happenstance – KW never said she was trying to be specific. You keep trying to force her to be, so that you can nail her on something.
She is correct. There is a spirit of the law here. A woman has to be careful to be within the letter of the law and also to be within the spirit of the law.
SJSinNYC – It is hard to believe that an Orthodox rabbi claims that collarbones are not one of the things that the halacha dictates has to be covered.
In terms of this whole discussion about Rabbi Falk’s Oz V’hadar Levusha – Rabbi Falk speaks about cultural norms in most yeshivish/kollel-type communities. I don’t think he is addressing what is culturally accepted in other types of communities. His p’sakim that refer to what is “accepted” should probably be taken in that context. It is difficult for people who do not come from those types of communities to relate to things he has sensitivities to. Also, he does make distinctions throughout the book between those things that are Shulchan Aruch and those that have to do with being “refined”.
And those who discussed Rabbis whose daughters/granddaughters don’t do certain things – there are many instances where a Rav can believe that something is halacha, and yet their daughters and granddaughters do not conform. That does not indicate that the Rav “holds” that way, it indicates that the girls involved may have a hard time with it.
And back to the original point of this thread the OP was asking what is wrong with denim and very long skirts – when I said “regal”, I meant the same thing as “refined” or “bas melech” or however you want to put it. We don’t always need to be formal, but we don’t want to look like we are basically walking around in our “house clothes”. (Please don’t start on ladies walking outside in housecoats or robes – I don’t personally think that is acceptable either.) The fact that people walk around that way nowadays doesn’t make it recommended.