’ *snort* , what they fear and want is rather obvious, don’t you think?  

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Why are you obsessed with avoiding the few women who may have had a few more partners than you?  Why do you exempt yourself from your American Taliban dystopian delusions about women?  Most American men, especially conservatives, pick and dump wives on the basis of their current looks, not previous lovers, and you know this!

  • colleen

    This is a troll. There is no point in trying to engage it in a rational conversation because he/she is unwilling (and most probably unable) to engage in a rational conversation. He/she posts here for attention (any sort of attention will do) and to anger and demean. The ‘pro-life’ movement attracts the worst sorts of men and women. Any attempts to engage them only encourages more verbal diarrhea

  • amanda-marcotte

    To give an accurate assessment of their internal thought processes is a silly thing to do; they know telling the truth about themselves hurts the cause, so they don’t do it. One thing liberals have to learn is that just because our public face comports with our private lives does not mean the same is true of conservatives.

  • amanda-marcotte

    To give an accurate assessment of their internal thought processes is a silly thing to do; they know telling the truth about themselves hurts the cause, so they don’t do it. One thing liberals have to learn is that just because our public face comports with our private lives does not mean the same is true of conservatives.

  • mad-mags

    Since when do “all women have breasts”? That statement is demonstrably false and pretty damn exclusionary. Other than that, this is a great article.

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Now if we could just get MSM talking heads to call conservatives out on their personal hypocrisies, we’d be half-way home.  I got smacked around by my own Catholic extremist family for calling out their hypocrisies and haven’t spoken with them in 20 years.

  • bj-survivor

    Come now, Jennifer. I’m sure you are aware that only upstanding Christian men and MRAs are allowed to make inferences regarding the actions and oratory of others. The idea that the female (or mangina) brain can make its own cogent inferences is simply preposterous.

  • bj-survivor

    This. I mean, what does it take for liberals and moderates to give up the notion that right-wingers can be taken at any sort of face value? Already, we can pretty much guarantee that when a conservative is screeching about teh gay sex, it will come out that he’s been diddling a boy-child, has a boy-toy prostitute, or will get caught doing the nasty in some rest stop bathroom. This concept can pretty much be applied to all of their pearl-clutchy moralizing.

  • silentfactor80

    Wow Amanda, you are probably just as radical as those you lob stones at! I agree with you that women know lust very well and are capable in their own right. In many religious circles I’ve seen documents that pretty much imply men are sub-human b/c of their sexual desire. Believe me, I fight them every time on this because it is as degrading to men as it is to women. This gets propagated because parents of daughters often tell them “boys are bad they get you pregnant.” Parents of boys say “if you get a girl pregnant you are a failure.” We as a society thus repress men and ignore women sexually. Is it any wonder people are a little titched in this department? I also agree that “longer skirts” are not really the answer to male lust. I depart where you imply that there is a right wing conspiracy to control women. That just as hilarious as the “birther” argument.

    What you understand as “conservative values” does not have to be thrown out entirely. In fact I do have a problem with women that dress provocatively because whether I stare at her or not, if she thinks I did I can be charged with sexual harassment. There goes my life. Would anyone believe me as a man that I did not look at a provocatively dressed female? Thanks to both radical feminism and the brand of conservatism you spoke of I do not stand a chance. I am guilty until proven innocent and still guilty then. Let’s not forget the famous case of the stripper versus the boys from Duke. Although I do not think the boys should have been at a strip club, the stripper ruined their lives through her false accusation and the media believing it.

     

  • thalwen

    The MSM need to get over their love affair of being “fair and balanced” by having two people on every single issue and report on stuff like, I don’t know.. facts? news? They’ve become such cowards because they’re afraid the right is going to call them biased, well too bad, reality really does have a liberal bias.

  • mindy-mcindy

    Wow! Someone has little grasp of what she said or reality in general. And your memory of the Duke case is shady at best. They had the stripper at their dorm, not at a strip club. While the media mostly believed it for a week or two, the holes were apparent in her story VERY QUICKLY. The DA who persued this had his law license taken away and the boys names were cleared. Most people remember the Duke case as the travesty of justice it was. And my goodness, your fear of women is just maddening. Really, you think that if you look at a woman in a short skirt walking down the street she can charge you with sexual harrassment?

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Thank you!  Compliments are interpretted by their intention and delivery.   Misogynist looksist playboy predators are always insulting, leering and crude.  Feminist males are sincere, classy and non-invasive in their appreciation of women. 

  • thalwen

    Ah I see, men need to get laid moar, and women need to put out moar because we’re being repressed. You keep equating the attitudes men get to women. Boys aren’t admonished for getting a girl pregnant, in fact they’re more likely to get a pat on their back. If anything the families usually only start to get mad when the slut starts demanding unreasonable stuff from the poor boy, like fatherhood duties to his kid. In conservative societies, a man who has sex has “stumbled” (usually through the fault of a woman) and just needs to repent. A girl/woman is used goods and therefore worthless. So yeah, it’s all the same, except for when it isn’t, which is pretty much all the time.

     

    Oh and the Duke case, yes one high profile case of judicial misconduct makes all rape and sexual harrasment claims invalid. Really, if you are getting accused of sexual harrasment for merely looking at a woman, you’re doing something other than just looking. 

    Also, poor menz.

  • silentfactor80

    Yes, I do think a woman who had something to gain or a hatred toward men would do such a thing. Look at what happened with Herman Cain. Not a shred of proof except several desparate women looking for a payout. Consequently it doesn’t matter if a woman would or wouldn’t because the law ALLOWS her to do that. The Duke boys records may have been cleared but their names and faces are in the news. Google them and you will get their history. Whether they went to the strip club or dorm doesn’t matter. The strip may have provided them a better witness but the bottom line is women don’t need much in the way of proof to legally penalize a man.

  • silentfactor80

    And who is the judge of who is a “feminist male” and a “playboy?” The woman of coarse. It is entirely up to her how she wants to interpret something and thus a man is wise to ignore all women and keep to himself. Even if I said to my gf “you look incredible in that dress” she can by law say I sexually harassed her and win. I highly doubt a promising payout would stop such a woman.

     

  • silentfactor80

    I have never heard a man get praise for getting a girl pregnant. I know of several guys that got girls pregnant and they got laughed at by their friends (guys). You are also changing the topic out of your own weak argument. What I was saying was how we parent young boys and girls. When I was growing up the attitude I got was “boys are bad and get girls pregnant.” Several of my friends that are girls got the same sad lines from their parents before they even engaged in any intercourse. My comment had to do with how we parent and teach our kids to understand the opposite sex, not how we deal with the consequences of bad choices.

    What conservative societies are you talking about? Must be one of fantasy that you feel justifies your take. Assuming you mean Christianity I think forgiveness and “repenting” is for everyone last I checked. Woman worthless? I am sorry you feel this way because clearly someone has been uncharitable towards yourself or someone you know to give you such a feeling. If anything conservative societies make women out to be angels and men the poor slobs that are sooo unworthy of a woman unless they work hard. Sound familar? Perspective my friend.

    I didn’t say the Duke case makes ALL claims invalid. Its just the example I have on top of my head. Here is a link to a published journal article on the subject (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8135653). The research showed upwards of 41% of claims are false and filed out of revenge or for attention. The simple fact is I think many women have abused the system and made it bad for other women. As a result the only way a man can protect himself is to avoid / ignore women as much as possible.

  • thalwen

    So the anecdotal evidence as to how you were raised makes everyone have the same experience? Most kids get the “guys are studs, girls are sluts” perspective. But yeah, it’s a good thing that at least some parents are teaching guys that they need to be responsible for their sexual choices. 

    As far as conservative societies – take your pick and I’ll take the perspective of reality. The reality is that nearly all conservative societies have misogyny at their cores. But then I’ll take your perspective –  that men are unworthy of a woman unless they work hard? See, a woman isn’t a thing you’re entitled to. It’s not like health insurance or your paycheck or the tacky award they give to the employee of the month. A woman is a human being and not something you “earn.”

    Thanks for the link.. oh an abstract..without the link to the actual paper. The self-reporting of a small metropolitan police agency? Without any verification beyond the cops’ words that the accusations were false? Good thing cops never lie and never underestimate sexual violence otherwise I might think your argument to be invalid. 

    You do make a very good point. Avoid and ignore us, it’ll save us the trouble. 

  • give-em-hell-mary

    “Herman Cain. Not a shred of proof except several desparate women looking for a payout”

    You ignore the news! — “family values” Cain dropped out because a mistress stepped forward with financial proof of his adulterous sugar daddy generosity!

    “women don’t need much in the way of proof to legally penalize a man”

    You’ve ignored 2,000 years of Western and Eastern justice usually letting rapists, etc. go scott free regardless of proof of their crimes against women.  You also never heard of the witch craze that torched millions of women just for their wrinkles that “proved devil worship.”

  • ley

    I love women. I consider myself fairly liberal. But I’m lost about this article.

     

    Seems like the pamphlets in question were encouraging women to wear more clothes in church.

     

    I agree.

     

    Women don’t need to wear long skirts and shapeless tops to be appropriately dressed. But in church why would you want to see women in mini-skirts and tank tops? That’s just tacky.

     

    So, I think your crying misogynist is unwarranted here.

     

    Here’s the other thing you’re missing. You keep saying “what about the men?”.  Well, here’s what- men don’t wear mini-skirts and tank tops to church. Men, are appropriately dressed. They aren’t the ones being tactless and insecure enough to dress like they’re out for cocktails while at church.

     

    I am a woman, I have no desire to “put women in their place”. But when I go to church, I’d like not to be staring at the bra strap or thong of the woman in front of me…

     

    too much to ask? Or is asking you to grow up and wear appropriate clothing somehow suppressing your womanly expression?

     

    - Ley

     

  • crowepps

    I don’t go to church for a fashion show, or to check out women’s fashions, and anyone who spends their time there sneering at other women’s clothes as ‘tacky’ or inappropriate seems to have missed the point of the Christian religion.

    People who are appropriately focused on thankfulness and what they need to improve about themselves, like maybe their insufficient level of loving kindness, likely won’t find bra straps or thongs distracting.

  • ley

    Oh I see, fashion isn’t important. That’s why women wear next to nothing in church. Thank you for enlightening me. I am glad to hear that other woman are wearing see through shirts and low-rise pants that show their thongs because they don’t want to be noticed or care what they are wearing.

    “Oh I am just going to church to be thankful, better put on my best panties and push-up bra”

    I’m glad it is not about fashion for you. (eye roll)

     

    I also hope that hypocracy goes down smoothly with that tall glass of self rightousness you’re drinking.

     

     

  • crowepps

    You sure seem obsessed with women’s underwear –

  • thalwen

    There are a lot of different churches. Some have very traditional dress, others are casual dress, others are targetted at certain audiences, like bikers. And it’s not like there’s a deficit of churches so if you’re concerned about the poor fashion sense of the church you go to, I’m sure you can find one around the corner that would better fit your sensibilities. 

     

    Oh and the men can do no wrong, which is why thongs and bra-straps are horrible, but tank-tops with pit hair and plumber’s butt are fine. 

     

    The issue isn’t about fashion or faux-pas in your choice of attire. It’s the idea that women are responsible for controlling mens’ sexual responses. Straight men get attracted to women, no matter how they’re dressed. That’s not a bad thing, it isn’t something devestating to a normal man that he needs protecting from. The idea that they have no control and responsibility for themselves is demeaning to men, and dangerous to women. 

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Where are these “immodest” congregations located? — I suspect such “thong and bra strap” worshippers are in sweltering tropical beach, forest or climate change drought areas where everyone else is similarly attired to avoid heat stroke.  Just a thought.

  • ley

    Right, you’re the one who wants women wearing things that reveal their undies… I don’t.

     

     

      you-   “hey look at my undies!!!”

      me- “um, no thank you”

      you- ” weirdo, why do you like undies so much?”

      me- (backs away slowly from the crazy lady)

      you- “men want to control me! waaaaa”

     

    end scene.

  • ley

    If men actually dressed like you just suggested at church I would be in an uproar. But more-so if they dressed like chip-n-dales dancers. <- That’s a fair equlivalent.

     

    It’s not like they’re saying don’t wear something you feel comfortable in or something nice or something pretty. Just not sexy.<– sexy as in for sex, duh.

     

    If men dressed in chip-n-dale outfits to church and strutted around half naked woman could complain the men were being “tempting” too.

     

    But men don’t dress sexy. Not overtly sexy.

     

    The only double standard being made here is by you. Woman can dress like sluts and men shouldn’t treat them like sluts. But if a man dressed sluty you know every woman would notice, because it’s rare.

     

    If you dress like a slut, be prepared to get called out on it. If you’re dressing like a slut in church grow up. It’s completely fair for men and women to ask you to put more clothes on.

     

  • ley

    Nope, I see plently of them right here in Wisconsin. So, not only are they dressing like sluts in church they are going out of their way to do it… it’s cold, put some clothes on idiot!

     

     

  • ley

    Simple, reasonable request; “Hey how about we all dress modestly in this church, out of respect for our God and your fellow worshippers.”

     

    Men’s reaction- Okay , sounds cool.

     

    Women’s reaction- Why are you obsessed with our bodies! Why are you trying to control us! You never let us do what we want! Waaaaaa!

     

    That is why this pamphlet is addressed to women.

     

    If you want to be treated as equals act like it.

     

    If you want special treatment to dress worse than men and still be respected the same, you will be treated like the spoil, selfish brats you are.

     

     

  • forced-birth-rape

    Look at this picture.

     

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/06/a-picture-is-worth-1000-words.html

     

    “TIME ranks Southern Baptists’ rejection of sex-offender database as a top “underreported” news story of 2008″

     

    http://stopbaptistpredators.org/index.htm

  • prochoiceferret

    Right, you’re the one who wants women wearing things that reveal their undies… 

     

    Um, what? You’re the one who brought up “undies” in the first place.

     

    I don’t.

     

    Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt!

  • ley

    Oh, well then. We are in agreement.

     

    No one wants to see women’s undies. Good.

     

    Problem solved.

  • ley

    Those people suck. I agree.

     

    Weren’t we talking about dressing appropriately for church?

     

    Oh that’s right, nice church clothes= patriarchal oppression.

     

    I’m sorry, I thought I was a liberal woman with an opinion of her own on this matter, guess I better fall in line.

     

    Men suck! Keep your hands off my ovaries you bastards! Who do you think you are requesting I dress nicely for church, that’s clearly sexist oppression!

     

    Better?

     

    There, now we all have the exact same opinion. That’s what being progressive is all about, right?

     

     

  • thalwen

    I’ve been to plenty of churches, synagogues, mosques, etc. I’ve never encountered women actually dressed like you have described. Now, I know there are churches that cater to a certain population that I have mentioned where it is perfectly reasonable to encounter men and women dressed in ways that seem strange for church. Most places of worship have their own dress code that ranges from very traditional to very casual and that is between the religious doctrines, the priest/rabbi/etc and the worshippers. Again, if you are attending a church where you feel the women are all dressed inappropriately and it is causing you grief, you can easily find another church without much inconvenience and where you will feel more comfortable. But no, you just want to whine about how women are all sluts and need to stop whining because we’re “spoil, selfish brats.” I also suspect your idea of “slutty” dressing is a woman appearing in public with you being able to tell she’s a woman, and since she’s a woman, she’s automatically a “slut.” 

    There is a huge difference between respecting religious tradition and this document. It is polite and respectful to dress and act a certain way in a religious establishment out of respect to the people who worship there. That is basic manners. This document isn’t about basic manners. It says that men are incapable of controlling their sexual urges, that women are responsible for controlling the sexual urges of men and that if men act inappropriately then it is the fault of the women. That is sexist to men and women alike. 

  • prochoiceferret

    Oh, well then. We are in agreement.

     

    No one wants to see women’s undies.

     

    Well, you sure do like to talk about them. Is this one of your fetishes?

     

    Problem solved.

     

    Nope, you’re still here yammering about womens’ lingerie.

  • thalwen

    No, we weren’t talking about dressing nicely for church.

    Really, have you read the article or any of the comments? Of course not, you’re too busy declaring how you’re a liberal woman and being oppressed by all the imaginary sluts whose main goal in life is to offend your fashion sensibilities. 

    We were discussing whether the responsibility for controlling a man’s lust belongs to himself. We were discussing whether taking that responsibility away from a man and giving it to womankind not only puts women in an impossible situation, since sexual desire will exist no matter how we are dressed, and puts men in a position to be equated with unneutered dogs that can’t help but hump anything in sight. We were discussing how the patriarchal notion that women are evil temptresses that make men stray from pure thoughts is bad for men and women. We were discussing how there is no limit to what is considered immodest and no amount of limits on immodest dress and behaviour are sufficient because no amount of modesty will stop people from having sexual desires. 

     

  • ley

    Have you read the pamphlet? I didn’t think so.

     

    My idea of slutty is pretty normal. If you’re dressed like you work at hooters, you probably shouldn’t be in a church.

     

    The pamphlet was about women dressing respectably in church. That’s all. It’s you who decided to whine about it. And I just pointed out how stupid that was. Case closed.

  • ley

    Yeah you haven’t actually read the full pamphlet have you?

     

    You took this woman’s bitching for truth.

     

    Way to think for yourself.

  • ley

    Ah yes, I disagree with you, so I should leave. Now we get to the heart of it. 

  • ley

    I love how quickly some women have jumped to “reading into” a simple request for decent apparel in church. The pamphlet lists many things men can do to be modest as well. But none of you actually read it did you?

     

    You read into it… without reading it. Awesome.

  • forced-birth-rape

    I am the grand daughter of a southern baptist preacher and went to home school. Jesus would never call a woman slut, or say the word bitching. To be so worried about church etiquette you dont talk or act anything like Jesus.

    Please everyone go read more about this here-http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/09/14/conservative-group-at-conference-tells-women-go-home-and-put-some-clothes-on/

  • ley

    You’re right He wouldn’t.  He also would not accuse a nicely (no swear words in there) written pamphlet encouraging modesty, a virtue, of hate and misogyny.

     

    There, now we’re all clear on what Jesus would and wouldn’t do.

     

     

     

     

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Are you the pamphlet’s author, because you’re awfully obsessed with how we dress!

  • forced-birth-rape
  • ley

    No. Once again. It was a plea for modest to all. You’re the ones obsessing about it.

     

    It should have gone like this;

     

    Dress modestly in churh.

    Okay.

    End of story.

     

    You’re the ones making it a into a big hissy fit. Then you have the nerve when I point out you should stop having a hissy fit about nothing to act like I’m the one making a big deal here. Wow.

     

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Because you are having a hissy fit!  As someone who grew up brutally bullied in church over parental abuse facial and body scars, and bullied by high school nuns over my corrective make-up, I envied women who could flaunt their perfect skin and not get insulted over disfigurements.

  • colleen

    The women here think for themselves quite well and thus are uninterested in your fashion ‘advice’, your pathetic cries for attention and your deeply creepy obsession with women’s underwear. We continue to work towards a world where people like you are universally  recognized as abusive and unmarriageable. Now sod off.

  • freetobe

    how your dressed for goodness sakes! The fact that anyone bothers to show up to church at all is what matters. After all Jesus made you without cloths as I recall. Maybe people should just attend in their birthday suits.

    I remember back when i was a Catholic that some of the youger boys wuld wear T shirts with skulls and stuff. Who cares They were there!

    Besides most of the women in my church were acting tlike they were in a fashion show tomake the other women jealous. That was so un-christian like. Best to be humble in Gods house and in life. if you beleive in God.

  • goatini

    that has all these scantily clad women?  Seriously.  Give me an actual example.  

  • ley

    I’m sorry to hear that . That really sucks. I wish you well. I’m sure you already know this, but you don’t need flawless skin, you’re beautiful just the way you are.

  • ley

    I completely agree, everyone should do their best to dress humbly in church. No one should be dressing to attract attention or distract from God. That was perfectly said.

  • ley

    wow. That was just really mean. And off point.

     

    I’m just saying the pamphlet was misunderstood. Asking church goers to dress modestly isn’t sexist or controlling. The fact that you think a simple request for modest dress is oppressive makes me think you’re childish. Your taunting me confirms this.

     

    You managed to take my suggestion of actually reading the pamphlet for yourself and make an informed decision and turn it into a creepy underpants obsession. Your mind is truly twisted. Sorry.

  • maiac

    You CLEARLY have absolutely no idea how sexual harrassment law works. Are you under the impression this is a criminal charge or something???

  • give-em-hell-mary

    I think you’re missing my point:  I really, really envy women who can wear skimpy clothes everywhere because they have no scars on their arms, legs and torsos.  Since first grade, I’ve always had to suffer in sweltering long sleeves and stockings, etc. to hide lobster skin courtesy of my anti-choice terrorist mom’s obsession with avoiding marital sex.  My nastiest insults have always come from “pro-life” modesty-obsessed hypocrites.  Would you still think I’m “beautiful” if I told you that I now wholeheartedly support abortion?

    “I’m sure you already know this, but you don’t need flawless skin”

    Actually, I learned the opposite is true, which is why my Catholic “pro-life” uncle/godfather banned me from his home.  Whenever mom and our family visited him and his family, I had to sit in the car for hours while they partied and dined inside.

    Looksism is why my career went nowhere, why I never got a husband, can’t run errands without being bullied by nearly everyone, and why most conservative men cheat on and divorce the mothers of their children.  Looksism rules patriarchy, and modesty is its handmaiden/henchman.

  • thalwen

    Yes, it should have gone like that. If it had, there would not be any controversy. Instead they include all the lovely stuff about the “spirit of femininity,” and how women need to keep men from “stumbling” and how men are all visual beasts and it’s the job of women to protect them from their naughty thoughts. That is what makes this a lovely example of sexist propoganda. It isn’t the idea of modesty that is sexist, it isn’t the idea of dressing appropriately in church that is sexist, it is the idea that is propogated in the pamphlet that men are visual sexual beings and seeing women causes them to have sexual thoughts, therefore it’s women’s fault if they think those thoughts and their duty to control those thoughts because men cannot control themselves for whatever reason.

    So I agree, if their real agenda was to have people dress appropriately in church, they should have put out what you posted. However, it is clear that that was not their agenda because of the additional language they used. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the patriarchal culture of the Abrahimic religions but there is a long and ugly history behind the idea of “modesty” that has nothing to do with people being appropriately dressed and that is exactly what this pamphlet was referencing. 

    And I don’t see anyone having a hissy fit except for you who is freaking out about teh dirty sluts in church who no one else seems to encounter but you and then attacking all of us because we are addressing the issues in the article instead of agreeing with you about how those sluts need to properly shame themselves.

  • ley

    Well, I think that really sucks. And, of course I still think you’re beautiful. I had a lookist liberal father. He made me wear next to nothing at age 11 when I first started to develop. As a result men treated me like an object. I was used time and time again by men who “loved” me, but really only wanted into my skin tight jeans, courtesy of my lookist father, who was obsessed with skinny. He forced me to have weigh-ins and shamed me if I gained even half a pound and made me do laps.  Lookism is awful but it’s not sunshine and roses on the liberal side either, it’s sucky on both sides. I ended up marrying a more conservative man than even I would have expected, but he is not lookist, he is a respectful, honest and good natured man.

     

    People can be douches. But don’t give up hope, they’re are actually still good people out there.

     

  • ley

    Well, I certainly didn’t mean to “shame” anyone.  And I feel badly I even used the word slut in the first place. I think I used it because what I saw as “modest” was called into question and I wanted to be clear that I thought only very skimpy clothing was inappropriate. 

     

    I still don’t come to the conclusions you do about the pamphlet. We’re are all visual and seeing boobs or part of them makes most people think sexy thoughts. The only think that makes the sexy thoughts “dirty” as you put it, is the church setting. I don’t think it’s bad to put it out there that people dressing sexily will cause sexy thoughts. The part you’re missing is the rest of the pamphlet where it addresses the same for men. So, naturally, you think this is all about oppressing women. But it wasn’t. It was really about dressing modestly in church. So the article was unwarranted.

  • crowepps

    “At heart, we are talking about a blame-the-victim mentality. It shifts the responsibility of managing a man’s sexual urges from himself to every woman he may or may not encounter. It is a cousin to the mentality behind the claim, “She was asking for it.”

    So the responsibility is now on the women. To protect men from their sexual thoughts, women must remove their femininity from their public presence, ridding themselves of even the smallest evidence of their own sexuality.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/20/opinion/ultra-orthodox-jews-and-the-modesty-fight.html

    The most extreme insist that women remove themselves entirely from the public, and appear only well wrapped in black veils, though even that doesn’t prevent the men from leering.

  • ley

    Well that’s just terrible.

    But it’s hardly true modesty, which is just dressing so not to attract undue attention to yourself… a good idea for men and woman, especially when you’re not the main focus, like at church.

     

    There is a lot of gray area between dressing like you’re invisible and dressing so you’re the center of attention. Not everything has to be so extreme.

  • goatini

    So there aren’t any actual examples, just a lot of running off at the mouth.  Figures.  

  • ley

    Walk into any church  in Wisconsin and you’ll see at least one young lady with her bra or underwear showing.  I’d like the churches I attend to not become public targets so forgive me for not listing them by name.

     

  • goatini

    What churches, and which faiths, are attended by women who are “dressing like sluts”?

  • goatini

    Just not buying that this is a female.  None of this person’s posts seem to be written by a female.  Too much fixation and obsession, with a good deal of fetishism.

     

    So GehM tells this person about her abusive psycho fundie religionist mother, and discusses the damage that pejorative looksism has done to her, particularly in the context of fundie religionists, who of course (were they actually acquainted with the Christ) shouldn’t (a) hurt children or (b) judge by appearance.

     

    And Concerned “Woman” For America here, just coincidentally, happens to have an abusive psycho LIBERAL (booga booga booga) father, a “lookist” (co-opting GehM) who “made (“her”) wear next to nothing at age 11 when (s/he) first started to develop”.  

     

    Aside from the creepy underage pr0n overtones in the post, did I mention that Senor(“ita”) Ley’s abusive psycho dad was a LIBERAL?

     

  • ley

    Are you trying to make targets out of the churches I attend? Surely you cannot expect me to list congregations online for any hate filled person to come and attack!

     

    The denominations are E.Free and Catholic though, I guess I can release that much info.

  • goatini

    Because I really don’t see that kind of thing going on in any churches I’ve been at.  Not even at the occasional mission visit.  At the missions, certainly the women are dressed casually because they’re not going to a worship service – but I’ve never, ever seen anyone “with her bra or underwear showing”.  Even at a tourist attraction, I don’t see women with (their) bra or underwear showing”


    Due to your deep concern for your community houses of worship to “not become public targets”, I don’t need name and address of the church(es).  I’m just a bit curious as to the faiths in which these “young lad(ies)” dress for a Girls Gone Wild video.  Which particular faith(s) do these “young lad(ies)” profess?

  • ley

    So, my life story isn’t good enough for you, huh? My papa’s treatment of me doesn’t fit into your world view so it must be fake? You’re unbelievable. Seriously, this is how you treat other women with different life experiences! You accuse them of being men! Sorry to burst your delusional bubble, I am a woman, my papa was liberal he also just happened to be lookist. It’s the truth, deal with it, or lie to yourself. But don’t spread BS about me and my life!

     

    Also, I never said my papa was psycho. He may have been a jerk, but he’s still my papa and I still love him.

     

     

  • goatini

     

  • forced-birth-rape

    My grandmother, wife of a southern Baptist preacher was obsessed with sin, sin was her favorite topic, and even she did not get traumatized over a bra strap.

  • goatini

    I never said my papa was psycho”


    **we have a winner**


    Because any *actual* female whose father was obviously grooming her, at age 11, for sex, would consider said father to be a psycho, amongst other things.  

  • ley

    My last reply wasn’t enough. This is gross what you’re writing here. My papa was a proud, Italian American man who wanted his daughter (me) to look her best. Trouble was, he had no sense of decency so I was dressed in revealing clothing. There was nothing creepy about it, and I find it so disturbing that you would say such horrible things about people you’ve never met. I wanted to share my personal struggle with my imagine and allow this other woman who was raised by conservative parents to see that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side. All people struggle with body imagine, where one young woman might grow up too oppressive, another is being too pressure to be perfect looking. You have made me feel so sick with your assertions. I am so sorry your mind works the way it does.

  • ley

    you’re sick

  • ley

    who’s traumatized? I just said, probably not the best idea in church. You really don’t understand anything that isn’t extreme, do you?

  • goatini

    made up better BS.  

  • goatini

    was writing for Penthouse Letters now.  

  • ley

    seriously, get help. you’re really sick. if you give me you’re email I can email you my # so we can talk about how you’re doing and why trust is such an obvious issue for you. please let me email you, I want to help. :(

  • ley

    gross

  • forced-birth-rape

    You are the one who keeps going on, and on about other women’s bras, most women do not notice other women’s bras.

  • ley

    It might be true that most other women don’t notice, I’m not a mind reader, are you? Shouldn’t be an issue though, right? Not in church anyway.

     

  • goatini

     

     

  • ley

    Oh, I get it…  I didn’t get the first troll reference, with the hairy arm… now I get them both.  I really want to get in touch with you without giving my personal information away because you concern me. I hope this is just a rare thing for you and you actually aren’t so sick and untrusting. I mean maybe you’re just egging me on. I hope so. I hope you’re not so gross for real, that would be frightening.

  • goatini

  • goatini

    Who is this, Jeff Gannon of Talon News?

  • ley

    You’re very handy with the pictures. Well, my name is Ley… maybe you could search for me on facebook? If you find me, send me a message so I can get in touch with you.

  • goatini

    for “Ley”. 

  • ley

    Are there really that many! I thought it would have been an uncommon name. Well, Ley Wire then.

  • forced-birth-rape

     

     

    ~ I went to church three times a week, vacation bible school every year, and countless revival’s for the first fifteen years of my life, the first fifteen years of my life was nothing but southern Baptist Christianity. I never encountered any woman or girl who said the word douche, again Jesus would never say that! ~

     

    ~ You continue to prove you are pure misogyny worried about church etiquette when you don’t know anything about Jesus Christ and can’t bring your self to talk or act anything like Jesus. If you were not so saturated in hatred of women you might realize that you sound like a obnoxious immature abuser, just a Christian for the misogyny, not because you love and respect Jesus and want to be anything like him. You are total opposite of the Jesus I was taught to love, you prove Christianity isn’t about poor sweet little Jesus it is about manpower and misogyny. ~     ~ You confirm this article. ~

     

    ~ I was sexually abused the first ten years of my life by a bible loving, bible verse quoting southern Baptist Christian man, who was obsessed with female submission. I, as a toddler, enticed the southern Baptist, bible loving, serial misogynistic pervert by wearing my very provocative pink overalls and button up long sleeve shirt with hearts on the collar. It does not matter what women and little girls wear, Christian men are going to be sex obsessed, misogynistic perverts regardless. The bible is all about virgin sex with little girls ~

     

    ~ Christian bible god saves man, Lot, who offers, NO begs, that a gang of rapist men take his two virgin daughters and gang-rapes them.

     

    Genesis 19:8 

    “Look now, I have two daughters who are virgins; let me, I beg of you, bring them out to you, and you can do as you please with them. But only do nothing to these men, for they have came under the protection of my roof.”

     

    Numbers

    31: 17 “Now therefore, KILL every male among the little ones, and Kill every woman who is not a virgin.

     

    31:18 “But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him keep alive for yourselves.” 

     

    Christian bible god telling soldiers to rape twelve and thirteen year old virgin girls. ~

     

     

    ~ My wife beating father was deacon and Sunday school teacher at our church, he read the bible to us every night before we went to bed.

     

    Sometimes when you go to liberal websites you might encounter ex Christians who know Christianity well and wont let you get away with your Pharisee behavior, in my Bible the Pharisees were the only people sweet little Jesus hated, and the Pharisees hated sluts, Jesus loved sluts. ~

     

    ~ If you were the myth of a real Christian you would be ashamed of everything you have posted here, but keep it up, you are turning people off of Christianity and church. Everyone I grew up with went to church, no one I know goes to church any more because they don’t want to encounter Jesus hating, Paul loving creeps like you. ~

     

     

    Matthew 7:1-2

    Do not judge and criticize and condemn others, so that you may not be judged and criticized and condemned yourselves. For just as you judge and criticize and condemn others, you will be judged and criticized and condemned, and in accordance with the measure you [use to] deal out to others, it will be dealt out again to you.

     

    Matthew 23:13

    Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, pretenders (hypocrites)! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces; for you neither enter yourselves, nor do you allow those who are about to go in do so.

  • ley

    Naw. I can say douche and love Jesus.  You’re like a word nazi. And you keep freaking out about a simple request. I’m not sure where, “cover the bra straps in church= woman hating” but it’s not in reality. Yikes.

     

  • goatini

    was already taken

  • ley

    No, because that’s my name. Oh that’s right, I don’t agree with you so I’m made up. (eye roll). Find me on facebook, Name- Ley Wire, you can see my picture of me with my baby girl… if you care to face reality, or if you don’t want to you can just assume we’re in the matrix if my existence is too hard for your fragile mind to bare.

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Could she be complaining about non-air-conditioned college campus churches with summer school students wearing shorts and camisole tops from their classes?

  • give-em-hell-mary

    “And Concerned “Woman” For America here, just coincidentally, happens to have an abusive psycho LIBERAL (booga booga booga) father, a “lookist” (co-opting GehM) who “made (“her”) wear next to nothing at age 11 when (s/he) first started to develop”.”

    You pointed out Ley’s suspicious coincidences and “ironies” so well!  Her “dad” sounds like he was borrowed from a female friend.  While I haven’t completely sorted out the contradictory double-binds of hypocrite theothugs, and while I suspect most men (and women) with eyesight can be looksist (who isn’t impressed by Hollywood beauty?), most liberal men make efforts to be polite to women who aren’t attractive to them.  Moreover, they support safety nets for abandoned mothers and children, and don’t cruelly blame the mothers’ “lack of religion or modesty” for their hardships.

    Ironically, my parents stripped me naked for humiliating cold weather backyard “medicinal” naked sun baths for my chemically burned (by mom) skin when I was in first and second grade.  Such sun (and UV and quartz lamp) exposure turned me from scalded red to purple.  Dad also let his engineer dad take insulting exploitive close-up pics of my face, hands, elbows, and naked rear end.  These episodes gave me PTSD and nightmares, and I got slapped around for resisting and complaining.  Yet years later when I experimented with tights, high heels, pencil skirts, waisted jackets and make-up, my abusive parents hounded me 24/7 over my “slutty” style.  God forbid some non-gay Catholic male student ask me out instead of spitting at me!

  • jennifer-starr

    Okay, let’s define terms here. When you say that your dad was liberal, what exactly do you mean?  Some kind of political activist?  Someone who always  voted Democrat?  Or is liberal simply the absence of conservatism? 

     

    Also, if what you’re saying is true, calling your dad a ‘jerk’ is a bit of understatement.  His obsession with your looks and  weight sounds positively creepy and kind of on the same level as those dads who are obsessed with their daughters ‘purity’. 

  • ley

    Sure, defining terms sounds fair. My papa just wasn’t conservative, he doesn’t vote, so I didn’t mean politically liberal. He has had type 1 diabetes since he was 9 and was spoiled because of it, as a result he never really grew up. So, he’s has the maturity of a kid. He is just lookist. He thinks looks are #1 important. So where other fathers might see having good grades or excelling at sports as a high priority he sees looks as being important, so he put pressure on us to be fit and attractive, my brother too. There’s more to the story, my mom’s family has a history of obesity, so what might have been just a wish for his kids to be well liked became an obsession to try and combat our genetic history. There was really nothing creepy or sexual about it, that’s goatini’s wheel house, not mine. My papa just didn’t understand modesty. I think every parent wants their kid to be well liked and not seen as ugly, but my papa didn’t realize there was a middle ground between not ugly and flaunty, called modesty. That’s why I think genuine modesty is so important for strong women who wish to be respected.

     

    Now I guess I’ll wait and see how the people on this site butcher and degrade or totally misinterpret what I just wrote (please don’t).

  • ley

    Look your parents sucked. But that doesn’t mean my life never happened or isn’t real. Open your eyes to other women’s pain, not just your own. Or have you been totally blinded by hatred?

     

  • goatini

  • ley

    confessing? How nice of you.

  • goatini

  • ley

    More confessions from goatini, how nice.

     

  • goatini

  • goatini

    before your story started stepping on its own toes.

     

  • ley

    More dog humor. mmm, yes.

     

  • ley

    Must be something only dogs can see?

  • jennifer-starr

    I get the gist of what you’re saying, but terming someone as ‘liberal’ simply because they aren’t conservative makes the assumption that everybody must fall into one category or the other, which I’ve not found to be true. Most people are a mixture of beliefs from both philosophies. You also seem to make the implication that liberalism is immature–my parents are both liberal, have been married for over forty years, homeowners and raised three children in a very stable environment. Ditto for my grandparents. And yet I once had a conservative woman with multiple husbands tell me that my parents had ‘no morals’.  Go figure. 

     

     

  • ley

    haha, yeah I didn’t mean to imply anything about liberalism. I consider myself fairly liberal, my husband’s pretty conservative though.

    I just wanted to point out that lookism wasn’t an exclusively conservative thing, it’s just a sucky people thing. That’s all. This woman who had the horrible conservative parents just seems like she has it her mind that all conservatives are horrible and all liberals are wonderful, but that is clearly not the case. The world isn’t so clearly divided like that and if, in your mind it is, then my life is going to rock the boat… or I guess, some here have found pretending I’m not real an effective coping mechanism. :/

  • jennifer-starr

    Additionally, my use of the word ‘creepy’ wasn’t meant to imply that there was anything sexual in nature going on–I do recall a friend’s mother who was obsessed with her daughter’s appearance-mainly because she was very socially aware and concerned about projecting the perfect ‘image’ to the neighbors. She also put her daughter into beauty pageants–this was the 80s so they weren’t quite as plastic as they are today, but with her it was all about keeping up appearances and as a conequence this girl felt very insecure about her appearance.  For someone’s dad to be that way just seems more than a little ‘off’ to me–and that he didn’t see how that would affect you is troubling. 

     

    Modesty is a bit of a loaded term. I tend to like clothes that are easy to move in and comfortable–jeans, slacks, blouses, cardigans–I don’t like anything too tight or short because it isn’t comfortable, ditto for any piece of clothing that you have  to fuss with and constantly arrange, pull up or down, etc. Barring some very conservative Christians who think any woman wearing pants is immodest and sinful, most people would probably call my dress modest. But the thing is that I’m dressing for myself and not according to some modesty doctrine—when I put something on, even for church, I’m not thinking about whether or not it’s going to cause some guy to look at me and ‘stumble’ or think lustful thoughts. Because that’s his problem and not mine. 

  • forced-birth-rape

    Shouldn’t you be at church looking for bras with the other church going perverts?

  • ley

    Yeah I completely agree with that. I think that some women do dress sexy though, because they like to feel sexy. And that’s cool. But not really appropriate in church type setting… or really any professional setting either. Some men do the same… or perhaps dress sloppy. Which, again, can be distracting in church. If you’re dressed like, “look at me!” when people should be paying attention to something else, it’s inconsiderate… and a bit immature. The pamphlet in question was just suggesting no one dress like, “look at me!” in church, not men or women. Some of the pamphlet was taken out of context and attributed to misogyny, this is not the case though. So I mentioned it… two days, several insults, accusations, melodrama and a chunk of my childhood later, and we’re still talking about it. I just suggest read the whole pamphlet yourself so you can honestly decide if you think it’s sexist or if it’s just a suggestion to dress respectable in church. That all.

  • ley

    I did go to church this morning, I prayed and sang and went home. Thanks for asking, I hope you’re having a nice Sunday too. :)

  • give-em-hell-mary

    I am concentrating on other people’s pain, and trying to hold accountable the perps who have harmed all of us.  I come here to comment because I’m worried about all women and their families being harmed by right wing fascist theothugs.  If I didn’t take the time to share what I learned, then I would be blinded by hatred.  Sharing=seeing with knowledge.

  • crowepps

    Had a little time today, so tracked down “Modesty Matters”, which is not a non-profit or faith group but instead a business started by a couple of religious women that used to sell modest clothes and now sells dress patterns and sewing lessons for making clothes that would be right at home on Little House on the Prairie or one of Warren Jeffs’ many wives.  I’d highly recommend that anyone who thinks it’s about women keeping their bra straps tucked in go take a look at what they’re selling.

    http://www.modestymatters.net/

     

  • colleen

    Ah, so ‘modest’ = 19th century. I can hardly wait untill they roll out the promised assessories (which appear to be gigantic bows)

  • jennifer-starr

    Well, if I ever want to go to a costume party dressed as Anne of Green Gables, I”ll know just where to shop. But anyone who suggests that women should wear this stuff on a daily basis  needs to have a slate broken over their heads. 

  • ley

    Is that the group that put the pamphlet out! Seriously, I was all for defending the pamphlet, if you read the whole thing it just sounds like people requesting decent clothes in church, which I 100% support. I cannot support their “classic A-line dress” however, oh no, that I cannot.

     

    Oh (sigh of relief) it’s not the people who put the pamphlet out.

  • ley

    What about the women who have been harmed by non-conservative men, or even by dare I say, liberal men (they’re not all saints, you know) does their pain not matter? Only the pain that fits you’re political agenda matters?

  • crowepps

    I believe that’s the group who was distributing it — unless there is another group using their registered and trademarked name?

    As I understand it, there were several different pamphlets.  The cover of “Modesty Matters” says it contains quotations from “Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior”, George Washington’s compilation of 110 rules based on a set of rules composed by French Jesuits in 1595.  I’m sure the good manners current among the gentry in 1595 are timeless, but they might be just a teensy bit dated.

    If you have information about the people who put the ““Modesty: It’s nothing to be ashamed of” pamphlet out, sure would appreciate a name or link, since there isn’t one provided either here or at the original article at Daily Koss.  Is there a publisher or organization name on your copy?

  • give-em-hell-mary

    Your idea of a “liberal” is my idea of a conservative cad with a sprinkling of anti-war slogans, or even a misinformed, mixed-up moderate.  The pain of all women matters, but conservative perps and pedophile priests mislabel the pain sources and viciously libel the liberal rescuers.  It has taken bullied me decades to sort through the centuries of patriarchal lies, and I’m sure I’ll never finish sorting.

  • thalwen

    According to the articles, the FRC provided them space, so maybe it’s one of their little sub-hate groups, or an affiliate. I was trying to find it myself but none of the articles give a source and the MM link goes to that awful clothing site. Either way, if  they’re associated with the known misogyny and hate group FRC, there’s really little doubt to their agenda.

  • jennifer-starr

    Apparently Modesty Matters is a group from Roanoke VA founded by a retired pharmacist named JH Woolwine. From the Mother Jones Article : 

    Modesty Matters, the group behind the flyer, is a new addition to the event this year. It was founded by a modestly dressed retired pharmacist from Roanoke, Virginia named J.H. Woolwine. He gave me a leaflet showcasing some models of modest dress for young people. They look like Mitt Romney’s high school yearbook photos: Buttoned up college students from 1965 wearing knee-length dresses and neckties.

    A “back porch thing” run by Woolwine and his wife, Modesty Matters is a somewhat quixotic effort to “move the media back to modesty,” which Woolwine believes could be a compelling nonpolitical issue that people on all sides could agree on. He could be right about that. Anyone who has struggled to find clothes for young girls that don’t make them look like hookers might agree.

    Of course, the information Woolwine is handing out might put off a few potential supporters, especially the women he’s seeking to persuade. On the flyer asking whether God “cares what I wear,” the writer explains that women need to dress more modestly in church because “men are particularly visual. Immodesty in church can trigger lustful thoughts.” It’s an interesting sentiment among a crowd obsessed with the possibility that Islamic militants could impose Sharia law on America. Woolwine is also distributing a “Resolution for Women,” which asks women to make a number of pledges, including “I will champion God’s model for womanhood in the face of a post-feminist culture.”

    But Woolwine insists that his activism isn’t just aimed at women. “It’s for guys, too,” he says. So far though, his group hasn’t really picked up steam. He’s got flyers out asking for someone to make him a website, and the table in the exhibit hall features a little box for donations. But he says he’s gotten quite a few signatures for his petition to ask Congress to make the day after Labor Day national “Modesty Day,” to remind kids going back to school to put some clothes on.

    Here’s the link: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/09/values-voters-americas-last-prudes

  • crowepps

    Appreciate your taking the time to track this down — it was really helpful.