Truth Steps Publishing
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Store
  • Free Resources
  • Reviews
  • Videos
  • Contact Us

Practical Modesty Tests for Clothes

7/26/2013

3 Comments

 
This video gives some easy to remember, simple to do tests of modesty for clothing. Use them for both yourself and your children!

The issue of modesty is certainly not a new topic. Unfortunately, though, modesty is too often addressed as a female's issue and concern. I believe that modesty is required of both men and women. The simple modesty tests that are described in this video apply to both.  
Outline of the 6 Tests:

1) Raise your Hands - Raise both hands high above your head to check for length of shirts and dresses.

2) Sit Down - To check the length and fit of shorts, dresses, and skirts, sit in a chair in various positions. For shorts, you will also want to sit on the floor in various positions.

3) Bend Over - In a standing position, bend over at the waist to check for gaps where pants/skirts meet the shirt. This will also check dress length in the back.

4) Rubber Band Test - Tug on your shirt in various places. If it snaps back at you, your shirt may be too tight. This applies to pants and skirts, as well.

5) Lean Over - Lean over to check if necklines are too large causing the "contents" underneath to be revealed. Also check the arm openings of sleeveless shirts for any gaps.

6) Full Length Mirror Test - Look the entire outfit over for one last check of anything that didn't get discovered in the above tests. Such as: Are any undergarments exposed? 
3 Comments
Angela Bennett
8/8/2013 11:16:23 am

great tips!

Reply
Kayren
8/14/2013 12:11:49 pm

We started with modesty tests for clothing when the girls were very young (around 7-8). They were so used to it by the time they were tweens/teens that they didn't question it. #1 and #3 are the primary ones we used.

Reply
Icorigin link
7/27/2015 12:52:05 am

Do police hate women who wear brown blouses instead of green ones, because they deem the wearing of green to be illegal?

Or do the police hate women who wear polyester slacks instead of cotton ones, because they consider the wearing of cotton to be unlawful?

Do police hate only caucasian women but love only quota-for-reparations negroid gals while ignoring kamakaze asians ones because of difference in skin color and/or presence of slanted eyefolds?

Is there anything "immoral" or "indecent" about women wearing brown blouses instead of green ones, or wearing cotton ones instead of polyester ones? Is the Bible relatively "colorblind" pertaining to differences in skin color of humans?

Female-human arms per se come in different skin colors, as previously mentioned. Does that make them evil, and born-with-them body parts to be ashamed of?

Similar-but-different female-human arms of all 4-billion individuals of the inferior gender throughout the world are often partially clothed (and sometimes completely clothed) in cotton instead of polyester or silk or nylon or rayon, and are sometimes green or brown but usually never rainbow multi-colored. Do those differences make one or the other or several of them obscene? Should we distinguish with discretion? Should there be sacred and righteous discrimination? Segregation? Public-health-protective quarantine because of such?

What if the [ supposed ] illegal or unlawful infraction has nothing whatsoever to do with the color of long or shortened sleeves of a blouse or gown or dress, and has nothing whatsoever to do with whether the woven material of such short-sleeved or even sleevesless garments is composed of either cotton or polyester or silk?

What if girls and women were arrested and ticketed and fined for mindlessly or deliberately, arrogantly and belligerently displaying or flaunting parts of their NAKED arms with shortened sleeves, or (worse yet?) all of their NUDE arms with sleevesless garments of whatever fabric material or color?

Does anyone really presume that a typical and healthy non-airconditioned non-shaded girl or woman would die of heatstroke unless she bared parts or all of her arms with short-sleeved or sleevesless attire?

Do teen-and-collegiate-aged woman softball players enjoyably displaying their cute men-imitating femininity in decent and convenient back-of-head ponytails with long-sleeved baseball shirts and full-length baseball slacks and socks with baseball shoes - vigorously playing a fast-paced and vigorous game of girl's softball - die of heatstroke when seen on cable TV? If not, why not? WHY?

Is there a necessity to over-tan or even sunburn the skin of partially-exposed or totally-exposed female-human arms for the purported and alleged sake of morlock-like/lemmings-plunging-into-the-sea-similar conformity to lewdly-demonic seasonal fashions and styles of abusive sex-objects-for-monetary-greed publishers and producers and studios?

CAN female-human blouses and shirts which absorb very-minute amounts of sweat on completely-covered arms be regularly and easily washed with other sweat-laden laundry (e.g. bras, panties, socks, slacks, etc.) when eventually needed, and clean clothes instead put on and worn?

IS the abstract concept of "modesty" and "decency" at ALL and in ANY CONCEIVABLE way involved in whether or girl or woman covers her arms completely when in general mixed-gender public view, or instead goes around with parts of her naked arms uncovered with short sleeves or even all of her nude arms uncovered with sleeveslessness (no matter what the outside and non-airconditioned temperature is during warm weather in America or Canada of Mexico or Antarctica or in Iran and other countries where Middle-East sharia-like islamic-fundamentalist hijab or burka costumes are customary) in GENERAL-PUBLIC view?

WERE the arms of their great-great-great-great-great-great grandmothers of the Old West and back to the Puritans and pilgrim pioneers covered by LONG sleeved garments? How about the Amish? How about Catholic nuns? If so, WHY? And do not give me the non-acceptable excuse of an alleged oversupply of flies, gnats, or mosquitos!

Generally, the King James and New King James and various other "translations" (questionably associated with the name: "Holy Bible") are rather accurate according to the original Hebrew and Greek words considered inerrant and valid of the Old and the New Testaments of that Bible.

However, for some strange cause, there is a serious discrepancy concerning vital English wording of KJV-type Bibles (and many other modern renditions such as the NIV and TLB) . . . in STARK contrast to the Revised Standard Version and ESV and NASV and Douay-Rheims version of Second Samuel 13 verse 18 -- directly related to and involved with the covering of the female bare arms of a certain women named who was wearing not a "multi-colored robe" but rather something quite different which is defined by scholarly lexicons as a robe or gown or dr

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Picture

    Author

    Jill Connelly is founder of Truth Steps Publishing and creator of Sermon Notes for Kids.

    Archives

    January 2014
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013

    Categories

    All
    Devotional
    Growing In Truth
    Just For Fun
    Just For Kids
    Prayer
    Sermon Notes

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.