The unmentionable "m" word

Before you figure out what the post is about and quickly exit, let me say that its NOT about what I think people should wear or how long or short skirts should be. The mention of the "m" issue is enough to generate a lively, if not heated, conversation in many circles, which might be why lots of people keep their thoughts on it to themselves.

That being said, the opinions about "m" that I do hear are often in one of two categories.

1. After hearing their thoughts or reading the quotes, I feel like a walking, talking instrument of Satan, an occasion of sin that needs to be swathed in layers of shapeless fabric lest an unsuspecting man be dragged into the pit of hell.............No, they don't come out and say that, but it's a negative, "can't be too careful," burden on the women approach.
2. People should wear whatever they like, whatever is in style; it's up to those around them to keep their minds pure and clean.

Admittedly, the second viewpoint has some appeal. Finding clothes that fit AND I like AND are affordable is hard enough, without also worrying about whether they are "m." But I can't see that this approach is in line with the concern we should have for the souls of others. On the other hand, option #1 seems to insult the beauty and dignity of women and the self-control and integrity of men!

I'm not sure that society has ever had a view of "m" based on a real understanding of women and men and even of humanity in general. For me, some of the most healthy and helpful words about "m" are in Love and Responsibility written by Blessed John Paul II before he became pope. He says -

"What is truly immodest in dress is that which frankly contributes to the deliberate displacement of the true value of the person by sexual values, that which is bound to elicit a reaction to the person as to 'a possible means of obtaining sexual enjoyment' and not 'a possible object of love by reason of his or her personal value.' The principle is simple and obvious, but its application in specific cases depends upon the individual, the milieu, the society. Dress is always a social question, a function of (healthy or unhealthy) social customs. We must simply stress that although considerations of an aesthetic nature may seem to be decisive here they are not and cannot be the only ones; considerations of an ethical nature exist side by side with them. Man, alas, is not such a perfect being that the sight of the body of another person, especially a person of the other sex, can arouse in him merely a disinterested liking which develops into an innocent affection. In practice it also arouses concupiscence, or a wish to enjoy concentrated on sexual values with no regard for the value of the person. And this must be taken into account."

He further writes -

"If then we wish to pass a moral judgment on particular forms of dress we have to start from the particular functions which they serve. When a person uses such a form of dress in accordance with its objective function we cannot claim to see anything immodest in it...Whereas the use of such a costume outside its proper context is immodest...For example, there is nothing immodest about the use of a bathing costume at a bathing place, but to wear it in the street or while out for a walk is contrary to the dictates of modesty."

John Paul II has written so much more that is relevant to the "m" issue - and that goes much deeper - but these quotes are great food for thought and a starting point for getting away from extremes.

One last observation is that, to some degree, everyone probably bases their decisions about "m" on their own experiences, outlook, and temptations (or lack thereof). It's not just that men and women tend to have substantially different outlooks, but this seems to vary a lot even from one individual to another, regardless of gender. For me, this is a reminder to avoid judging people for what they wear and that it's worth going through the extra inconvenience of trying to be "m" out of love for others.