The Art of Selling Modesty

The Short of It

The book Sexy Girls: How Hot is Too Hot?:

1. Shows that while the principles included in the book are good, they can’t be put into practice, even by the book’s publisher. This models for the reader that it is enough just to concur with the themes presented in the book, that it’s not necessary to change our behavior. (See James 1:23-24.)

2. It can put a “stumbling block” in the way of unsuspecting guys who happen to see this book on Amazon or at the Christian bookstore. (See Matt. 18:6.)

3. It sets a dangerous precedent for book publishers: If it’s shown that using a “sexy girl” on the cover of a book boosts sales and nobody in the Christian community challenges that book’s cover, then it paves the way for other book publishers to adopt similar techniques to sell their materials.

The Long of It

In the matter of 24 hours, eight reviews were added to Amazon on a book that had previously received little attention on the site. Sure, there'd been a few reviews previously posted, but nothing like what ensued during this seemingly small time period.

Nothing short of controversy could spur on such an onslaught of comments. In this case it was a couple reviews questioning the appropriateness of the book's cover. A Christian book written by a Christian author and published by a Christian book publisher, it features the torso of a woman dressed in a tube top. And, while part of the book's title, placed in a black box, covers her exposed mid-drift, the picture does well to accentuate her well defined shoulders and hint at her cleavage, while making sure part of this headless, faceless woman's stomach peeks out at us. The book, Sexy Girls: How Hot Is Too Hot?, was written by best-selling author Hayley DiMarco and published by Hungry Planet. The goal of the work: To teach teenage girls the importance of modesty.

What's clear from the Amazon debate is that Christian audiences are split over the appropriateness of this book's cover image. Some have no qualms with picture. Others, such as me, my husband, several family members, and friends, are concerned about the impact of such a visual image. Still others have concerns over its appropriateness, yet have embraced the work despite this due to its inner message. In an email I received from a large Christian bookstore chain in response to my concerns, I was told this:

I reviewed this book for our buyer before it was published and ame to the same conclusion that you did. In fact, I will quote rom the first paragraph of my review: "The content of this book is fine and is very much needed. I only wish the title and cover at were different. I'm sure that's done for the purpose of getting teenage girls to pick it up and read it, but the suggestive cover art and title actually do what the author is trying to get the female reader not to do."

There is some consensus that if the girl on the cover were dressed appropriately, those for whom the book is written wouldn't pick it up to look through it or buy and read it. So even though I agree with your assessment of the cover art, we believe that it is so important to get the message of the book to girls who are tempted to dress like this that we are carrying it in our stores.

In an email two of my female friends received in response to their concerns over the cover's appropriateness, the publisher had this to say:

Regarding the cover, let's see if we can replicate the issue of "using sex" to sell books but, this time, let's replace the topic of modesty with one that might have less static for you: men that are unfaithful. If we at Hungry Planet were ever to do a book on this topic, we would never use a cover of a man not cheating on his wife. "The Glory of a Faithful Husband" for example would not be an effective title nor would an accompanying cover depicting a man snuggling up to his wife on the couch with a bowl of popcorn watching a movie for a book on infidelity. We package books that attempt to address people's immediate or looming problems. Instead of the "glory" title, we would deem the titles, "Cheating Husbands" or "How Men Destroy Their Marriages" much more effective along with a cover that depicts a man slipping into a hotel room with a strange woman (biblical term). Now, when using this alternate topic and example, I can't imagine a reasonable person expressing grave concern that the cover I've described is endorsing infidelity. Rather, we'd be using effective imagery to convey the nature of the problem in one quick visual, or "aha!" moment. No one would have a problem with using a picture of infidelity to "sell a book" on the topic of infidelity.

The other thing to remember about "Sexy Girls" is it is written for a female audience. If we were using sex to sell this book, we would have a hunky Abercrombie & Fitch guy on the cover to use sex to sell. So in both these cases, those that are initially objecting to the cover are not looking at it in context. Instead, the concerns being raised from a few Christian men are from knee-jerk reactions to the imagery which just proves Hayley DiMarco's main point in the book that men are visual creatures.

Hmmm. For those of us who are concerned with the cover's appropriateness, let's examine the publisher's argument point by point to see if it holds up.

First, we're told, "We package books that attempt to address people's immediate or looming problems. Instead of the 'glory' title, we would deem the titles, 'Cheating Husbands' or 'How Men Destroy Their Marriages' much more effective along with a cover that depicts a man slipping into a hotel room with a strange woman." In today's society modesty and unfaithfulness are indeed "looming problems." However, so is pornography. If we're to follow the publisher's logic, then would a pornographic picture on the front of a book addressing the problems of pornography be appropriate because in the publisher's words, it would "be using effective imagery to convey the nature of the problem in one quick visual, or 'aha!' moment"? Should we sell such a book in our Christian bookstores?

The question also needs to be raised whether using less "obvious" imagery on the front of books such as Lisa Bevere's Kissed the Girls and Made Them Cry or Joshua Harris' Sex Is Not the Problem, Lust Is has hindered their messages of sexual purity from being communicated, not to mention reduced their book sales.

Second, we're reminded that Sexy Girls is targeted to the female audience. Okay, so the writer and the publisher are targeting teenage girls. Therefore, they've determined that the cover is appropriate. Yet, I'm left to wonder this: Are teenage girls the only ones who lay eyes on the cover? Or, has this cover which is unashamedly displayed in Christian bookstores across the U.S. suddenly made these stores an unsafe haven for men? Will men now need to walk through what used to be a safe place on guard against the sexual immodesty of this cover? Because, after all, as DiMarco tells teen girls on page 32 of this book:

All men are attracted by different parts of your body that you may or may not have exposed. They aren't all sex-crazed--well, maybe they are, but it's natural to some extent. I mean, they have these things called hormones, which do somewhat color how guys see the world, and by that I mean your body. So whether you are targeting them or not, they are looking.

So, although DiMarco and her publishers are not targeting this book to guys, I bet you that guys are looking and, because they are as DiMarco says "visual creatures" who "are turned on by what they see" (p. 33), this book has the ability to tempt a man to lust.

Third, we're told that, "If we were using sex to sell this book, we would have a hunky Abercrombie & Fitch guy on the cover to use sex to sell." The publishers are asking us to believe that female sexuality is not something used to sell products to females. I beg to differ.

As a former television and film graduate student, I was taught that in film there's a technique of focusing on part of the woman, rather than the woman as a whole. This is referred to by feminist film scholar Laura Mulvey as "the gaze"; a technique that put renowned filmmakers such as Alfred Hitcock under fire for his continued use of it. Defined as the camera's eye being that of the male viewpoint, shots are targeted to portray the woman as less than human; instead as an object made up of parts.

We see this technique employed today in television commercials, not to simply sell products to men, but instead to sell products to women. Victoria's Secret may show the woman as a whole, however the emphasis is on the woman's body, specifically the stomach, breasts, and thighs. Additionally, many commercials for beauty products such as lotion and body wash incorporate shots of women's legs, bare backs, and hints at their chests. These television advertisements rarely show the woman as a whole individual without also emphasizing her parts as means of displaying her sexuality. In the secular community it is recognized as an attempt to use sexuality to grab the viewer's attention and sell a particular product; in both of these examples products that were created for and are marketed to women.

Fourth, the publisher writes, "So in both these cases, those that are initially objecting to the cover are not looking at it in context. Instead, the concerns being raised from a few Christian men are from knee-jerk reactions to the imagery which just proves Hayley DiMarco's main point in the book that men are visual creatures."

One, I read the book, cover to cover. Two, I'm not sure why my female friends who wrote the publisher, as well as myself, fit into the category of "a few Christian men." We are women who are raising our concerns. The inclusion of this statement from the publisher shows that they are ignoring the concerns from women and failing to acknowledge that it's not simply men who have a problem with this cover.

In conclusion, it's clear from the publisher's email that they recognize this cover displays immodesty. In admitting that they're using what they term "effective imagery to convey the nature of the problem in one quick visual, or 'aha!' moment," they're admitting that they know the picture portrays sexual immodesty. Let's look at what DiMarco has to say about those who recognize the power of sexual immodesty, yet to choose to use it anyway:

We can't mess around with the spirits and the hearts of those around us. It just isn't holy, and it most certainly isn't safe. Jesus makes it pretty clear that to do so carries a terrible price. He says 'woe' to those who are the stumbling block.Woe! Not a thing to play around with. Before you read this, you had the excuse of ignorance. You don't have to worry about being in deep spiritual trouble, because you didn't know what you were doing, and God judges your heart and motives. But now that you do get it, the rules have changed. Now you are esponsible for how you dress... You can no longer make yourself a stumbling block to the men in your path. If you do, woe to you! (p. 95)

From the content of this book it's clear that the author and the publisher are well aware of the impact sexual immodesty has on men in general. Yet, they justify their cover choice, failing to admit that by using this cover and placing it in Christian bookstores, sending it to male editors for promotion, encouraging male youth pastors to give it to the girls in their churches, they've put a stumbling block in the paths of these men. In this case, the means should not justify the ends.

It's not my intention to see the content of this message not reach teen girls. Instead my motivation in writing this and other commentary on the book is to see it not reach audiences with its current cover. The author and publisher need to be held accountable for going against the very message they claim to promote.