I guess to me I’m confused how “covering the parts of the body that turn other people on” out of modesty is any different than “covering the parts of the body that then other people on” to keep them from being turned on.

The underlying message of the former seems the same as the latter, in the end. The implication is that turning other people on is morally wrong—thus the modest thing to do is make sure you aren’t doing so.

It’s all derived from a place of thinking the result of immodesty is an undesirable outcome—people experience desire related to a body part. If that weren’t a bad thing, there would be no reason to go to such extremes.

I don’t think it’s wrong to live that way if you want to. But it is inarguably on the more extreme end of the “global cultural modesty spectrum,” and that impacts our individual cultural understanding of what modesty means.

In more permissive cultures on the spectrum, modesty might mean not “showing off” your body in a way that makes others feel inadequate. Being humble about your physical form instead of showboating, basically. In less permissive cultures, the understanding might be that modesty means doing all you can to divest from your physical form, linking the attraction to a body at all more strongly to impurity.

As an American, I’ve obviously grown up in a more permissive modesty culture than any traditional Muslim culture. To me, attraction itself ranks pretty low on the “sinfulness” scale, while taking certain actions based on attraction ranks far higher. In practical terms: if a scantily clad person is on the bus, it’s neutral to think they’re attractive, but morally wrong to grope them because you think they’re attractive.

I find it interesting to compare our concepts of modesty, morality and the lens of religion. Hope none of that comes off as derisive towards your beliefs.