For your daughter: Balancing modesty and bodily autonomy rights

 Many pro-spanking parents love to joke about their teenage daughter and what she likes to wear, and shaming her for her choice to dress to impress. Proper Christian garb is a careful balance between modesty and bodily autonomy rights.

Modesty is a biblical concept. It says in 1 Timothy 2:9 

In like manner also, women adorn themselves in modest apparel, shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broiled hair, gold, or pearls.

Note the examples given. We are talking about a ritzy woman who likes to wear fancy gowns, pearls, or have their hair in ribbons, bows, or having big earrings. Skipping this command alone will not land you in Hell, and the offense is only activated when someone voices concern in a moral legal statement under Christian law stating that "All that gold around her neck, it just jumps out at you. Too busy." However, it is a good idea to dress modestly.

However, modest dress and chaste dress are two different things. The Greek root word denoting fornication in the New Testament is πορνεία (Latin: porneia) and refers to sexual desire being imposed on an individual outside of marriage, and any adult sexual entitlement imposed on a child. This is a lift-up word that makes relevant ALL of the sex crime statutes under the Mosaic Law, in spirit, to the Christian reader. The New Testament serves as a device to transport the Law to our modern times.

Children in the biblical context were naked, meaning they rarely had clothes on. The two main modes children were in involved playing aside of the mother outside, naked, or being in the house naked. The other mode was the child being wrapped in cloth, and carried by a papoose bag on the mother's back.

Nudity within a family home was not discouraged, and in fact was the norm, particularly for wives and children, as the summers could get very hot. This goes to show that child nudity is not a sin, but exploiting it is sin, and is abuse. See Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

 The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and refers to "stirring up" or "upbraiding" children, referring to legal damages against children, namely the slightest of personal slights imposed by a parent or other adult that is committed with willful or reckless intent. If she felt reminded of her body due to a parent saying "wear something different. I don't want you going out looking like that", or else simply being offended by the remark.

The ides is for young girls to wear whatever they want, dress however they wish, and not have adults make a big fuss over it either way. However, at the same time, within Christian circles, I might add that I'd encourage a more modest wardrobe, in that dress might be attractive, but is plain in nature, meaning no fancy chains or that sort of things that could be a distraction to how God naturally created you. Yes, to be obvious, we need to wear clothes, but certain clothes stand out more than others. This is something a girl should be convicted of herself, by seeing parents dress that way. Some children with autism naturally seek to appear plain...Plain does not necessarily mean dress like the Amish, but you get the point when I mention them - fake appearances are what is banned, nor showy attire. Also, it isn't a major commandment. If an adult sees a young girl in showy attire, and you feel sexually threatened, that alone reeks of entitlement. As for me, I like what I see, going out and about.

Let the sexist, misogynistic parents BURN! WE at conservatism hate sexism and misogyny too. Just in an unspoken way. Ultimately, adults are at fault, and all except us few gentle parents will BURN!