Close Up of Smiling Blonde Woman | How Modesty Empowers Women | Public Square Magazine | Why is Modesty Important? | The Importance & Value Of Women's Modesty

How Modesty Empowers

Is encouraging women to conform to the diminutive dress standards of Instagram leading them to a place of freedom and power - or just the opposite?
Photo by Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash

Several months back, a Twitter firestorm erupted when Sports Illustrated featured plus-size model Yumi Nu on its cover. What stood out to me was that, when confronted with yet another hypersexualized image of a woman being used to hock swimwear and magazines, the only important question for most Americans was how attractive (or not) they found the model. 

Whether one cries “yes” or “no” to celebrating plus-sized models, the upshot is that women are still being told that their bodies are what matter most. We are inundated with images of women in various states of dress, subjecting themselves to public adoration or scrutiny, all in an effort to drive some form of consumption. Sometimes, as with pornography, it’s women’s bodies themselves that are the product. 

For this reason, I’ve been taken aback by recent claims online that modesty sexualizes women. We’re told that teachings that emphasize conservative dress standards control women by shaming them into believing that their bodies cause men to have inappropriate thoughts. The implicit message is that it’s only by rejecting modest dress that one can escape this shame and act in a truly self-directed manner.

Does it seem like the young women baring their bodies according to the dictates of Instagram have escaped into freedom?

I would ask: does it seem like the young women baring their bodies according to the dictates of Instagram have escaped into freedom? Are these women and girls acting in a truly self-chosen manner? Or has embracing the pressures of our wider cultureand its demeaning, reductive, and dangerous messages about how women obtain their sense of valuebeen rebranded as liberation? Who actually benefits from this shift in mindset?

It is certainly true that women are not ultimately responsible for men’s thoughts, and I can understand why some women experience knee-jerk reactions to reminders of the value of modesty. And yet, we know that there is a connection between bodies and sexuality because the media and advertisers exploit that connection every day, reinforcing the idea that for women, sex appeal is their most valuable currency. If our discussions about modesty obscure this connection, it will not be to the advantage of our girls and women. Refusing to ask any thoughtful questions about why girls and women dress in certain ways in today’s society signals we’re missing the heart of why modesty matters—to help girls and women withstand relentless societal pressures to derive their sense of self-worth from their sex appeal.

I had very little understanding of the concept of modesty before joining the Church as a teenager. In the early days of my conversion, I mostly just dressed the way my friends had. I was not necessarily choosing revealing clothing with some ulterior motive to be more sexually appealing, but of course, even as a teenager, I was not ignorant to the fact that attractive women have more of society’s graces bestowed upon them. The predominant narrative presented to women through social media, popular shows, movies, and even music is that being sexually desirable sets you apart in important ways, even from other women. You can fast-track your sense of validation by dressing in ways that prioritize your physical appeal. More and more influencers are multiplying this message with an additional refrain: if anyone tries to stop you from obtaining validation in this way, it’s only because they want to shame and control you.

From a combination of church discussions and increased awareness that my own dress was incongruent with what the girls and women around me wore, my attire shifted, and by the time I enrolled at BYU at 17, my dress easily conformed with university standards. Of course, at some level, this change was driven by a desire to fit in with my new community. The desire to fit in is universal and certainly not limited to religious communities. But I also know that wasn’t the sole, or even most important, reason for the way I was choosing to dress.

You see, I’d stood alone in dressing rooms wrestling with questions about whether to buy a flattering but slightly too revealing garment. In those moments, I really didn’t see myself being ostracized for pushing modesty boundaries. On the contrary, even within a church context, I thought I’d actually find more approval and that it would outweigh whatever stigma I might encounter. But I sensed that my real internal conflict stemmed from a different question: to what sources am I turning for a sense of worth, and where would God have me find it? I realized that perhaps the dress limitations prescribed by church teachings were, in fact, intended to help me confront this very crucial question and to set me on a path toward a more transcendent sense of self-worth. And I came to appreciate that the higher teachings that motivated dressing modestly are ultimately about separating one’s sense of self-worth from the ever-changing dictates of fashion and the empty promises of our cultural obsessions with sex appeal.

Women can then decide whether popular trends that further undress them are leading them anywhere they can find true self-worth and fulfillment.

By comparison, many popular voices online seem to see conforming to certain dress standards as merely an act of conformity. They see only the internalization of other peoples’ values. I believe the truth is much more complicated. All cultures, religious and otherwise, hold expectations for the individuals within them. As we mature, we will naturally chafe to discover that some of our expectations for ourselves originated outside of us. But another part of maturity is seeing this realization less as a threat and more as an opportunity. We now get to decide whether we will consciously adopt those expectations as our own. Simply rejecting standards, like modesty, can be just as much of a decision directed by external pressures, with the result that we have not escaped into more individual freedom but into another community with its own, often less clearly stated expectations.

In other words, rejecting modest dress does not necessarily mean we are acting with greater self-direction and power. How you look is still very much a priority, but the reasons are different. There are still rules for how to dress being pushed on Instagram or in popular entertainment; they just serve different purposes. Where empowerment can really occur is in the space of awareness of competing values between one’s faith and one’s larger community.  In that space, women can then decide whether popular trends that further undress them are leading them anywhere they can find true self-worth and fulfillment.  

Let’s stop pretending that laying aside aspirations and standards for dress is a newly enlightened path to freedom. And let’s stop telling our girls and young women that there’s something oppressive about principles that interfere with our ability to fit in with the world. These principles are an invitation to true freedomto letting go of the world’s expectations for us and obtaining treasures where neither moth nor rust can corrupt. In a world where women and men are hearing incessantly that the “worth of souls is great” if they look like this, I thank God for other voices reminding us that our value is intrinsic, eternal, and on a different plane entirely than the outfit we are wearing.

About the author

Meagan Kohler

Meagan Kohler is a Latter-day Saint wife, boy mom, writer, and occasional philosopher. She also writes on Substack at Mirabile Dictu.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Statue Of Green Angel Holding a Red Rose | Angels All Around Us | Public Square Magazine | Mine Angels Round About You, To Bear You Up | Angels Are All Around Us

Angels All Around Us

A Christmas present from our team to the many who are grieving the loss of a loved one this holiday season. May you rejoice to know what is coming and feel peace at what is already here.  

Missionaries Victims of Arson Hate Crime + Today’s Digest

Our daily rundown of the articles from around the web that we feel our readers would enjoy and appreciate. We hope to highlight the best of what’s around. Public Square Bulletin recommends: Connecticut Man Accused Of Setting Car On Fire Because Victim Was Mormon Associated Press Police said the man admitted to starting the fire and said he did it because he didn’t agree with the man’s religious beliefs. LDS Daily followed up reporting new details on the case. Latter-day Saint leaders and LGBT+ advocates deepen their relationship on Washington D.C. Temple tour Tad Walch – Deseret News The Washington D.C. temple open house has helped further the alliance between those working for religious and LGBT+ rights. Helping to prove the point Rev. Marian Edmonds-Allen recently made here in Public Square Magazine. Like Christmas, Eid is being commercialized – and that’s a welcome thing Rifat Malik – NPR Eid, a holiday celebrating the end of Ramadan has been increasingly commercialized in the United States. While Christians are most familiar with bemoaning the commercialization of holidays, Rifat Malik explores why this might be a blessing to the Muslim-American community. Abortion restrictions v. religious free exercise: Which will win? Mark Silk – Religion News Services We may be looking at a major reversal on religious freedom issues. Some faiths, such as Judaism, specifically require abortion in limited circumstances. Will they be able to access those abortions as part of the free exercise of religion? Seek and Expect Miracles Anne Hinton Pratt – Meridian Magazine Anne Hinton Pratt takes President Russell M. Nelson’s directive to seek and expect miracles seriously in this article identifying the kinds of miracles we can look for and how to be more aware of them in our life.

The Ordinary Saint’s Guide to Under the Banner of Heaven: Episode 4, “Church and State”

Summary — The episode begins with the detectives checking in on Bishop Low’s home, which they find ransacked and deserted. Pyre finds a letter written by Ron’s wife to the Prophet expressing concern about her husband’s refusal to pay taxes. The detective contacts the Church about the letter and is told the letter was handed down to one of the bishop’s counselors, LeConte Bascom, who works at the bank. Brother Bascom says he had to turn Ron down for a loan because his brother’s refusal to pay taxes made him a liability, though it’s heavily implied that the real reason is that his wife’s letter was seen as an embarrassment to the Church. In flashbacks, we see Dan marching in a Pioneer Day parade, shouting about the government’s illegal taxes, as well as smoking and kissing a woman who isn’t his wife. Dan’s father says he’s ashamed of his immoral behavior and anti-tax nonsense and advises him to study the scriptures to set himself back on the right path. This unfortunately drives Dan into researching more obscure history of the Church, including information on polygamy.  He makes a business trip down to Colorado City to visit the breakaway polygamist sect there and manages to get the name of a pro-polygamy pamphlet called “The Peace Maker.” He reads this pamphlet and brings up the idea to his wife Matilda, telling her she’s limiting his spiritual power if she doesn’t let him marry a second wife.  During this conversation, Dan is pulled over for speeding and refuses to cooperate with the officer, leading them on a police chase that ends with his arrest. At the jail, Dan’s brothers try to convince him to stop his resistance to the government. Ron feels it’s his responsibility to show Dan the error of his ways, but instead, Dan runs circles around him, leaving him speechless and admitting that he’s going to lose his business and home. Dan somehow turns this fact into evidence that his views are correct and ends up winning over Ron to his side. In the present, Detective Pyre is being leaned on by the Laffertys’ stake president to release them into his custody but refuses. The detectives have identified the car the killers were probably using and plan to hold a press conference to ask for tips when the police chief returns from vacation and demands that all mentions of fundamentalism Mormonism be scrubbed from the press briefing. (It’s implied he’s being leaned on by the Church.) Pyre tries to toe the line at the conference but eventually caves to a persistent reporter and admits that he thinks that the murders may have something to do with fundamentalist beliefs. The next day at church, the ward is shunning the Pyres, and a specific couple is assigned to keep an eye on their faith. Meanwhile, a police officer has located Bishop Low fly fishing in the mountains and safe. Church History — During Dan’s explanation of polygamy, we get flashbacks to the infamous scene where Emma finds out about the doctrine of polygamy for the first time and throws the revelation in the fire. Though church members will be familiar with this story, the tone is portrayed very differently than we are used to. Emma is shown as being absolutely skeptical of Joseph’s translation of the Book of Mormon and other prophetic acts, even though she firmly testified of the truth of these things even after her break with the Church after Joseph was murdered. Joseph is portrayed as proclaiming the doctrine of polygamy only for his own physical gratification, which is a common anti-Mormon trope with little evidence behind it. While it is true that one of Joseph’s wives was only 14, the facts behind the situation are more complex than portrayed in the show. The pamphlet “The Peace Maker” is portrayed by Dan Lafferty as an “essential LDS tract” written by Joseph Smith, and no one in the show ever corrects this perception. In fact, the tract was not written by Joseph Smith, and he repudiated it during his lifetime. This episode presents a slanted view of church history, giving only one side of the conversation and showing the modern church as trying to hush it up rather than having its own interpretation of events. Shibboleths — Pyre claims that writing a letter to the prophet is like writing to “Heavenly Father himself,” which is absolutely wrong. While members of the Church do revere the prophet and listen to his teachings, he is not God, and this equivalency is not one Saints would make (though outsiders think we do). The idea that doing business with fundamentalists is like “doing business with the mafia” is totally alien to me. They are regarded as somewhat of an oddity in Utah, but not dangerous like organized crime. One unusual phrase occurs when the stake president claims that the Laffertys need to be released into his custody for “healing prayer.” I honestly have no idea what this phrase refers to and have never heard it in an LDS context. And the formal type of shunning portrayed happening to the Pyres is not something we do. Though obviously, wards vary in their culture, there is no formal instruction not to talk to those who have questions. Rather, we are encouraged to keep being friends with those who are struggling with faith and support them however we can. Changing History — It is interesting to note that in the actual chain of events, it was Sister Low, not Bishop Low, who was on the Lafferty hit list. Sister Low was a Relief Society President who supported Dan’s wife as she sought a divorce. Why does the show change this? Perhaps the idea that the Church has female leaders doesn’t fit well with the show’s depiction of the oppression of women in the LDS church. Brenda Lafferty’s sister has also expressed her disappointment with the way the show is misconstruing her sister’s murder in pursuit of an

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This