Modesty…What Guys REALLY Think
Author: DavidJones // Category: Ethics, Pop Culture, Youth Culture
Today marks the 3rd and final day for my discussion on modesty. Instead of writing more of my own opinions, I thought I would share with you some actual statistics. Alex and Brett Harris of TheRebelution.com put together a Modesty Survey Team to collect results on the issue of modesty. Over 200 Christian girls submitted their questions. In less than 20 days, 1,600 guys responded.
I’m not going to go too in-depth with this. If you want to check out the entire survey, you can read the results by clicking here or by clicking the banner at the top of the page. I just want to provide you with a few statistics that were eye-opening to me:
For this format, a statement was made, and guys answered if they Strongly Agreed, Agreed, were Neutral, Disagreed, or Strongly Disagreed. I’ve broken down the answers a little bit more. Remember, girls asked the questions. Guys answered. The percentages reflect the answers of the guys.
Don’t forget…when guys said that something is a stumbling block, they were literally saying it is something that causes them to lust/sin.
Guys notice whether a girl dresses modestly or not: 96.3% agreed
Seeing even an inch of skin between the bottom of a girl’s shirt and her pants is a stumbling block: 71.3% agreed
You have less respect for an immodest girl than for a modest one: 75.6% agreed
Wearing pants with words across the backside is a stumbling block: 84.3% agreed
Zipping a form-fitting jacket to just below the chest draws too much attention to the bust: 56.8% agreed
It is okay for girls to wear tighter and/or more revealing clothes if they are working out: 52.4% disagreed
Showing any cleavage is immodest: 70.4% agreed.
Bending over so that cleavage is visible down the front of the shirt or dress is a stumbling block: 89.8% agreed
Skin-tight jeans are a stumbling block: 76.2% agreed
A girl’s physical posture and/or position can be a stumbling block: 84.7% agreed
The lines of undergarments, visible under clothing, cause guys to stumble: 71.6% agreed
A girl’s underwear should never show: 89.5% agreed
A girl bending over and exposing her lower back is a stumbling block: 63.6% agreed
A shirt buttoned to just under the bust is a stumbling block, even if a modest shirt is worn underneath: 41.6% agreed
Knee-length skirts are modest: 71.8% agreed
Miniskirts are immodest: 93.1% agreed
Seeing a girl stretching (e.g. arching the back, reaching the arms back, and sticking out the chest) is a stumbling block: 56.8% agreed
Tags: Do Hard Things, Girls. The Rebelution, Guys, Modesty
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:27 pm
First let me say that I am 100% for modesty and purity of the mind. I believe that we as Christians must always be mindful how we look and what we look upon. The results of the above study prove to me that men can lust after a woman that is covered from head to toe. Not that I think I am better or more holy than anyone else, but over 50% of guys stumble when they see a girl stretch!?!?! That is ridiculous. I wonder what the percentage of men is that would say that a women reaching for something on the shelf at Walmart is a stumbling block. Christian men need to step it up. We are not animals. We are not controlled by carnal lusts but we are new creatures.
I believe most of the problem is not what girls wear, that only adds fuel to the problem. One of the fruits of the Spirit is self control and I feel too many people don’t harness their minds
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:36 pm
It didn’t just say when a girl stretches. There was more detail to it:
“Seeing a girl stretching (e.g. arching the back, reaching the arms back, and sticking out the chest) is a stumbling block.”
If guys are being open and honest about something that makes them lust, I don’t think you can call it ridiculous. This survey was not saying it’s a sin for girls to stretch…it was just informing people about something that can be a stumbling block for 56.8% of the guys that answered.
Yes, the responsibility falls on guys to keep their minds pure, their eyes off things they shouldn’t be on, and to have self-control. But, females do play a role in the whole ordeal as well.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:45 pm
We can pass the blame back and forth all day long, but when we stand before the Throne, it comes down to personal responsibility and holiness of your own mind. “She should have dressed better” or “She shouldn’t have stretched with her chest pointing out” or whatever else will not be a valid excuse. She will have to answer for her sin, but it does not cancel out your lust.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:49 pm
EXACTLY!
We will all be held responsible.
Girls will have to answer for not glorifying God with their clothing and being a stumbling block to guys.
Guys will have to answer for lust.
Obviously, we can mix and match those sins with both genders, but the point is clear. Each person is responsible for his or her own sin. Since we all struggle with sin, we need to do our part by helping our depraved brothers and sisters in the battle.
April 23rd, 2009 at 10:27 pm
3 points:
1. Let me just say that I hate square butts and BK.
2. I was thinking today about the clothing of women in Jerusalem in oh I don’t know when Jesus was 30. He addresses the issue of lust even with a culture where women were immodest without head covering. Quite extreme parallel with today’s culture and lust…
3. People may make fun of other people who wear long jean skirts and extremely conservative clothing, but they may have the right idea. The guys and girls in that culture come across as naive, but I guarantee it’s all worth it when they marry somebody who has never seen another person in the same way. Maybe our contemporary modifications and keeping up with culture has put us in a bind. We’re trying to live holy lives surrounding ourselves with unholy things, even just shorts.
Jeremy, haven’t you seen even shampoo commercials where a fully clothed woman is reaching back to run her fingers through her hair… the commercial uses a woman stretching to pull in the male audience… they want it to be sensual and it usually is… as innocent as it sounds.
April 23rd, 2009 at 11:42 pm
I think this is a great topic. But what is “modest”? Are we right on this? In the Victorian Age it was commonplace for women to have a lot of cleavage showing and sometimes so much that a portion of the nipple would be showing. That wasn’t frowned upon, but the ankle was considered something that needs to be covered like we require breasts(female) to be covered today. So are we right today or were they right in the Victorian Age? If you show a kid two toys and tell him he can’t see they toy hidden in the cabinet what we’ll the kid want to see? We are drawn to what we can’t see. I’m not advocating we become nudists, but sometimes we can put too much into what skin is right or wrong. Some of it’s even gender related. It’s not considered okay for men to have the upper arm showing in church, but it’s fine for women to have it exposed. We have made every body part sexual through our own actions, not God’s. A woman’s breasts are not sexual organs, but we have made them into that over time. I find it somewhat funny that a 3 year old girl has to wear a bikini top when 350lb. men walk around the beach with C cup size man boobs exposed.
April 24th, 2009 at 11:57 am
Josh, excellent point. Modesty is partially cultural. Showing the ankle was a stumbling block for Victorian men, however I do not if anyone has a problem with it today, although Im surprised they didnt ask in that survey.
Sometimes we put such an emphasis on what is forbidden, that we desire it just because we know we’re not suppose to. Its like if all of a sudden I repeatedly told you DONT EAT CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIES. May not have even thought of eating a chocolate chip cookie but now you want one
April 24th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Jeremy, check out the link to the survey. I only put a very small percentage of what was on it. The survey wasn’t to bash girls or guys. It’s a study of everything you can think of. Check it out.
April 26th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
David, thank you for bringing a little attention to this topic. I do think some girls simply do not understand how much some men struggle in this area, so when a girl who wants to do right sees a survey like this it should help here evaluate her dress better and make the proper changes.
April 27th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I’ve heard from males that if guys stare longer than 3 seconds they’re probably thinking something they shouldn’t…. do you agree?
A friend went to a camp where the counselors discussed rules the week before camp started and that was one of them – that guys weren’t allowed to look at the girls for longer than 3 seconds – the male counselors came up with the rule. The camp was specifically geared towards bringing teens for a week of as much focus on Christ as possible – not the opposite sex. It was extremely successful and not a FWB camp believe it or not.
April 27th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
I think every man and woman needs to read the books “For Women Only” and “For Men Only” by Shaunti Feldhan (I think I spelled her name right). I’ve only read the one for women so far, but it was very eye-opening for me. I knew that guys struggled in this area, but I didn’t have a clue the extent of it until I read this book. The books are written from a Christian perspective and they are about lots of things, not just this. But to all the ladies out there, this book is an excellent way to help us understand a little better what guys are going through. And guys, from what I’ve heard, the book for guys is also excellent. One of my aunts gives those books as wedding/engagement presents. She says for the couple to each read the one written for them, and then to trade and read the one for the other person. That way you can talk about it later and say “Well this is exactly like me, and this is nothing like me” or whatever. Anyway, just a thought!