Sexy Purity?

This is the follow up to my blog post Modesty Revisited.  I know you may reading the title and thinking that sexy purity is an out and out oxymoron.  For that reason, I followed up the title with a question mark.  Is sexy purity even something that is possible?  Should we push for the idea of sexy purity?  I believe the answer is yes to both questions, but it will take some work to get there.

To begin, we must redefine terms to mean something other than what our culture declares.  What is the meaning of the word sexy?  Meriam-Webster gives two definitions of sexy, and I began to ask why.  When did sexy become a word that means more than one thing?  Is the word sexy an objective word?  Why was my first instinct to look in the dictionary to define the word sexy?  Don't I know what the word means?  I am 36 years old, happily married, and have a child.  Surely I know the meaning of the word sexy.  So, I threw out the meanings found in the dictionary and our culture for my own definition.

In the end, I believe sexy is a completely subjective idea that exists only in the mind of each individual.  In essence, each individual defines what sexy is.  What one person considers sexy, someone else may not.  Yes, there are some people who everyone will say is sexy, but there are those individuals who go against the flow and don't find those people sexy.  I read an article yesterday about a survey done of men and who their perfect woman is.  As expected, most men picked the bombshell type as their desire physically, but when the overall results were in, the girl next door with her personality and charm won out the best girlfriend ideal.  What does this tell us about sexy in our culture?

Obviously sexy must deal with certain aspects of who a person is.  Sexy must have something to do with attractiveness.  It must also have something to do with desire.  But must sexy always have something to do with sex?  That may be a stupid question.  You may be thinking, "Duh!  3/4 of the word is sex!"  But does sexy have to be about sex in the way our world has made it about sex?

In our world, sexy has come to be defined as that quality that makes you want to get naked with someone.  Sorry about the visual, but that is it.  In order to be seen that way, many members of the female persuasion have taken to showing as much nakedness as they can in order to arouse the curiosity of their intended suitor.  These same ladies partake in behavior that they believe will make them more appealing.  To put it in the words of one youth, "Sexy equals doable."  Why must it mean that?

In the end, I believe sexy has come to mean what it does due to a failure in our society.  When sex becomes something you do for fun with whoever you want without a commitment, sexy has no choice but to break down.  At this point, people cease to be people and become menu choices.  People begin to act like the world is one big buffet of people to try and cast aside if you don't like them.  This lack of commitment leads to a breakdown of relationships.  In that context sexy is going to be equated with that quality that gets me into bed with the person I desire to sleep with.

But what if sex were viewed at a higher level? What if sex was the expression of love it was meant to be in a life-long, committed, godly relationship?  What does sexy mean in those parameters?  I believe in that case sexy becomes the quality of an individual that would make them someone you could share your life with.  This isn't a definition of sex as purely carnal pleasure.  This is a definition of sex as that ultimate conduit of intimate communication.  That moment when two souls become one and the needs of each emotionally and physically are met.  That does not happen in a one night stand.  It doesn't happen in a teenage love affair.  It happens in those couples who work hard to be the completion of their partner in every aspect of life.  So what if we defined redefined sexy as the quality or qualities of an individual that make them a person you can share your life with?

All at once, sexy is not about sex because there are couples who cannot have intercourse for various reasons who share their lives and have true intimacy for decades.  I guarantee these couples would believe their spouse is sexy, but they would not be defining sexy as the world defines sexy.  Their definition may be one that says sexy is the quality that makes them complete me.

So why don't we now begin redefining sexy?  Why don't we take back the glorious gift of sexuality from our creator from those who have sought to mar it?  Why can't we start teaching those around us that sexy has nothing to do with lust, nakedness, or lewd behavior and everything to do with pure and godly qualities that make someone a good choice to spend our life with?  If we redefine sexy to mean the quality of an individual that would make them someone you could share your life with, how much more uplifting and inspiring is that to someone you call sexy.  All at once sexy goes from being a derogatory statement of non-personhood to the greatest statement of worth about a person.  I am not suggesting we start calling people sexy.  I am simply working to redefine this aspect of our personhood.

If sexy is defined in this way, you can have sexy purity.  The funny thing most guys don't tell girls is they want to have sex with you, but they want to marry a virgin.  I was youth minister for too long asking the questions during straight talk sessions, and I never once had a guy say I want to marry the girl who slept around.  Without fail, they all wanted a girl who had remained pure.  And if that is their true desire, there is nothing that can make a girl sexy (my new definition) more than purity.

So, while I may have rambled, I do believe sexy purity is possible.  In the next few posts, I hope to explore how those terms can be re-imagined in our churches and our society.  Basically, if we redefine sexy in this way, how does a person act and dress to be the individual of desire?