Fashion, modesty, decency and menswear for women.

After my post yesterday, I'll be exploring the topic further.

.
First, from the current Catechism of the Catholic Church:

.

2521. Purity requires modesty, an integral part of temperance. Modesty protects the intimate center of the person. It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden. It is ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity.

.

2522. Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. Modesty is decency. It inspires ones choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.

.
2523. There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body.... Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

.

The catechism says nothing about menswear on women - or is it implied?
.
I'm beginning to think it may be implied. Compare the CCC citations with a document on the subject of modesty and menswear styles for women, composed by Cardinal Siri in 1960 - the same year Sr. Lucy of Fatima stated the secret was to be opened and read, since it would be better understood at that time. And do recall that the '60's were a time of radical change, and not just in women's fashions.
.
"...Clothes to be modest need not only to cover the body but also not to cling too closely to the body. Now it is true that much feminine clothing today clings closer than do some trousers, but trousers can be made to cling closer, in fact generally they do, so the tight fit of such clothing gives us not less grounds for concern than does exposure of the body. So the immodesty of men's trousers on women is an aspect of the problem which is not to be left out of an over-all judgment upon them, even if it is not to be artificially exaggerated either.
.

However, it is a different aspect of women's wearing of men's trousers which seems to us the gravest. The wearing of men's dress by women affects firstly the woman herself, by changing the feminine psychology proper to women; secondly it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate relationships between the sexes; thirdly it affects the woman as mother of her children by harming her dignity in her children's eyes. Each of these points is to be carefully considered in turn:
.
Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies. - CCC 2523
.
A. MALE DRESS CHANGES THE PSYCHOLOGY OF WOMAN. In truth, the motive impelling women to wear men's dress is always that of imitating, nay, of competing with, the man who is considered stronger, less tied down, more independent. This motivation shows clearly that male dress is the visible aid to bringing about a mental attitude of being "like a man." Secondly, ever since men have been men, the clothing a person wears, demands, imposes and modifies that person's gestures, attitudes and behavior, such that from merely being worn outside, clothing comes to impose a particular frame of mind inside.
.
Then let us add that woman wearing man's dress always more or less indicates her reacting to her femininity as though it is inferiority when in fact it is only diversity. The perversion of her psychology is clear to be seen.
.
These reasons, summing up many more, are enough to warn us how wrongly women are made to think by the wearing of men's dress." - Giuseppe Cardinal Siri, Archbishop of Genoa, 12 June 1960
.
Like I said in an earlier post, I don't really care about this issue - although I don't mind seeing women in Ralph Lauren (photo)... Anyway, I doubt many contemporary women could ever be convinced to go back to house dresses. It seems to me, it is too late, just like the Fatima secret and consecration of Russia - the horse left the stable, the train already left the station. However, I find the Cardinal's warning, as well as the timing of his "notification" to be terribly significant. I can't delve into it at the moment, but I hope to post a thing or two in the days to come.
.
Cardinl Siri was a leading candidate for the papacy in the conclaves which elected John XXIII as well as Paul VI, and I believe those which elected John Paul I and II. Some Sedevacantists believe Siri was indeed elected but shoved aside in favor of John XXIII, I have no interest in that sort of intrigue - way too Ron Howard for me. Suffice it to say, Siri was a very prominent churchman, and his teaching deserving of great esteem and worthy of serious consideration. Likewise, I don't think I should be making fun of people who reject certain contemporary fashions any longer either. My apologies.