| Author | |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 1:56pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Kim and I were chatting this afternoon about modest fashion. I know some of you have had the pleasure of meeting Colleen Hammond and hearing her speak. I haven't  and her book is apparently sold out at Tan right now. But...as I begin to recognize that maternity clothes don't appear to be in my future (where is the icon for fervent prayer?) and my regular clothes are woefully outdated (and don't fit anyway  ), I'm thinking it's time to investigate this whole "Dressing with Dignity" thing. Would somebody please tell me what it's all about?
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bridget
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2198
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 2:27pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Modesty is the virtue that keeps you from being an occasion of sin to others when you are young and fit, and from making a spectacle of yourself when your not.
Can't remember where that came from.
Anyway, Colleen's book chronicles the history of fashion as it relates to the break down of modesty. It is much more interesting than it sounds, an eye opener.
She started researching and writing on the topic after she ran across a marketing study that used technology to track men's eyes. The conclusion was that when men see a women in pants, their eyes go involuntarily to her behind or crotch.
Colleen teaches that modesty is an attitude as much as what we wear. She, herself does not wear pants, but has gotten so much heat about that in her talks, that I don't think she says "No pants" anymore. She advocates dressing stylishly and with femininity. She went through a'potato sack' phase herself and doesn't reccomend it.
Colleen has been chosen by Alice Von Hildebrand to be her successor.
I should just send you my copy of her book, there is so much info in it.
__________________
God Bless,
Bridget, happily married to Kevin, mom to 8 on earth and a small army in heaven
Our Magnum Opus
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 4:43pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I haven't tried to find it locally yet. The study sounds interesting. I wonder what my husband would think of "dresses only." For me, I think it would probably be skirts only; I can never find dresses to fit properly and I am a total failure at learning to sew. I had a wonderful tutor once upon a a time, a gifted seamstress who gave up after eight years of trying 
I noticed in the recent wedding issue of our diocesan paper that all the brides wore strapless dresses. I can't even imagine! On Colleen's site she has a link to a Mormon (LDS) wedding site and all the dresses are lovely modest dresses. Mormons aren't allowed to go into the temple without proper clothing. Apparently, Catholics are 
I'm not planning on wearing anything strapless anywhere, anytime. But, what is appropriate and functional and lovely--and it there a regional slant to this whole conversation?
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bridget
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2198
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 4:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| But, what is appropriate and functional and lovely--and it there a regional slant to this whole conversation? |
|
|
Yes, Colleen aknowledges that it's easier to wear dresses and skirts in Texas than in midwest winters.
However, Monica and I decided to try to wear mostly skirts and dresses and it really hasn't been that difficult.
The information in her book is radical. But she didn't make up the guidelines. It's researched and based on the Vatican guidelines
__________________
God Bless,
Bridget, happily married to Kevin, mom to 8 on earth and a small army in heaven
Our Magnum Opus
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Molly Smith
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 08 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 669
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 4:54pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I just caught the Duggar family story again on DHC (Bridget, if you're still interested, I TIVOed it and if I can figure out to transfer it from tivo to vhs I'll mail it you  ) and Mrs. Duggar's take on modesty is "dressing to draw attention to your countenance". The girls (including mom) all wore white shirts with jumper style dresses and the boys all wore khaki pants with a solid shirt. They looked great, and comfortable, and I remember all of their beautiful faces. Just something to think about...
Blessings,
__________________
Molly Smith in VA
Mom to seven beautiful children, ages 1-14
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 4:57pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh Molly! If you figure it out (somehow I think Rick will figure it out  ), I'd love a copy!
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
amiefriedl
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 15 2005
Location: N/A
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 323
|
| Posted: Feb 26 2005 at 8:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh, I love this thread! Thanks for starting it!
I wasn't interested in Colleen's book because I thought it was another 'trad' style rant on not wearing pants and always wearing chapel viels.
I'm NOT against skirts or chapel viels, but there are times when skirts are NOT the most modest thing to wear and when chapel viels are impossible (read: 2 year old at the grabbing stage.).
Very recently my parish priest (FSSP) gave a sermon on the vatican guidelines and I had a 'duh' moment when he said that fashions change but the female body never does, so it is actually easy to set guidelines on what to and not to do.
All my friends that I've discussed this issue with want to follow the guidelines but each has their own personal 'hangup' on a particular part. One of my hangups is sleeveless shirts for summer, the kind with regular neck/collars but simply 'stop' at the shoulder. When it is dogdays hot, I love them. My best friend can't understand why shorts in summer could possibly be unacceptable. I also was raised in pants, didn't own a skirt until high school. (I'm doing my daughter the favor of a wardrobe with lots of feminine clothes. But how do little girls play in skirts all day modestly?)
And so it goes, the battle against the boiling-frog syndrome. Raise the ankle length skirts a little until one day, 'voila' mini-skirts are fine. Raise the sleeves until we are all so used to showing skin that scandal doesn't even cross our minds and so forth.
And perhaps it is like changing from bad dietary habits to good ones. One must change a little at a time for the changes to really stick. For me, it used to be that I wouldn't even wear a skirt to Mass (it was even the Latin Mass, I'm really bad! ) Now I enjoy my dresses and skirts on Sunday. (Of course, I can't wait to get home and change into my comfy jeans!)
I must get Colleen's book now and try to open my mind!
__________________
In Christ the King through Mary our Mother,
Amie
Blessed with an awesome hubby and Mom of ds10, dd7, dd3 and dd 10months.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bridget
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2198
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 7:55am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I organized an event at our parish last fall and invited Colleen to speak. I am fairly familiar with her history and what she teaches.
Colleen fought her own research at first. Her early adult years were very worldly so she does understand how hard the issue is for many women. (Her reversion story is quite dramatic and worth hearing if you ever get the chance.)
I have been wearing mostly dresses and skirts since I heard her talk. I'm tall, so I had to have my winter skirts made for me. I wanted them to come below the top of my dress boots. When I wear boots, I just wear socks, no skin shows. When I wear shoes, I wear the thigh high stockings, I can't stand nylons, especially pregnant.
My 8 year old daughter wears mostly dresses and skirts as well. (It was her idea.) I got her a nice assortment of cotton play dresses and found some skirts at the thrift store. She wears white cotton shorts underneath.
We both still wear pants or capris for some outdoor activities.
I started veiling at Mass several years ago after researching the reasons behind it and reading a little of cannon law. For me it is a conviction, that built up over a few years. My little ones are pretty used to it and usually leave it alone. Sometimes they can't and I just wear it for the consecration and to receive the sacrament.
I'm not sure I would do it if I was the only one at our parish. I would not want to stand out or appear 'holier than thou'. There are about a dozen women there who veil. I have grown to really like wearing the veil. It helps get my mind focussed on the significance of the Mass, and be less distracted. (I need all the help I can get in this area.)
__________________
God Bless,
Bridget, happily married to Kevin, mom to 8 on earth and a small army in heaven
Our Magnum Opus
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
TradCathMom
Forum Rookie
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 94
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 10:31am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bridget wrote:
Modesty is the virtue that keeps you from being an occasion of sin to others when you are young and fit, and from making a spectacle of yourself when your not.
|
|
|
What a beautiful quotation Bridget!
I had gone into the skirt thing with the idea that I simply could never wear skirts and have a flock of little children and a house to constantly clean. Though I always wore skirts to Mass, of course. Well, after some promptings from a lady I knew from St. Mary's in Rockford, I decided to try wearing them for the month of November (this was several years ago now) and offered it up for the Holy Souls.
Well, doggone-it if I didn't get just as much done and I no longer felt dowdy and lumpy. I felt like if someone would come to the door they wouldn't look at me like I couldn't handle the large family I have. I do think we need to be a good example and the harried mother look doesn't give a good example!
I have worn skirts ever since and have been glad of it. I feel comfortable and neat and presentable (most of the time! I do have some scrubbing day skirts  ).
I really like my little girls in dresses and jumpers.
Julie
__________________
Julie
 Wife to Tom
Mother of 11
Julie's stuff
Trinity Acres
JMJ * AMDG
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aiereis
Forum Pro
Joined: Feb 22 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 115
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 1:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
I noticed in the recent wedding issue of our diocesan paper that all the brides wore strapless dresses. I can't even imagine! On Colleen's site she has a link to a Mormon (LDS) wedding site and all the dresses are lovely modest dresses. Mormons aren't allowed to go into the temple without proper clothing. Apparently, Catholics are
|
|
|
When I got married (2003)I had an impossible time finding a modest wedding dress. They were ALL immodest in one way or another. I finally ended up with a Mormon "temple" dress, which was just a modest wedding dress. I got so many complements on it! I don't think it occured to anyone that I wasn't wearing a dress that the trend-setters would consider "frumpy."
__________________
Christina
Mommy to a lively toddler and a sweet bambina.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 1:18pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Christina!
And Welcome! I think there is a way to upload photos...maybe we can all see your wedding dress . I was so pleased to read your introduction.It will be fun for those of us who have been at this awhile to follow you as you do what we hope our children will do: bring home education to the next generation. We'd love to hear more about your homeschooling and your husband's and what you envision for your children. Feel free to open another thread in the Fireside forum to tell us all about it!
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 2:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| I'm not planning on wearing anything strapless anywhere, anytime. But, what is appropriate and functional and lovely--and it there a regional slant to this whole conversation? |
|
|
I think there is. Look at what John Paull II has to say in Love and Responsibility:
We have already touched on the question of dress. It is one of the matters concerning which problems of modesty and shamelessness most frequently arise. It is difficult for us to go into details or to discuss the nuances of fashion in male and female dress. These matters certainly have a bearing on the problem of modesty and shamelessness, though the connection is perhaps not that which is commonly thought to exist. Dress can, of course, help to accentuate the sexual values in different ways - in different ways on different occasions, irrespective of the congenital or acquired dispositions of a particular individual. This accentuation of sexual values by dress is inevitable, and is not necessarily incompatible with sexual modesty. What is truly immodest in dress is that which frankly contributes to the deliberate displacement of the true value of the person by sexual values, that which is bound to elicit a reaction to the person as to a 'possible means of obtaining sexual enjoyment' and not 'a possible object of love by reason of his or her personal value'.
The principle is simple and obvious, but its application in specific cases depends upon the individual, the milieu, the society. Dress is always a social question, a function of (healthy or unhealthy) social customs. We must simply stress that although considerations of an aesthetic nature may seem to be decisive here they are not and cannot be the only ones: considerations of an ethical nature exist side by side with them. Man, alas, is not such a perfect being that the sight of the body of another person, especially a person of the other sex, can arouse in him merely a disinterested liking which develops into an innocent affection. In practice it also arouses concupiscence, or a wish to enjoy concentrated on sexual values with no regard for the value of the person. And this must be taken into account.
This does not, however, mean that physical shamelessness is to be simply and exclusively identified with complete or partial nakedness. There are circumstances in which nakedness is not immodest. If someone takes advantage of such an occasion to treat the person as an object of enjoyment, (even if his action is purely internal) it is only he who is guilty of shamelessness (immodesty of feeling), not the other. Nakedness as such is not to be equated with physical shamelessness. Immodesty is present only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person, when its aim is to arouse concupiscence, as a result of which the person is put in the position of an object for enjoyment. What happens then may be called depersonalization by sexualization. But this is not inevitable. Even when nakedness goes with mutual sexual enjoyment respect for the dignity of the person can be fully preserved. This is how it must be in marriage, where there exist the objective conditions for the genuine absorption of shame by love...
Although physical immodesty cannot be identified in a simple way with nakedness as such, it none the less requires a real internal effort to refrain from reacting to the naked body in an immodest way. It should however be added that there is a difference between immodesty in feelings on the one hand and reflex sensual reactions to the body and sex as a 'possible object of enjoyment' on the other. The human body is not in itself shameful, nor for the same reasons are sensual reactions, and human sensuality in general. Shamelessness (just like shame and modesty) is a function of the interior of a person, and specifically of the will, which too easily accepts the sensual reaction and reduces another person, because of the person's 'body and sex', to the role of an object for enjoyment.
While we are on the subject of dress and its relevance to the problem of modesty and immodesty it is worth drawing attention to the functional significance of differences in attire. There are certain objective situations in which even total nudity of the body is not immodest, since the proper function of nakedness in this context is not to provoke a reaction to the person as an object for enjoyment, and in just the same way the functions of particular forms of attire may vary. Thus, the body may be partially bared for physical labour, for bathing, or for a medical examination. If then we wish to pass a moral judgment on particular forms of dress we have to start from the particular functions which they serve. When a person uses such a form of dress in accordance with its objective function we cannot claim to see anything immodest in it, even if it involves partial nudity. Whereas the use of such a costume outside its proper context is immodest, and is inevitably felt to be so.
For example, there is nothing immodest about the use of a bathing costume at a bathing place, but to wear it in the street or while out for a walk is contrary to the dictates of modesty. It would be wrong not to refer here, if only cursorily, to another particular problem, that of pornography (or shamelessness) in art. It is a very broad problem, and extremely complex on detailed examination, because of the diversity of the arts. I am concerned for the present only to define the gist of the problem. An artist communicates in his work his own thoughts, feelings, and attitudes, but his work does not only serve this purpose. It serves the truth, in that it must capture and transmit some fragment of reality in a beautiful way.
Karol Wojtyla Love and Responsibility pp. 189-192
Ok that was really long (sorry) but gosh what a lot of good stuff huh?
God Bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 2:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bridget wrote:
| I'm not sure I would do it if I was the only one at our parish. I would not want to stand out or appear 'holier than thou'. There are about a dozen women there who veil. I have grown to really like wearing the veil. It helps get my mind focussed on the significance of the Mass, and be less distracted. (I need all the help I can get in this area.) |
|
|
Bridget,
This is exactly why I don't wear my veil anymore. There is only ONE other woman who wears a veil and she is Nigerian. She's a wonderful woman, a friend in fact but people see her veil as something cultural. For me it had become a major distraction because it was a constant battle not to have my baby pull it off my head. I was always fussing with it. But I don't want anyone to think I am trying to be "holier than thou". I really prayed a lot about it and asked my husband (who has always been in favor of my wearing it). He agreed that maybe it wasn't the right time for it. I do still wear it to adoration or if I am away and go to mass without my family. And I continue to pray about it and seek God's will.
God bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 3:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm a recent convert to skirts after reading an article written by a friend of mine here. I didn't agree with all the points she made, but it did make me think hard about the issue. I realised that I so rarely wore skirts or dresses, that I felt self-conscious on the rare occasions when I did. I'm not a naturally feminine, dressy type, and jeans and trousers (pants ) had become camouflage wear for me. One of my friend's points was that men almost universally prefer their wives in skirts, so I asked my dh and guess what ... she was right! Another factor that convinced me was people watching. Maybe one in twenty or thirty women I saw wore skirts. If that. And even though I was one of the worst culprits, it seemed wrong that women's clothing had become so de-feminised. So for the last three or four months I have been wearing skirts almost all the time. It took maybe a couple of weeks to get used to them. My biggest discovery is that they are more comfortable than jeans . I do feel more feminine. I look smarter without effort - a skirt and sweater looks better than jeans and a sweater.
Personally, I don't see it as a matter of modesty, just a femininity issue. I don't have any problem with trousers, and do still wear them on occasions, though increasingly I need a reason to wear them (typically going to the gym or hard physical work). When I buy trousers for normal wear in the future, I will make a conscious effort to choose pairs that are more feminine.
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06)  (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 3:04pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Dear Kathryn,
Is that article available online somewhere?
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 3:14pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Me again  . This is what the CCC has to say on modesty, which goes further than just what one wears. And yes, Elizabeth, there is a cultural element to modesty ("the forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another").
2521. Purity requires modesty, an integral part of temperance. Modesty protects the intimate center of the person. It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden. It is ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity.
2522. Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. Modesty is decency. It inspires ones choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.
2523. There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeruistic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inpires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.
2524. The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06) (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 3:16pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
Dear Kathryn,
Is that article available online somewhere? |
|
|
No, but I have a copy. Inconveniently on my other computer  . I'll check with her if it would be OK to post it here.
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06) (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 5:47pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kathryn UK wrote:
| Personally, I don't see it as a matter of modesty, just a femininity issue. I don't have any problem with trousers, and do still wear them on occasions, though increasingly I need a reason to wear them (typically going to the gym or hard physical work). When I buy trousers for normal wear in the future, I will make a conscious effort to choose pairs that are more feminine. |
|
|
Kathryn,
I've been thinking the same thing. I think pants can be modest but femininity is important too. Like yours, my dh prefers skirts and/or dresses. I even asked my older sons and they said the same.
A few years ago I wore skirts almost exclusively but have gotten away from it in recent years. I can't really say why - just wasn't paying attention I guess. 
Anyway I talked to my 8 yr. old dd Mary about it today and she and I have decided to start wearing skirts and dresses on a more daily basis. (Dd Maggie, who is 5, doesn't need any prompting as she would wear dresses 24/7 if she could. ) I think I need to get sewing!
God bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
teachingmom
Forum All-Star
Virginia Bluebells
Joined: Feb 16 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
|
| Posted: Feb 27 2005 at 10:24pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is a very interesting topic. I know Elizabeth started the topic in writing about her adult concerns about modest dressing, but I also think a lot about it in relation to my children. I was talking about it with a friend and dh just last night--and that was before I read the beginning of the thread here.
With 5 daughters, I am very concerned about this. As far as modesty goes for children, I have very strong opinions on two things. I think dresses and shorts need to be an appropriate length. I prefer dresses that come below the knee for the girls, but some styles that come right to the knee look OK. For us, shorts don't necessarily have to come to the knee, but at least halfway down the thigh for the girls. (Getting longer as they get older.) The other style that I think is always immodest is summer tops with spaghetti straps. I think they are immodest on 3 and 4 year olds! I think they show too much chest, shoulders, and back. That same amount of skin showing at the pool looks normal on a child. But I think it look improper in places other than the pool or beach. By the way, I definitely prefer wider straps on bathing suits too. We buy the swim team style suits at Costco each year.
__________________
~Irene (Mom to 6 girls, ages 7-19)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: Feb 28 2005 at 2:12am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Irene, I totally agree about the spaghetti straps. My other strict rule is that tummies have to be covered. No belly tops! I'm less strict about skirt and short length, as I tend to judge this more on style. My dds are allowed skirts above the knee, but only if they are age appropriate - by which I mean in a childish style, not imitating immodest adult clothing. Both skirts and shorts will need to get longer as they get older.
What you say about the pool is exactly the point the Pope made in the extract from Love and Responsibility that Michele posted earlier. Certain items of clothing are modest when worn in the correct context, but not when worn elsewhere. Now I come to think of it, my 6yo's new-ish bathing suit has spaghetti straps, and I hadn't even noticed!
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06) (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Tea and Conversation
Topic: Modesty is....
