Recently, I read a blog post written by someone I went to high school with (it seems like ages ago, but it’s been less than two years, crazy). Overall, they’re a sweet person, a little naive, and highly religious. I say all of these things not to imply that they are bad things, merely contributing factors in what I believe creates their opinion on the matter of what women should be wearing as pants — an opinion that not only offends, but saddens me.
Basically, their argument was this:
1. Leggings are great for wearing under things. But they’re immodest to wear as just pants.
2. Wearing leggings as pants is a temptation to men.
3. Wearing leggings as pants is not only immodest, but without class.
4. Overall, men prefer that their future partner not spend their youth wearing leggings as pants (where they get the stats on this I don’t know — it was not credited).
There were a few other points — it was not particularly well structured — but you get the general gist.
Reading this made me very angry. So angry, I sat with my fingers hovering about the keys for several minutes, debating whether it would be worth it to state my case. Only one person had commented so far, commending her wonderful representation of solid Christian morales. I could have written a small novel, a hateful one, in reply to this post. Instead, I stormed to Twitter….
Maybe not the most eloquent or mature way of dealing with my feelings (another issue altogether — why do we feel the compulsion to broadcast ourselves on social media when we’re upset? That seems like the least logical thing to do. Then again, we are probably feeling pretty passionate. As if that’s an excuse), but it let me blow off steam.
Inevitably, I got to thinking. This is not a new problem. Maybe not with this specific issue, but these anti-women kind of blanket statements have thrived probably for as long as we’ve had genders. Or writing. Or religion, or something. I know this was not something the writer said out of any hate — truly, it was a composition of love. They don’t want others to go to hell for wearing non-pants in public! That’s why they’re writing this!
The thing is, it’s a very superficial position. Superficial, because the writer isn’t looking at what they’re saying. They are imply not considering their words, their points, what their position is imply. This young lady is digging a hole for others of her sex, and it’s simply painful to see her do it in the name of faith. It seriously troubles me to see such superficial thinking. Maybe it’s the critical thinking curriculum I’m getting at university at the moment, but I am legitimately distressed by this — beyond the fact that little legitimate thought went into the blog posting, but it is so very, very anti-women. These thoughts of immodesty and temptation only add further to a rape culture that seeks to punish women for merely existing and having vaginas. The writer is all but saying that I am classless, immoral, immodest, and unfaithful to my future spouse should I even think to wear stretchy, soft pants-like goodness with my sweaters and tunics. Because God forbid any male have any conception of the shape of my ass — that’s tempting, and as we know, men are but savages, left to the whims of their genitalia.
I’m not Christian, but I was raised in two churches, and I’m pretty familiar with how things work in both Protestant and Catholic faiths. I am well aware the sexist nature of some doctrines, but I also know there are pro-women ways of approaching faith. This was certainly not one of those ways. It’s not even pro-man. It’s pro-nobody.
I guess my overall point is for God’s sake, consider what you’re implying when you decide to dictate your lofty morality on others. There’s often a greater philosophy, one that can occasionally reek of ignorance, revealed in those blanket statements. As the Green brothers often point out, the truth resists simplicity. If it seems simple, then it probably really isn’t.
Dani On The Fritz 