« Mennonites and Hitler, teacher-student relationship policies, and struggling with self-righteousness | Main | More on modesty »

May 12, 2004

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfa9e53ef00e5505455578834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Modesty, concealment, and the erotics of the hidden -- updated:

» Best of Me Symphony LV from Parableman
The 55th Best of Me Symphony is up at The Owner's Manual. My Theistic Explanations is there. In it I explain why it's fallacious to conclude that God's existence can't in principle be the conclusion of an inference to the... [Read More]

» http://www.lurking-chihuahua.us/blog/_archives/2004/12/23/213746.html from lurking Chihuahua

I found an interesting blog entry about modesty in women's clothing. Then main point of the article was that over exposure to sexual stimuli such as porn or the ubiq... [Read More]

» OVEREXPOSED ! from lurking Chihuahua

I found an interesting blog entry about modesty in women's clothing. Then main point of the article was that over exposure to sexual stimuli such as porn or the ubiq... [Read More]

Comments

The Angry Clam

This is just the angry reaction to the realization that one of the avenues of female domination over men is now cut off.

Compare/contrast to reactions to large-scale entrance of women into the workplace.

That was what always irritated me about a large swath of feminist theory- it had gone beyond "liberation" into a fixation on dominance.

Good riddance.

Anne

Hugo, I'm sitting here trying to reconcile this posts with the ones you've made in the recent past and failing.

With great restraint :) let me ask you if you might not want to consider that the problem here is the men, not the women.


Hugo

Dear Anne:

See my post at your blog. I think I may need to explain myself further, but I stand by the thrust (sorry) of my argument. I appreciate your restraint -- I know emotions can run very high on this.

Anne

It's never the wrong time for a bad jokes. ;)

I'm going to think about this at length and respond later.

Jonathan Dresner

Hmm. I'm reminded of the discussion of footbinding I had in class a while back.... aside from the attractiveness of small feet, one of the stronger theories about the popularity of the practice is the way in which the foot became both fetishized and hidden except from female attendants and THE MAN.

anj

Aren't we somewhat losing the point? Hugo, are you saying that you want western women to hide themselves? I have not read Wendy's book - but I do know that as long as we live in a culture that embraces pornography, women and men are devauled. And when the innate dignity of a human being is devauled, whether thru abuse, or self-image issues, true intimacy and sexuality are impossible. And that is the tragedy of porn. It sounds like Naomi Wolf has learned this, have we?

Hugo

I most definitely DON'T want women to hide themselves. I do want a society where eros is celebrated in relationship, not on billboards.

Xrlq
I most definitely DON'T want women to hide themselves.

You sure had me fooled. After reading Anne's extremely thoughtful and insightful reply, I could have sworn your position was that women should have their feet bound to keep them small, be required to wear burkas and whalebone corsets, lose the right to own property, drive a car, or vote, and be blamed for their own rapes.

anj

Hugo, I did not think that you wanted woman to hide themselves. Sorry if my first comment was not clear on that point. And Xrlg, I think I can pick up the sarcasm in your comment, I hope? Hugo, I am with you - I want that kind of society also. And this woman is glad that you are posting about this issue. And thanks for the link to the Naomi Wolf article, it was great.

John

XRLQ, You Rock! ;-)

Jonathan Dresner

Hugo: Something has been bugging me about this whole discussion, and I'm just starting to figure out what it is; frankly, I'm not sure I have it yet, so bear with me.

I alluded to it in comments to Anne's post: the earliest articulation, and perhaps a root of the concept of the hidden as titilating, is the story of The Fall, a.k.a. the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. The idea that the body should be hidden because of its sexual potential (not for warmth, or neatness, or because pockets are convenient, but for shame) is at the root of the titilating erotic power you claim is present in more hidden flesh. Exposure is bad because it seems to reveal our self-knowledge of our sexual nature, and creates an environment in which others are also aware of our sexual nature. But the question arises: why should they care? They care because we still think that the exposed body is inherently sexual, and we think that because we are ashamed or afraid of that sexual potential.

What if the exposed body were just the exposed body? What if all it revealed was flesh? What if we realized that to view was not to possess; that to expose was not to offer? (also that to cover was not necessarily to hide)

I don't think, fundamentally, that blaming women or men is going to get us to the root of the problem. It is, as I've argued before, systemic and interactive. I do however, think that "mystery" is a pretty weak peg to hang erotic desire on, when maintaining it creates so many more problems than it solves.

Miss O'Hara

This is a wonderfully thought-out piece, and I agree with Hugo, Naomi, and Wendy Shalit (whose book is *fantastic*).

Jonathan, I think that the problem is not necessarily the exposed flesh, but our culture's utter and complete sexualization of the female body. Look at our television, our films, our advertising; it is all based on sexuality. Worse, it has trickled down into everyday life, where women show up at the office in pants hanging so low they can barely sit down and midriff tops.

If anything, women are to blame, not the men: by catering to men's most base (sorry, men!) desires, we've actually done the opposite of what we thought to achieve. Men now expect perfection, and compare every single woman to every single other woman they have ever seen. Love is no longer the important thing, and eroticism is dead.

As a young female, I know that wherever I go, I am being evaluated purely based on my physical attributes, lack thereof, or a bad hair/wardrobe day. And although I dress very 'stylishly,' I also dress pretty modestly, even for a slim, young female; I know that the evaluation is likely not positive. After all, I'm not displaying my wares for all to see and judge, and therefore, am not an attractive woman.

Furthermore, the constant images of pure perfection all of us see nearly constantly (and I work at a major ad agency, so as part of my job, I have to keep an eye on all forms of media!) mean that, regardless of what men SAY about "knowing that it's fake," men still WANT that perfection and expect it. Thus, as Naomi points out, REAL, flesh-and-blood women, with physical 'imperfections' men (and women) in another age would really have had nothing to compare to, and may even have found charming or 'cute,' are now looked at as justification for withdrawing love and affection.

Furthermore, as we read above, this also deadens normal male sexuality so that they are no longer truly excited by reality - only that perfection which is paraded before them on the street, the screens, the papers, the internet.

Really, men *and* women are losing out in this environment. I think there is much to be said for modesty and the mystery it maintains. I'm not advocating ankle-length skirts and high-collar blouses, by any means, but covering what should be covered would certainly not hurt anything, would it?

Jonathan Dresner

The problem of unrealistic body expectations, Miss O'Hara, is very much a male product: Women are present in pornography as subjects, but the photographer/cinematographers, producers, directors and editors who take pornographic scenes and airbrush and edit them so that they represent an unnatural perfection are a distinct part of the problem. Fashion magazines, etc., play their role as well, with the same techniques. The expectation of perfection is a carefully constructed and maintained social phenomenon.

More broadly, when you cite "culture" as the culprit, you are obscuring the fact that culture is not a disembodied thing, but an amalgam of millions of people's behavior patterns, and that the chief architects of those patterns are largely male.

There was a time when I would have recommended a year's subscription to AdBusters for someone who worked in your profession, but the magazine is on probation with me right now. Find some back issues, though.

neocon

Ironic that Jonathan is arguing the "feminist" argument aganst Miss O'Hara.
I take some issue with the statement that men are the chief architects of culture. Women are the primary consumers in society. The make most of the buying decisions in households. You cited fashion magazines as well and women are in the majority there as well. Women also are the primary educators, but for formal education but also in the home. I am not saying men are blameless, but I think your assertion that primarily men make culture is a bit dated and without support.

Jonathan Dresner

Ironic? I don't know.

You're right that women as consumers do play a role in construction and maintenance of culture, just as women build culture in their roles as primary child-care, and in their public and private relationships with men. I still think that, when we're talking about sexuality and social position, that the preponderance of power is in the hands of men.

I'm not going to argue quantities or weights. Somewhere, in all these discussions (and I can't seem to find it at the moment), I said that culture, particularly sexual culture is not something you can blame solely on men or on women, but is a system, interactive and dynamic.

Part of the problem, as Anne Zook pointed out in her responses, is that a system like this does not necessarily respond well to simple solutions: promoting modesty for women, for example, has other ideological and social implications which are largely inimicable to the feminist project.

Hugo has taken me to task for this before, but I continue to urge greater understanding and analysis before promoting social solutions to complex problems. I think taking our own actions is fine (we need experimentalists, to test these theories) but before we start saying "this is the solution for all of us" we need to think a little harder about who "all of us" is and whether the solution really solves more problems than it creates.

Miss O'Hara

Jonathan, I, as someone who worked in the cosmetics business for several years - well, I more than anyone understand the airbrushing and all of the 'development' that goes into promoting certain images. But this construct is not going away; rather, with the increased nudity and soft-porn (and worse) print ads and TV spots, it will only become more prevalent and even worse.

As far as men being the architechs of this; yes, at first. And still, in a way (I work with a nearly all-male broadcast production team). However, women have upped the ante by adopting this 'carefully constructed social phenomenon' (which it is, of course). Thus, not only must I, as a female, compete with starlets and models, I now have to compete with my peers, who dress the same way as the women society puts forth as 'perfect' and 'desirable.' Therefore, while men may have created this construct, women, by adopting it, have increased the importance of it and the speed at which it is adopted - and the speed at which the ante will be upped.

I just don't think that men are the primary architects anymore. By buying into and adopting the fallacy of physical perfection that is ever-present in our media and culture, women are a large part of it.

Really, by accepting it, we've told men that it is all right to judge a female solely on the merits of her physical being, rather than skill, wit, charm, spiritual fruits, or anything else. Primary educators, indeed. The result? Women have bought into the airbrushing, and thus created an iron maiden of sorts, not just for ourselves, but for men, who can no longer be happy with women as they truly are - imperfect, unairbrushed, and very often in poor lighting. All the world's a stage - if Shakespeare only knew!

I think social solutions must be looked at as well before implementation. However, I think it is clear that *something* needs to change.

Jonathan Dresner

Miss O'Hara: I'm not going to argue percentages, because it devloves into a blame game. I do agree that the increase in women's agency, liberation and equality, as it's commonly called, has increased their responsibility, as well, for their choices. I'm not sure (OK, I'm going to argue percentages a little bit) that women's agency is old or deep enough at this point to qualify as equal or chief in the social/culture process.

I do agree that change is necessary, and I don't believe in "iron maiden" cultures anymore. The very fact that we are having this discussion is a sign, I think, that things are and will change, and I think we have a chance to make things better, in the long run.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004