Joanne Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 http://phyliciadelta.com/to-the-girls-in-the-pew-ahead-of-me/ Ew. The subtle, passive/aggressive syrupy sweet approach is more evil than direct commentary on modesty. Control, slut shaming, and misogyny wrapped in evangelical "gratitude." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Jay Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Blech. But she says they were wearing makeup so clearly they are still floozies. What will our poor, defenseless men do??! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettyandbob Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Bleah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chocolatechip Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I think it's a nice letter. From the thread title I was expecting some sort of tirade about immodest girls in the next pew. Whatever. I don't want to have a raging debate about it, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppy Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 What a depressing little piece. Good job girls, you're just pretty enough to draw men to church and not so wanton looking that you tempt them from God. Textbook objectification in a smug little package. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrookValley. Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I...oh, nevermind. This will do: :ack2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pawz4me Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 What a depressing little piece. Good job girls, you're just pretty enough to draw men to church and not so wanton looking that you tempt them from God. Textbook objectification in a smug little package. She wasn't exactly kind to the man, either. Methinks somebody could do with a bit of soul searching about judging others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cammie Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I think it is ...weird. But I guess we don't know the background, don't know the boy, don't know the writer. Perhaps the back story is necessary to understand the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikin' Mama Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I don't like it because it takes more than clothes to be an example of Christ, in my opinion. The author is assuming way too much about the girls and the guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikin' Mama Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Oops! Dp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chocolatechip Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I don't like it because it takes more than clothes to be an example of Christ, in my opinion. The author is assuming way too much about the girls and the guy. True. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Whatever problems the boy was having, they are his problems and should not be blamed on the women/girls around him presenting potential "distractions." The girls in the pew in front of them deserve no credit, any more than if they'd been dressed differently they'd be blameworthy for the young man's hangups or spiritual tight spot. Ugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Excuse me. I need to go brush my teeth. Where's the vomiting smilie? This woman is assuming a lot. About the women and the man she assumed was in church to scam on girls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lang Syne Boardie Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 We don't need to know the boy. If he was there to think lustful thoughts about girls he didn't need them to be dressed in provocative clothes, did he? Poppy is right. This author still believed in the moral authority of churchgoers to objectify girls. The fact that they passed muster on this one occasion doesn't change the fact that they don't exist to be evaluated on whether or not they are likely to tempt males. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SproutMamaK Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Ugh. I'm a Christian and this is what bothers me about church. I was about to say I can't put my finger on quite what it is that bothers me about it, but I just realized it's because there are SO MANY things than I can't pin it down to which one is the most troublesome. Edit: And I'm sure that for the 100th time this summer, this is probably about to blow up my facebook newsfeed and make me consider deleting a whole bunch of my "friends". Although perhaps not, since last time I actually followed through on that desire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lang Syne Boardie Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Whatever problems the boy was having, they are his problems and should not be blamed on the women/girls around him presenting potential "distractions." The girls in the pew in front of them deserve no credit, any more than if they'd been dressed differently they'd be blameworthy for the young man's hangups or spiritual tight spot. Ugh. Yes! If they get credit for his purity they'd also have to get blame for his impurity. The latter is screwed up; therefore, so is the former. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itsheresomewhere Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Read the comments. Those will make you want to barf, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiveOaksAcademy Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I think it's a nice letter. From the thread title I was expecting some sort of tirade about immodest girls in the next pew. Whatever. I don't want to have a raging debate about it, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucyStoner Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 And then there's this: http://phyliciadelta.com/that-day-i-wore-yoga-pants-5-myths-about-modesty/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Jay Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Wow. Yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolt. Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Translation: "Dear girls, the most important thing about you is how you look, especially how you look in what you wear. I'm so very glad that you allowed male gaze and body shame to govern your clothing choices this morning. It's good for everyone (and by "everyone" I mean men) that you know how to be properly worldly. Something about seeing that kind of cultural conformity and subordination is soothing to the church (I mean men). PS, for hetero males, attraction to women is obviously rooted in sexuality, but it's very good that your particular look lets them feel attraction without experiencing the pseudo-religious shame of admitting that it is sexual. I'm sure everyone (men) including my friend feels the same. PPS, I want to touch you. Don't worry about it." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Word Nerd Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 http://phyliciadelta.com/to-the-girls-in-the-pew-ahead-of-me/ Ew. The subtle, passive/aggressive syrupy sweet approach is more evil than direct commentary on modesty. Control, slut shaming, and misogyny wrapped in evangelical "gratitude." Really?! SMH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T'smom Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Excuse me. I need to go brush my teeth. Where's the vomiting smilie? This woman is assuming a lot. About the women and the man she assumed was in church to scam on girls? Well, this is disgusting, but I got the impression that it was her son with all the praying she had been doing for him. I gathered that he wouldn't usually go, but was doing it for her this one time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Control, slut shaming, and misogyny wrapped in evangelical "gratitude." Yeah! What a backhanded, condescending compliment! "Yo, hot girls in the pew in front of me: You are so hot. You don't dress like tramps to cheapen how hot you are. Most people look at the skin for hot, but I get off on thinking about what a modest, good, obedient wife you might one day be." [/pant pant pant] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I feel icky. So many things wrong with those articles. ETA: I know they're not articles, it's someone's blog. It's the pain meds talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 lol as your PPS, bolt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momacacia Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Yeah, because God couldn't have worked in that guy's life if you'd have gotten in His way. I'll just slap Gothard on it and be done there. :-/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T'smom Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 And then there's this: http://phyliciadelta.com/that-day-i-wore-yoga-pants-5-myths-about-modesty/ Yuck. I clicked on that too. What I found really weird about that is that she was hurrying to get dressed to answer the door for Mr. M, then she refers to him as her husband?!? Why was her husband at the door?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Jay Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Bolt's PPS wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8circles Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Yuck. I clicked on that too. What I found really weird about that is that she was hurrying to get dressed to answer the door for Mr. M, then she refers to him as her husband?!? Why was her husband at the door?!? I thought the same thing - that one didn't make sense at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegularMom Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 sigh.... ick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I don't like it because it takes more than clothes to be an example of Christ, in my opinion. The author is assuming way too much about the girls and the guy. *snort* Yeah, like what if he's gay? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Unless the "man in question" was a child molester with a penchant for young teenaged girls, that letter is completely idiotic. I know the woman was trying to be kind, and I don't question her sincerity, but I hate the perception that those girls would have been less religious or less worthy of respect in any way had they been dressed differently or worn more makeup. And let's not forget that she is also assuming tremendous weakness on the part of the man. Judgmental all around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrub Jay Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 But is being so judgemental actually kind? Honestly, she struck me as a pretty horrid, nasty person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandylubug Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 These kind of things make me want to teach my girls to not be modest, LOL.... Our town is gearing up for Secret Keeper Girls conference and many of our friends are attending. I've been able to skirt the topic for the most part but it makes me feel icky...just like this article. Watch the dang sermon woman and stop passing judgement! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelwydd Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 And then there's this: http://phyliciadelta.com/that-day-i-wore-yoga-pants-5-myths-about-modesty/ Hmmm. Yoga pants are the new slut wear? The things one learns from the modesty watches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 But is being so judgemental actually kind? Honestly, she struck me as a pretty horrid, nasty person. I think her intention was to be kind. She probably has no idea that she is being judgmental, because she seems to truly buy into the whole modesty thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandylubug Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I think her intention was to be kind. She probably has no idea that she is being judgmental, because she seems to truly buy into the whole modesty thing. The correct response to her sincerity is "bless her hearrrrrrrrt!" Well, in GA...those words would be uttered from my lips :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lang Syne Boardie Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 These kind of things make me want to teach my girls to not be modest, LOL.... Our town is gearing up for Secret Keeper Girls conference and many of our friends are attending. I've been able to skirt the topic for the most part but it makes me feel icky...just like this article. Watch the dang sermon woman and stop passing judgement! I don't have daughters but I'm answering this anyway. :p (I have four sons.) I grew up in the 70s and 80s in a small town that was heavily populated by conservative Christian denominations. Mainstream but conservative, I should say. Modesty for girls and women was a big deal, even at public school, but not as big a deal as I'm seeing in fundy organizations today and homeschool groups are the worst. I just point out my background to say that an emphasis on modesty was a major part of my upbringing, lest anybody think I don't know anything about it or never believed in it. I do, and I did. I don't hold this as a religious tenet anymore but I personally dress very modestly out of preference. I think the misogynist music that is so popular and the control of girls' appearance in churches and homeschool groups are two sides of the same coin. I think both objectify girls to an alarming degree. Both teach them that they are only sex objects and their weakness and power are both directly related to the way men perceive their sexuality. The former leaves them thinking their only value is in seeming sexy to males. The latter hauls God and guilt into the equation. What a terrifying scenario! Let's just create victims. Let's just let lights be blown out as we teach our girls to please all the people. :( So if I had daughters, the first thing I'd do is jettison that coin. Beyonce's music and Ladies Against Feminism, thrown into the garbage, at the same time because they are the same thing. The next thing I'd do would be to raise my girls to believe in themselves so that their self-worth doesn't hinge on whether they are sexy or whether they are buttoned up. I'd raise them to be pretty sure that nobody in their universe has any right to comment or to have an opinion on the topic. Girls would be in charge of their own bodies and their own clothing choices. Respect for dress codes for work and school -- yes, if they are reasonable and equal. Conformity to a wardrobe to please someone other than herself -- no. And help her find her voice to tell them all to jump in the lake, and the confidence to find better friends. I'd be willing to risk some ridiculous concoctions by little girls or some indecency in big girls as they find their own way. I think that's part of the growing-up process. We live in a society where a girl can wear her underwear out in public and be mainstream about it, so there was never a better time to experiment. I'd remove my daughters from groups who judge creative expression in appearance, just as I removed my young sons from people who thought little boys ought to be silent and motionless all the time. I hope I'd teach appropriate clothing for situations, from choosing less eye-popping ensembles for church to wearing swimsuits at the beach because that's appropriate. Swimsuits that fit and are comfortable based on body type and preference, which does mean that some girls need bikinis! Where do we wear bikinis? At the beach. Do we wear bikinis to Walmart? No. Are we sluts if we do wear them to Walmart? No, we just don't have much sense. That's not the same thing. Thanks for listening to a rant from a mother of boys who is very concerned about the climate for girls today. I'm concerned about my daughters-in-law and my granddaughters. I want them to be strong, and good, and not judged by their sexiness quotient all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiguirre Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 What the heck?!? I can't believe anyone said this with a straight face: "I like those pants. I like them because not only are they comfortable – as all yoga pants are – but I look trendy. I look like one of those suburban moms with a ponytail, pushing her children through the market in a twin-seat stroller. And I like that look, regardless of the consequences." Wait a minute! The new object of lustful thoughts is some mom of toddlers who didn't have time to wash her hair or energy to choose something other than the daytime pajamas??? This is so many shades of crazy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Library Momma Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Um, but she is noticing how attractive these girls are in their modest clothing. Doesn't that really say that it doesn't matter how they dress - If she, as a heterosexual middle aged woman, is admiring these girls why does she think that the young man is not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Unless the "man in question" was a child molester with a penchant for young teenaged girls, that letter is completely idiotic. I know the woman was trying to be kind, and I don't question her sincerity, but I hate the perception that those girls would have been less religious or less worthy of respect in any way had they been dressed differently or worn more makeup. And let's not forget that she is also assuming tremendous weakness on the part of the man. Judgmental all around. I'm all for modesty, and I do think *some* women dress immodestly for attention and enjoy the effect they have on men, but the article did kinda "dumb men down"... I didn't think men were so weak until reading that?? Can they really not look the other way if someone is dressed immodestly and it causes a problem for them? It would be interesting to get a man's perspective on that. What type of yoga pants are these women wearing? Can men not look at ballerinas? Olympic swimmers? A man has a problem if a woman can't dress in a leotard. That's unfair. Again, I am all for modesty, but the man is responsible for his thoughts, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellydon Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I think it's a nice letter. From the thread title I was expecting some sort of tirade about immodest girls in the next pew. Whatever. I don't want to have a raging debate about it, though. I thought it was very lovely as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Weirdness abounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Every one of you was attractive. Every one of you could have advertised that attractiveness with what you wore, drawing attention to the shape of your waist, your curves, or the length of your legs. But you didn’t. What DID they wear? Sacks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFG Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Yuck. I clicked on that too. What I found really weird about that is that she was hurrying to get dressed to answer the door for Mr. M, then she refers to him as her husband?!? Why was her husband at the door?!?I agree. I have seen that piece a few times and never could figure out their relationship Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lang Syne Boardie Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 What DID they wear? Sacks? Sandwich boards over gunny sacks ought to do it. Hideous, yet still uncomfortable? Perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Strawberry Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 What kind of perv is the guy in the back row? Or what does she imagine him to be? I did NOT get the impression he was her son, or even anyone she knew beyond church gossip. Maybe he has tattoos, and she assumes him to be of poor moral fiber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyacinth Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 "Thank you for being pretty. Not distractingly pretty, mind you, but just the perfect amount of pretty." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitten18 Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 I notice that her wedding dress has a fitted waist, and she is dangerously close to showing her shoulders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.