The Hypocracy of Christian Modesty

As someone who is highly interested in the topic at hand, I've done countless hours of research into modesty. There are innumerable reasons for choosing to be modest-- which I have recounted many here and elsewhere across the web. Unfortunately, in the course of all this research, I've stumbled across a sad truth.

One of the largest hypocrisies I see propagated by the Christian mainstream is the idea of modesty in and of itself, and to whom the command to be modest is actually for. It is true that the majority of church denominations will say that modesty is something to be desired...but the divergence comes when they seem to espouse the idea that modesty is only meant for women.

I've seen the argument time and again on mainstream Christian websites dealing with modesty:  men are more VISUAL than women, therefore when a woman is immodest around men it is a greater stumbling block to them and leads to more incidents of lustful or improper thoughts. 

Following this roundabout logic (and I hate to say it, but...), the feminists are almost right. Women are still being blamed for the ideas and thoughts of men. Men do objectify women. Often enough, if a woman is sexually assaulted, what she was wearing at the time still does come into question. There are still men who blame women for their own shortcomings and inability to control their sinful, base urges.

And yes, all of that roundabout logic is garbage.

All that being said, I still think that the italicized statement above is a complete crock. Why? ...well, I spend some of my free time on Pinterest (for those that don't know, it's an online picture collecting site). I enjoy surfing around for cute, modest outfits, home decorating ideas, recipes, and inspirational quotes. I'll tell you one thing: that site is a GREAT tool for getting into the heads of both women AND men.

The hugest thing I've noticed is that the idea that MEN are the visual ones and MEN are the ones doing all the objectifying is complete and utter BS. I cannot look through a single post without seeing scores of half-naked men, all sweaty with sexy looks on their faces and shirtless with all their chest and arm muscles rippling. Not only that, but it's WOMEN who are posting all this, and making indecent and downright crude remarks about them!

"Mmmm! Yummy!" "He's so hot!" "I'd do that!" ...yeah.

Women are just as much visual creatures as men are, and they're just as sexualized, crude, rude, and dirty towards men. Seeing men in any state of undress is just as much of a stumbling block, but because this mistaken idea still exists, it continually gets overlooked.

The churches that throw a fit when a woman is caught in a skirt higher than her kneecaps while not chastising their men for running around shirtless (hopefully not at church!) are doing their members a huge disservice. Yes, it might be "hot outside"...but you don't see women running around with their shirts off. That, to their minds, would practically scream "Rape me!" However, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, too. They have that age-old adage for a reason, because it's true.

...I don't think it's too much to ask for men to suck it up and keep their clothes on. There's only one man I want to see in ANY state of undress, and that's my husband!

Modesty isn't just for women: it's for everyone.

What is Being a Submissive Wife?

I wrote the forthcoming little snippet on the 11th of January of this year in one of my mom's groups and just happened to stumble across it by accident. Once I reread back over it and realized that it needs to be re-posted somewhere where it can get more exposure.

Some of these things have changed-- especially in the realm of my staying at home, because I now work-- but it's still pertinent and I've left it in its entirety without changing anything.

So here goes!

---

To me, being a woman submitting to one's husband is a matter of following Natural Order-- the rules of the universe given to us by our Creator to live by. Since the dawn of time, this is how it's been, and only ever changed until very recently. It makes absolutely no sense to me to live the way people do now. The constant struggle for power over the relationship and always wondering who is in charge is asinine at best. It's no wonder children are growing up nowadays not knowing what role they are to play in life!

In a sense, I do follow my HOH in a biblical way, too, although I don't do so because I'm a Christian. I'm actually not, although I do believe in Jesus Christ, his message, and God's all-encompassing love. I just firmly believe that the bible taught us that families should be ordered this way simply because it is Natural for us to do so...or, if you want to put it biblically, because God wants us to live this way. Since God is the Maker of All Things, following the biblical standards set forth is simply True, Right, and Natural, because he is the Creator of everything and therefore all Natural Laws belong to God. ...if you can follow my roundabout logic! 

My position is that if it worked so well for so long with the man being the head of the household, it oughtn't have ever been changed in the first place. 

I am a natural submissive in the realm of the classic 50s style housewife. I love to cook and clean, and especially love taking care of my man. I prefer to stay at home to do this, and he prefers it as well. Submitting is easy for me because my HOH makes it very easy for me to do: he's hardworking, extremely trustworthy, caring, loving, considerate, and strong. He always thinks of his family first before worrying about himself. His morals are unshakable, and he has not and never will give me cause to doubt him.

Modesty in an Immodest World

When most people think of modesty, what do they think of?

That's a loaded question, because of course people think all kinds of things. I know when I reached my later teens and early twenties, I had a rather negative viewpoint of modesty. I was raised to be modest, you see, and once I left my father's home I decided I would simply do what I want. Skirts below my knees? Not on your life! High-collared shirts? Oh, hell no! I was woman, hear me roar...and all that other nonsense.

When I was that age, I decided to go against much of what I was taught in matters of looks and appearance. It was rebellion on my part, and I thank God that I'm smart enough to not have been a REAL rebel and get myself into illegal drugs or binge drinking, as so many young adults do in this day and age. No, my rebellion was in how I looked, and by God, I was going to do what I wanted and dress how I wanted.

So, yeah. I showed up at nightclubs at the age of twenty-one wearing little more than a fishnet dress, thong, over-bust corset, and knee-high stiletto boots. Pretty much everything I had was on display for everyone to see...and I did get a LOT of looks. How could I not?

Did I love the attention it got me? ...not so much.

Instead of feeling free, beautiful, and desired, fully in charge of my femininity and the burden of responsibility cast off...I kind of felt like crap. I felt like a slab of meat. Men's eyes were on me everywhere I went in that club, and I knew EXACTLY what they were thinking. They didn't even HAVE to undress me in their head. Hell, I did it for them! Get them a little too drunk, and I could've faced a really bad situation. Thank you, God, that nothing more than a few errant drunken gropes happened. 

Rather than making me feel good, this behavior-- this acting out-- made me feel cheap and sleazy.

Damnit. Those feminists lied to me...again!

Modesty sans frumpiness!

Nowadays? I'm older and wiser. Fortunately. I've thrown off the feminist propaganda that tells me I can damn well do what I please and damn the consequences of my actions...and in doing so I've gotten back to my roots. I'm generally conservative in nature to begin with (how I ended up half-naked at a club making out with girls and having a couple too many I can't even imagine now!), but my spiritual path is taking me even further than I was raised to be.

Why be modest, though? Is there really anything wrong with wearing a tank top and short shorts? I mean...I live in FLORIDA, the United States capital of God-awful summer heat! I SHOULD be able to bend the "rules" I've got in my head of what is modest and immodest...right?

Not so much. At least, not for me. To me, modesty is about respect. It's respect for myself, for my relationship with my HOH, and for God.

• Dressing in a trashy way with lots of skin showing isn't respectful to myself. It feels as though I don't value myself. I don't want to be one of those women who get ahead in life because they wear miniskirts and let their breasts hang half out. Let me instead be judged (if you will) based on my OWN merits...not by how I look. I want my children to grow up knowing that I respect myself. I want them to learn from my example and not make the same mistakes I have.
• I take a great amount of pride in my relationship. If you haven't figured it out yet, I'm submissive to my HOH naturally; it doesn't take any effort on my part whatsoever. I consider the fact that how I dress is not only a reflection on me, but it also is a reflection on HIM and our relationship. I have respect and deep, deep love for him and our relationship, and I aim to show it through my style of dress. My body is his to see...and his alone. I am not for public display.
• God created us all beautiful, in our way. I wouldn't cover myself up in ugly sacks and say "This is what God wants from me!", waving around my piousness like a badge of honor. I'm a humble person...but I still want to be pretty. God made women to be beautiful, so just because I won't wear tank-tops anymore and prefer long skirts does NOT mean I am all of a sudden going to wear ugly clothes. News flash: I can wear bright colors and lively patterns on my clothes and STILL look modest!

Of course, not everyone will agree with this, and I don't really care one way or the other if they do or not. I know how I feel when I dress modestly, in long skirts and dresses.

I feel feminine.

I feel pretty.

I feel confident.

I feel respectful AND respected.

To me, that doesn't seem like such a bad thing at all...

---

To see the kinds of styles I enjoy, feel free to follow me on Pinterest, my second best hobby! 

 

The above photo is courtesy of Gal Meets Glam.

Viewpoints on Spirituality.

It's funny how a span of only a few months can see huge changes come to a person and manifest in the world. In my last post, I talked about how I felt lead toward covering my head and dressing more modesty for submissive and spiritual reasons. In fact, I prefaced it with the idea that I never intended this blog to be full of my spiritual musings at all. I'd truly wanted it to be so that each and every submissive-- regardless of what manner of sub they are-- would be able to find something of value to themselves on my blog.

But...things change. 

The older I get, the more I realize that I'm sort of doing it wrong. Submissiveness is about and ought to be about spirituality, first and foremost above all else. If it's not about spirituality, then it's about sexual pleasure...and what God wants from us out of life is not simply reacting to pleasure and pain.

Last September, I wrote a lengthy post on here about why I was trying to keep religion out of my writings. The post was called Submission vs. Religion, and it can be found here. I find it kind of funny that, in reading back over it, while I was asserting that religion / spirituality ought not necessarily have a place in submissiveness...at the same time, all my arguments were FOR submissiveness as a natural trait God asks of humans!

My post was very contradictory on the whole, and let me quickly just point out why. In it, I asserted from the very beginning that because I don't agree with ALL of the teachings laid out in the bible, I don't need the bible to tell me how my life should be lived whatsoever. I said that I could clearly see from the way the universe works that natural submission is normal and derived from God.

And it IS true. Submission IS evident throughout our world. However...why was I saying that I didn't need the bible to tell me so?

It wasn't because it was not true. It was, and is, very true. I was doing so because somewhere inside of me, I still had that faint resistance toward organized religion, which was manifesting itself in a distrust of the words in the bible.

But the bible also tells us that "You will recognize them by their fruits." (Matt. 7:16a) So, too, we can recognize the BIBLE ITSELF by its fruit, the fruit being the grain of Truth that is found there.

Therefore, it's sound to reason that if the bible shows how headship ought to be arranged and it's also in line with Natural Order...it's ordained by God, who itself created Natural Order, making the admonition in 1 Corinthians 11:3-- "that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God"-- a natural, simple Truth.

Is the above roundabout logic? Perhaps. But it is true nonetheless, and in a lot of ways it's making me rethink my spirituality.

How did I get to headcovering? Why the appeal for me? Well, if you move on from the third verse I quoted just there, it says that women ought to cover their head when praying or prophesying. Most organized religions in this day and age kind of skip over that part because it simply doesn't fit into the way our modern society works. They want SOME of the Truth there...but are unwilling to go all the way and also take the Truth from the rest of it.

A woman covering her head shows submissiveness toward her head of household and to God. It shows modesty and decency and respect. Are these traits that a submissive woman would want to have? As far as I'm concerned, you bet!

So, yeah.

You may find that the context of this blog becomes more and more spiritual. I'm tired of trying to fight off my inclination toward disbelieving the bible simply because I've been burned by organized religion in the past. I'm a Seeker of Truth; that's something that is more important to me than anything else. 

If there are Truths throughout the bible, then you can rest assured that I will find them, utilize them, and share them here. And if the thought of scripture being quoted here and there, with sound, logical reasoning why I think it ought to be followed, upsets and / or insults you for some reason...then it's safe to say that you may want to look elsewhere for a different person's writing who is more in line with your thoughts on the matter.

Or...stay, and share with me this submissive journey I'm on. 

The choice is yours.

Making Changes in My Life.

Image from GarlandsofGrace

I swore to myself that when I started this blog, I wouldn't get all spiritual on folks. After all, not everyone is submissive because of spiritual reasons, right?

Well...things are changing in my home, and it's something I feel the need to express. If you don't like it or feel uncomfortable, feel free to skip over this post.

K and I have been making a point lately of spending the evenings when I have off work just talking. We'll sit out on the porch, have a glass of wine or two, and talk about whatever comes up. Lately, what's been coming up is our need to be more spiritual. We spoke at some length about the Amish and the appeal of their community. We talked about why there's so much appeal in that sort of lifestyle for us. And through the course of all that, a few things came into my mind.

Modesty is important, isn't it?

It's part of what separates a spiritual person from your average, everyday sheeple. Being modest shows respect to yourself, to your HOH, and to the Creator. It shows that you value the sacredness of those relationships.

I came to realize that, while I'm not trashy in dress and appearance by any means, I could be doing better. And something moved in me to do better because of it. I spun it around in my head for a day or two, and finally brought it up to HOH: I want to start covering my head.

Why?

To show my submissiveness. To show modesty. To feel more feminine. He took in my answers and said he had no problem getting behind it, and my journey took a new turn. We ended up at Walmart in the crafts section, and I picked out a couple different fabrics I liked to turn into head coverings. I also got a nice blue flowered bandana that I thought would do the trick. At home, I did a bunch of research and started making a couple of covers for myself.

Once I put it on, I had this feeling come over me. It felt right...like this was a part of something I'd been missing out on. It's only been a week, but that feeling hasn't gone away. I'm fully aware that it will not, because he and I have in some ways stumbled across a Truth in it. Modesty has its place in our life. Head covering is a way to show that.

Within another day or two, I felt pulled toward looking even more feminine. I had an urge to go through my closet and throw out every pair of slacks I own. Of course, I didn't do that...because I've only a couple skirts and one or two dresses to wear, period. That wouldn't leave much for my daily life at all. But when the opportunity arose to hit up the local Goodwill, we went, and I walked out with three nice floor-length skirts.

Am I saying this sort of thing is for everyone? No, not necessarily...but it could be, and perhaps it should be, too. I'll get to the reasons why I think it can and should be in a future post.

Submission vs. Religion

One of the things I've griped about to K on a regular basis is dealing with labels. The inconsistencies and misinformation about just what submission is was one of the reasons I decided to make this blog in the first place. I've spent plenty of time on here already writing about why submission doesn't automatically mean BDSM, but now I want to go another route: religion.

I've been doing research on submission for years. Even as a teenager, I realized this innate need to be submissive, which sparked hours upon hours of fruitless searching for others like me. The best place to research, of course, is the internet, but simply Googling "submission" or "submissive" is bound to give an absolutely massive list of things I'm not looking for. One of those, of course, is religion.

I'm a firm believer in Natural Order. While I am very spiritual, not all of my beliefs line up precisely with biblical teachings, and it's for that reason I shy away from any sites proclaiming submission due to God's will. It doesn't take rocket science for me to understand that it IS, in fact, God's will for a woman to defer to her husband. I just personally don't feel that I need the bible to tell me that, nor half a hundred fundamentalist Christian ladies to tell the same.

I've spent some time talking about Natural Order before. For those that can't be bothered to read, I'll give my interpretation of it. God created the universe, and with it came all those tricksy little rules we call scientific Laws. Try for a moment to go against the Law of Gravity, and see what happens. The Laws of Motion...no one can get out of those. The list, in fact, is simply staggering: our entire universe is governed by all these laws, and there's nothing anyone can do to change them. Unfortunately, there is one law that's never talked about, and that's in regard to household roles.

The reason for that, of course, is simple to find. Feminism has gone a long way toward ruining Natural Order by insisting that a woman is weak, lazy, or selfish if she desires of a Natural, traditional way of life in her relationship. The fact of the matter is simple: not EVERYONE can be a leader. For every leader, someone must follow. This is truth in every aspect of human relationships, from the workplace to the home. Why, then, are we told that it's wrong if we follow Natural Order and take a step back so our men-- generally considered natural-born leaders-- can head the household and do the leading for us?

All over the bible there are commandments or assertations that a man should be the head of the household. One quote goes like this:

Ephesians 5:22 -- Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband. --KJV

The commandments here-- this scripture being the foremost quoted in favor of biblical submission-- are as plain as day. A woman is instructed to submit to her husband, and a husband is commanded to LOVE his wife as his own body. It doesn't command him to lord it over his wife, or make her feel inferior to him.

The rub lies in the translation of the word "submit". There are so many misunderstandings of the word that the actual term gets entirely lost in translation the moment it's said.

Dictionary.com defines the word submit this way:

sub·mit
[suh-b·mit] verb, -mit·ted, -mit·ting.
verb (used with object)

1.
to give over or yield to the power or authority of another (often used reflexively).
2.
to subject to some kind of treatment or influence.
3.
to present for the approval, consideration, or decision of another or others: to submit a plan; to submit an application.
4.
to state or urge with deference; suggest or propose (usually followed by a clause): I submit that full proof should be required.

So submission, in essence means to yield or defer authority to another. Nowhere in this definition is there an allusion that doing so makes one less superior or less intellectual to another. Nowhere does it say that the one doing the submitting loses everything of themselves, nor does it state that the person in authority has the ultimate, final say.

Now, I promised myself that I wouldn't get too heavily into the bible as the basis for this article. Not everyone follows the bible or the teachings of Christ, and it's my determination to keep out religion as much as I can throughout this blog. It was something I had to talk about at least once or twice, however, because of the staggering number of people that follow these Natural Laws due to religious convictions.

I went ahead and did a bit of research on men versus women in the role of natural-born leadership capabilities, and while there's plenty on the subject itself, I found a post by a lady on some random forum that sums it up perfectly. 

 

Are men really more intelligent than women? Why have men been made natural leaders? Why do we always rely on them to make vital decisions?

Well let’s start by analyzing the differences between the two sexes. Women and men aren’t the opposite of one another but on the contrary they complement each other: this means that one isn’t superior to the other when abilities are involved. If men are physically stronger, women are emotionally stronger; sometimes the strong will of women have made them able to go through tougher physical pains and struggles such as delivery and menstrual pain. What man could ever bear the pain of giving birth to a baby? Sounds strange but someone could say that all in all men aren’t as strong as they claim but that women, maternal instinct combined with the love for their loved ones, are better survival in tough times. But even at this point men are still made leaders in every department worldwide. The society has been patriarchal as long as we can remember and the justification has always been the hierarchy inspired by God to men in the Bible. However there are some societies where religions like Islam, Judaism and Christianity are unknown but yet the man is still the head of the home. Why?

The answer is more simple than it seems. Naturally men are instinctive: this means they are physical just like most of their needs. Like wild animals (no offense meant) their main preoccupations are to protect their lives and those of their loved ones and provide them with everything they need to be safe. That’s what we call “Survival Instinct”. Since their role is to protect lives, they have developed the ability to think faster (not necessarily deeper) than women, as it can take less than a second for a life to be broken. They might be insensitive to internal suffering but they sure perceive any type of threat to their safety. This said, we can understand why men are natural leaders but we still haven’t answered another important question: are they really more intelligent?

Being instinctive means thinking primarily of our needs, thus putting ourselves before any other thing. If we think just a moment of those people we repute to be intelligent we’d see they are those who somehow always do all they can to get what they want. Not just anything but the one which requires less time. Normally we say these individuals are smart because they know the easiest and fastest way to success, well men are just like that. Used to think fast when problems arise they give the impression of being smarter but they are simply instinctive because if we should consider every aspect of the decisions they make we’d see that only the antecedent has been considered and not the consequence. Whatever will be, will be. Women on the other hand, being more emotional, are likely to put themselves in other people’s shoes so they always reflect on what can happen if they should act this way rather than that way. This makes them quite slow in decisions making, but that doesn’t make them less capable: in fact they are accurate observers and analyzers.

Knowing this defect of ours of taking too much time to make a decision, we often let the men make those that are required immediately: finance; while we keep the others which concern a farther future to ourselves: getting married, creating a family; long term decisions to be precise.

After this brief but attentive breakdown of the differences between men and women, we can conclude by saying that both sexes are intelligent: men are fast thinkers, while women are attentive observers. However if the latter never think of possible reactions to their actions, the former also take too much time to act. All in all, they are on the same level. One can’t be without the other. The man would go on creating one disaster after the other, while the woman would get old thinking of what move she should make.

Ending: oh, yes! We sure complement each other!

--michelin89, taken from http://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-143533.0.html

As can be seen through the course of this segment, there's absolutely no need to point toward religion as the only reason for natural dominance or submission. It's a simple biological fact that men are hard-wired toward supporting, providing, and protecting, while women are wired for loving, caring, and nurturing. Going against that grain is simply going against Natural Order.

Now, I'm not saying that these traits are 100% true across the board. This isn't about absolutes where it concerns personalities. I've met many strong women, and many nurturing men. That doesn't mean, however, that a strong woman MUST be dominant in order to be fulfilled, nor does it mean that a nurturing, loving man must be submissive because that's just their nature. Their true nature is to follow what Natural Law dictates, because none of these traits are mutually exclusive. One doesn't have to ONLY be strong and dominant at the same time; one doesn't have to ONLY be nurturing and submissive at the same time.

The fact of the matter is simply this: religion did not CREATE Natural Laws. They are only reinforcing the Absolute Truth of the matter. Therefore, there's very little need to bring religion into it at all.

When I Was...

...twelve years old, I still played make pretend in the woods, running around barefoot, tanned, and happy all summer long like a wild little Indian child. I had barbie dolls and I used them. Kissing games were just that: games. Twelve year old girls of today are concerned about dressing with the fads of the day, having their own cell phone, and asking their friends for blowjob techniques.

...I didn't even know what a blowjob was until I was sixteen years old.

Children in today's day and age are growing up far too fast.

Schools push sexual education at far too young an age, encouraging kids to get out there and be sexually active instead of letting the parents teach moral and social responsibility and readiness. Little tween girls are nothing but carbon copy sluts like the other little girls they see on television. Short skirts, thongs hanging out the back of jeans slung so low it's lucky they haven't developed pubic hair yet, the list goes on and on and on. Just the clothing that's pushed on young girls is enough to get them to believe it's okay to show your goods and be a complete tramp.

Little boys listen to rap music proclaiming that it's good to "smack a bitch", "beat ho's", and "live for bling", and they repeat it wholeheartedly without even understanding what the words mean. By the time they reach an age where they DO, they come to the misguided understanding that all women want it, even if they say no, that women are tools for their satisfaction and nothing more, and that being "gangsta" is cool.

Society has done absolutely nothing to contradict these children, and in today's modern society, parents are so busy both working full time jobs to see to it that they learn otherwise. The television is their true babysitter, friend, confidant, and parent.

It's a sad, disgusting state of affairs.