Summer White


We love summer!  I found this white hat with a navy blue ribbon at Target this weekend!  Aside from sunscreen or sunblock, a hat is absolutely necessary in the scorching heat of Texas, and since we spend a lot of time in the water all summer long, a hat protects from age-spots.


I’ve always been pale… and have at times, fallen prey to the temptation to use a tanner lotion or self-tanner cream.  The best one I’ve found is St. Topez, in Medium to Dark, I’ve used it almost every summer for a few years now, and it creates a natural looking bronze.

This summer, however, I’m going to embrace the pale!  Enough with the fake tans… I really like my white skin haha.

White is in this summer right?

Behold, the summer white! 🙂


  1. Since I have been fighting skin cancer since I was 40, I agree sunscreen is necessary. The hat will give you protection and looks very stylish on you.

  2. Oh wow!!! I’m so sorry! Yes, that’s the bad part of being white right? The higher risk of skin cancer…. I love hats!!! And they really do make an outfit.

  3. You look divine in a hat. My youngest daughter has always avoided the sun. The lighter the better for her. She slathers on the SPF 50. She looks really cute in a hat too. I noticed the hatband complements the stripes of top or dress. The subtle tie at the bodice really sets it off. No surprise from a fashionista like you. 😉

  4. That’s a great outfit, Dragonfly girl! 🙂
    You look travel-ready, too. Somewhere like Hawaii, or the Florida Keys.

  5. I do love a good hat! It’s a great look you’ve created here.

    I wonder if I could offer you a word – woman to woman – for your consideration? I can tell that you really pour your heart and passion into this blog. But I think the combination of cleavage-revealing shots as well as candid details about your sex life is unkind to the men who read here, and their wives. And I don’t think that is fitting for a Christian woman.
    I’m not trying to suggest that you are responsible for their thoughts, or even if they read your blog at all. Just that since you know men read here, perhaps a bit more modesty in both your pictures and topics would be in order?
    That’s my 2c – take it or leave it 🙂

  6. I don’t usually write details of my sex life, no where is it narrated or described with details like a romance novel would… sorry if my posts of marriage and sex have offended you in some way. I do try to bring up topics like the post I did on questions husbands and wives should feel completely comfortable talking to each other about, I’ve seen many other Christian women write their own books on these things, and including not details, but hints of their own sex lives being good in their books. It’s setting an example in a way, and in order to be able to write about things like this, you have to had mastered something or have become good enough at something that you feel like you can write about it for other people to benefit from. Our marriage is something that I feel confident writing about. Sex (the way it should be perceived in marriage) is something I feel very confident in writing about as well. We have been very blessed, even in the first few months of our marriage, I asked God to make our sex life blossom, to really bless it. And it has, and we’ve reaped the benefits of it impacting our marriage (because a sex life good or bad, will always be the heart of a marriage).

    Modesty is a different topic, it’s so different for everyone, and I think it’s a personal conviction issue maybe that we really cannot put onto others. At the same time, I understand modesty is necessary. Even the issues of bathing suits is really tricky and personal! It’s also contextual. Seeing a woman in a bikini when she’s in the surroundings of many of women being in bikinis at a waterpark or beach isn’t as drastic as seeing her alone in a bikini. The aforementioned situation is where she is likely to be overlooked, or just might be looked at as someone who looks fit. But alone, when no one else is wearing a swimsuit or beach clothes, it’s much more noticeable and she would stand out more. This dress is actually a swimsuit cover up dress that I do wear to the beach or waterpark. So in the setting, it’s actually more modest than a regular swimsuit or bikini. But taken away from that context, I can see what you mean about being very revealing.

  7. Also, whenever my husband and I go out, no matter what I’m wearing, if it’s feminine enough, or a dress, (most of which I have do not show any cleavage at all and have a much higher cut line), there are always men that still completely stare at me when we’re walking by. My husband notices and tells me lol… and it is not because of cleavage or immodesty (because it usually happens when there is none at all showing). I could see it would feel threatening to their wives 😦 but it happens all the time.

  8. A friend of mine was in Muscat, Oman a couple of weeks ago, dressed to the nines in flowing, white gauzey stuff, topped with a large white hat. She’s a very, very fair northern Euro redhead: her skin is almost translucent. Air temperature 112F. So her skin was glistening and running with perspiration.

    While looking for an Portuguese fort old fort she walked up to a cop and, in perfect Arabic, asked for directions. He was shaken and startled; thought she was a ghost.

    I’m all for big hats, if only to send them sailing across the room when back inside.

    Also, not being an anti-sex Christian, I wasn’t in the slightest embarrassed by the excellent photos. Femininity is not corruption. Corruption lives only in the heart, and accrues to some irrespective of what they wear.

    You can just see the heat in this photograph. Now THAT’S hot. I really cannot believe that we send men out humping 80 pounds of gear to fight wars in this. But it certainly explains why most of the locals prefer to have us do it for them.


  9. Oh wow!!! She sounds like a vision! There is something about white clothing that looks so becoming in the summer. How fascinating she can speak perfect Arabic! That is one of the most difficult languages correct? She just sounds beautiful and fascinating.

    And yes, I cannot imagine trying to fight wars or street fights while wearing extra weight in the heat. My husband does that – all the extra things he has to wear for his police work weigh a lot – he even is able to swim in it and keep from drowning… even keep another person from drowning with all of it on. Hard core. He absolutely loves it though… gives him a rush to chase people, get in fights, etc.

  10. I’m starting to really appreciate the attitude of indifference to criticism online. To not be bothered or upset with any of it… even with real trolls. Criticism can be constructive or destructive, but when it’s online, there’s a personal aspect of it missing that makes it hard to trust or in-genuine.

    I once heard a sermon from Chuck Swindoll (really love his work), about how one cannot really offer criticism or rebuke or correction to someone, without being the proper person to do so – mostly because of the lack of a real relationship. I can think of times I’ve seen people brutally criticized, and it was always by people who either 1) had something personal against them already, 2) felt threatened by them or insecure around them, or 3) didn’t truly know them. It was sometimes a combination of all three going on in the background. No amount of positive, constructive criticism can come from that kind of mental perspective, even if the person tries to clout their intentions as well-meaning. So Chuck Swindoll basically said, if it’s not someone you’re close to, someone who you feel real genuine care and love for, someone that you actually KNOW, then it is not your place.

  11. Thanks for replying 🙂
    I haven’t felt offended by any of your posts, I just felt that they were quite revealing. Modesty is not just about what you wear physically, it is also an attitude.

    As mentioned above, you can take or leave my thoughts on this.
    I am not a concern troll, as implied below.

    I realise we’re not close, Dragonfly, but this is something I’ve been thinking for a while, and I felt that it would be better to just say something to you. Especially since we are both sisters in Christ.
    “Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses.” Proverbs 27:6

  12. See that’s the thing though… about criticism online… you just don’t know how it will be received. It’s like going to someone’s site, seeing that it is a Christian woman, and picking her apart in a coment meant to “help” her, but there is no gurantee that you or your words will actually help at all… and according to Swindoll, usually it’s not an outsider’s place to do something like that. Not saying you don’t have valid points, and I actually do appreciate criticism… but I’ve seen the reasoning behind how concern trolling (especially by women, it is usually by women) is destructive. It’s like going to a woman’s site, seeing she’s Christian, finding something that she’s failing in – it doesn’t matter, it could be as sensitive a topic as her weight. And then remark to her that she is failing as a wife and mother, that she really *should* lose that 20-30 extra pounds that she’s been holding on to for far too long. Or telling her that doesn’t she think she’s being quite mean to her husband, by making it harder for him to be attracted to her sexually, or making it easier for him to be tempted to lust after other women? It might all be true, but pointing it out in a comment on her blog, not done in an email privately, is probably not helpful… Swindoll actually said it was “hurtful.”

    That kind of issue is just as sensitive as modesty, and just as personal… plus it is based on personal conviction, which we should not enforce on others. Going to a woman’s site that I have absolutely no relationship with at all even in real life, does not give me license to tell her what she’s doing wrong or failing in. I could do it, I could use that “freedom” as a Christian, but would it really be helpful coming from a stranger, online? Someone who is no value in her life whatsoever, or do you think she’d be wise to listen to someone closer? Swindoll clearly preached that the criticism being received well should be the ultimate goal… the wounds from a friend can be trusted thing only goes so far, especially with a stranger picking apart a woman online just because they can.

    Not saying you’re wrong, just trying to point out how your criticism will not always be received well, and for good reason. A blog is like someone’s living room… so it’s like you are coming into a living room and criticising your hostess to her face, except not because online, you’re safe from seeing their reaction behind your computer.

    *An edit: The reason why it’s called concern trolling is because of how this kind of criticism is done in public, in a comment that is due to embarrass your hostess because instead of rebuking in private, or by someone who is the proper close person to do so (as per Swindoll), the concern troll is humiliating the hostess – which is the opposite of said “concern.” A person who is truly concerned would confront in private. Again with the living room example, no one that actually cares about their hostess would be so rude as to insult her in front of all her guests while she was throwing a party or get-together, if they were truly concerned, they would find a way to get her alone, in private, to have their word with her “woman to woman,” in the very least, to preserve her dignity and respect, and to keep her from being humiliated in front of her other guests (other people reading her blog). A person that is truly concerned would not confront her on one of her failings in her living room, in front of her guests at a party, with a microphone (because anyone can read comments). It just comes down to manners and kindness… and real concern.

  13. I didn’t mean to hurt or embarrass you, but point taken, I should have emailed you about it instead.
    It’s interesting that your view your blog as your living room. I view my blog more like I am writing a book or a magazine. It’s a place for me to think things through, and therefore I welcome any thoughtful criticism. My view is that if I am prepared to discuss something in public, I should also be prepared to defend it in public. But I guess different blogs have different purposes, with different kinds of people behind them.

  14. Sure, but you learn to handle it with aplomb and befriend the women and ignore the men. Its your social duty as a cutie to be nice about it. It inspires others. This is only going to increase as you age if you stay fit and other women don’t. I intend to be a fit grandma 😉

    I applaud the hat! I took one up a couple years back and white on blondes with blue eyes really is stunning. Get your glamour sunglasses and people will be calling you a movie star 🙂 If there’s one giveaway of my age, its sun damage to my face. I grew up on the beach, but I’ve learned to be more protective of my daughter’s face: she’s prettier 😉

  15. Social media seems to enable, without the filtering that we practice IRL, a sporting outlook on capricious outrage. Half the world turns into a Church Lady, defining for others what is wrong with them (thereby elevating themselves to postures of superior virtue).

    Then social media convinces us we should care. Greg Gutfeld recently wrote about this, noting that actually, others’ opinions are worth far less than we think they are.

    “Social Network Dysmorphia”:

  16. BuenaVista,
    You commented that as you aren’t an anti-sex Christian, you weren’t embarrassed by these photos.
    So you note that there is something sexual about the photos…
    I am simply pointing out that yes, there is something sexual about the photos, and that it’s not appropriate for a public blog.

  17. I also wanted to add that I haven’t come here for the purpose of fault finding and then publicly humiliating you. I’ve been reading along for a while and have left several positive comments on other posts.
    I guess I considered myself a “blogging friend” and that’s why I felt comfortable saying what I did (although, as noted above, I should have done so privately).

  18. Yes, I’ve learned a lot through receiving online criticism, even the hate mail… namely, that you just really cannot believe, think about, or take to heart much of the online criticism you get about you personally. My self worth isn’t based on my performance (success) or on what other people think… their approval. It’s based on being a daughter of God who created me. Even though I fail sometimes, I understand His forgiveness and grace and love, and then I can be more humble but also have real strength.

  19. Air raid siren: two, two two straw men in one! As a personal favor, a straw man argument is refuting a principle that no one raised. We have a president who is compulsive about this. So, it seems, are you.

    1. Nothing the Dragonfly said, here, or ever, suggests that sexuality has a place except within marriage. So your little “get your burka on, heathen kafir” commentary has nothing to do with what she has written.

    2. Nothing I said supports your comment that I found them “sexual.” I found them feminine. Oh, and by them, I guess I should be plain, for you. I refer to the photos, not the boys in the photos.

    All projection, all the time, eh?

    You’re just wandering around the internet tut-tutting and shaming people for not complying with your personal preferences. Have a ball. Let’s be real, though, and not confuse scolding with higher order activities, such as thinking and reasoning.

  20. On the “hate mail”, well, a single man receives hate mail from time to time. But I always wish to point out, in response, and before my stronger impulse to discretion kicks in, “Well, okay. But for some reason it was important for you to continue the conversation. Why is that?”

    Jenny Holzer: “Protect me from what I want.”

  21. “1) Be kind and generous to other women”

    Full disclosure, I kind of suck at that. 😛
    I’ve had to program an override into my computer that doctors my responses. For example, what I said above:
    “That’s a great outfit, Dragonfly girl! 🙂
    You look travel-ready, too. Somewhere like Hawaii, or the Florida Keys.”

    …came out of the program, with all the other stuff taken out. The original post was actually:

    “OMG! I can’t believe how cute this bitch is. Is she breastfeeding? I looked like that in my 20s when I was breastfeeding…I want to look like that again. And look at that perfect skin. I want to hate her but she’s just too nice and agreeable. Geez. That’s a great outfit,
    she looks like a movie star going to Hawaii, or the Florida Keys or something.”


  22. I read your blog and, as a Christian man, I don’t find either the posts or the photos unkind.

    In order for Christians to be relevant and real online they have to write about what interests them without trying too hard to conform to some subjective standard of what should/should not appear on a Christian’s blog.

  23. Thanks, I know what a straw man is. (And I have no president!)

    People make arguments with words, and they also make arguments with their actions. It was the latter I was addressing.

    1. If her pictures are sexual in nature (as I believe they are), then her actions in posting them here suggest that she does think her sexuality has a place in the public sphere. Notice, I said her actions suggest this, not that she has argued this with words!

    2. If you don’t find the photos at all sexual, then how is it at all relevant that you “are not an anti-sex Christian”?

    See, I can logic too!

    And I certainly don’t wander around the internet tut tutting. As I mentioned above, I’ve been reading Dragonfly’s blog for most of this year, and the majority of my comments have been positive.
    I don’t expect you to want to read my blog, but just to let you know, a common theme there is my own areas of weakness and ways I am trying to grow. I do not hold any illusions about myself holding the higher moral ground.

  24. It’s ok Seriously Serving, no need for anyone to argue anymore… you can believe they are sexual photos, probably most people would not think so. Sexual photos have a different look on the face or in the eyes, artists in the past understood the difference when they would paint nudes of women… the photos weren’t sexual, just art. The people viewing it didn’t view it as sexual… but to be the one posing obviously, in my opinion would be revealing too much.

    I tried to post some examples of photos that aren’t sexual, contrasted with ones that are intended to be, but the links didn’t work… will have to when I have time. Basically, it’s different for men and women, women can see something as sexual when men won’t at all. If my photos had been sexual, it would’ve been a push-up bra, massive cleavage and a different look or facial expression.

  25. Dunno. She seems to have a big nose. Also her thighs are crossed demurely. And no visible tattoos!

  26. Yup. Big nose.

    Don’t worry, I won’t be emailing you privately to defend my whimsy and sarcasm. Or personal preferences. I leave that to Church Ladies. The public sphere is so disrespectful of Church Ladies, who know what’s good for us, and just want to protect us from sin. We should provide a Safe Space for them, with cookies, onesies, and lots of pillows.

  27. I wonder, BV, if you know anything about Benjamin Franklin. He was likely agnostic (I cant tell from his writings) its like he wanted to believe in God, but seeing how Christian prudish men and women would send women they deemed “witches” to torture or death penalty… all because a member of the church decided they weren’t “pure” enough… I think it ruined his faith to a certain degree. Most of the women accused were caught in some kind of horrible circumstance of offending the wrong person. And they were crucified for their perceived impurity or “sins” all so that the Christians could be on a higher moral ground than the people they didn’t like.

  28. He couldn’t deal with the shaming and anti Christian behavior, and reconcile that God would allow it… reconcile that it was done by very religious men and women. Sometimes the accused hadn’t done anything wrong at all, an offense had been bogus, but they were still subjected to the shaming, torture, or death penalty.

  29. Per hate mail, my computer program (described above) has a feature for that too. For example the following post and/or piece of hate mail:

    Dude: “HAH! You’re an awful mother. Your sons will be gay and you wear the strap-on and peg your husband. I feel sorry for that douchbag being married to you. You’re just waiting to screw someone like ME! Bitch! But I don’t want you….my ex was so much hotter than you. In fact, the girl I’m screwing right now as I type (while making so much money…I’m SO happy and rich. Did I mention how happy and rich I am? That’s how I get back at people like you) is much hotter and younger than you…

    Come bitch! Rhetorically battle with me. Can’t handle it, can you? Oh…you old slattern. You’re so afraid of intelligent conversation…”

    Is converted to:

    Dude: “Hey, ‘Sup?”

  30. I would call him a Deist. He was raised a strict Puritan Calvinist, but as a scientist and thinker he deviated from Biblical literalcy as an adult. His work often references God — e.g., “Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God” — and like most of the Founders attributed the newly claimed unalienable rights to God’s natural law. But he also wrote his own 10 Commandments, calling them the 13 Virtues (IIRC).

    Jefferson was also of this stripe, and often called a Deist. Today Jefferson is often claimed by Unitarians (my former church) as a progenitor of a liberal religion uncommanded by any particular Being. Jefferson notably produced his own bible: he cut out the sections he disagreed with.

    These guys were committed children of the Enlightenment, raised in Christian households. They neither denied God nor accepted literally Christian gospel. They took significant liberties in thought and action.

  31. Jefferson’s Bible is in print:

    He distills our bible to its Unitarian core; he was interested in Jesus’ teachings, but took a razor blade to the sections that attribute divinity to Him. Legalistic Christians (the ones who want to police their version of Christian modesty come to mind) consider this blasphemy, of course, but often fail to note that in their own use of the Bible they have preferred chapters and verses. I think it’s a very helpful tool to understanding Jesus as a thinker, arguer, pedagogue, and complementary to Trinitarian Christianity.

    People think of Unitarians as liberal Protestants, but in fact they’re not, if one attends to definitions, Christian. Once I was giving a talk and my host was chit-chatting with me and asked me where I go to church. I said, “Unitarian.”

    His face went blank.

    “You know, Jefferson, Emerson, William James, Harriet Beecher Stowe, people like that.”

    “So it’s Protestant?”

    “Actually, we’re not Christian.”

    His face was now white, and blank.

    He said, “So, is that like … Jewish?”

    Denominational squabbles and rule-making amuse me. These days I just tell people I’m trinitarian and follow the Westminster Catechism. It’s remarkably hard to find a church and pastor that do too. I’ve found that most Church Ladies and their white knights don’t even know what it is.

  32. You’re right! Everything says he was a deist… I think I must have been confused with if he truly believed in Christ or not. I didn’t know that Jefferson produced his own bible! Very interesting men.

  33. I think most people today, who are atheist or agnostic, like to say “I’m spiritual but not religious.” I really have no idea what this means, often, other than they like yoga and candles and eating vegan and have other false idols. (This would describe most Unitarians, too, I think, which is why I can’t be one anymore: explicitly, and a priori, Unitarians reject a priori the concept of a creedal Church. That’s right, their creed is the creed of no-creed. So, WTF? I started my transition out by describing myself as a Transcendentalist (e.g., Emerson), i.e., a Unitarian who reads the Bible. Now there’s some pretzel logic to take down an unlit street of dark theology.)

    But I think it’s really important that we not assign the “spiritual but not religious” label to people like Franklin and Jefferson. (Not that you did.) Both believed in an ordered universe commanded by *a* God; both were clearly cultural Christians. Obviously their deviations from Biblical literalness disqualify them as creedal Christians, unless one believes that such qualities as reason, doubt — sole properties of humans, not otherwise existing in nature — exist for a purpose. And that purpose is known to, and imposed on us as *duty*, by God. This was the insight, afforded to me by C.S. Lewis when I read his apologetics for the first time seven years ago, that likely saved my life and opened my life to faith.

    Legalistic Christians trouble me because our smallness as humans, coupled with a divinely awarded capacity to think, observe, struggle and occasionally earn insight, invalidates the notion of thought policing by similar, fallen people. I know that such thinking makes me a *kafir* — an infidel — to many. (Footnote: A buddy in DC gave me his tactical ball cap, with a velcro patch where the flag usually goes; only the patch now reads “kafir” in Arabic. This is how a few guys say EFF-U to the bad guys in certain squalid corners of the world; I just like to wear it into a coffee shop in Minneapolis filled with Somalis.) I annoy a pastor friend, from time to time, when I argue that Jesus is likely busy with higher order problems than the status of my relationship with Him; I scare my most devout friend half out of his wits when I challenge his belief that my every thought and action is of consequence to Jesus; Jesus is my master and commander, my occasional brother in arms (I hope) — not my home room teacher and hall monitor. I owe Him; He owes me nothing.

    For anyone in distress, in shame, or in pain, I always recommend The Great Divorce, by Lewis. In it he constructs a parable of egoistic failure, in which all of us exist in a place we think is the earth, but is in fact Hell. Yes, he notes that we are already — literally — in Hell, but only a few of us will admit it. This is the insight that saved my life once, and once more. And thus too many of us fail to seize upon the opportunity to escape via God’s love. Now this is creedal blasphemy, isn’t it. But I defy anyone to assert a) Lewis’ failed Christianity; and b) God’s condemnation of Lewis. *God* created Lewis’ blasphemy; his blasphemy is therefore blessed. Even my pastor friend has to agree with that, so we always laugh off our differences, at least until he tries to hug me. (The sacramental hug: would it be so bad to just shake hands?) A year ago I was in a new catastrophe of my own, seeming making; I should not have survived, and was not expected to. I just take it as a not-so-gentle reminder by God that he gave me a way out; why was I dallying and not taking it? Two roads always diverge in the woods; only we can choose which one we take.

    Apologies for rambling on with my backroom theology, on the occasion of a delightful OP on your white hat.

  34. “Spiritual but not religious”…many of the people claiming this tag today are a long long way from rationalist Agnosticism or Atheism….a lot of them believe in magical crystals, homeopathy, “sprits” of various kinds, a conscious Gaia, etc etc….oddly they also frequently claim to be advocates of science and denounce traditional religious believers as anti-scientific.

  35. You have a way of writing that inspires, BV. It is fascinating to hear about your journey of faith, of finding it… Lewis’ own journey was endearing to me…. LOL he called himself “the most dejected and reluctant convert in all of England.” I most definitely believe that reason and doubt are gifts and have purpose, probably the most damaging thing a Christian can tell another (especially younger) Christian is that “you should just believe, doubt of any kind means you don’t have enough *real* faith.” Christianity shouldn’t be embraced by abandoning reason and rational thought…. You have no idea the joy I felt when I read your line about your life opening to faith, and about Jesus’ role in it. I need to read The Great Divorce… definitely in pain. Thank you, BV!

  36. Thanks. Lewis’ early life was difficult, and then the horror of working in the trenches of WWI convinced him there couldn’t possibly be a God. So he was a thorough atheist in 1921. By 1939, he was the most compelling Christian in the world.

    Your children will love his children’s (Narnia etc) books, when they’re a little older.

  37. My husband already started reading Narnia to our oldest this year… he loves it and is really smart so he can follow along pretty well… but he’ll definitely need to re-read them later on when he can really grasp the deeper meanings.

  38. And about Lewis… I cannot imagine the tragedy of losing your mother so young. And he prayed for God to heal her, so for a little boy, to feel like God didn’t care enough about her (or you)… I just can’t imagine going through that. I was estranged from my parents when I wanted to get married to my husband, and it felt like losing a limb, I was legally orphaned, that sent me into a clinical depression. But I can’t imagine losing them (either one of them) as a child and being a true orphan.

    Now with my dad going through some intense mental issues (no prior history), I feel like I’m losing him already – permanently. He’s been hospitalized…. So crazy how it just happened out of the blue, like a mental switch flipped.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.