Immodest Dress by Mrs. Carrie R. Moon

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Dec 5, 1912

Immodest Dress

By Mrs. Carrie R. Moon

PAUL, when talking to Timothy about how he should instruct the church, said, “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel.” We are often led to wonder how Paul would feel if he could rise from his grave and witness the fashions of the present day.

To say that the style of dress which prevails quite extensively among women at the present day is far from modest is expressing the matter mildly. This is the opinion not alone of Christians, but of the world at large.

Perhaps you, dear reader, can remember your feelings the first time you saw a woman on the street wearing a “hobble” or a “tube” skirt. Can you truthfully say that it looked neat or modest to you then?

But alas! many of us have passed through the changes of sentiment described by the poet:—

“Vice is a monster of such horrid mien That to be hated needs but to be seen; But seen too oft, familiar with its face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

This evil has become so flagrant that the pastors of popular churches have felt called upon to denounce it from their pulpits. The following quoted from the Inter-Ocean, one of the daily papers of Chicago, presents the subject in plain language:—

“PHILADELPHIA, PA., Aug. 11.—Wide-spread interest in this city has been attracted to the statement of the Rev. Dr. Walter T. Sumner, chairman of the Chicago vice commission, that indecent dressing, particularly tight skirts worn by women, contributing to sensuality, is largely responsible for ‘mashers.’

“Ministers and moral censors of the city lauded the stand of the Chicago clergyman, and declared that a campaign to change the style of dress should be inaugurated here. They also agreed with him that the nation is passing through an era of suggestive dressing.’

“In discussing the situation, Dr. Sumner said:—

“‘If there is an increase in annoyance to women upon the streets, I am inclined to think that it can be traced to the dress of the women. We are going through a period when women are making many efforts to accentuate those lines which lead to sensuality.

“‘The average working girl to-day is taking, no doubt ignorantly, as her standard of dress that of the demi-monde. It is no wonder that she, consciously or unconsciously, invites men’s attentions.’

“The Rev. Dr. John W. Sayers, pastor of St. Matthew’s Methodist Episcopal Church, one of the leading Methodist ministers of the city, suggested that mothers are responsible in large measure for the risque styles affected by young women. He said:—

“‘Unquestionably the styles affected by women are having an unwholesome effect upon the morals of the nation. Many of these styles are decidedly immodest. But can we blame young girls for adopting them when well-dressed women show them the way? We see young women in almost all walks of life wearing costumes that modest women might call indecent. We see these short skirts and hobble skirts almost everywhere.

“‘Who is responsible?—The girls’ mothers. They should use good counsel and their authority with the young women. Mothers should be honest with their daughters. I always preach that. If the mothers did their full duty, we should see less of these outlandish styles.’

“The Rev. Dr. Amos Johnson, pastor of Siloam Methodist Episcopal Church, who has been active in moral movements in the northeastern part of the city, advocated a conference the aim of which would be to wage an educational campaign to show women and girls the evils of the hobble skirt.

“‘I think that the Episcopal authority of Chicago has uttered the truth,’ commented Dr. Johnson. ‘Modesty stands in deadly peril because of the supposed striking attires now worn by women. It is time to call a halt.’

“The Rev. Thomas C. Pollock, of the Oak Park United Presbyterian Church, declared that the predominance of mashers was a shame to the police forces of the larger cities. He further said:—

“‘But ministers and others, shocked by the pageant of immodest clothing, do not censure the police. The root of the evil is in the senseless desire of women to expose their charms, so far as the laws permit. They have gone far enough, and moralists should step in.’”

Woman was placed in the world to be a help to man. It is her work to exert such an influence as to elevate, ennoble, and refine the sterner sex.

It is enough to make one’s heart ache to see sweet young girls dressed in such a way as to lead young men to make remarks about them which would mantle their cheeks with shame if they could hear them. It is also sad to see the look of pertness which soon takes the place of the look of girlish modesty upon the faces of these dear maidens. Will the mothers sometime have cause to weep bitter tears because of their folly in not preserving the sweet modesty which is always a safeguard to its possessor?

But what shall we say when we see these demoralizing fashions among the people who profess to have heard and responded to the call, “Come out from among them, and be ye separate”?

These styles are too common to need to be described—the tight skirts, the low-necked waists, and sleeves that leave nearly the entire arm bare, the “cob-web stockings,” the unnatural masses of hair, the grotesque hats, etc.

It is most encouraging to see men of the world taking a strong position against this evil. The Chicago Daily Tribune recently published an article under the heading “Chicago Leads a Revolt Against Risque in Dress,” in which the statement is made that Chicago has renounced allegiance to style centers of the East. The writer quotes Alexander Weiss, who is one of the best-known designers of ladies’ fashions in the West, as saying: “This cutting away from the old régime is going to raise the standard of modesty in Chicago. Chicago women have been wearing tight and short dresses because that kind of clothes was the kind exhibited in the fashion centers in this city. We’re going to eliminate the hobble, the tube, and all the different styles which are immodest, no matter whether they continue to be the rage in New York or not. And in their stead we’re going to bring out dresses much more beautiful and artistic.”

Young girls have said to the writer: “But what can we do? We do not want to wear these tight skirts, but our mothers say we must—that it takes so little goods and so little work to make dresses this way, and that other people wear them, and we must, too.” Can any mother think of weighing a few yards of dress-goods or a little extra work against the conscience of her daughter?

God is purifying unto himself “a peculiar people.” He is sanctifying and cleansing his church, “that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” Surely his people, those whom Christ has left here as his witnesses, should separate themselves entirely

from worldly fashions that are extreme in any way, and above all, from those which border upon the immodest.

Shall we not, as a people, take our stand against all that is immodest and unhealthful, and seek to dress and to live as those who are looking for the soon-coming Saviour, who will clothe his people with his own spotless robe of righteousness?

South Bend, Ind.