As far as Bais Ya’akov and the “frum” world being guilty of this, I had several female friends who went to Bais Ya’akov, and physical beauty is also strongly emphasized. One particular friend of mine was talking about shidduch in that particular type of Orthodox world (I am Sephardic and have less familiarity with that type of Orthodoxy) and she mentioned that if the mother isn’t still a size 2 that a lot of times the girl will be passed over. While I approve of modest dress, to me the point of dressing modestly is to de-emphasize the importance of physical beauty and remind us that internal and spiritual beauty is enduring and what we should be seeking.

While I strongly approve of educating women in matters of Torah and Halakhah, my fear (based on the observations of my female friends) is that finding a husband is still more important than studying the Law for the sake of the Law and of God. Having a properly “frum” girl who knows her stuff is a pre-requesite for marriage. I personally care a great deal more for her intention for learning, not just that she has learned.

Ori: Yet the evidence is that many women, including capable ones (my boss, the professor dovid wrote about in comment 20, etc.) do that. Why do you think that is?

Dr. Hall, I agree that there are “tznuis” issues in the Orthodox community (of course, a non-Jew would have absolutely no idea what we’re complaining about!). If I understand your argument correctly, though, it would seem that the problem is not so much with frum women as with frum men’s perception of woman. The solution would not be to encourage women to take pride in their intellectual development but to encourage men to value women for their intellect. Also, why would this be a problem in the MO world, where I’m sure you’d agree that women are encouraged to develop their intellect (and many do attend Gemara shiurim and Ivy League universities)?

Personally, I think the problem is that many people lack an appreciation of what is an “ikar” (of primary importance) and what is a “tafel” (of secondary importance). Too many people focus on “chitzonius” (external qualities) rather than on “pnimius” (internal qualities). If women would sense that men value solid “hashkafos” and spiritual attainments over looks, they would be less inclined to dress in a manner that calls attention to themselves.

Another VERY IMPORTANT POINT is that the definition of what constitutes “inappropriate conduct” between men and women has changed dramatically.

today, it is routine for men to cohabit with “dates” that they have just met and that they barely know–in fact, in some quarters, this is the expected behavior. The Navy has redesigned its ships to accomodate a 10% rate of pregnancy among its Navy women.

Advertising today and routine radio programming discuss topics that would have been absolutely verboten years ago.

So, today, “sexual assault” takes on a very narrow definition–actual physical violence. The other, softer pressures that are placed upon women are redefined as “consensual.”

The many “sexual harrassment” scandals that have rocked Wall Street and Corporate America, even including the “Sexual Harrasser-in Chief” Bill Clinton, are only the tip of the iceberg on what is really going on below the surface.

If I were a woman attempting to function normally in today’s Sodomite degenerate society, I would do my best to conceal my physical attributes with the most modest clothing I could find.

A woman needs to be attractive to her husband, and nobody else–period!

“By “guilty of this” I was referring to the fact that in some of our girls’ schools and our contemporary writings, women’s intellectual development is downgraded.”

Thank you for your explanation. However, I’m still not sure who you’re referring to here to be honest. To the best of my knowledge in the Chareidi world the push has been in the opposite direction. They focus more n academics in the Beis Yaakovs than ever before and there’s alot of complaining about that. Almost every girl attends seminary in EY nowadays, which is a marked difference from years past. Perhaps you’re referring to something else. I’m confused.

I did not try to argue that modesty isn’t a good thing for other reasons - merely that the danger argument is not very strong. Personal dignity is another matter, one that I do not consider myself qualified to comment on (I think it’s subjective).

Personally, I dislike feeling attracted to women who aren’t Teresa. It distracts me, and makes me feel like I’m being unfaithful to my wife. Yet I don’t think I have a right to expect the women I work with to accommodate me in the way they dress. The problem is mine to deal with.

“Official statistics only record those cases that have been reported.”

A well-designed survey does a better job of estimating actual rates of crime. The US government has been doing such surveys for a long time:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/viortrdtab.htm

While they do not report state-by-state statistics (and indeed it is probably difficult for a national survey to do so in small states), it does show that sexual assault rates have declined by over 80% since the 1970s. I don’t think that the rate of alluring dress has declined by anything close to that amount, if indeed it has at all.

“Nobody would argue that a woman who walks alone at night in central park is more likely to be raped than one who is walking a big, mean dog or who carries a weapons.”

That same government survey reported that about 70% of female sexual assault victims were assaulted by someone they knew — “an intimate, other relative, a friend or an acquaintance”.

“Unfortunately, much of the world values women only for their ability to catch a man—and the frum world is not innocent in this.”

“I’m curious what you mean by this? What evidence do you see that suggests that the frum world is guilty of this? [Also please define “Frum” – Mo, Chareidi?]”

By “frum” I meant Orthodox. By “guilty of this” I was referring to the fact that in some of our girls’ schools and our contemporary writings, women’s intellectual development is downgraded. My argument was that people who are proud of their intellectual accomplishments don’t feel even the internal need to look outwardly alluring. (I’m not saying that we should throw every Beit Yaakov student into a gemara shiur or push them to apply to Ivy League colleges. But every Jew, male and female, should be encouraged to develop intellectually and we should make the point clear that it is not non-tzniut to learn. No Torah hashgafah values ignorance!)

O.K., let’s get back to basics.

A man or woman who has self respect and a sense of dignity will wear clothing that conceals the physical body that he has in common with the animal world.

A person who takes off his clothing is giving us all a message that he sees no great difference between him(her)self and a horse!

Of course, this doesn’t mean that being scantily dressed is a good thing. Most people who don’t wear seat belts don’t get into accidents. Most babies who sleep on their tummies do not get SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). We still wear seat belts and put our babies to sleep on their backs.

Official statistics only record those cases that have been reported. There are numerous cases that are not reported–for obvious reasons.

Just use a little common sense!

But I have seen a female accounting professor (married with a newly born baby), dress in an alluring manner.

1. The chance that a particular man will become a potential rapist.
2. The chance that a potential rapist will choose a particular woman.

The state statistics Charles B. Hall cites are mostly affected by #1. Alaska probably has more rapes because of the difficulty in law enforcement with such a low population density.

We can argue whether the overall level of modesty affects this factor, but the individual contribution of each woman is negligible either way.

#2 is more likely to be affected by a woman’s personal behavior. Nobody would argue that a woman who walks alone at night in central park is more likely to be raped than one who is walking a big, mean dog or who carries a weapons.

The level of modesty may also have an effect here. Would Moshe Anas be more likely to rape a woman who is dressed modestly, or one that shows a lot of skin? I have a naive assumption, but I’d be interested in seeing research.

Ok, most women who are scantily dressed are not sexually assaulted.

Looking at the rates of sexual assaults in the US, New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut have three of the four lowest rates among the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Is there really significantly more alluring dress among women around here? Compared to Alaska, which has by far the higest rates? Furthermore, the rates have dropped substatntially in the US since the early 1990s. Did women in the general population really start dressing more modestly starting in 1993? This may be worthy of further study, but I would hesitate to say that this is empirical proof of HaShem’s ways in this matter. There is perfectly adequate support for modesty in our tradition without appealing either to fear or to statistics.

“Unfortunately, much of the world values women only for their ability to catch a man—and the frum world is not innocent in this.”

I’m curious what you mean by this? What evidence do you see that suggests that the frum world is guilty of this? [Also please define "Frum" - Mo, Chareidi?]

Thank you in advance

I’m suprised at your comment:
“While I certainly don’t support women (or men) dressing in alluring manners, plenty of modestly dressed women have been attacked on dates or while walking down the street.”

We’re talking statistical proabilities here. Your exceptions prove the rule!

I”ve never seen a female medical school professor dress in an alluring manner. Women who are valued for their brains don’t need to. Unfortunately, much of the world values women only for their ability to catch a man — and the frum world is not innocent in this.

“influenced by what they see around them”

When a major circulation newspaper in New York City can put full color photographs of scantily clad women — or even totally naked people in suggestive positions — on their front page and not get a peep on protest as a result, we can see how far we have slid. Was it exempt from criticism because it supports conservative political causes?

“immodest dress will attract violence in the worst case”

While I certainly don’t support women (or men) dressing in alluring manners, plenty of modestly dressed women have been attacked on dates or while walking down the street.

The Talmud tells us that someone who exposes him(her)self to danger will attract danger. It is a law of cause and effect.

It is no justification of violent and criminal behavior to observe that immodest dress will attract violence in the worst case, and bring sin and tragedy on the Jewish People in the best case.

In all cases, the immodest person will be punished, in this world or the next.

The guy can be admonished for putting himself in such a dagerous situation. However, his irresponsibility does not diminish the crime of the mugger, and the criminal should not get any leniencies based on his victim’s irresponsibility.

“But Judge, he was *asking* to be mugged.”

Ream argues “I suppose I’d feel better about the modesty movement if it had its parallel in the world of men.” Well, in Judaism it does. Modesty of dress and behaviour are also incumbent on men. It would be a shame if we lost sight of that.

No one would argue that the right to say no to sex isn’t a good thing. And surely we can agree that talking to girls about the value of their bodies, and their selves, is a welcome cultural shift. But when Shalit argues that “many of the problems we hear about today — sexual harassment, date rape . . . are connected to our culture’s attack on modesty,” she is making a dangerous leap.

It’s not a lack of female modesty but a sense of male entitlement that leads to sexual violence. And the idea that we women can change men’s behavior by changing our clothes is not only disconcerting, it has been debunked. As millions of women know all too well, no one ever avoided a rape by wearing a longer skirt.

Ms. Ream’s argument rejecting the assertation that modesty can prevent date rape and sexual harassment is a bit too skimpy (pardon the pun) to be taken seriously. If it is true that the cause of date rape and sexual harassment is male entitlement, then the cause of that entitlement is, in part, female behavior that seems to suggest that such entitlement will at least be tolerated if not outright condoned. It’s hard to argue that a male sense of entitlement is the root of all evil when it comes to male-female relations when women not only send inappropriate visual cues to men, but oftentimes confirm such cues with immodest activities with men.

When women come to work or go on a date with virtually everything “on display” and then tell men “look but don’t touch” it’s not all that surprising that some men cross the line. Of course that does not absolve the man who commits date rape, not in the slightest. But such a woman cannot claim to be 100% innocent either. If your clothing (or lack there of) say “YES!” but your mouth says “no” you’re sending mixed signals that are bound to attract men with little self control and few if any redeeming values.