by Tony Thomas
CNHI
—
While driving through town last week, I passed a middle-aged man doing some repair work at a small business, and he wasn't wearing a shirt.
The sight took my breath away. Appetite, too.
There was also a golfer on my favorite course who was shirtless. The course rules state that shirts must be worn, and the guy teeing off on the 18th hole needed a large one.
Nobody gets too exorcised when a kid decides to shed his shirt, and no rules exist that clearly define the age when shirts should be worn, but overweight men ought to exercise enough discretion to keep the passing masses from upchucking. Right?
Our culture has become way too lax about the way we dress in public, and I’m not just talking about men.
I passed a “lady” in a convenience store who was wearing those new hip-hugger jeans that exposed more flesh than any man needs to see. Her top was as miniscule as a Band-Aid, leaving her midriff fully exposed, and she was pregnant. Having lived through three pregnancies myself, I know that a smart man cuts a pregnant lady an ample amount of slack, but no man wants to see another man’s bride in Kroger with her stretch marks showing.
This problem of exposed flesh is not limited to Indiana. Twenty-five topless women recently paraded on motorbikes and through the streets of Auckland, New Zealand, despite the winter chill and nippy wind. No arrests were made, but 4,000 workers at a nearby labor protest rally were momentarily distracted.
A homeless woman in Munich insists on bathing in the public fountains. She goes by the name of “Billie,” and she’s 44 years old. So far, she’s been arrested 21 times.
And teenagers in Vermont shed their clothes this summer after learning about their history. The village of Brattleboro dates back to 1724 and public nudity isn’t illegal unless “it’s done to arouse sexual gratification.”
Our family has vacationed in Daytona Beach for nearly 30 years. With the passing of time, I have noticed that the swimming attire requires less and less material, thereby exposing more and more flesh. Could I suggest a possible ordinance? “Dental floss is not an accepted substitute for a bathing suit.”
We aren’t the first generation to be exposed to the occasional forced organ recital. Ever see Michelangelo’s David? He could have used an appropriately placed fig leaf at a minimum.
The church in Corinth was reminded by Paul that some parts of the body are indispensable. He adds, however, that the “parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty” (1 Corinthians 12:22, NIV).
Modesty. Now there’s a forgotten virtue. As Monty Hall used to say, "Let's make a deal." Middle-aged and overweight men should keep their “unpresentable” flesh covered, and ladies ought to keep their cleavage to a minimum (top and backside).
Nobody wants to see a plumber. When it comes to attire, less is not always best. Leave something to the imagination.
• Tony Thomas is a church pastor, a high school basketball coach and author of “A Smidgeon of Religion.” He can be reached through the newspaper at ptnews@pharostribune.com.
