Girls post pictures of their modest outfits on Suddenly Darling, a Christian style forum that promotes modest dressing. Under many of the girls’ pictures, there are lengthy debates on whether the hemline was long enough, or whether the tights covered enough, all in the form of comments. I go crazy and then wonder if there’s something wrong with me.
Is it right for people to judge others on how much skin they cover, and how long their hemline is?
Not only does the idea of modesty restrict creativity-the followers of this idea do not understand differences. And anyway, people have different standards, so you can wear your below knee dress and stopping scolding the others that wear above knees and feel comfortable.
The form of entertainment known as porn is not the same as art with exposed human figures. In porn, people market their nude bodies and sexuality, whereas in art and fashion photography, the nude figure is part of the picture, a symbol of truth. It’s like how the painters of the Renaissance and even before that painted nude women. They didn’t do it to market sexuality, and neither are these artists.
After all, everyone has a body that is essentially naked, so covering up and condemning people in bikinis is just plain pathetic. Because dude, were you born in a turtleneck and long skirt?
Nudity in photography is a symbol of truth, vulnerability, and embracing of life. It’s what people really look like. The artists who expose skin are not marketing nudity, they’re expressing the truth. The truth of a human being, and the truth of life. Fashion envelopes us in luxe fabrics, but also aims to bring to us the meaning of life. This really is what every field of art and science ultimately tries to show. . .
Attempting to brand people as immodest and slutty when they’re in a crinoline tutu is just plain ridiculous. Sure these people can stick to their modesty values and religious morals, but they can’t force it onto other people, people who might be in quest of the truth.