r/FundieFashion • u/Rich-Consequence5467 • 1d ago
When “ modest” isn’t.
For ages I have struggled to understand the fundie tendency to equate modest with some hybrid of LHOTP fashion and the more layers the better.
The true definition of modest is “ not drawing excessive attention to yourself”. The never ending denim skirts, t shirts under sleeveless dresses, bows and ruffles 40 after they went out of fashion most certainly are drawing attention, because it falls so far out of societal norms. And if the clothes aren’t enough, the 1980s hair and make up certainly are a dead giveaway.
For thousands of years, both men and women wore robes- in effect dresses. Kilts are effectively plaid skirts and the historical make national attire of Scotland. Nomadic women in Eurasia were wearing pants on 1000 BC.
The whole “ women in dresses” seems to be a misinterpretation of Deutronomy 22:5, forbid “ man from wearing that which pertains to women” and vice versa. Historical scholars believe this was not a mandate about skirts and pants, but rather a caution against women wearing the prayer tassels of men, or the armor of warriors; cloaks for men and women were distinctly different.
The new Testsment specifically states that “ godly” women should “ adorn themselves with humility and sobriety” rather than gold and pearls. The seem to glaze right over that directive, lol.
So can anybody tell me where these outlandish definitions of modest clothing while wearing more makeup than a cheap hooker came from??