Modesty: What do you think about it?

I had a few questions in my comments section about my opinions on Indian dress after this blog post where I wrote about learning to wear the Indian saree. As I've thought about it I realized I've actually had quite a few conversations lately, not necessarily with locals but with other field studies students and other volunteers living where I am, regarding topics of modesty and dress, and so I'm going to spend the rest of this post answering the questions from my previous post.

I'll start by answering the questions I was asked.

I would be interested to hear what you as a woman have to say about clothing in India. Do you find them oppressive that women have to be so covered? 

The simple answer?
No.
I hadn't thought about it a lot. I have some semblance of a memory when way back when they were telling me I had to be sure to cover my ankles in India that I may have found it frustrating to seek out the right clothing to take with me, but mostly I was excited to get to India and buy and wear their clothing, ankle length or not, and stop wondering about what from America would work.

Also, I don't remember thinking so much about how they had to be "so covered" as I found it interesting what it was they had to have covered. This is a topic that has been of interest to me for a while. For Indians showing a part of a bare midriff with the sari is not immodest, I, however, cannot wear the sari without some alterations due to the religious garment I wear that symbolizes part of my commitment to my faith and dictates some aspects of my modesty due to the need to cover it.

This thought on what needs to be covered lead to a conversation with another field studies student in which we discussed the varying perceptions on modesty throughout the world. They mentioned a group I can't name nor do I know how fictional or historically accurate they are, but the story demonstrates an idea of modesty and the differences our society can place on us that can be quite influential and important to look into when trying to understand behavior.

 

 He talked of an indigenous tribe that wore almost nothing, nudity was acceptable and common and their perception of being "immodest" was to dress as their Gods. When the colonizers came they found their lack of clothing primitive and offensive and went about dressing them in layers of clothes and it was at that point that promiscuity rose to an all time high in that community, because for them they were now dressed in immodest and alluring ways whereas their simplicity before was what they were used to.

I wouldn't say we all undress and accept our bodies as a normal thing to see in public, it wouldn't work because that is not what all societies have decided is proper or modest and many things have been sexualized so as to create the necessity of certain standards if desiring a certain attitude or behavior to follow. Do I think some of that is too bad? Well, yes. I think that the body is a beautiful and sacred creation, it is also a sexual one and this is normal and good, but in general many societies have disgraced the body and sexuality. That is what I find oppressive and sad, that is what dictates a lot of what is required in different cultures for modesty - though other factors that play into it would be an interesting study, why does my very specific culture find shoulders and midriffs immodest while Indians think ankles are, etc.?

 Modesty is a lot about an attitude, and this can be a personal attitude or one held by society at large. This is mostly getting at the fact that modesty has to do with deportment and this combined with dress. Also, it doesn't have to be considered bad or oppressive that our very individual society defines how we choose to behave, it just is and maybe we want to change it and maybe we want to go against it, but society will give us the consequence of that regardless of our choice so sometimes it's better to conform, it gives us time to consider and work on more important matters.

Take "ain't" for example, (read about ain't here), linguists may debate that it is correct in following a certain pattern and could be legitimately used, and yet it's a rather stigmatized word in professional settings and so despite my linguistics professors spouting off that it's perfectly acceptable, they simultaneously say it's not acceptable and we should avoid it in certain settings so as to remain academically and professionally respected - because society says so and that hasn't changed yet. I could spend my life trying to make ain't acceptable again, or use it and take the consequences of society that come, like maybe not getting a job, but I'd rather focus my time on other things, but that's a personal choice. The same kind of thing is true with some aspects of modesty, and I think it doesn't hurt us to follow along with society in some things. It is interesting what society chooses to do and how they choose to feel about certain things, along with the process of changing it, or looking at why it came to be that way in the first place.

Currently I would say these are things happening and changing in India. Although it's surely different in each area, the one I am in has not felt as prudish as some made it out to seem.  Though most women you see are still wearing clothing to cover the whole leg, some do not, or at least not as strictly as it was made out to be - and nobody seems excessively offended by the matter. Similar to what I mentioned in my Sari post, dress standards and styles are also changing and with that a few concepts of modesty. The traditional dress is slowly beginning to lose some of its popularity, and change is in the air for what is stylish and what is acceptable by society in India. Personal choices or small groups withing society's choices are still seen everywhere; from those who wear the burka to cover nearly everything, to those in the traditional sari to a little more modernized and maybe shorter style.

These very basic and limited to my own small area observations made, let me point out that the biggest reason why my answer holds very little legitimacy - I'm surrounded by Tibetans. Although I often see Indians I have not interacted very personally with any of them, I haven't asked these questions or heard conversation on the matter. I don't know at all what they feel about it and I don't even see them that much. What is interesting is how different the Tibetans are. We came ready to cover our ankles and be respectful and found ourselves surrounded by shorts, shorter ones than I wear, and casual t-shirts and many other western styles.

The Tibetans have mentioned to us that it is better to be more covered than they often are in causal settings when going out into the Indian community. I appreciate that they would make the statement and suggest it to us. Although they have different ideas of what is acceptable and when, they live in an area where it is different from their own culture and society and they understand that and are aware of it enough to then choose to what degree they will respect it.
Another reason I might be a silly person to ask, I'm kind of hyper modest myself and personally like to have certain things covered a certain amount, on myself - and don't mind a culture who respects certain ideals of modesty because I think going towards the opposite where nothing is considered unacceptable is a worse direction.


How would you feel if you had to dress that way everyday, would it be great, would you get tired of it and want shorts and t-shirts back again? 

All of that said - and now answering this second question - I like having the freedom to choose what I wear, but like Averyl said in her comment on my post, I feel somewhat oppressed in my own society by the fact that by wearing one of the beautiful and intricate every day outfits of the Indians I would be a bit stared at, and unacceptable, even, as being professional or properly dressed for certain situations. Our cultures are just different, I wouldn't say one is bad and one is good, just different. I would say society is always oppressive in some way, just different ways, and a big part of what makes life and history interesting is the tug of war happening between society and groups or individuals in society that changes what is acceptable for the majority. Let's put a plug in for BYU accepting beards again right here and now and leave it at that.

One last thing:
When deciding to write this response as an actual post of its own I decided I wanted to read up on the topic a little bit also, so of course I went to Wikipedia (and if you click on that link it should take you to a page talking about modesty that I actually enjoyed reading). There weren't a lot of new things there but I felt like it addressed a variety of topics regarding modesty well, in one place. It was also interesting to note that of the few religions they specifically talked about, mine was one of them!

This is partially interesting due to my religions smallness in comparison to all others. Despite being small there are some topics I know we're known for and our statements, doings and otherwise might be mentioned regarding those things but I guess i just hadn't expected modesty to be one of them. This is not because I don't think my religion places modesty as an important issue, I just didn't think it was one of the issues we talk about that the rest of the world would care about much.

I'm afraid I've now talked about a lot of things in a rather unorganized way that I don't feel like fixing right now; and my own writing brought up even more questions to be answered or addressed than I began with, for myself and maybe for my original questioners also. All us field studiers live in very different locations and societies and if anyone from one of them reads this and thinks they have additional insights on what is modest where they are, and why, I think that would be an interesting addition to this conversation.