In Paris, France, the answer would be yes.

In 1800, a Paris police chief introduced a rule banning women from dressing like men—namely by wearing pants instead of skirts and dresses.  This idea is not that foreign.  The Biblical Old Testament speaks of it being wrong for women to dress like men such that you cannot tell the difference, so 1800 France would have been under the influence of those types of ideas.

What’s so amusing is that the law is technically still in effect!

Old Laws on the Books

Paris isn’t the only city or country to have old laws on the books there are websites that chronicle old laws—like where to put lanterns on your buggy and how late people can be out at night.  Usually they don’t see much daylight, and they’re not enforced.

In this case, people have tried to remove the rule multiple times—each time resulting in a weakening of the rule, but not a removal.

The latest attempt to remove the outmoded rule was in 2003, when a Right-wing MP from President Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP party wrote to the minister in charge of gender equality. The minister’s response was: "Disuse is sometimes more efficient than (state) intervention in adapting the law to changing mores."

As Evelyne Pisier, a law professor whose book Le Droit des Femmes (The Rights of Women) unearthed the curious decree points out, given that trousers are compulsory for Parisian policewoman, they are all breaking the law.

Personally, I believe that women look more feminine in skirts and dresses, but I have no problem with them wearing properly fitting pants.

What do you think about women wearing pants and old laws?  What would be the best way to address this issue?

I invite you to come check out the launch of a new website that we’ve started called:

Is This Modest?

The point of this site is to help people answer questions of modesty from both a guy’s and girl’s perspective.

We have a group of writers lined up, but the key feature of this new site will be our outfit reviews.

Part of the problem I’ve had with posts on modesty is that there really is a gray area when it comes to what is and what is not modest.  That’s because there are a lot of things that could go either way, or may be all right in layers, but when worn by themselves are not modest.

By having images and reviews, we can help you determine whether things are modest, as well as discuss how one can remain modest in the current culture.

My first series over there takes a look at what a popular Men’s Magazine (Men’s Health) thinks about different things a woman wears—and what they believe the woman is saying about herself.

So, take a walk over to Is This Modest, and while you’re there, let me know what you think of the theme—is it modest?

Welcome to the June 1, 2008 edition of carnival of modesty.  Not a lot of good submissions today, so I’ll have to augment them from sites I’ve found in my travels.

Lin Burress presents You Are What You Wear: What Your Clothes Say About You.

Theresa L. Twogood presents Just What If…What Then?

Louise Manning presents Quotes about dignity.

Mama Archer presents Modesty Articles and What Do Men Consider Immodest?

A Husband presents Satisfy Your Hungry Eyes.

Jen presents Men’s eyes: looking for the opportunity to imagine.

Principled Discovery presents Marketing our youth.

Matt Ahearn presents Modest Attraction.

Cheri presents Employment – "The Next Generation" (or Why I am Having a Tirade Today")

Mac presents Modesty – Part 7.

Miss Aniela presents Pretty ugly.

Psalm 128 presents Simply Modest.

The Villiage Idiot presents Summer is almost here, and news about dress codes.

Sonja presents Modest?

Heidi presents Weekend Worship – Modesty, Part 4.

Mrs. Hurzeler presents The Truth About Improper Clothing!

Kristie presents 20 Ways for Young Women to Claim the Respect.

Jennifer Bacak presents Modesty.

Greg presents A Disturbing Trend.

Mrs. Darling presents Modesty in young girls.

Cassandra DeBenedetto presents Chaste people have libidos?…Go figure!!!

That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of carnival of modesty using our carnival submission form. Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.

Technorati tags: carnival of modesty, blog carnival.

Welcome to the April 30, 2008 edition of carnival of modesty.

Articles

Christine @ Serenity How? presents An Open Letter to the Makers of Low Rise Jeans for Girls posted at Serenity How?.

Ginger presents Modesty Defined at Clark Chatter.

Allison Brewton presents Modesty… more really is better! at …REDEEMED FOR LIFE…

Mrs. Darling presents Preparing our children for the real world at Dishpan Dribble.

Carolyn McCulley presents A Sneak Peek at Modesty at Radical Womanhood.

Patty presents Just a Thought at MorningRamble.

Hendrick Family presents Serve God, Obey God, and Modesty Tangent at Sit a Spell.

Emily presents Modesty vs. Insecurity and Striving for beauty: the heart of the matter and ‘God, My Heart, and Clothes’ at Unfurling Flower.

Mary O’Hayes presents Dress Codes Being Enforced/Parents Complain at Modestly Yours.

Joel Griffith presents What Happened to Modesty at The Seventh Sola.

Suzanne Hadley presents Modest Expectations at Boundless Line.

Mrs. Amy Brigham presents Battle Scars at ~Clothesline Alley~.

Elizabeth Esther presents Modest Mommies at Three’s a Crowd.

Mrs. Wilt presents How Then Shall We Dress? at The Sparrow’s Nest.

Sheri Prescott presents Modest Monday ~ Pop-Culture vs. Raising virtuous and pure daughters and Modest Monday: Maternity Clothes at Purely His.

Daniel Ritchie presents Albert N. Martin on Female Modesty at Reformed Covenanter.

Rob presents Oklahoma Court: Women Don’t Have An Expectation of Privacy In Their Skirts at Say Anything.

Marsha West presents Hyper-sexualizing Girls at Novakeo.

Lydia Brownback presents Modesty Reruns at The Purple Cellar.

Mrs. Anna T presents Changes in me – the gift of growing and When Mom challenges modesty at Domestic Felicity.

Anna presents It’s Okay to Desire Modesty at Hope Road.

Anna presents The Perverse Psychology of ‘Showing Off’ at Veiled Glory.

E-Book

Daddy, Will You Please Cover Me?

Stores

Down East Basics

CL Swim Designs (Hat Tip: razorbackmama)

A Formal Choice

Modest Prom

Modest By Design

That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of carnival of modesty using our carnival submission form. Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.

Technorati tags: carnival of modesty, blog carnival.

In a recent interview with Mrs. Wilt at The Sparrow’s Nest, Christa herself talked about why she started her company:

In reality, Christa-Taylor.com grew out of frustration. After searching endlessly for a swimsuit that just didn’t exist, we designed our own. Under the direction and guidance of my Dad and brothers we started to experiment with different ideas, and eventually the possibility of opening our own Christa Taylor line. With much counsel and much perseverance we launched Christa-Taylor.com on January 15th, 2007, with just 1 swimsuit and 2 skirts. Since then, we have continued to refine and perfect our service and selection. It’s still very much a work in progress, but what an adventure!

What I find comforting as a father about this movement is that women are reclaiming the right to be known for what’s on the inside, instead of just what’s on the outside.  And that they’re coming up with good, practical definitions for what is modest:

We are continuing to develop and perfect our guidelines in our apparel choices and designs. Honestly, this is a very difficult question to answer, as many pieces are case specific. However, we do follow general guidelines such as, no skirt shorter than 23”, no deep Vs, no open backs, key holes, no cheap fabrics, no halter tops, etc.

I believe that they are on the right track.  What do you think?

Welcome to the March 31, 2008 edition of carnival of modesty. There’s not that much on topic this week in the carnival, but please enjoy these submissions that are on topic!

Rob Moshe presents Live Your Best Life By Serving Others posted at Rob Moshe, saying, “This is not necessarily a fitting post for your carnival. Once the project starts, each day I will recognize a fellow blogger that “Helped”"

Ariah Fine presents Open Letter to Anyone Returning from a Missions Trip posted at Trying to Follow.

My Story

Dawn presents Modesty in Public posted at “At Thy Word”, saying, “I was teased at work for dressing modestly. It really surprised me.”

Shamelle presents It Doesn’t Cost Much To Consult With God posted at Enhance Life.

That concludes this edition. Submit your blog article to the next edition of carnival of modesty using our carnival submission form. Past posts and future hosts can be found on our blog carnival index page.

Technorati tags: carnival of modesty, blog carnival.

But it doesn’t end with those that officially peddle porn. Yes, porn has gone mainstream– as something that anyone can get into, and now you can get for free. And it’s through all media.

Ann Althouse muses about the Internet taking the profit out of pornography by quoting from the New York Times which states that since you don’t need a lot of “quality” and anyone can now produce this stuff, more people are getting into the market for the thrill of it, for the attention, and for reasons other than making the big bucks.

Rob at SayAnything talks about how there’s a new reality television show to help virgins get sex

My question is, how is this not prostitution (which is a question I’ve also posed with regard to pornography)? Basically the show would consist of a bunch of “johns” paying the show’s “pimps” with strange antics (which will serve as content for the show) in exchange for a sexual tryst with the girl the pimps are pimping out.

On Craigslist, a popular classified ad site, Two were charged with pimping teen girls.

“The actual use of Craigslist for prostitution-related crimes has increased dramatically,” Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart said Thursday. “Even the street prostitutes are getting involved in this.”

Founded in 1995, Craigslist carries nearly 200 categories of classified ads, including job openings, items for sale and personal ads. The “services” category has a section labeled “erotic.”

During an investigation by the vice and child exploitation units of the Cook County Sheriff’s police, officers responded to ads offering women 18 and 19 years old. Monday, they arranged an encounter at an apartment in the 4000 block of W. LeMoyne. An officer picked up the girl and determined she was 14. The girl offered sex for $250.

And it’s finding its way into every day life. Michelle Malkin brought the way dolls are concieved back around Christmas, asking when the doll section turn into a porn shop? And then there’s the case of the substitute teacher convicted of exposing Seventh Grade Students to pornography.

It seems that no matter where we are we cannot escape the influence of porn, or being exposed to its wake. As pron charges ahead with more daring things to try to make their money, the clothing gets more risque, the “free” content gets more risque and those that are impacted by it all get more numerous. And the worst part is that, as it becomes more prevalent, it numbs us to it all. We get less influenced by what we see, and start to view the end point as the worst.

And the other part is that those that use the teen girls to make their content and market their clothing are perverting their ideas of femininity and womanhood, nd make it harder to be modest and pure in their lives going forward.

Indeed, for as long as there has been modest clothing, there has been immodest clothing. If we take a chance to look back through history we will find that prostitutes (no, it’s not the world’s oldest profession, since Adam could be considered a farmer or engaged in husbandry even before there was a woman on the face of a planet) were identifiable. Why these women chose to do this is a discussion for another time, my point is that they dressed in a way to advertise what they were selling, and it was clear what they were doing.

Down through the centuries we see that there is always this difference in literature and history. We see women that portrayed chastity, virginity, modesty, etc. and those that did not. But! We also see that, over time, what was considered risqué has steadily seeped into the chaste woman’s wardrobe. I don’t think that we could place a finger on when it happened or the first instance of this cross over, but I’m certain that as long as there has been lacy frilly under things there has been a certain desire to appeal to the baser desires of the opposite sex– which is all fine and good when it comes to husband and wife, but wrong when used otherwise.

I’m certain that as Sodom and Gomorrah moved down the path to the sinful, sexual corruption that lead up to its destruction, we would see that path paved with a blurring of the lines between acceptable and unacceptable fashion. Why? Because fashion affects the mind and influences it. In the case of America, we are also blurring these lines as we celebrate more and more skin being displayed.

What is a woman advertising or drawing attention to when she wears a shirt that exposes her midrift? She’s drawing attention to my curves, and attention to her womanly features. What’s the problem here? Nothing, if you’re trying to say “I have the morals of an alley cat!” or “Guys! Look here! Don’t I look nice?” I am told that a man’s attention is like a powerful narcotic, and that is part of the reason for the explosion of exhibitionism on the web and in the mall.

You see, we are now constantly focused on exposing the previously unexposed. We’re drawing attention to things that used to be personal. We’re removing the surprise and mystery out of things that used to be saved for spouses, and instead broadcasting them from the mountaintops.

The funny thing is, in our culture’s effort to forge new frontiers of shock, we have resulted in showing off things that used to be mocked! For example– the belly that hangs out. I’ve seen a lot of this and it’s just disgusting, even though it’s “the style.” It is now the style to wear clothing that doesn’t fit. Before people would have made fun of a person for not having clothes that fit, now it’s cool. And it draws attention to ones midsection like the midriff baring shirts– but it doesn’t show the belly button. That has to make it better right? Pair this with a tight pair of jeans, and there’s little left to the imagination.

It’s interesting that in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus chose to emphasize and intensify two sins. In choosing the two He did he got to the heart of sins that people may not have been practicing on the outside, but had been poisoning their hearts on the inside. In the case of adultery, Jesus told those present that it wasn’t enough to just not commit adultery, but if a man looked upon a woman to lust on her, then he was committing sin.

Any Christian woman can guess the next step. That short skirt and plunging neckline should be avoided at the very least because it may cause a brother to stumble. I’ve tried to be very careful with this post and the images used to depict my points, but even then I wonder if I may have ventured too far. The net can be a dangerous place simply because people– both men and women– have allowed pictures to be taken (and things to be worn) that cross the line, but they excuse it in the name of fashion.

It’s gotten to the point that we need to have serious discussions about not only how we dress and how we let our children dress, but the effect of how others dress at the beach or in the mall on us and our children. There may come a time where we have to avoid certain places because of what they display. That time may be sooner than we think.

Keep in mind, with all of this, that I’m not saying that a woman should not wear makeup. I’m not saying that she shouldn’t look her best. I’m even not saying that a woman shouldn’t dress to wow her husband or that some of these things may not be appropriate in his presence. What I am saying is that people should be defined by their insides, not by what they wear. We should all stop and ask ourselves these questions:

• What am I selling by wearing this?
• Who am I selling it to?
• Does what I wear glorify God?
• Can I cause a brother/sister to stumble by wearing this?

In I Corinthians 11 we have an interesting passage of Scripture. In this passage, Paul is talking to the Corinthian believers about what head gear, if any, they should have when prophesying, preaching, or praying.

Some look at verse 2 and claim that it’s an ordinance that Paul is sharing, and give the following commands about head gear the same weight as Communion and Baptism. I think the plain reading of the passage does not give clear weight to that, since Paul states, “Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.” The following “but” seems to say “Yes guys, you’re doing a good job keeping up with the ordinances, but there’s something I have to tell you…”

Now the next set of instruction is pretty clear– God lays out the order of leadership starting with himself down. Christ is the Head, then the man, then the woman (persumably children follow). Then we start to get into the head covering discussion. Let’s see if we can figure out first what Paul is stating:

1. If a man has his head covered while he prophesies or prays dishonors his head.
2. If a woman does not have her head covered while prophesying or praying, it dishonors her head.

Paul then goes on to defend his reasoning: Man being created in the image of God is the glory of God, whereas woman being created from man is the glory of man. Paul goes on to say that the two are one in the Lord, which may be reference to what happens in marriage. This is Paul’s appeal to the creation order.

Paul then makes a second appeal– to nature: He talks about the fact that long hair on men it is a shame and long hair on women is a glory. Some take this to say that women should have long hair (a topic for another time maybe). In context, to me, it looks like he’s justifying his comment about coverings by saying that the fact that there are differences in hair lengths indicating man and woman, so should there be a difference in head coverings. That the glory of the man is that the woman covers her glory (her long hair) to show respect/honor to her husband.

I’ve went to a church while at college, that had any woman involved in ministering to the congregation wear a hat– on the platform, in the choir, etc.– though the congregation was not forced to do it. I have also noticed in a few churches that I have been in that the women are not usually the first to offer to lead in prayer. Could it be because they are more keenly aware of the Holy Spirit and would feel more liberty with their head covered?

Some feel it is necessary to cover their heads all the time. Some only while in church. This passage definitely seems to teach about prophesying / praying, not about at all times.

Now, most churches I’m a part of say that this was a cultural thing. I could get that if Paul just appealed to nature. See, the same people that say it’s cultural agree with the pattern of headship layed out here “because we were created in that order.” However, the head covering seems to be intermixed within the passage.

I’m not opposed to saying it’s cultural– but if it isn’t, is the fact that it’s inconvenient excuse the obligation? Should a leader in a church call on a women to pray or prophesy if she’s uncovered? If you take this passage literally, then he shouldn’t.

A lot of the discussion centers around a command in Deuteronomy 22:5 in which God through Moses states that it is an abomination to the Lord for a man to wear women’s clothing and for women to wear men’s clothing. In essence, God created them male and female and He wants them looking the part. (Contrast this to current society’s desire for genderless bathrooms, cross dressers, etc…)

I guess I should start with the men. This means that, guys, you’re going to have to take to liking skirts and stop your sisters in Christ from wearing that which pertains to a man, since further down in the same passage God commands: “A man shall not take his father’s wife, nor discover his father’s skirt.” (Deut 22:30) One web author goes on to say the following (I did the linking):

There are many more Bible verses for men wearing skirts than women wearing them! The Bible speaks of men’s skirts twelve times (Dt 22:30, Dt 27:20, Ru 3:9, 1 Sa 15:27, 1 Sa 24:4, 1 Sa 24:5, 1 Sa 24:11, 1 Sa 24:11, Eze 16:8, Hag 2:12, Hag 2:12, and Zec 8:23).

Now, obviously I’m attempting to shock you into thinking! I’m obviously not advocating that men should start a new fashion trend. What I am saying is that you can’t determine a specific article of clothing from this passage. This passage does not say that women have to wear a dress or a skirt and cannot wear pants.

There is a good principle in there, though, which I’ve alluded to before. There should be a difference in your dress than the opposite sex. Now, many people have different opinions of what this should be. An opinion is fine, but falls under what we talked about earlier in the Romans 14 passage about Christian Liberty. For sake of discussion, I’ll talk about some of the main ideas:

Mrs. Alta Jorgensen has some definite views about women’s clothing. She worked temporarily in fashion design and illustration and has some drawings on her site. Her argument is that the fashion designers are trying to make women look like men intentionally, and don’t flatter women’s lines. She encourages women not be sucked in by current fashion trends and to be feminine.

Having attended a conservative Christian University whose dress code was for women to wear skirts/dresses most of the time, I can attest to the fact that going to the mall was quite the adventure “women in jeans!” Does this have an effect on men? Sure.

M. Thaxter Dickey talks about modesty in his web article. He has five reasons for being modest in dress stating that when women dress provocatively:

1. It is unfair to men
2. It is a dangerous threat to Chastity
3. It is unfair to women
4. It is an indicator of uncertain character
5. It reflects poorly on one’s vocation as a Christian

There are others, and I’ll give links of need be, but I think you’re seeing my point. God wants a difference, and he puts high value on modesty. Compared to the one passage about looking different, modesty is everywhere in Scripture. There are groups that are willing to make their members wear skirts, but don’t care how modest. We need to be concerned about modesty first and foremost.

* Correction made before the five points– spotted by Red State Rah Rah.