(Teacher)
In the book by Wendy Shalit, titled A Return To Modesty (1999), Shulit refers to romantic idealism and innocence as the modest form of sexual expression. Meaning, she believes in the one time love affair between one man and one woman. (Shalit, 1999) This has a religious tone and includes manners set for young women in the seventieth century and has nothing to do with twenty-first century reality. Although her ideas seem rather outdated, she does make some rather good points about how women who become more sexually promiscuous wear risker clothes and have many sexual partners which puts them at risk for STDs, unwanted pregnancies, and date rape. (Shalit, 1999) Although her views may seem to be crazy, they are within the typical religious abstinence education curriculum and therefore should be viewed as such. Her claims are a result of her own experiences and point of view on sexual behaviors that put women at risk.
Although the book has plenty of support from readers and analysts who enjoyed the return to innocence theme, its feminist theme is questionable. The author seems uncomfortable with giving children the correct information about sexuality. Meaning that her inability to feel comfortable discussing how babies are made and would rather continue the stork myth to maintain te innocence in children is archaic and dysfunctional in the 21st century.
Shalit argues that before the Sexual Revolution there was a lack of rape. However, this is false information because rape did occur but it was not a subject that was open for discussion and rarely reported. Sexual assault and harassment were also prevalent as they are today but they were taboo subjects. No matter how a woman dressed, she was still the object of sexual desire from men and historically that was just the way society operated.
Shalit seems to be unaware that there are modest cultures and social groups throughout the United States that are not sexually promiscuous and that being modest is the norm rather than the opposite of her themes in the book. Cultures across the globe have practiced modesty and that only specific groups seem to avoid the virtue. Her selective choices of modesty seem to only fit where she feels comfortable, such as conservative dress, gentlemanly behavior, and chastity, however she dismisses the other part of those topics in failing to include that along with acting delicate comes unequal pay, inferiority, lack of opportunities and the lack of equal rights. These topics are never brought up, and seem to be unasked about in review forums that rave about the book and how wonderful it is.
There are several issue that the book has, which need to be addressed. First, the idea that it is okay to condemn women who have had multiple sexual partners or who do not dress with absolute purity are somehow incapable of modesty is absurd. Second women who dress with skin showing are seductive and impure is archaic in nature. Those are not feminist ideas. Feminism has more to do with the equality of the genders than it does with how someone behaves or dresses. The third problem with the book is that the author suggests that society judges women unfairly, when she seems to do exactly that.
Although she does not come right out and state that she blames the victims for rape crimes, she indirectly blames them by stating over and over that if women are innocent until marriage, they will avoid sexual crimes against them. This indirect blaming is also the same mindset that judgmental people seem to use when they attempt to blame society for their issues with drugs, crimes, and mental instabilities. The idea is somehow that the victim is to blame because he or she allowed the crime to occur against them. This is not feminist and is certainly not a virtue or ethical
Feminism is the belief that women are equal to men in all realms of society. This includes economic, political, and social groups as well as the idea that women can be themselves and still succeed as well as any man. Modesty is the belief that a person holds an unassuming role in society with his or her behavior. The two can be used together, however, they are not necessarily synonymous. It is unrealistic for a person to believe that he or she can be plain in behavior and have the ability to succeed at anything equal to another. It is by our human uniqueness that drives is each to perform at his or her optimal rate and achieve success. For example, if a simplistic woman who acts meek and innocent wants to be a CEO, she is going to have to change a few things about herself, including the fact that she must let go of her innocent view point and assume a role of leader which is an experienced wise leader. Leaders are not innocent, nor are they meek. That is one essential issue with this author’s viewpoint.
Shalit has a very good point that women should respect themselves and their sexual behaviors need to be their own choice. However, she does not give any support for women who are not chaste and pure. This is a very big problem for being a feminist as feminism includes all women, not a chosen few.
Work Cited
Shalit, W. (1999). A return to modesty. New York, NY: Free Press.
