Rebuttal To Anne Marie’s Post About Modesty
This post is sort of a continuation of my previous post (link to my previous post)
As to my previous post:
I tried the FlowerDust.net link (under the Singles category) which brought me here:
I have skimmed over some of her posts, and I’ve stopped to read the modesty one a bit more closely at this point.
DOUBLE STANDARD: CHRISTIANS TEACHING MODESTY IS PRIMARILY FOR WOMEN BUT NOT FOR MEN
At least, I take it that she is primarily concerned about female modesty, which itself is problematic, because if one is going to scold and lecture women not to be “immodest stumbling blocks,” one needs to give the same lectures to men, because there are visually oriented hetero women such as myself who get turned on by hot and sexy, near nude men, or men in swim trunks, or in-shape men in well cut suits, or men in T-shirts and tight jeans.
But Anne Miller doesn’t care about me and my temptation struggles – she only cares about men.
Here’s a link to her post:
Begging your pardon, but 99% of Anne’s post misses the point about modesty discussions.
Here are some excerpts from her page:
- You do have freedom. And I think the greatest freedom is to choose to say no to your freedom for the sake of another person.
- …That, my friend, is not freedom.
- Let’s call it for what it is: entitlement. Many of us feel entitled to do what we want, to wear what we want, and to behave how we want to behave. Loving another is not about how we feel or even embracing our freedom.
- True freedom is laying down your life for another.
PROBLEM IS MALE ENTITLEMENT
The real problem is Christian male entitlement, not an entitlement attitude by women. A woman simply choosing her wardrobe for the day is her going about her business, she is living life, she is not engaging in “entitlement.” I address the concept of male entitlement a little bit farther below, so I won’t get into that more here and now.
CHRISTIAN DOUBLE SPEAK AND REDEFINING WORDS
Christians constantly redefine the meanings of words so that they end up being the opposite of what they are.
Christians are forever shaming and guilt tripping one entire gender – usually females – and telling them that freedom is not really freedom.
Or, some Christians, such as Miller, define the word “freedom” to mean something akin to, “allow your life to be limited by what men want, feel, and need.” Telling me to give up my rights and preferences for another group of people, due to their potential weaknesses or for whatever other reason, is not freedom of any kind, no matter how you couch it.
These sorts of Christians – like Anne Marie Miller in this example – say that inhibiting yourself and your rights is actual freedom.
No, it’s not, I beg to differ, once more: you are being a codependent doormat, allowing your choices in life to be dictated by other people’s wants and preferences and their potential to sin.