There are Roman era texts complaining about how wealthy women wore the thinnest silk they could possibly find, to the point where they might as well have been out naked anyway.This is a very interesting point. I agree with you that St. Paul was primarily speaking of not flaunting wealth or showing off your beauty, and that we tend to forget that aspect of modesty. But, at the same time I wonder - was it really a thing in the ancient world to show off large parts of your body? Everyone wore long robes or togas, unless of course they were competing in athletics or wearing a soldier’s uniform or something like that. So maybe the reason that St. Paul didn’t address that aspect of modesty (i.e., covering yourself with an appropriate amount of clothing) was that his contemporary audience already did cover appropriately and didn’t need to be told to do so.
Amazon. Take your measurements. Assume the sizing is something completely different than you are used to. Read reviews.Trying my best to find long sweaters so I can wear my leggings for fall, so far no luck.
We in Australia have to keep all ourskin out of the sun…skin cancer.Yes, that’s often skin that really needs to be kept out of the sun.
Isn’t this more about privacy rather than modesty?Because I don’t like giving people more information about my person than they are entitled to. I dress modestly whether with men or with women.
Why would you want to dress modestly at home?you are likely modest in public and private
That’s very thought provoking question.Objectification becomes less of an issue with age, does modesty.
What in the instances about people wearing designer clothes or Rolex watches etc?modesty in dress is dress that does not encourage envy,
I can’t even tell if that was said tongue-in-cheek, but I know there are people who believe it.If everyone was modest and didn’t wear expensive stuff, then purchase of goods would go down,then isn’t this counterproductive for society because we need a capitalist society,and some wealthy people,to improve economies and therefor people to have money to help those in poverty situations…
I don’t think the poor ever see most of that money. If anything, those who are in the business of selling unnecessary things search the world to find the most vulnerable and underpaid workers to make their wares, so they can keep more of the profits for themselves and buy more things they do not need themselves and have more people to jump to attention for themselves.I meant it seriously.Naturally,I also wish wealthy people would give more to those disadvantaged but I don’t think it is cut and dry because the way I see it,spending is good for the economy (and in turn the poor).
Nobody needs a Louis Vuitton bag,or a Lamborghini-they buy it because they want it.It doesn’t give anyone true happiness but if all wealthy people decided to be modest and not buy these luxury goods anymore then those businesses would cease to function which would mean they would no longer be paying that country tax,which would in turn affect poor people as the government would have less money and then pay them less welfare (if at all).
Our Governments give us stimulus money to spend to stimulate the economy because,even though it sounds bad,spending is good.
My dad thinks the same way you do th I’m not sure if this is correct.
I agree with this and that is why the focus needs to be on ensuring that workers are not exploited,rather than people being modest and not buying luxury/expensive stuff.anything, those who are in the business of selling unnecessary things search the world to find the most vulnerable and underpaid workers to make their wares, so they can keep more of the profits for themselves
Doesn’t this come down to intent and character though?Ie:there could be two people in the same “luxury” outfit and one has this character and one doesn’t.PetraG said:It is to say that eliciting envy from others or seeking to put oneself above others is not one of them
If I weren’t a religious person, sure. Likewise, a nonreligious person could desire to shield themselves from the male gaze without giving virtue a single thought.Isn’t this more about privacy rather than modesty?
Same as with men. Knowledge of my body they are not entitled to.What sort of information would you be giving to other women?
Because at the heart of modestly is an imperative to be dressed appropriately for any given situation. At the same time, because I am always dressed modestly, there are just some modes of dress that feel entirely uncomfortable to me even if I’m all by myself. This is what I mean when I say that a person who dresses modestly for his or herself own wants and needs is very likely to be modest even in private. Modesty becomes internalized. It is a part of who you are. You scarcely even have to think about it.Why would you want to dress modestly at home?
I agree with you, at least from a secular point of view. But, from a Christian point of view, this is a very difficult argument to make. First and foremost, vanity is sinful. So, for the Christian, we should be endeavoring to avoid that. Secondly, I don’t see how you could possible see yourself as God sees you and think he wants you to reveal yourself to all and sundry. So, I think from a Christian stand point, such a person is in need of better catechesis.I think there are some women though,who dress very immodestly but still have high self worth.Its often though that women who dress immodest have no self respect etc but I don’t think it always is that way.Its more like some have such a high confident of their body and self worth that they want to show everyone-like vanity I guess?