Why "dress policing" is sin

Many parents out there who have a daughter want her to dress "modestly", not understanding what modesty is. They sexualize the concept of modesty, whereas modesty is not reliant on the sexualizing nature of anyone's choice of garb.

The Tenth Commandment, in Exodus 20:17, states:

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

The Hebrew word translated "covet" is למחוד (Latin: lachmod) and refers to, in terms of adult sexual entitlement, not simply wanting things from a child, but wanting things from them to the point of seeking to impose said want on them, leading to theft/abuse. Abuse is whatever the victim perceives as such, regardless of age. It says in Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as this is well-pleasing to the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to secure, vulnerable rest in the love and grace of parents, and this meant feeling safe in various stages of undress, many times, in gentle parenting homes, down to full nudity. Punishing this nudity within a family home is a violation of Divine Codified Jurisprudence. The Greek root word translates "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and is one of the Greek root words in the New Testament that refers to the offenses, meaning the torts and damages under the Mosaic Law, as summed up under the New Testament teachings as the slightest of personal slight against a child, and/or her papers or effects. Policing dress is beyond the authority of any parent to set limits about, as abusing or controlling children for a choice to dress in a showy manner is abuse. A young girl has the  right to roam the house completely naked, and no adult in the house has the right to take advantage of the situation.

It says in 1 Timothy 2:9-10 KJV:

In like manner also, that women adorn themselves with modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety, not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array. But (which becometh women respecting godliness) with good works.

This refers to a specific setting - Sunday mass. Women, however, in general, were encouraged not to wear expensive clothing, and instead look plain. However, it was not a man tenet of the church then, and the biblical writers were comfortable with sexual descriptions enough that this would be a sexually laced command if it taught about "covering up lest you incur the lusts of men". Basically, the more expensive your clothing, the more immodest you are, regardless of how much skin is covered up. This commandment did not apply to a family, where wives and children especially wore no clothing at all, and the wife rarely left the house. Think a dress that fits on quickly on a hanger, to just throw on quickly while going out and about with the child. The climate in ancient Israel could get very hot, or very cold, so people dressed accordingly, but there was heat in homes, usually from burning wood.

Modesty wasn't avoiding the natural appearance of the body, but embracing it in an appropriate manner, meaning being free with one's body in a home setting, while wearing plain clothes that don't stand out, brag about class, or are offensive. Modesty was about simply throwing on clothes, and not caring about impressing anyone, as this alone is bragging or entitlement. The best thing to do here is to, yes, just throw on clothes that fit your personal style, as an instant choice. If you are trying to be somebody else with your flashy clothing, that is immodesty. But, even then, this is not a huge command, and simply is a poor statement about yourself as an individual to God. He includes it in the judgment, but it isn't a dealbreaker. Also, certain functions demand fancy clothing, such as dresses and tuxedoes, in which case it is acceptable to dress that way because of the nature of the occasion. Dress to the level appropriate for the venue, and you should be good, but do so in a plain way that does not stand out.

Who is supposed to dress the police of children, namely daughters? Daughters themselves. Children themselves. Parents only when asked "should I wear this?". Plunging neck lines? Short skirts?  Bikinis? Those outfits actually aren't sin if they are the cheap kind you might find at Wal-Mart. Adults are solely responsible for their behavior around a child dressed in showy attire, and if the child at all perceives abuse from them by feeling uncomfortable, unsafe, annoyed, or alarmed, the adult perpetrator and him/her alone is abuse. Children should not be told to "cover up" at home. Perhaps in public, if they have poor social skills to that degree, they should be told to cover up for the sake of the civil authorities. In a private home, anything goes pretty much, and if an adult exploits a child's state of undress, it is their fault, not the child's fault for not "covering up". Nudity in the biblical context was seen as vulnerability, meaning a vulnerability you hide behind closed doors. 

The sexually entitled parents who police the dress of children will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them languish in eternal Hell-fire prepared for Satan and his accomplices. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!