Damaging modesty memes

[Mrs. Funk]

http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1340866071471_1107012.png

This meme has made the rounds on my Facebook wall for months, and reared its ugly head again today. The friend who posted it fails to see why I would have any objections to it. Urgh.

[wuapinmon]

Well, aside from being lame, it's generally stupid. ALL MEN look at immodestly dressed attractive people, pigs and gentlemen alike. Also, I'm unaware that rolling around in manure is part of a courting or mating ritual among the porcine species. Also, I'd venture that the unmarried boy who originally wrote this is deflecting guilt over his porn 'problem' onto the subject of his gaze.

[Sullyute]

I think that there is a grain of truth to the message about attracting pigs, but I still have issues with the presentation. How comes it is addressed to "Girls" but it is coming from "Real Men". They also have a picture of a young girl on the message. So is this suppose to be directed to prepubescent girls from adult men?!

I don't have problems with modesty lessons, as longs as it is directed to an age appropiate group and they discuss what modesty actually means (it is more than just clothing).

[NorthwestUteFan]

I will just drop this right here. It seems an appropriate response.

http://mormongags.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/node-gallery-display/Modesty.JPG

[LA Ute]

http://static.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/1340866071471_1107012.png

This meme has made the rounds on my Facebook wall for months, and reared its ugly head again today. The friend who posted it fails to see why I would have any objections to it. Urgh.

Is someone using that graphic in church? Good grief!

[DU Ute]

Here's a great response to this nonsense some valiant young man came up with at BYU-Idaho: (http://youngmormonfeminists.org/2013/03/17/confronting-the-naked-facts-of-male-immodesty-one-kneecap-at-a-time/)

364

This is the kind of stuff that makes us ALUF's grateful we had the good sense to not go to a Church school.

[UtahDan]

I just don't know why someone with legs that nice it talking to a guy with a Derp on his shirt. Surely she can do better.

[Rocker Ute]

Can you guys at least post NSFW in this thread? My boss just walked by my office!

Oh, I am just going to leave this here. I hope nothing happens to him in the parking lot because it is going to be hard to not argue he didn't bring it on himself.

365

[big z]

Can you guys at least post NSFW in this thread? My boss just walked by my office!

Oh, I am just going to leave this here. I hope nothing happens to him in the parking lot because it is going to be hard to not argue he didn't bring it on himself.

365

Aren't you the boss?

[Rocker Ute]

Aren't you the boss?

I was pretty disappointed in my conduct, we are going to have to have a one on one about this unfortunately.

[Mrs. Funk]

Is someone using that graphic in church? Good grief!

No, I've never seen it at church but I've seen it passed around Facebook exclusively by LDS people, so the religion forum seems the most appropriate. It seems to me a symptom of the larger disease in our church that is the obsession with what Mormon women wear.

[LA Ute]

No, I've never seen it at church but I've seen it passed around Facebook exclusively by LDS people, so the religion forum seems the most appropriate. It seems to me a symptom of the larger disease in our church that is the obsession with what Mormon women wear.

I think it's good to caution young women (teenagers and younger) to avoid dressing provocatively in order to get young men's attention, but I don't like over-the-top stuff like that graphic. Besides, kids tune us out when we go that route. Sweet reason works much better.

[Pheidippides]

I think it's good to caution young women (teenagers and younger) to avoid dressing provocatively in order to get young men's attention, but I don't like over-the-top stuff like that graphic. Besides, kids tune us out when we go that route. Sweet reason works much better.

I agree (gasp!) that if young women are dressing provocatively to get the attention of the young men as an intentional matter it can be a problem at an extreme level. But I am personally offended as a man at the notion that somehow immodest dress turns me into a caveman. I've seen lots of women dressed immodestly and I've never raped any of them. I've never even cat called them.

[Mrs. Funk]

I think it's good to caution young women (teenagers and younger) to avoid dressing provocatively in order to get young men's attention, but I don't like over-the-top stuff like that graphic. Besides, kids tune us out when we go that route. Sweet reason works much better.

For me, the only tack that ever made sense (or worked) was teaching me to respect my body and to avoid dressing like a hoochie to reflect respect for myself. Indirectly, it was church leaders who taught me that I have tremendous power in how I choose to dress.

There's nothing redeeming about this meme, but the main problems are with presentation and the overall attitude of talking down to women. Like sully pointed out, the business about "real men" and "girls" squicks me out. It's amazing to me that people don't realize that it tacitly compares these "girls" to pigs, too, with all that stuff about rolling in the mud. It's degrading no matter how you slice it.

[LA Ute]

For me, the only tack that ever made sense (or worked) was teaching me to respect my body and to avoid dressing like a hoochie to reflect respect for myself. Indirectly, it was church leaders who taught me that I have tremendous power in how I choose to dress.

There's nothing redeeming about this meme, but the main problems are with presentation and the overall attitude of talking down to women. Like sully pointed out, the business about "real men" and "girls" squicks me out. It's amazing to me that people don't realize that it tacitly compares these "girls" to pigs, too, with all that stuff about rolling in the mud. It's degrading no matter how you slice it.

OK. Are you disagreeing with my post, or just adding your own thoughts?

[Mrs. Funk]

OK. Are you disagreeing with my post, or just adding your own thoughts?

A little of both? I see problems with couching modesty solely in terms of the impact it will have upon young men. It teaches that young women are responsible for the thoughts (and perhaps indirectly or even directly?) the actions of young men. It can also teach them, "Gee, I can make the young men CRAZY with sex rage if I wear a short skirt. What a great idea."

We both agree that the meme I posted is problematic. I'm not accusing you of being a neanderthal and I think you've been a parent for more years than I've been alive, so I feel it's wise to at least hear what you have to say. :)

[LA Ute]

A little of both? I see problems with couching modesty solely in terms of the impact it will have upon young men. It teaches that young women are responsible for the thoughts (and perhaps indirectly or even directly?) the actions of young men. It can also teach them, "Gee, I can make the young men CRAZY with sex rage if I wear a short skirt. What a great idea."

We both agree that the meme I posted is problematic. I'm not accusing you of being a neanderthal and I think you've been a parent for more years than I've been alive, so I feel it's wise to at least hear what you have to say. :)

The first thing I should say is that my friendly but (only slightly) snarky response was intended for Phieippeeedieees, not you. :). He and I kind of banter that way, and I frequently decry his sadistic abuse of straw men.

I agree with you that modesty should not be couched solely in those terms. I think it should be a comprehensive discussion and should be very elevated. I can say that after 8 years of going to YW class, girls' camp, youth conference and the like (I just can't seem to get out of this bishopric!), and watching my own daughter grow from age 8 to 16, the kids in our area live in a sex-drenched world. Most of them seem to appreciate a little guidance because they feel inner conflict between what they've been taught all their lives - what feels right to them - and what they see going on around them. (At high school proms around here you'd see lots of teenage girls whose parents ought to be horse-whipped for sending 15- and 16-year girls out dressed in amazingly revealing outfits.) Girls that age don't want to look like Church Lady - they want to look nice and attractive - they want to fit in - they want to be kids and have fun. It is not an easy thing to deal with, for either the kids or their parents.

[LA Ute]

For me, the only tack that ever made sense (or worked) was teaching me to respect my body and to avoid dressing like a hoochie to reflect respect for myself. Indirectly, it was church leaders who taught me that I have tremendous power in how I choose to dress.


There's nothing redeeming about this meme, but the main problems are with presentation and the overall attitude of talking down to women. Like sully pointed out, the business about "real men" and "girls" squicks me out. It's amazing to me that people don't realize that it tacitly compares these "girls" to pigs, too, with all that stuff about rolling in the mud. It's degrading no matter how you slice it.


I agree with this. As I said, I was attempting to tweak Pheidippides when I asked if you were just agreeing with me, because I think Pheidippides does.

[Mrs. Funk]

I agree with this. As I said, I was attempting to tweak Pheidippides when I asked if you were just agreeing with me, because I think Pheidippides does.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, but you quoted my post, not his.

[LA Ute]

I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, but you quoted my post, not his.

It was my fault. I quoted the wrong post! When I post from my iPad I often have spastic fingers, resulting in confusing posts.

[Mrs. Funk]

It was my fault. I quoted the wrong post! When I post from my iPad I often have spastic fingers, resulting in confusing posts.

Yes, I gathered that. :) It's fine. I'm not a terribly combative poster, so I was a little surprised initially.

[Pheidippides]

I agree with this. As I said, I was attempting to tweak Pheidippides when I asked if you were just agreeing with me, because I think Pheidippides does.

Whew! I was confused too for a moment. I mostly agree with you in general terms. Please don't ask me to evaluate specific outfits for modesty ratings, though, because I suspect we'll have a full blown fight on our hands. And I'm already busy trying to fend off torches and pitchforks on CB.

[FountainOfUte]

I just don't know why someone with legs that nice it talking to a guy with a Derp on his shirt. Surely she can do better.

Not if she's at BYU-I.

[LA Ute]

Please don't ask me to evaluate specific outfits for modesty ratings, though, because I suspect we'll have a full blown fight on our hands.

I want to check back with you when you have a daughter who's 16 and going to her first major high school dance.

[Pheidippides]

I want to check back with you when you have a daughter who's 16 and going to her first major high school dance.

14, not 16 (personal family choice - both my wife and I have voted to ditch 16 and be more flexible depending on the kid). and start checking because I have two years to go.

I will agree that a lot (most?) of what kids wear to proms these days is trashy. So you picked a bad example - I think our disagreements will be comparatively minor on that front.

[Mrs. Funk]

I want to check back with you when you have a daughter who's 16 and going to her first major high school dance.

I'm not going to argue that there are very scanty/tight/revealing dresses that show up at school dances, or claim that I'd be comfortable with a hypothetical daughter of mine wearing them. It wasn't all that long ago for me I was shopping for a prom dress and attending prom as one of the significantly more covered up attendees.

There's also quite a range of "immodest" dresses by Mormon standards, which includes even chastely bare shoulders in a a dress that otherwise covers up. Like the esteemed Pheidippides, I get a little impatient with drawing imaginary lines on a woman's body.

[LA Ute]

I'm not going to argue that there are very scanty/tight/revealing dresses that show up at school dances, or claim that I'd be comfortable with a hypothetical daughter of mine wearing them. It wasn't all that long ago for me I was shopping for a prom dress. There's also quite a range of "immodest" dresses by Mormon standards, which includes even chastely bare shoulders in a a dress that otherwise covers up. Like the esteemed Pheidippides, I get a little impatient with drawing imaginary lines on a woman's body.

In our case we haven't stuck strictly to those lines. Again, it is a tricky line to walk, IMO.

[Mrs. Funk]

In our case we haven't stuck strictly to those lines. Again, it is a tricky line to walk, IMO.

I think it is, and one I saw my own parents struggle with while I was growing up. I remember coming upstairs ready for church wearing a dress my mom bought me for my uncle's wedding six months before. She told me to go downstairs and change. I'm still confused over that one, but apparently in retrospect she decided the dress was a no-go in some modesty aspect. (FTR, it had cap sleeves and brushed my kneecaps.)

[Pheidippides]

I'm not going to argue that there are very scanty/tight/revealing dresses that show up at school dances, or claim that I'd be comfortable with a hypothetical daughter of mine wearing them. It wasn't all that long ago for me I was shopping for a prom dress and attending prom as one of the significantly more covered up attendees.

There's also quite a range of "immodest" dresses by Mormon standards, which includes even chastely bare shoulders in a a dress that otherwise covers up. Like the esteemed Pheidippides, I get a little impatient with drawing imaginary lines on a woman's body.

Drawing the imaginary lines is kinda creepy if you think about it.

For me it's about general presentation. There are plenty of sleeveless dresses/halter tops (for example) that are appropriate in a professionalish setting like an after work cocktail party. Same with other types and styles of outfit in other situations. But just like its not appropriate or classy to wear track pants to the office, it's not appropriate to wear lingerie to a public event without something else. Unless you live in NYC and it's halloween, in which case the normal rules don't apply apparently.

I view my role as helping my kids learn how to be classy and appropriate adults, and dress is just part of that. Believe it or not, my wife and I have already discussed prom dresses and spent some time looking at examples so we know what we think is okay and what is not. Almost none of the things we agreed upon are Authorized Pattern approved as we don't think that is the correct standard at all.

Knowing my daughter as I do, I don't think this will be too terribly difficult. It's her younger sister that may bring challenges.

[Virginia Ute]

I think those flowy skirts like the one she is wearing are soooo good lookin!

[Mrs. Funk]

Careful. That sounds a bit rapey.

[wuapinmon]

Careful. That sounds a bit rapey.

Indeed, it does. Withdrawn.

[Mrs. Funk]

Indeed, it does. Withdrawn.

You're a good dude, wuap.

[DU Ute]

You have to be careful easing up on these standards. It may seem fine until you have a generation of men who grew up with young women wearing sleeveless attire and have been driven into an addiction to hardcore shoulder porn.

[Mrs. Funk]

Memes aren't supposed to be accurate. They're just supposed to be clever, funny, and/or snarky. Neither of the two memes posted on this thread offer much of value - they're just internet memes. They're the modern bumper sticker (like the bumper sticker Mrs F is using as a signature). Don't take them literally, and don't get too worked up over them.

While I agree with you in theory, I've had countless friends post and repost this meme with commentary like, "So funny and so true!" or "Ladies, read this!" or "I couldn't say it better myself!" When I've commented that I dislike the condescending wording or the inaccurate ideas about modesty, people get surprisingly up in arms defending the accuracy of the meme. They seem to be taking it pretty seriously. Tacit acceptance of the underlying sexism and attitude towards women in this meme upsets much me than the meme itself, although I don't care for the meme either of course.

[Two Utes]

While I agree with you in theory, I've had countless friends post and repost this meme with commentary like, "So funny and so true!" or "Ladies, read this!" or "I couldn't say it better myself!" When I've commented that I dislike the condescending wording or the inaccurate ideas about modesty, people get surprisingly up in arms defending the accuracy of the meme. They seem to be taking it pretty seriously. Tacit acceptance of the underlying sexism and attitude towards women in this meme upsets much me than the meme itself, although I don't care for the meme either of course.

This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty.

[scottie]

http://www.modbod.com/

[Mrs. Funk]

http://www.modbod.com/

I see bare shoulders on that page. Shun! Shun! Avoid the appearance of all evil!

[scottie]

I see bare shoulders on that page. Shun! Shun! Avoid the appearance of all evil!

Request for a mixed-message emoticon/smiley... TIA!

[Mrs. Funk]

Request for a mixed-message emoticon/smiley... TIA!

:) Was the dripping sarcasm not apparent?

[scottie]

:) Was the dripping sarcasm not apparent?

That was meant for the folks at mod-bod!

[Mrs. Funk]

That was meant for the folks at mod-bod!

Aha! Yes.

[Mrs. Funk]

Hey, just remember that they aren't agreeing with the literal meme. They are simply laughing at it and agreeing with the underlying message - that how we dress affects how we are perceived. The internet was never meant for intelligence or seriousness. It's meant only for jokes, sports, and stubborn arguments.

It's more pernicious than just how we as humans dress affects how we are perceived, but it seems you're just trolling me at this point.

[Mrs. Funk]

Ok, sorry. Didn't mean to offend. Over and out.

Perhaps I misunderstood. Feminists can have a sense of humor, too!

[Two Utes]

Perhaps I misunderstood. Feminists can have a sense of humor, too!

I find it interesting that women in the most liberal countries in the world (Western Europe and the US and Canada) are the least "modest". In other words, when women are more allowed to make their own decisions about dress and style, they tend to wear less "cover up". Yet, when men dominate the decision making (fundamental Islam and yes, even Mormonism) the standard is more cover up.

[wuapinmon]

Modesty is little more than a construction of our social reality (hence exposing one's ankles 100 years ago was almost slutty). We 'know' that exposure of certain parts of the body are immodest. The consequences of this knowledge are that men dislike the feelings that thoughts about someone else's body cause in us, especially if we 'know' that such thoughts are immoral. If we don't possess that same heteronomous knowledge, then we merely enjoy the goods on display (unless there's a non-religious knowledge informing our dislike of immodesty), in some cases bordering on voyeurism. When we've decided that we know that immodesty is an artificial construct, and we want to look without restraints, we go to strip clubs where the social reality that forbids staring and voyeurism is altered by the exchange of capital in return for giving away your right to feel outrage at someone oogling the form of your body. Immodesty ultimately always revolves around the male id (Freudian term, not i.d.).

I had a student from Finland once. She was a great person, creative, artistic, intelligent, athletic, kind, and good with kids. We hired her to take our Christmas card photos. She was also absolutely stunning. I spent a great deal of mental energy trying to ignore her beauty whenever I dealt with her socially. She invited me to her senior art show; I was excited to see her creativity on display. I walked in to find the centerpiece of her exhibition a lifesize photographic portrait of her naked sitting cross-legged, shaven, and staring straight into the camera. I had a visceral physical reaction to that image (THANK GOD SHE WASN'T THERE WHEN I WENT). It wasn't arousal, on the contrary, I felt ashamed and angry. I had honestly agonized over never viewing her that way, not allowing myself to envision her that way, trying to respect her enough to not delve into adolescent fantasy, and she destroyed that in one moment. I didn't want to consider her that way. I didn't want that image in my head, and now, I have no choice. Something like that doesn't easily delete itself from the memory, for she is exquisite. But, I'd give anything to erase that from my memory. So, while modesty is a social construct of the collective male id, trying to get women not to tempt us, we are powerless, ultimately before the reality that our society has decided to deconstruct in order to embrace humanist principles of equality, something I support.

[LA Ute]

Good post, wuap.

This is an interesting (albeit Judeo-centric) take on the external nature of what we call sexual morality (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0003.html):


It is probably impossible for us, who live thousands of years after Judaism began this process, to perceive the extent to which undisciplined sex can dominate man's life and the life of society. Throughout the ancient world, and up to the recent past in many parts of the world, sexuality infused virtually all of society.

Human sexuality, especially male sexuality, is polymorphous, or utterly wild (far more so than animal sexuality). Men have had sex with women and with men; with little girls and young boys; with a single partner and in large groups; with total strangers and immediate family members; and with a variety of domesticated animals. They have achieved orgasm with inanimate objects such as leather, shoes, and other pieces of clothing, through urinating and defecating on each other (interested readers can see a photograph of the former at select art museums exhibiting the works of the photographer Robert Mapplethorpe); by dressing in women's garments; by watching other human beings being tortured; by fondling children of either sex; by listening to a woman's disembodied voice (e.g., "phone sex"); and, of course, by looking at pictures of bodies or parts of bodies. There is little, animate or inanimate, that has not excited some men to orgasm. Of course, not all of these practices have been condoned by societies — parent-child incest and seducing another's man's wife have rarely been countenanced — but many have, and all illustrate what the unchanneled, or in Freudian terms, the "un-sublimated," sex drive can lead to.

De-sexualizing God and religion

Among the consequences of the unchanneled sex drive is the sexualization of everything — including religion. Unless the sex drive is appropriately harnessed (not squelched — which leads to its own destructive consequences), higher religion could not have developed. Thus, the first thing Judaism did was to de-sexualize God: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" by his will, not through any sexual behavior. This was an utterly radical break with all other religions, and it alone changed human history. The gods of virtually all civilizations engaged in sexual relations. In the Near East, the Babylonian god Ishtar seduced a man, Gilgamesh, the Babylonian hero. In Egyptian religion, the god Osiris had sexual relations with his sister, the goddess Isis, and she conceived the god Horus. In Canaan, El, the chief god, had sex with Asherah. In Hindu belief, the god Krishna was sexually active, having had many wives and pursuing Radha; the god Samba, son of Krishna, seduced mortal women and men. In Greek beliefs, Zeus married Hera, chased women, abducted the beautiful young male, Ganymede, and masturbated at other times; Poseidon married Amphitrite, pursued Demeter, and raped Tantalus. In Rome, the gods sexually pursued both men and women.

Given the sexual activity of the gods, it is not surprising that the religions themselves were replete with all forms of sexual activity. In the ancient Near Fast and elsewhere, virgins were deflowered by priests prior to engaging in relations with their husbands, and sacred or ritual prostitution was almost universal. Psychiatrist and sexual historian Norman Sussman describes the situation thus: "Male and female prostitutes, serving temporarily or permanently and performing heterosexual, homosexual oral-genital, bestial, and other forms of sexual activities, dispense their favors in behalf of the temple." Throughout the ancient Near East, from very early times, anal intercourse formed a part of goddess worship. In ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Canaan, annual ceremonial intercourse took place between the king and a priestess. Women prostitutes had intercourse with male worshippers in the sanctuaries and temples of ancient Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, Cyprus, Corinth, Carthage, Sicily, Egypt, Libya, West Africa, and ancient and modern India. In ancient Israel itself, there were repeated attempts to re-introduce temple prostitution, resulting in repeated Jewish wars against cultic sex. The Bible records that the Judean king Asa "put away the qdeshim [temple male prostitutes] out of the land"; that his successor, Jehosaphat put away out of the land ...the remnant of the qdeshim that remained in the days of his father Asa"; and that later, King Josiah, in his religious reforms, "broke down the houses of the qdeshim." In India until this century, certain Hindu cults have required intercourse between monks and nuns, and wives would have intercourse with priests who represent the god. Until it was made illegal in 1948, when India gained independence, Hindu temples in many parts of India had both women and boy prostitutes. In the fourteenth century, the Chinese found homosexual Tibetan religious rites practiced at the court of a Mongol emperor. In Sri Lanka through this century, Buddhist worship of the goddess Pattini has involved priests dressed as women, and the consort of the goddess is symbolically castrated.

Judaism placed controls on sexual activity. It could no longer dominate religion and social life. It was to be sanctified — which in Hebrew means "separated" — from the world and placed in the home, in the bed of husband and wife. Judaism's restricting of sexual behavior was one of the essential elements that enabled society to progress. Along with ethical monotheism, the revolution begun by the Torah when it declared war on the sexual practices of the world wrought the most far-reaching changes in history.

Interesting stuff.

[Two Utes]

To LA Ute (don't want to paste that huge article). Interesting article. However, it seems fundamental Islam has taken Judaism to the next step. So is fundamental Islam an essential element that will enable society to progress even faster?

Roman and Greek societies were very open about sex. Yet, they were two of the most advanced human civilizations.

What you appear to be saying is just what I learned on my mission. Make strict rules for the masses to the detriment of those more advanced because the masses are simply incapable of exercising good judgment and self restraint.

[Sullyute]

I find it interesting that women in the most liberal countries in the world (Western Europe and the US and Canada) are the least "modest". In other words, when women are more allowed to make their own decisions about dress and style, they tend to wear less "cover up". Yet, when men dominate the decision making (fundamental Islam and yes, even Mormonism) the standard is more cover up.

Or in other words, those who are more religious tend to be more "modest" in their clothing standards.
:stirthepot:

[Two Utes]

Or in other words, those who are more religious tend to be more "modest" in their clothing standards.
:stirthepot:

Or in other words, those who are more dominated by men tend to be more "modest" in their clothing standards.

[LA Ute]

To LA Ute (don't want to paste that huge article). Interesting article. However, it seems fundamental Islam has taken Judaism to the next step. So is fundamental Islam an essential element that will enable society to progress even faster?

Roman and Greek societies were very open about sex. Yet, they were two of the most advanced human civilizations.

What you appear to be saying is just what I learned on my mission. Make strict rules for the masses to the detriment of those more advanced because the masses are simply incapable of exercising good judgment and self restraint.

I'm not sure I buy everything in that quote from Dennis Prager. (I am not well-schooled enough in ancient history to know if he's right.) I thought his comments were responsive to wuap's point about sexual morality being a construct that varies from society to society. As a believer in the Judeo-Christian tradition I was also impressed by the idea that Judeo-Christian teachings about sex were revolutionary. As for Islam, I think the extreme elements of that faith have perverted the Judeo-Christian view of sex into something truly oppressive. Any religion can do that, of course, and IMO some Judeo-Christian faiths also have.

[wuapinmon]

I'm not sure I buy everything in that quote from Dennis Prager. (I am not well-schooled enough in ancient history to know if he's right.) I thought his comments were responsive to wuap's point about sexual morality being a construct that varies from society to society. As a believer in the Judeo-Christian tradition I was also impressed by the idea that Judeo-Christian teachings about sex were revolutionary. As for Islam, I think the extreme elements of that faith have perverted the Judeo-Christian view of sex into something truly oppressive. Any religion can do that, of course, and IMO some Judeo-Christian faiths also have.

Islam is just lagging behind Christian mores by about 400 years. We're seeing how our ancestors behaved about the time that Jamestown was founded.

[LA Ute]

Islam is just lagging behind Christian mores by about 400 years. We're seeing how our ancestors behaved about the time that Jamestown was founded.

Fair enough, but did the Jamestown settlers perform honor killings and female circumcision?

[wuapinmon]

Honor killings, no, they just marched into the Pawhotan's lands, took them, and eventually exterminated them. Female genital mutilation is barbarous, but predates Islam.

[UtahDan]

Honor killings, no, they just marched into the Pawhotan's lands, took them, and eventually exterminated them. Female genital mutilation is barbarous, but predates Islam.

The Christian world was still torturing heretics at the time Jamestown was settled and we all know the awful things that we done to people later in Massachusetts. I can't remember who pointed it out (one of the four horsemen I think) but if, in fact, heresy was something that could cause a person to be tortured endlessly in hell, then killing and torturing people who might potentially spread that awful fate to others is not an illogical response.

[LA Ute]

Whoa! I'm not going to defend Christian excesses either. Just quibbling with wuap's equation of modern extreme Islam with 17th century Western Christianity. I think we can all agree that Islam needs to be reformed, and that Christianity was often used as an excuse for evil behavior.

My original point was that the Prager excerpt is intriguing in its claim that a monogamous (generally) and marital approach to sexual behavior was revolutionary and was largely a relatively recent and Judeo-Christian idea. Lest I end up also defending that branch of religion, I'm just agreeing with wuap that humanity's view of sexual morality - rules of behavior - is based on external standards and does evolve.

[wuapinmon]

Whoa! I'm not going to defend Christian excesses either. Just quibbling with wuap's equation of modern extreme Islam with 17th century Western Christianity. I think we can all agree that Islam needs to be reformed, and that Christianity was often used as an excuse for evil behavior.

My original point was that the Prager excerpt is intriguing in its claim that a monogamous (generally) and marital approach to sexual behavior was revolutionary largely a relatively recent and largely Judeo-Christian idea. Lest I end up also defending that branch of religion, I'm just agreeing with wuap that humanity's view of sexual morality - rules of behavior - is based on external standards and does evolve.

You see genital mutilation as Islamic. It goes back far beyond Islam. Islam only served to reinforce the practice among the uneducated and chauvinistic societies of Africa.

[LA Ute]

You see genital mutilation as Islamic. It goes back far beyond Islam. Islam only served to reinforce the practice among the uneducated and chauvinistic societies of Africa.

It's not Islamic any more than beheadings or torture are Christian.

Now, back to damaging sexual memes....

[wuapinmon]

It's not Islamic any more than beheadings or torture are Christian.

Now, back to damaging sexual memes....

Oh, we've not even sighted an iceberg yet if we're talking about damaging sexual memes. This is just a quick sample.

http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/047-Religion-1-Fan.jpg

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/222/232/SANDWICH.jpg

[wuapinmon]

Here's one I just grabbed off facebook from a male Church member.

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/550003_516430275064741_1728988785_n.jpg

[mUUser]

Bingham High School in today's Trib:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58442977-78/dress-students-dance-code.html.csp?page=1

[Solon]

Bingham High School in today's Trib:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58442977-78/dress-students-dance-code.html.csp?page=1

I don't have a huge problem with this story in principle (although I will avoid deciding at just what point a dress becomes "backless," etc.). The majority of high school students are legally children. The high school was up front about what the dress code would be. Lots of places & situations have dress codes.
It might be a good lesson for kids to learn about appropriate vs. inappropriate - something the facebook era has eroded.

I thought the photoshopping story was much more egregious.

[Diehard Ute]

My one thought has little to do with whether it's right or wrong. But I find it somewhat weird the school refused comment and instead had a 17 year old student body officer available to the media

[UtahsMrSports]

I don't have a huge problem with this story in principle (although I will avoid deciding at just what point a dress becomes "backless," etc.). The majority of high school students are legally children. The high school was up front about what the dress code would be. Lots of places & situations have dress codes.
It might be a good lesson for kids to learn about appropriate vs. inappropriate - something the facebook era has eroded.

I thought the photoshopping story was much more egregious.

I agree completely with this. As a student attending a dance, it is your responsibility to find out what the dress code will be and to abide by it.

In what other walk of life would behavior like this be acceptable? Does anyone walk into a store, grab a soda that is priced at $1.50, pull out a couple of quarters and demand that the store accept it and then throw a fit when they don't? Good grief!

[Rocker Ute]

Not really here to state on position or another, but at work there was a modesty debate, and as it always does it came up about how there are modesty standards for women but not for men.

The debate was raging when a normally quiet programmer piped up and said, "When the style for men is to have the bottom of their junk hang below their shorts I'm sure they'll be people shouting about that too."

That pretty much ended the debate... For the moment.

[LA Ute]

Here's my modesty point, in the form of two questions: Obviously, we would all agree that in our society showing up naked in public is unacceptable and inappropriate. (Please spare me the lame jokes.) So:



How much skin needs to be covered?




How do we decide?


These aren't stupid questions.

[Sullyute]

I think you are missing a negative article in your premise.

[LA Ute]

I think you are missing a negative article in your premise.

I think I fixed it.

[mUUser]

Dress slacks sighting at church 3 weeks in a row from the same active, long-time member.

As I walked up to my wife after church, one of the RS sisters walks up at same time and appeared to be on a crusade to "understand" why the pants-wearing sister was trying to make a "statement" (a statement about what, I'm not certain) at church.

Before anything came out of my wife's mouth (who I'm sure would've said something rude) I reminded her that for a church obsessed with female modesty, she appears to be the most modestly dressed of all the women at church today.

End of conversation. Let's get out of here!!

[Rocker Ute]

Dress slacks sighting at church 3 weeks in a row from the same active, long-time member.

As I walked up to my wife after church, one of the RS sisters walks up at same time and appeared to be on a crusade to "understand" why the pants-wearing sister was trying to make a "statement" (a statement about what, I'm not certain) at church.

Before anything came out of my wife's mouth (who I'm sure would've said something rude) I reminded her that for a church obsessed with female modesty, she appears to be the most modestly dressed of all the women at church today.

End of conversation. Let's get out of here!!

I love how this sort of stuff totally distracts from the message. Ironically we had a few women routinely wear dress slacks to church who have now quit. While basic speculation on my part, knowing them well I'd be surprised if they quit because of fear of criticism or reprisal, but probably because dress slacks on women at church now means something.

[LA Ute]

Reading posts here sometimes makes me wonder if Utah is a completely different planet.

I guess we all have our own frame of reference. I don't think anyone in our ward would notice if a woman wore pants or a man wore a purple shirt. But that's a function of local culture. I think most members of our ward see church on Sunday as a weekly refuge that they look forward to, so t hey're just glad to be there and to be with others who are like-minded. I'm not sure church attendance is seen the same way in some locations with high concentrations of members (e.g., where the neighborhood and your ward are practically the same thing). Then again, muuser doesn't live in Utah, so it can't be just that. I don't blame muuser for noticing, because in his ward pants on woman are probably a very rare thing.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Reading posts here sometimes makes me wonder if Utah is a completely different planet.

It can be. The byu-indoctrinated masses maintain their 'uniform of the Priesthood' mindset and keep it throughout their lives as a foundational proof that they live a higher law than the mindless, immoral hoi polloi around them. It is a symbol of their superiority over their fellow men and (especially) women.

I remember when I was first married we had a good friend who was a recent convert. She is absolutely gorgeous and she worked as a clothing buyer for Nordstrom. One day she wore a very nice pair of tailored trousers to church. My wife overheard a few sisters in the ward talking about how 'cheap' she looked wearing trousers. The irony was that our friend's very nice professional outfit was significantly more expensive than the Dress Barn muu muus worn by the holier-than-thou types.

[Rocker Ute]

It can be. The byu-indoctrinated masses maintain their 'uniform of the Priesthood' mindset and keep it throughout their lives as a foundational proof that they live a higher law than the mindless, immoral hoi polloi around them. It is a symbol of their superiority over their fellow men and (especially) women.

I remember when I was first married we had a good friend who was a recent convert. She is absolutely gorgeous and she worked as a clothing buyer for Nordstrom. One day she wore a very nice pair of tailored trousers to church. My wife overheard a few sisters in the ward talking about how 'cheap' she looked wearing trousers. The irony was that our friend's very nice professional outfit was significantly more expensive than the Dress Barn muu muus worn by the holier-than-thou types.

My point was this movement has caused people who would otherwise wear slacks on occasion to not wear them because it means something now. I could be wrong but up to that point, nobody cared a lick in my ward in Utah whether someone showed up in slacks or not. Probably still don't.

It reminds me of something we did in high school. We got a new principal and administrative staff my senior year. My high school previously had zero problems with gangs, dress codes or anything else, but the new administration was terrified of gang problems at our school, and started banning trends they thought were gang related. (A group of about 20 friends had gone to Disneyland together the previous summer and had all bought the same baseball cap with Mickey Mouse on it and wore them regularly. The admin thought they were a gang and so outlawed the hats). We all thought that was ridiculous, so a bunch of us decided that we would start to wear Webelos neckerchiefs to school as a joke. We got what we expected, a week later Boy Scout gear was banned.

The point being, by saying that wearing slacks to church, or men wearing colored shirts represented some sort of protest has restricted what people who don't support the movement in what they will actually wear. But what a ridiculous thing anyway, it was a childish protest when it happened and childish now. I hope people come in whatever they've got and don't think twice about it.

[mUUser]

That might be true of my ward, or it might not. I have no idea how common it is for women to wear pants. I'm completely oblivious. If not for this message board, I'd have never heard of the pants thing.


I'm a people watcher. I love it. At church, the airport, football stadium, the park, wherever. I notice people. I watch how they act, what they wear, what they say, how they say it, etc.... I guess it comes from my sociology classes. Having said that, I don't interact because I like my privacy, but I do notice, and notice others reaction to others, but I'm totally oblivious to ward drama....who has walked out on who etc....

This particular sister sits directly in front of me in primary, so I can't help but notice. I'm interested in it. Intrigued by reactions to it. And it makes it especially interesting because her and her husband are ward and stake leaders in every sense of the word. It's simply unexpected.

In the end, I will take any side show I can get at church to help through an otherwise fairly mundane 3 hour block, 2 hours of which is largely babysitting.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Women wearing pants to church is only a 'thing' because it was already seen as edgy or out of line. If this was normal (other than in wards full of Democrats) then it wouldn't even get a second notice.

[Rocker Ute]

Maybe it wasn't normal, but it definitely wasn't edgy. Maybe it was the female version of the bow tie or suspenders, but even less noticeable.

I've always seen bow tie wearers as agitators and I drive slower past their houses to see if anything is out of line. Our first counselor regularly wears a bow tie (yes, I have noticed and gossiped about it). I've noticed that since then other men have began wearing bow ties, and even some of the young men.

I suspect we have some bow tie wearers in our midst here on UB5.

Rainbow suspenders, on the other hand, are a pretty cool way to keep up your pants.

Oh, and your post is spot on.

[mpfunk]

I think part of the reason for women to wear pants is to hopefully identify like minded people or people who are at least going to be safe. My wife has worn a sleeveless dress for a similar reason.

Of course the church is such a horrible place for anyone with feminist ideals that we are on an extended hiatus right now anyway.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[DrumNFeather]

I think part of the reason for women to wear pants is to hopefully identify like minded people or people who are at least going to be safe. My wife has worn a sleeveless dress for a similar reason.

Of course the church is such a horrible place for anyone with feminist ideals that we are on an extended hiatus right now anyway.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

I have to wonder if this is largely a Utah thing. The gap isn't significant in our area...or so I'm told (and have observed) by those who have feminist ideals in my ward and stake.

[Rocker Ute]

I think part of the reason for women to wear pants is to hopefully identify like minded people or people who are at least going to be safe. My wife has worn a sleeveless dress for a similar reason.

Of course the church is such a horrible place for anyone with feminist ideals that we are on an extended hiatus right now anyway.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

This is too bad. I think it is a lot harder to effect change from the outside than the inside. I've been vocal often about changes that can be done within the church organization that I think would help greatly regarding gender equality while also not compromising beliefs that people hold dear. (No threat of excommunication that I'm aware of.) One outcome of this is I was asked to speak about how 'virtue' is not just a value for women to the youth (both ym and YW) in our ward. It's small stuff but that is where change begins.

Young people need to see that there are many ways to live the gospel and that there is a place for them, and if there isn't one it needs to be created and they can be part of that.

My mission president used to say that we shouldn't just do member missionary work because it would make for a homogenous church.

On that note I was in Killeen Texas, a town as a whole that still rife with racism. There were two wards that reflected that. One ward was completely white the other was primarily black and other minorities. An old black lady was going to the 'white' ward and got up one Sunday and said, "I just realized I'm the only black person here!' We talked to her after and mentioned that a lot of black people went to the other ward. She said she was going to get black people to come there and she did, it was great and much needed. Few people actually cared, they were obnoxious but the others were grateful she was courageous and stubborn.

Good people who withdraw because of reasons like you state (which are legitimate) unfortunately lead to this further homogenization and group think. If you believe in core of the doctrine but struggle with the culture, I personally think you should come back and make a difference.

I also think it is none of my business, so file what I say as some broad generalizations around a situation I don't fully understand.

[LA Ute]

I suspect we have some bow tie wearers in our midst here on UB5.

I own a couple but haven't worn them for 20+ years. I hope you will still like me.

My formal outfit includes a real bow tie also. None of that clip on stuff for me.

As a public service I'll post this for those who may decide to take the plunge someday:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxKA9be_3Gk

[LA Ute]

BTW, I am on record as hating white shirts, and I think the whole idea that it is a priesthood uniform is ridiculous. So far no church leader has called me on the carpet for this. Then again, I have knuckled under and worn a white shirt to church for all the years I've been in the bishopric.

One of my law partners was bishop of the YSA ward at UCLA and never wore a white shirt the entire time her served. I kind of admire his pluck but shirt color is not on my list of things worth taking a stand on. I just whine about it to my friends.

[Rocker Ute]

BTW, I am on record as hating white shirts, and I think the whole idea that it is a priesthood uniform is ridiculous. So far no church leader has called me on the carpet for this. Then again, I have knuckled under and worn a white shirt to church for all the years I've been in the bishopric.

One of my law partners was bishop of the YSA ward at UCLA and never wore a white shirt the entire time her served. I kind of admire his pluck but shirt color is not on my list of things worth taking a stand on. I just whine about it to my friends.

I'm with you. I've never liked white shirts, rarely wear them. We can still be friends despite the bow ties, but I will still eye you suspiciously.

[LA Ute]

White shirts are great. All week, I have to decide how to match colors with my shirt and slacks. I do alright, but I'm no fashionista. Sunday morning is always a relief when I can just throw on a white shirt and know that it goes with whatever pants I grab.

That said, I estimate the number of people in the Church who really care about white shirts at under 1%.

That is one advantage of white shirts. I always wear them to court and to important business meetings. Your estimate of 1% may be right. I still dislike feeling like I have to wear them. But I suffer quietly and with great dignity, if I do say so myself.

[mpfunk]

This is too bad. I think it is a lot harder to effect change from the outside than the inside. I've been vocal often about changes that can be done within the church organization that I think would help greatly regarding gender equality while also not compromising beliefs that people hold dear. (No threat of excommunication that I'm aware of.) One outcome of this is I was asked to speak about how 'virtue' is not just a value for women to the youth (both ym and YW) in our ward. It's small stuff but that is where change begins.

Young people need to see that there are many ways to live the gospel and that there is a place for them, and if there isn't one it needs to be created and they can be part of that.

My mission president used to say that we shouldn't just do member missionary work because it would make for a homogenous church.

On that note I was in Killeen Texas, a town as a whole that still rife with racism. There were two wards that reflected that. One ward was completely white the other was primarily black and other minorities. An old black lady was going to the 'white' ward and got up one Sunday and said, "I just realized I'm the only black person here!' We talked to her after and mentioned that a lot of black people went to the other ward. She said she was going to get black people to come there and she did, it was great and much needed. Few people actually cared, they were obnoxious but the others were grateful she was courageous and stubborn.

Good people who withdraw because of reasons like you state (which are legitimate) unfortunately lead to this further homogenization and group think. If you believe in core of the doctrine but struggle with the culture, I personally think you should come back and make a difference.

I also think it is none of my business, so file what I say as some broad generalizations around a situation I don't fully understand.

I appreciate this post and I get this point. It is the whole be the change that you want to see in the church. It was a great idea, until the church starting ex-communicating people because of views that are part of the change that my wife and I would like to see in the church.

It is not a healthy place right now for our family.

[Scorcho]

I like a white shirt, but it's a little cultish how much we have gravitated to it in the LDS community

[LA Ute]

I like a white shirt, but it's a little cultish how much we have gravitated to it in the LDS community

We sometimes look like a bunch of hard-core Southern Baptists or semi-Mennonites.

Then again, we haven't needed guidance like this:

1358

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

We recently had our whole stake reorganized due to recent development and lost about half of our ward in the process. As a result, I was released from EQ presidency. When the bishop called me in to extend my new calling at Teacher's Quorum advisor, we went through all of the job details and commitments. After 10 minutes of discussion and my "I'll have to talk to my wife, but I don't see it being a problem," the bishop started to get visibly nervous before saying , "there's one more thing we need to discuss. I'm not really sure how to dance around this, so I'll just come out and say it. The brethren have asked that those who work with the youth, provide the best examples as these young men prepare to enter the temple and serve missions." At this point I'm thinking that some of my unconventional EQ lessons has made its way back to him. "Part of being a good example is making sure that we're wearing a white shirt to church. Do you have any white shirts?" "Yes sir. Sure do." "Brother Schr-Ute, will you magnify this new calling and wear a white shirt every Sunday?" Sure. Whatever. But if I start hearing gruff about my constantly scruffy face, there will be push back.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

I like a white shirt, but it's a little cultish how much we have gravitated to it in the LDS community

One of the boys in the stake was doing an Eagle Scout project collecting dress shirts for less fortunate members and converts. In caps and bolded letting at the bottom of the collection box was the reminder, "THESE SHIRTS WILL BE USED FOR ATTENDING CHURCH SO PLEASE INSURE THAT ONLY WHITE SHIRTS OR BEING DONATED."

Wow. Way to limit your ability to give to the less fortunate based off of some silly Law of Moses cultural ridiculousness.

[LA Ute]

To be clear., I think it's nice that the boys who bless and pass the sacrament wear white shirts, but our bishop thinks it is more important that they get to do that than it is that they wear the right shirt. So when one of them forgets (which is rare) he doesn't make a big deal out of it. He has corrected well-meaning YM leaders who've tried to stop boys from blessing or passing because they lack a white shirt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UtahsMrSports]

When I was on my mission (here in the states), we had a promising young investigator. I dont think she had been to any type of church before and I know she was very nervous her first sunday. She was from a rough area and I dont think she had much as far as clothes go. Ill never forget when she walked in wearing a fairly revealing dress. There was some shock on some faces as she tried to find a seat. My companion ran up, threw his suit coat over here in front of everyone (she had ended up on the first row). She left after Sacrament meeting and we never saw her again.

That is one that I desperately, desperately wish I could have back because I would have handled it so much better.

As a sidenote, a couple of weeks later, we had another investigator show up falling-down drunk to our 9 AM Sacrament meeting. When the deacons brought the bread, he grabbed a handful and yelled out "GRACIAS!!!!" (this was an english-speaking ward). Ditto the water, despite our efforts. When the first speaker got up and started out by saying that she had been introduced to the church as a fan of Donnie and Marie, this dude lost it, yelling "IM SICK OF THIS!!! DONNIE AND MARIE!!!! I THOUGHT I WAS COMING TO CHURCH!!!!! NOT A FREAKING CONCERT!!!!" We just escorted him out and some sympathetic member came and drove him the 7 miles back to his house. I dont think that ward had much confidence in us after that, lol.

[UBlender]

I own a couple but haven't worn them for 20+ years. I hope you will still like me.

My formal outfit includes a real bow tie also. None of that clip on stuff for me.

As a public service I'll post this for those who may decide to take the plunge someday:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxKA9be_3Gk

My EQ Pres wears a bow tie. I don't trust him. This is all 100% true and sincere although the causality may be a little questionable.

[Two Utes]

BTW, I am on record as hating white shirts, and I think the whole idea that it is a priesthood uniform is ridiculous. So far no church leader has called me on the carpet for this. Then again, I have knuckled under and worn a white shirt to church for all the years I've been in the bishopric.

One of my law partners was bishop of the YSA ward at UCLA and never wore a white shirt the entire time her served. I kind of admire his pluck but shirt color is not on my list of things worth taking a stand on. I just whine about it to my friends.


Every male BYU law student who comes and interviews with our firm wears a white shirt. Everybody else wears all colors of shirts. I rarely if ever wear a white shirt, even to court. I hate them. Perhaps it's because of the local culture.

[Two Utes]

We recently had our whole stake reorganized due to recent development and lost about half of our ward in the process. As a result, I was released from EQ presidency. When the bishop called me in to extend my new calling at Teacher's Quorum advisor, we went through all of the job details and commitments. After 10 minutes of discussion and my "I'll have to talk to my wife, but I don't see it being a problem," the bishop started to get visibly nervous before saying , "there's one more thing we need to discuss. I'm not really sure how to dance around this, so I'll just come out and say it. The brethren have asked that those who work with the youth, provide the best examples as these young men prepare to enter the temple and serve missions." At this point I'm thinking that some of my unconventional EQ lessons has made its way back to him. "Part of being a good example is making sure that we're wearing a white shirt to church. Do you have any white shirts?" "Yes sir. Sure do." "Brother Schr-Ute, will you magnify this new calling and wear a white shirt every Sunday?" Sure. Whatever. But if I start hearing gruff about my constantly scruffy face, there will be push back.

What the hell does a white shirt have to do with magnifying your calling? Whatever the hell that means.

[LA Ute]

This is the only counsel I've ever seen or heard about what to wear in church. It's from a GC talk by Elder Holland (https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1995/10/this-do-in-remembrance-of-me?lang=eng&query=white+shirts). His subject was the sacrament, and 95% of the talk is about how to make that ordinance meaningful in our lives. He also mentioned this:


In that sacred setting we ask you young men of the Aaronic Priesthood to prepare and bless and pass these emblems of the Savior’s sacrifice worthily and reverently. What a stunning privilege and sacred trust given at such a remarkably young age! I can think of no higher compliment heaven could pay you. We do love you. Live your best and look your best when you participate in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. May I suggest that wherever possible a white shirt be worn by the deacons, teachers, and priests who handle the sacrament. For sacred ordinances in the Church we often use ceremonial clothing, and a white shirt could be seen as a gentle reminder of the white clothing you wore in the baptismal font and an anticipation of the white shirt you will soon wear into the temple and onto your missions.

That simple suggestion is not intended to be pharisaic or formalistic. We do not want deacons or priests in uniforms or unduly concerned about anything but the purity of their lives. But how our young people dress can teach a holy principle to us all, and it certainly can convey sanctity. As President David O. McKay taught, a white shirt contributes to the sacredness of the holy sacrament (see Conference Report, Oct. 1956, p. 89).

So I am fine with this, but my bishop emphasizes the bolded words. It's a suggestion, not a requirement. A boy shows up in a blue shirt, that's fine, it's more important that he pass the sacrament. But any discussion of the subject should include a tie-in to what Elder Holland said about the principles underlying his request. We all have a little Pharisee deep inside us, trying to get out, and stuff like white shirts is a tempting invitation.

[UtahsMrSports]

Makes for a great story, though, and isn't that what missions are all about?

Oh yes. I may be crazy, but I truly believe that there were times on my mission when something or somebody crazy was put in my way so that my companion and I could laugh and relax a little during what was an otherwise stressful day.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

When I was on my mission (here in the states), we had a promising young investigator. I dont think she had been to any type of church before and I know she was very nervous her first sunday. She was from a rough area and I dont think she had much as far as clothes go. Ill never forget when she walked in wearing a fairly revealing dress. There was some shock on some faces as she tried to find a seat. My companion ran up, threw his suit coat over here in front of everyone (she had ended up on the first row). She left after Sacrament meeting and we never saw her again.

That is one that I desperately, desperately wish I could have back because I would have handled it so much better.

As a sidenote, a couple of weeks later, we had another investigator show up falling-down drunk to our 9 AM Sacrament meeting. When the deacons brought the bread, he grabbed a handful and yelled out "GRACIAS!!!!" (this was an english-speaking ward). Ditto the water, despite our efforts. When the first speaker got up and started out by saying that she had been introduced to the church as a fan of Donnie and Marie, this dude lost it, yelling "IM SICK OF THIS!!! DONNIE AND MARIE!!!! I THOUGHT I WAS COMING TO CHURCH!!!!! NOT A FREAKING CONCERT!!!!" We just escorted him out and some sympathetic member came and drove him the 7 miles back to his house. I dont think that ward had much confidence in us after that, lol.

This isn't my story, but in one of my areas we lived with another companionship. One Sunday evening they had a baptism of a golden investigator. When they returned to the apartment that evening, I asked them how it went and was met with a look that couldn't decide if he should laugh or cry. Apparently, upon leaving a wonderful baptismal service for this woman with the missionaries, the bishop and his wife, and the ward mission leader and his wife, the bishop commented at what a lovely service it had been and how they were looking forward to having her in the ward. This new convert just looked off into the distance and replied. "Yes. That was a nice one. I think next week I'll try the Lutherans."


This is the only counsel I've ever seen or heard about what to wear in church. It's from a GC talk by Elder Holland (https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1995/10/this-do-in-remembrance-of-me?lang=eng&query=white+shirts). His subject was the sacrament, and 95% of the talk is about how to make that ordinance meaningful in our lives. He also mentioned this:


So I am fine with this, but my bishop emphasizes the bolded words. It's a suggestion, not a requirement. A boy shows up in a blue shirt, that's fine, it's more important that he pass the sacrament. But any discussion of the subject should include a tie-in to what Elder Holland said about the principles underlying his request. We all have a little Pharisee deep inside us, trying to get out, and stuff like white shirts is a tempting invitation.

Sounds like your bishop has a healthy outlook on the matter. Though it kind of reminds me of that suggestion on section 89.

[mpfunk]

Every male BYU law student who comes and interviews with our firm wears a white shirt. Everybody else wears all colors of shirts. I rarely if ever wear a white shirt, even to court. I hate them. Perhaps it's because of the local culture.

My law school (not BYU or Utah) specifically instructed us that we should wear a white shirt to any interviews with firms. Perhaps things have changed these days. I also don't wear a white shirt to Court.

[Two Utes]

My law school (not BYU or Utah) specifically instructed us that we should wear a white shirt to any interviews with firms. Perhaps things have changed these days. I also don't wear a white shirt to Court.

That is dumb advice.

[LA Ute]

I wear a white shirt to court because I want the judge looking at me, not my clothes. It's kind of a utilitarian thing with me. No loud ties, either.

[Rocker Ute]

I appreciate this post and I get this point. It is the whole be the change that you want to see in the church. It was a great idea, until the church starting ex-communicating people because of views that are part of the change that my wife and I would like to see in the church.

It is not a healthy place right now for our family.

I get it, and understandable. I am on the high council now, a discussion was about a new mission prep teacher. A couple dozen names of men were being bounced around, I finally said, "Is there any reason this can't be a woman?" The group sat there kind of stunned for a second, then he Stake President said, "No..." Eventually a woman was called.

I may not be advocating for the depth of change you are, but I certainly don't see the reason many leadership and other callings can't be held by women without a doctrinal change. Ward clerks, executive secretaries, ward mission leaders, Sunday school presidents, etc. I asked that loaded question in the same meeting, to some rolling eyes, it isn't that risky but I also don't think my membership is in question either.

Anyway, the point is, to date I'm certain no women had ever been considered for the calling in my Stake, and now an amazing and inspirational person holds it. Kind of a laughable story. Baby steps.

[Two Utes]

It is dumb that any firm would care about the color of a shirt, just like it is dumb that any bishop would care.

Agreed.

[mUUser]

What the hell does a white shirt have to do with magnifying your calling? Whatever the hell that means.

A white shirt is unnecessary to his calling, just as it is unnecessary to the sacrament service. You won't get one iota more out of either by wearing a white shirt.

In fact, not only is a white shirt unnecessary and unimportant to the sacrament service, but the blessings of the sacrament ordination isn't even dependent upon the worthiness of those administering it, much less whether they're wearing a white shirt.

Some hard line, 100 percenters feel its their stewardship to separate the wheat from the chaff in our church. For those that aren't "all in", looooooong suffering patience & faith is often required. Believe me.

[UBlender]

Some of the church's "suggestions" that are interpreted as hard-line stances can be damaging as well.

In my old ward, I was in the Elders Quorum presidency. One day, a nice lady on our street dropped by our house and began telling me that it was time for me to come visit her son and help him come back to church. The son was 20ish, but hadn't been to church since he was 16-17.

While I didn't ask why he stopped coming, she went ahead and explained that one Sunday he had worn a non-white shirt as a way of notifying people that he wouldn't be participating in the administration of the sacrament that day. It was meant as a signal not that he didn't want to, but he wasn't worthy to do so on this particular day (not sure why and I never thought it mattered to me).

Anyway, the Young Mens president at the time was a hard-line type of guy and apparently lit him up pretty good over not wearing white. The kid didn't come to church for several years but did eventually return (missed the suggested window for missionary service). It was all so completely unnecessary. You can argue that the kid should have had a thicker skin and not let an angry old man deter him from church (and you wouldn't be wrong, technically) but why people get hung up on things like this and blow things up over something like shirt color is beyond me. Completely against what the gospel is, IMO. I do think the church has a weakness in that there are so many suggestions and guidelines and even rules that are not essential to the gospel and it takes the focus off of where it should be.

(Off soapbox).

[LA Ute]

A white shirt is unnecessary to his calling, just as it is unnecessary to the sacrament service. You won't get one iota more out of either by wearing a white shirt.

In fact, not only is a white shirt unnecessary and unimportant to the sacrament service, but the blessings of the sacrament ordination isn't even dependent upon the worthiness of those administering it, much less whether they're wearing a white shirt.

Some hard line, 100 percenters feel its their stewardship to separate the wheat from the chaff in our church. For those that aren't "all in", looooooong suffering patience & faith is often required. Believe me.

Let me give an alternative perspective. A while back Pres. Uchtdorf said that priesthood holders should try to have a vision of what they are doing. A deacon may think he is just routinely passing the sacrament, but he may be passing it that day to someone who's having a serious personal crisis and really needs the spiritual help and strength the sacrament can provide. With that thought in mind a deacon might stand a little taller, be a little more reverent, and so forth. He might also want to have his hair combed, not wear an earring, and so forth, so as not to distract the person's attention or detract from the experience at all. Wearing a white shirt could contribute to the "specialness" of the experience, and could avoid a distraction. So I'm not buying your statement, "You won't get one iota more out of either by wearing a white shirt" is off the mark, in my opinion.

[Solon]

What the hell does a white shirt have to do with magnifying your calling? Whatever the hell that means.

The white-shirt "suggestion" is passive-aggressive doublespeak. It either matters or it doesn't. Obviously, it doesn't.

My neighbor tells a story about, when he was in high school, how the Stake President spied a young woman (teenager) in the hall who was wearing sandals without nylons or socks. The Stake Prez berated her & kicked her out of the building for the infraction. Sent her home to cover up her legs/feet.

Too bad bad she was an investigator.

[Mormon Red Death]

Let me give an alternative perspective. A while back Pres. Uchtdorf said that priesthood holders should try to have a vision of what they are doing. A deacon may think he is just routinely passing the sacrament, but he may be passing it that day to someone who's having a serious personal crisis and really needs the spiritual help and strength the sacrament can provide. With that thought in mind a deacon might stand a little taller, be a little more reverent, and so forth. He might also want to have his hair combed, not wear an earring, and so forth, so as not to distract the person's attention or detract from the experience at all. Wearing a white shirt could contribute to the "specialness" of the experience, and could avoid a distraction. So I'm not buying your statement, "You won't get one iota more out of either by wearing a white shirt" is off the mark, in my opinion.
really LA ute? One could "stand a little taller" wearing any color of shirt. BTW can we just be honest about the policy? It's so the church can further its brand off the back of its members.

Mormons aren't rebels. Mormons are neat and clean. Mormons don't have long hair and think for themselves. They wear white shirts with no beards.

[Rocker Ute]

Mormons don't have long hair and think for themselves.

This is so tired and is repeated so much I think the people who say it can't think for themselves.

Let's talk some more about the oppressive nature of a white dress shirt and then I'll find some people with real problems. LA Ute's position in this thread about the matter has been pretty clear, so why trounce on him about this. There is nothing wrong with asking a kid to wear a white shirt; there is something wrong with jumping all over a kid if he doesn't. Nothing LA Ute has said is contrary to that.

[Mormon Red Death]

This is so tired and is repeated so much I think the people who say it can't think for themselves.

Let's talk some more about the oppressive nature of a white dress shirt and then I'll find some people with real problems. LA Ute's position in this thread about the matter has been pretty clear, so why trounce on him about this. There is nothing wrong with asking a kid to wear a white shirt; there is something wrong with jumping all over a kid if he doesn't. Nothing LA Ute has said is contrary to that.
Is there anything wrong with asking a kid to wear a white shirt? of course not. Suggesting that someone is more righteous because they are wearing a white shirt is just bullshit.

[LA Ute]

really LA ute? One could "stand a little taller" wearing any color of shirt. BTW can we just be honest about the policy? It's so the church can further its brand off the back of its members.

Mormons aren't rebels. Mormons are neat and clean. Mormons don't have long hair and think for themselves. They wear white shirts with no beards.

You misread me. The deacon could stand a little taller because he realizes the significance of passing the sacrament, regardless of the shirt he wears. I've said here that I don't think white shirts are essential and they can produce a Pharasaic approach. I do think that when worn in the right spirit they can be a sweet gesture of devotion. But wearing one doesn't make anyone more righteous. Hey, remember, I'm the guy who brought this subject up and said we go too far with white shirts.

[Rocker Ute]

Is there anything wrong with asking a kid to wear a white shirt? of course not. Suggesting that someone is more righteous because they are wearing a white shirt is just bullshit.

Read what he said again, because you are way off, he never said nor implied that.

[chrisrenrut]

. . .Mormons aren't rebels. Mormons are neat and clean. Mormons don't have long hair and think for themselves. They wear white shirts with no beards.

Mormons who do choose to have long hair and think for themselves (and wear shirts of many colors, or women wearing pants to church) should be secure enough with theirselves and their testimony to not allow the unrighteous judgement of others affect them.

When I got back for my mission, I grew my hair shoulder length, and would have grown a beard if not for my darn Scandinavian ancestry. Later after I cut it, I would dye it different colors for occasions, such as green for St Patrick's day, or red for attending a game at the Marriott center (Van Horn years). I attended the temple regularly, served in the EQ presidency, and drove my parents nuts. But I was secure with who I was, and only cared about the opinion of a few select people. Anyone else thinking I was less worthy or deserving didn't know me, and I didn't care. That said, when I had green hair, I felt very self conscious at church, and felt I was distracting from the spirit of the meetings (like Spence Eccles eyebrows). But a seafoam or buttercorn colored shirt would not have (Jcrew was big back then).

Leaders should realize that young men and investigators are not that secure. They will be influenced by how others perceive them. Here is where Mormons should stay passive aggressive; compliment a young man wearing a white shirt, without compliments when wearing a black shirt with a white bow tie (however hard that may be).

[DrumNFeather]

really LA ute? One could "stand a little taller" wearing any color of shirt. BTW can we just be honest about the policy? It's so the church can further its brand off the back of its members.

Mormons aren't rebels. Mormons are neat and clean. Mormons don't have long hair and think for themselves. They wear white shirts with no beards.

This guy is a Mormon!

1359

[Diehard Ute]

This thread makes me laugh. In all the years I attended the Presbyterian church I never once wore a white shirt.

I many times wore a Ute sweatshirt :)

[LA Ute]

This thread makes me laugh. In all the years I attended the Presbyterian church I never once wore a white shirt.

I many times wore a Ute sweatshirt :)

Sure, rub it in.


When I got back for my mission, I grew my hair shoulder length, and would have grown a beard if not for my darn Scandinavian ancestry. Later after I cut it, I would dye it different colors for occasions, such as green for St Patrick's day, or red for attending a game at the Marriott center (Van Horn years).

Photos! We need photos!


Leaders should realize that young men and investigators are not that secure. They will be influenced by how others perceive them. Here is where Mormons should stay passive aggressive; compliment a young man wearing a white shirt, without compliments when wearing a black shirt with a white bow tie (however hard that may be).

Words of wisdom.

[Solon]

Read what he said again, because you are way off, he never said nor implied that.

LA didn't say it (in fact, he said the opposite; and I do love LA Ute), but it is unofficial official policy.
The white-shirts are a thing intended to create & promote a unique LDS identity. So is the Word of Wisdom (as it is interpreted today), as well as the short haircuts and other cultural tics that make the Mormons appear corporate wholesome.

But MRD is right: I can think of nothing in the LDS church more stupid than the culturally (and hierarchically) reinforced suggestion that wearing a white shirt causes or correlates to righteousness & worthiness.

[Two Utes]

Let me give an alternative perspective. A while back Pres. Uchtdorf said that priesthood holders should try to have a vision of what they are doing. A deacon may think he is just routinely passing the sacrament, but he may be passing it that day to someone who's having a serious personal crisis and really needs the spiritual help and strength the sacrament can provide. With that thought in mind a deacon might stand a little taller, be a little more reverent, and so forth. He might also want to have his hair combed, not wear an earring, and so forth, so as not to distract the person's attention or detract from the experience at all. Wearing a white shirt could contribute to the "specialness" of the experience, and could avoid a distraction. So I'm not buying your statement, "You won't get one iota more out of either by wearing a white shirt" is off the mark, in my opinion.

This might be the absolute worst reason for wearing a white shirt I have EVER heard. Love ya LA, but are you serious?

[LA Ute]

This might be the absolute worst reason for wearing a white shirt I have EVER heard. Love ya LA, but are you serious?

Yes. And you're buying lunch next time!

[Two Utes]

Yes. And you're buying lunch next time!

Deal.

[Scratch]

The white search for the sacrament thing is interesting because it's actually pretty ordinary and merely encouraged, as opposed to required. If you think about sacraments in other Christian organizations, the priest providing the sacrament will usually be adorned in some symbolic garb that is way more pronounced than simply wearing a white shirt. Ironically, if the LDS church had something similar (imagine having robes or something in storage that deacons would put on to pass the sacrament) I think it would result in much less discussion; rather, it would merely be symbolic of performing the ordinance. However, because the LDS church has suggested/requested (but not required) those passing the sacrament to do something as ordinary as wear a white shirt it generates a great deal of discussion simply because the requested attire is so ordinary.

I would add that those who believe the missionary dress and grooming code is important for ordinary church attendance are nuts.

[mUUser]

.... Wearing a white shirt could contribute to the "specialness" of the experience, and could avoid a distraction. So I'm not buying your statement, "You won't get one iota more out of either by wearing a white shirt" is off the mark, in my opinion.


A non white shirt could be considered a distraction during the sacrament? How then do we address a boy that walks with a limp, a hairlip, spilled OJ on his white shirt, crooked tie, crying toddlers, squirmy preteens, an early teen "mustache", a priest's squeaky voice, brown shoes with a black belt, facial tics, cheerios on the floor, sniffles n sneezes, and a million other things that cause more distraction to the sacrament service than a blue shirt.

To be clear, my son wears a white shirt to pass the sacrament simply because the bishop prefers it, and I feel sorry for all the crap a bishop has to deal with, so don't want to contribute to the heaping pile of steamy crap already on his plate. I'll do near anything to avoid being a problem to a man already taxed to the hilt, but, to me it makes zero sense to suggest a white shirt is an important part of either magnifying a calling or contributes some special spirit to a non saving ordinance such as the sacrament.

We'll simply have to disagree on this my friend.

[Diehard Ute]

The white search for the sacrament thing is interesting because it's actually pretty ordinary and merely encouraged, as opposed to required. If you think about sacraments in other Christian organizations, the priest providing the sacrament will usually be adorned in some symbolic garb that is way more pronounced than simply wearing a white shirt. Ironically, if the LDS church had something similar (imagine having robes or something in storage that deacons would put on to pass the sacrament) I think it would result in much less discussion; rather, it would merely be symbolic of performing the ordinance. However, because the LDS church has suggested/requested (but not required) those passing the sacrament to do something as ordinary as wear a white shirt it generates a great deal of discussion simply because the requested attire is so ordinary.

I would add that those who believe the missionary dress and grooming code is important for ordinary church attendance are nuts.

Churches such as the Presbyterian church have their lay leaders serve communion, and have no dress code etc. Depending on what the nature of the service is (most churches have more formal and more casual services) you'll likely have someone wearing a golf shirt and khakis serving you.

Some denominations do have very regimented rules etc, many others do not and adjust based on the type of service, time of year etc (things tend to be less formal during the summer months for example)

The service I attended when I went was a smaller informal service. I often served communion and never even wore a tie ;)

[tooblue]

really LA ute? One could "stand a little taller" wearing any color of shirt. BTW can we just be honest about the policy? It's so the church can further its brand off the back of its members.

Mormons aren't rebels. Mormons are neat and clean. Mormons don't have long hair and think for themselves. They wear white shirts with no beards.

The "moronirony" of my siblings (two utes included) is embarrassing. "Rebelling" as MRD equates it is a tired cliché and a much more harmful meme than any supposed modesty meme advanced by the church. Seriously, MRD? You and two utes are caucasian, short haired, clean shaven, white shirt wearing, middle aged males sucking at the tit of the insidious corporate conglomerate that is the US legal and health care systems. Neither of you would know a rebel if it came up and bit you on the ass. How's that for a meme?

Good gravy. We wear white shirts precisely because it is a cultural construct that is both a traditional, outward manifestation of respect for an ordinance or ritual, which can also be construed as rebellious in context to the much larger social construct that romanticizes the north American myth of individuality.

[Rocker Ute]

"I'm not popular enough to be different..."

1360

For the record I think we've canonized the white shirt thing more than any church instruction in this thread alone.

When I was priest age I remember our adviser saying about us saying the sacrament prayer, "Don't say it too monotone, don't say it to dramatically. Don't say it too fast or too slow. Say it in a way where people focus on the prayer and not how you are saying it." Same thing with the white shirt, a little 'uniformity' in this reduces some distractions, provides a little formality and structure and indicates to the youth that what they are doing is important. A white shirt is probably the easiest thing for most young people to get too. I don't think it goes much beyond that, and as all here seem to have concurred, a kid showing up in a colored shirt isn't reason to exclude them.

[LA Ute]

For the record I think we've canonized the white shirt thing more than any church instruction in this thread alone.

When I was priest age I remember our adviser saying about us saying the sacrament prayer, "Don't say it too monotone, don't say it to dramatically. Don't say it too fast or too slow. Say it in a way where people focus on the prayer and not how you are saying it." Same thing with the white shirt, a little 'uniformity' in this reduces some distractions, provides a little formality and structure and indicates to the youth that what they are doing is important. A white shirt is probably the easiest thing for most young people to get too. I don't think it goes much beyond that, and as all here seem to have concurred, a kid showing up in a colored shirt isn't reason to exclude them.

I not sure how I came to be seen as the leading proponent here of white shirts (a great irony, for those who know me) so I'll just say I think Rocker has this right. In a perfect world, or at least a better world than the one I had as a teenager, LDS young men who are taking part in the sacrament will appreciate the sacredness of the ordinance and the impact it can have in people's lives. I don't think I fully "got" that until many years later. I am still "getting" it, in fact. So if a young guy says to himself, "I am passing the sacrament today and that's really important, so I am going to make sure my hair is combed and my shoes are shined, and I'm going to stand up straight and be very respectful of this process while I am doing it," then to me that's a great thing. If the guy says "I'm going to wear a white shirt too out of respect and because that's what the church leaders suggest," then there's everything right with that. That's all I am saying.

We have to teach the kids correct principles and let them govern themselves, however, so I will never support requiring white shirts as a uniform for passing the sacrament. Nor will I forbid some kid from passing because his shoes aren't shined, and so forth. In my ward our deacons, teachers and priests wear white shirts because they've bought into the above principles. If one of them forgets, or doesn't have a clean white shirt on that Sunday, just doesn't want to wear one, or whatever, nothing happens. He passes the sacrament.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

Mormons who do choose to have long hair and think for themselves (and wear shirts of many colors, or women wearing pants to church) should be secure enough with theirselves and their testimony to not allow the unrighteous judgement of others affect them.

When I got back for my mission, I grew my hair shoulder length, and would have grown a beard if not for my darn Scandinavian ancestry. Later after I cut it, I would dye it different colors for occasions, such as green for St Patrick's day, or red for attending a game at the Marriott center (Van Horn years). I attended the temple regularly, served in the EQ presidency, and drove my parents nuts. But I was secure with who I was, and only cared about the opinion of a few select people. Anyone else thinking I was less worthy or deserving didn't know me, and I didn't care. That said, when I had green hair, I felt very self conscious at church, and felt I was distracting from the spirit of the meetings (like Spence Eccles eyebrows). But a seafoam or buttercorn colored shirt would not have (Jcrew was big back then).

Leaders should realize that young men and investigators are not that secure. They will be influenced by how others perceive them. Here is where Mormons should stay passive aggressive; compliment a young man wearing a white shirt, without compliments when wearing a black shirt with a white bow tie (however hard that may be).

This is me at about age 25. I started growing my hair out my last couple of years of school and really let it go when I started working as a field biologist after graduating. I maintained it at this length for maybe seven years. Once I got married and my wife's sister started cutting my hair, it started getting shorter and shorter. Throughout the majority of the time I had long hair, I was active in the church. When I'm being honest with myself, there was definitely some rebelliousness in my insistence to grow it out. Not so much in a counter-culture frame as much as a novelty context. I have a full head of thick hair. The longer it got, the more the girls liked to play with it. As far as comments at church, there were plenty. Mostly "good nature ribbing" which I'm more than willing to play along with, but as you mentioned, only because I was confident in where I was in the church and away from church. Maybe it helped that I could pull the Jesus doppelganger. During the long hair chronicles, I served in a Sunday school presidency and three EQ presidencies (one as president), so any angst I received either came from my mother or from those who I had no direct report to. I remember one Sunday afternoon, I was in Provo for the mission homecoming of my roommate's girlfriend. Her father was a very successful ob/gyn and stake president. While sitting on the front porch of his palatial home, complete with a full-sized indoor swimming pool, he decided to engage in conversation with me. Almost immediately, he began lecturing me on my appearance, which he had reduced to my hair length and beard as my suit and tie matched everyone else's appearance that afternoon. "I know that guys like you like to throw out the fact that Jesus had long hair and a beard, but you're wrong to do it. Do you know why Jesus had long hair? Do you know why Brigham Young had a beard? Because those were the social norms in their day. They did it to blend in. Did you grow your hair out to be more like Jesus? Of course you didn't. You grew it out because it helped you stand out. It brings attention to you. Any time that we're doing something for the purpose of attracting attention to ourselves, we've fallen out of favor with our Heavenly Father. You should really reconsider the way you present yourself. Listen to the Spirit and walk away from pride."

Did I mention that I had just met this good brother that day? Before venturing back into the house to find my roommate, I noted "what a nice house you have. Probably the biggest in the whole neighborhood. You must be very proud."

Stuff like this seems to happen all of the time in the church. People either struggle with a lack of self awareness or think that they can just say whatever the hell they want to in the church as long as their "intentions are good." I remember walking out of the high council office after reporting home from my mission and running into a woman from my parents ward.
"It's good to see you. Are you happy to be home from your mission?"
"I am. Looking forward to the next chapter."
"Oh. My sons weren't ready to come home. But they liked their missions, so..."

1361

[Two Utes]

This is me at about age 25. I started growing my hair out my last couple of years of school and really let it go when I started working as a field biologist after graduating. I maintained it at this length for maybe seven years. Once I got married and my wife's sister started cutting my hair, it started getting shorter and shorter. Throughout the majority of the time I had long hair, I was active in the church. When I'm being honest with myself, there was definitely some rebelliousness in my insistence to grow it out. Not so much in a counter-culture frame as much as a novelty context. I have a full head of thick hair. The longer it got, the more the girls liked to play with it. As far as comments at church, there were plenty. Mostly "good nature ribbing" which I'm more than willing to play along with, but as you mentioned, only because I was confident in where I was in the church and away from church. Maybe it helped that I could pull the Jesus doppelganger. During the long hair chronicles, I served in a Sunday school presidency and three EQ presidencies (one as president), so any angst I received either came from my mother or from those who I had no direct report to. I remember one Sunday afternoon, I was in Provo for the mission homecoming of my roommate's girlfriend. Her father was a very successful ob/gyn and stake president. While sitting on the front porch of his palatial home, complete with a full-sized indoor swimming pool, he decided to engage in conversation with me. Almost immediately, he began lecturing me on my appearance, which he had reduced to my hair length and beard as my suit and tie matched everyone else's appearance that afternoon. "I know that guys like you like to throw out the fact that Jesus had long hair and a beard, but you're wrong to do it. Do you know why Jesus had long hair? Do you know why Brigham Young had a beard? Because those were the social norms in their day. They did it to blend in. Did you grow your hair out to be more like Jesus? Of course you didn't. You grew it out because it helped you stand out. It brings attention to you. Any time that we're doing something for the purpose of attracting attention to ourselves, we've fallen out of favor with our Heavenly Father. You should really reconsider the way you present yourself. Listen to the Spirit and walk away from pride."

Did I mention that I had just met this good brother that day? Before venturing back into the house to find my roommate, I noted "what a nice house you have. Probably the biggest in the whole neighborhood. You must be very proud."

Stuff like this seems to happen all of the time in the church. People either struggle with a lack of self awareness or think that they can just say whatever the hell they want to in the church as long as their "intentions are good." I remember walking out of the high council office after reporting home from my mission and running into a woman from my parents ward.
"It's good to see you. Are you happy to be home from your mission?"
"I am. Looking forward to the next chapter."
"Oh. My sons weren't ready to come home. But they liked their missions, so..."

1361

Would anybody care to explain to me why God doesn't want you to attract any attention to yourself?

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

This might be the absolute worst reason for wearing a white shirt I have EVER heard. Love ya LA, but are you serious?

This line of thinking perfectly illistrates the Mormon modesty dicotomy. Sure we won't be punished for Adam's transgression, but the sisters will be held accountable for any unrighteous thoughts among the brethren due to their apparel selection and the brethren will be held accountable to everyone who can't feel the spirit because they're wearing a sky blue dress shirt.

P.S. The young men in my ward all look fantastic in their white shirts on Sunday but seem to have opted to express their individuality through their choices of footwear. Guess we need to broaden our uniform clarifications.

[Scorcho]

I bet if you trace this back, you'll simply find that decades ago the LDS Church invested heavily in Clorox.

[FountainOfUte]

I struggle with the "White Shirt Manifesto." Over time, I've begun to feel like the contemporary LDS church is ironically picking up some of the Pharisee-like traits that we "Harumph!" at every fourth year in Sunday school.

I'm less than a year from turning 40. I currently wear the "Jesus" look (hair/beard) that Schr-Ute described above. I wear it for many reasons. First, and foremost, it's a fun change. Secondly, my wife thinks it looks hot. For the first 12 years of my life, my hair looked like Moe from the Three Stooges because it was so straight and fine that it would do nothing else without great effort. I've tried a few different looks over the years just for the variety and change of pace. Go back two years and I was sporting a buzz.

But I'll admit, there is an element of "rebel" about it, too. I like that it's different. I like that it makes a few people ask "What's going on with Brother FountainOfUte"? It's stupid and immature that I get some kicks from that. But whatever. The truth is, I'm as active as ever with a strong testimony and a desire to instill this in my kids. But I want my kids to understand what's important. And the truth is, loving, respecting, and honoring the the Lord in your heart is what's important. Question is, does a total lack of pride (and fashion sense and creativity) manifest itself in a white shirt? Yes, maybe...for me. I'll probably have finally overcome some pride the day I feel that for myself it's time to practice the White Shirt Manifesto going forward. I'm not there yet.

I do wonder what place the white shirt manifesto has in the modern church. What does the Lord think of it? Honestly? I can't say for sure that He doesn't care. While there's no mention of Christ's 12 apostles being asked to shed their fisherman's rags for clean, non-distracting white robes ...maybe they did. The New Testament only has so much room to talk about Christ's legacy, and I'm guessing there wasn't room to elaborate on the jots and tittles of the time. I like to think that much of our notions of outward devotion are meaningless to Him. But what I like to think doesn't matter at all.

In the meantime, I like that someone can come to church and see a guy with a beard and long hair pulled into a man bun sitting with his family preparing to take the sacrament. They can see that a guy in the EQ presidency isn't wearing a tie some weeks, but he's otherwise neatly dressed for worship. I'm happy to play that role because I feel like we have to "show that look" a little bit and there are plenty examples of the dark-suit-white-shirt-and-tie routine. I want anyone who comes to feel that they can come as they are. And then we'll all work together to make ourselves a little more Christ-like together.

[LA Ute]

1361

I find that striped shirt pretty horrifying. You didn't wear that to church, did you?

[Sullyute]

Wow, so Dwight is actually Ben Afflect, who knew?!

[Diehard Ute]

Wow, so Dwight is actually Ben Afflect, who knew?!

I swear he's Christian Bale

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

I'll stick with this.

1362

[Rocker Ute]

All this talk of church weirdos reminds me of some of my last days in a single's ward. We were informed a gentleman had asked if he could come and talk to the men about how to find a wife. No I'm not kidding. We were all encouraged to be there. To this day I'm not at all certain why.

So we arrive to find a fat and bald 50yo man (bless his heart) there to present to us. The first thing he tells us is that he is an expert and knows how to find a wife because he has done it twice. We all kind of glanced at each other as we didn't know if it meant he'd been divorced, was a polygamist or some other scenario. He went on about appearance and grooming, most of the standard stuff that we've joked about in this thread. Some weird things about hygiene like bathing at least 2x a day and to always wear cologne. Then he went onto the importance of being confident, which is where things got funny.

He was saying, "Women love confidence, so if you see a woman you want to meet, just walk across the room, shake her hand, tell her your name and tell her you'd like to meet her." So he gestures to me, which knowing how I am, and particularly how I was in my early 20s, had he the slightest bit of inspiration he would have passed right over me. But he points at me and asks me to get up and come to the front and stand opposite of him, I on one wall, he on the other. He then says, "This is how you meet a woman" and then walks assertively towards me with his hand out, all the way across the room. When he finally reaches me I shake his hand and with his face about two inches from mine he says, "Hello. My name is so-and-so and I would like to meet you. What is your name?" It was all very weird and awkward there, it most definitely would have been in real life. I would have loved to have seen it in live action.

So I say my name and he stops his role-playing and says, "So, now tell us how that made you feel." I said, "Truthfully? Kind of confused, but also a little curious." The room burst out in laughter, he turned bright red in anger and said, "If you aren't going to take this seriously then I'm going to ask you to leave." So I shrugged my shoulders and left, I think I'm the better man for not having sat through another moment of that crap. In retrospect maybe I shouldn't have been such a chump, but I can't fix that.

It reminds me that we are all a little brain damaged.

[LA Ute]

All this talk of church weirdos reminds me of some of my last days in a single's ward. We were informed a gentleman had asked if he could come and talk to the men about how to find a wife. No I'm not kidding. We were all encouraged to be there. To this day I'm not at all certain why.

So we arrive to find a fat and bald 50yo man (bless his heart) there to present to us. The first thing he tells us is that he is an expert and knows how to find a wife because he has done it twice. We all kind of glanced at each other as we didn't know if it meant he'd been divorced, was a polygamist or some other scenario. He went on about appearance and grooming, most of the standard stuff that we've joked about in this thread. Some weird things about hygiene like bathing at least 2x a day and to always wear cologne. Then he went onto the importance of being confident, which is where things got funny.

He was saying, "Women love confidence, so if you see a woman you want to meet, just walk across the room, shake her hand, tell her your name and tell her you'd like to meet her." So he gestures to me, which knowing how I am, and particularly how I was in my early 20s, had he the slightest bit of inspiration he would have passed right over me. But he points at me and asks me to get up and come to the front and stand opposite of him, I on one wall, he on the other. He then says, "This is how you meet a woman" and then walks assertively towards me with his hand out, all the way across the room. When he finally reaches me I shake his hand and with his face about two inches from mine he says, "Hello. My name is so-and-so and I would like to meet you. What is your name?" It was all very weird and awkward there, it most definitely would have been in real life. I would have loved to have seen it in live action.

So I say my name and he stops his role-playing and says, "So, now tell us how that made you feel." I said, "Truthfully? Kind of confused, but also a little curious." The room burst out in laughter, he turned bright red in anger and said, "If you aren't going to take this seriously then I'm going to ask you to leave." So I shrugged my shoulders and left, I think I'm the better man for not having sat through another moment of that crap. In retrospect maybe I shouldn't have been such a chump, but I can't fix that.

It reminds me that we are all a little brain damaged.

So that was you, huh? I've always wanted to catch up with the young punk who embarrassed me that day.

[utahby5]

After my mission I was done with white shirts and suits for a while. Not a rebellious thing, just bored with it and preferred something else. For 2 years as ward mission leader followed by 3 years as ward executive secretary and 3 subsequent years as EQ Pres I wore a blue shirt every Sunday. I liked to rent the jumpsuits at the temple, so I didn't even need a white shirt for that. Only one person ever commented on it, a young married kid that moved in the ward and told me it would be better if the EQ pres wore a white shirt. Whatever, he was a decent kid. Then I got called to be in the bishopric. I really like the stake President and I respect him for his personal life, success and his perspective in church service. He asked me if I would wear a white shirt. I said yes out of respect for him and I have worn it since. I also bought a jacket to wear, haven't felt a need for a suit yet. In regards to where this places my mormon orthodoxy in my extended family, I guess I am less orthodox than tooblue, slightly more than MRD, and basically hasidic mormon compared to twoutes. Is that about right? Overall I say, "la di fricken da".

[LA Ute]

This is a good piece, and helped me think a little differently about the question:

The Problem with Overemphasizing Modesty

http://ldsmag.com/the-problem-with-overemphasizing-modesty/

[UtahsMrSports]

This is a good piece, and helped me think a little differently about the question:

The Problem with Overemphasizing Modesty

http://ldsmag.com/the-problem-with-overemphasizing-modesty/

Thanks for sharing this, LA. While I don't agree with everything she said, it gave me a lot to think about and on some things, I thought she hit it out of the park.

As a youth leader myself, this made me think of what I would do in a situation where a young woman came to a church activity wearing a swimsuit that was not necessarily "For the Strength of Youth" approved. There was a time in my life where I (regrettably) probably would have said to make her go home and change. Now? Like she said, I would just be glad that she was there participating in a youth activity. Life is hard enough as is, no need to make someone feel stupid at a church activity.

Now, I disagree with how she handled the situation with the young men, if that encounter actually happened (the dialogue by the boys, as quoted, was crap. It was likely altered, but to what extent, Im not sure.)

I don't know how I would have handled it, but something about her approach seemed off to me, can't quite put my finger on it. She was right, its wrong to judge, but the boys weren't all together wrong either. I dont know......

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

I ran into a guy into stake a few weeks ago at Costco. A mutual friend of ours that lives in Utah came up. At one point he brought up her Instagram pictures of her daughter and how "he doesn't agree with the immodest photos she posts and hopes that she makes changes before her daughter gets older. The daughter turns two next month. She has the occasional post of her daughter covered in lunch/crafts/bubbles in only her diaper. This is the type of modesty conversation that I'll never understand.

[Brian]

I ran into a guy into stake a few weeks ago at Costco. A mutual friend of ours that lives in Utah came up. At one point he brought up her Instagram pictures of her daughter and how "he doesn't agree with the immodest photos she posts and hopes that she makes changes before her daughter gets older. The daughter turns two next month. She has the occasional post of her daughter covered in lunch/crafts/bubbles in only her diaper. This is the type of modesty conversation that I'll never understand.

That is extraordinarily creepy.....

[LA Ute]

I think the article's most important message is to care more about the individual (usually but not always a young woman) than about what he or she is wearing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NorthwestUteFan]

It is nice to know that Utah isn't the only state with screwed up modesty issues. This girl in Kentucky was sent home for her immodest clothing. Apparently the rule is that girls cannot show any portion of their collarbones, because it is distracting to the boys.

This is terribly wrong. They may as well just tell the girls to wear burkhas.

1538

[Rocker Ute]

That is extraordinarily creepy.....

Judging from the 4yo streaker that just got out of the tub and came flying by, this person would not approve of what is going on in my household.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mpfunk]

If it happened, the boys' perspective on the interaction may be quite different.

I have been teaching youth Sunday school for 3 years, and my wife has been the YW president over the same time span. Guess how many lessons out of the new curriculum deal with modesty? Zero in Sunday school, and one optional lesson in YW. I don't know how this topic is overemphasized, and I personally don't know anyone who is "obsessing" over it. I feel like the author wrote this article to condemn ideas that went out of vogue before my lifetime, but, of course, I don't live in Provo.

I do think the principle is misunderstood, though. Most normal people associate modesty with humility and not drawing attention to yourself. I am not normal, but that is how I understand and teach it as well. There is, however, some percentage of LDS folk who can't seem to get past the clothing aspect of that.

Also, I have no idea who Lindsay Sterling is.

I want to go to your LDS church. It would be much better one than I have experienced. In your church, I be there wouldn't be an activity where the young women are told that the young men are going to police their clothing put ugly athletic shorts on any of them that are dressed immodestly. In your church, a prominent leader probably wouldn't make an offensive statement and promote rape culture by calling women "walking pornography." In your church, a magazine wouldn't post an equally damaging comment that women often "get the men they dress for." Your church also probably wouldn't have the awful comments to that article showing how the way modesty is being taught is a huge problem.

I'd be much more willing to go to your church.

[mpfunk]

You should, man. I've never heard of any of those things. Well, I've heard of comments, but I haven't read them. Only the craziest of the crazy post comments on articles, right? I mean, they must be crazier than people who post on message boards, and we're loco.

Did the athletic shorts thing happen in your ward? I've never heard of that. Closest I've ever come was in Wisconsin, where leaders interviewed the youth prior to dances to ensure that the youth understood clothing rules. And I thought that was strange.

You know what else they did in WI and do here in CO that I don't like? They do a "Mormon Prom." No me gusta.

Yes the athletics shorts thing happened in my old ward. It was in Utah.

[jrj84105]

I ran into a guy into stake a few weeks ago at Costco. A mutual friend of ours that lives in Utah came up. At one point he brought up her Instagram pictures of her daughter and how "he doesn't agree with the immodest photos she posts and hopes that she makes changes before her daughter gets older. The daughter turns two next month. She has the occasional post of her daughter covered in lunch/crafts/bubbles in only her diaper. This is the type of modesty conversation that I'll never understand.
And that's how you find the pedophile.

[mUUser]

....

To join my LDS church, you need to take things in the spirit in which they were intended. So your leader said "walking pornography." Yeah, a poor choice of words, but it was probably part of council motivated by concern for the YW and a desire to help them dress well. We can't all be poets.....

Don't feel obligated to defend this, but your choice, of course.

[LA Ute]

I think mp lives in Utah County, where the worst excesses in Mormondom occur. I guess we have company with some Baptists, who think showing a clavicle is immodest. I haven't seen that one in Mormon circles yet.

I like the idea of teaching men -- starting when they're young -- that their response to the way women dress is up to them. They (we) are going to be dealing with that challenge all our lives, so why not just confront that need?

That said, modesty belongs in the conversation somewhere. No one (well, almost no one) would deny that people should not walk around naked. So where do we draw the line? How much coverage is enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DrumNFeather]

You should, man. I've never heard of any of those things. Well, I've heard of comments, but I haven't read them. Only the craziest of the crazy post comments on articles, right? I mean, they must be crazier than people who post on message boards, and we're loco.

Did the athletic shorts thing happen in your ward? I've never heard of that. Closest I've ever come was in Wisconsin, where leaders interviewed the youth prior to dances to ensure that the youth understood clothing rules. And I thought that was strange.

You know what else they did in WI and do here in CO that I don't like? They do a "Mormon Prom." No me gusta.


I think mp lives in Utah County, where the worst excesses in Mormondom occur. I guess we have company with some Baptists, who think showing a clavicle is immodest. I haven't seen that one in Mormon circles yet.

I like the idea of teaching men -- starting when they're young -- that their response to the way women dress is up to them. They (we) are going to be dealing with that challenge all our lives, so why not just confront that need?

That said, modesty belongs in the conversation somewhere. No one (well, almost no one) would deny that people should not walk around naked. So where do we draw the line? How much coverage is enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have resisted the idea for a long time that the church is different in Utah. I hate the term "Utah Mormon," mostly because it is spoken with the same level of disgust as "TBM" is. However, I've come to realize that you certainly have these wacky pockets of Mormondom, which is truly unfortunate. And yes, many of them are concentrated in Utah, sadly.

My ward out here in the East is very much like Sancho describes. People invest in the ward and they invest in the youth and as such, the message remains on point to what LA noted about valuing the individual over anything else. Oh sure, you have your weirdos, every ward has them, but the general ward population is still far more concerned with supporting and valuing people above all.

Several years ago, the SP was sitting in EQ when my buddy was teaching, and he started to go down a lame modesty path about the girls and women in the stake dressing a certain way and my buddy who was the EQP at the time cut him off mid sentence and basically said "that's not their responsibility, it's ours and ours alone." Left the SP speechless (and probably stewing). Be the change.

As the father of three daughters, I certainly have a vested interest in the messages and examples they get at church. Fortunately, I have no complaints in that regard from the ward(s) I've been in. However, should a problem ever arise, I will not stand on the sidelines and watch it unfold. Frankly, I don't understand how people with such strong objections to the message do. So much of one's church experience happens on a week to week basis. We all can control that, and we all can work to make those experiences good for folks, particularly the youth, no matter where we sit on the faith scale.

[Rocker Ute]

However, should a problem ever arise, I will not stand on the sidelines and watch it unfold. Frankly, I don't understand how people with such strong objections to the message do. So much of one's church experience happens on a week to week basis. We all can control that, and we all can work to make those experiences good for folks, particularly the youth, no matter where we sit on the faith scale.

This is the answer. People hate correlation because it makes the experience homogenous, but they also hate when people go off track. As I'm sure will shock you, I'm kind of a loudmouth at church with these sort of things, but invariably I'll have people stop me and say, "I'm glad you said something, I was thinking the same thing..." and I've come to the conclusion that most people sit there silently while disagreeing. That should stop. It doesn't mean you need to be a jerk, but often just offering a different perspective takes care of the matter. But I think that a few people can set the culture in a ward pretty quick, for good or bad. My mom used to say, "There are kooks everywhere..."

This isn't a modesty meme, but my wife is in the Primary presidency. They got a new song leader and a few weeks after those Bear Lake drownings where the little girls said that they stuck together and sang Primary songs for encouragement while they tried to get to safety, she showed up with two little life jackets. She shared that story and then had a kid on each side of the room stand up and put one on and stand in the front. She explained she was going to have a contest to see which side of the room could sing the best. So as they started to sing she said, "Uh oh... this side of the room needs to sing louder or your family will start to drown..."

That ended right there, the Primary President hopped up and was like, "Hold on a minute we forgot to do birthdays!... Can I talk to you about something really quick." So the kids did the birthday stuff and she took her out in the hall and was like, "We are not doing this today..." And that was that. I obviously know the song lady, she doesn't have a bad bone in her body, just a really really stupid idea that she hadn't thought all the way through.

My point in sharing is in my somewhat normal ward, weird stuff can still pop up, but people tamp it down pretty quick. I think in other wards people don't do that out of desire to be polite or something. With the YOUTH they often lack the wisdom, experience and fortitude to stand up to adult leaders and say, "Hey that just doesn't sound right to me..."

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

Dr. Hanks writes a follow-up to respond to several of the comments from the original piece. More good stuff. I seriously don't know how you can read these and still be "yeah, but..."


We teach that modesty is important because it invites people to pay attention to our personalities rather than our appearance. But if we’ve gotten to the point where we scrutinize women’s outfits to make sure that the sleeve reaches all the way to the edge of the shoulder and that the skirt reaches all the way to the knee, or if we make snap judgments about a woman’s character based on whether or not her outfit exactly meets the standards in For the Strength of Youth, then we’ve come back around to judging people based on their appearance, and the point of the principle has been lost.

http://ldsmag.com/misunderstanding-modesty-part-2-dr-julie-hanks-responds-to-comments/

[mUUser]

You can't send a YW or YM through the program without friction at some point. You have more liberal members rubbing the conservative crowd the wrong way -- and vice versa. Guys like me say "Let it Ride" while being quoted chapter and verse from the various books, pamphlets and manuals. Contention will happen. No way around it.

[LA Ute]

Dr. Hanks writes a follow-up to respond to several of the comments from the original piece. More good stuff. I seriously don't know how you can read these and still be "yeah, but..."

http://ldsmag.com/misunderstanding-modesty-part-2-dr-julie-hanks-responds-to-comments/

When we are talking about making people uncomfortable about being with us there really is no "yeah, but." (Yes, I am sure someone can come up with a hypothetical that would disprove the rule, but not one that is reasonably likely to come up.) All of us have a little tiny Pharisee somewhere inside of us, struggling to get out. We need to keep that little twerp bound and gagged.

I really liked this bit of a speech recently given at the FAIR conference, Christ’s Emancipation of Women in the New Testament (http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2015-fairmormon-conference/christs-emancipation-of-women-in-the-new-testament):


Jesus did not live by these segregating restrictions for women. He refused to isolate women and treated them as valued individuals. He allowed women and children to join the group of five thousand and later four thousand men who gathered to hear Him teach in Galilee (Matthew 14:21; 15:38).[18] (http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2015-fairmormon-conference/christs-emancipation-of-women-in-the-new-testament#_edn18) He refuted those who wanted to send the women and children away (Mark 10:13-14; Matthew 15:23). He welcomed women to stay in the same room as men (Luke 7:38-40). He did not segregate the unclean, whether they were sick or sinful or social outcasts.

This is beautifully illustrated in all three synoptic Gospels on a crowded street in Galilee (Matthew 9:19-22; Mark 5:24-34; Luke 8:43-48). The story begins with a throng of people accompanying Jesus across town to the home of Jairus, a ruler of the synagogue, to heal Jairus’ daughter. En route, an “unclean” woman tries to touch Jesus to receive His healing virtue. This woman was labeled “unclean” because, for over a decade, she had an “issue of a blood,” possibly a hemorrhaging uterus.[19] (http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2015-fairmormon-conference/christs-emancipation-of-women-in-the-new-testament#_edn19)

Socially this meant, for the past twelve years, the Mosaic law forbade her from going out in public, touching anyone, worshipping in the synagogue or temple, or sharing her husband’s bed (Leviticus 15:19-28). As a result of her condition, her husband had probably divorced her (Deuteronomy 24:1).[20] (http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2015-fairmormon-conference/christs-emancipation-of-women-in-the-new-testament#_edn20) Since physical disabilities were seen as the consequence of sin, and a woman’s menses made her “unclean” (Ezekiel 36:17-18), we assume that at least some of her neighbors and family had probably accused her of wickedness and rejected her.[21] (http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2015-fairmormon-conference/christs-emancipation-of-women-in-the-new-testament#_edn21) The Gospel of Mark also included that she was destitute after spending all her money on medical help (Mark 5:26).

Yet this faith-filled and determined woman sought healing from the Lord: “If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole” (Matthew 9:21; Mark 5:28). To do so, she broke the segregation protocol that had banished her to a life of seclusion—she went outside into a crowded street and tried to hide herself in the pack following Jesus. When she touched His outer garment, or the hem of His tunic, Jesus immediately felt that “virtue has gone out of me,” or more literally, “power has gone forth from me” (Luke 8:46 KJV and RSV). Jesus gave part of Himself in order to heal the woman physically. This in turn led to her healing socially and emotionally as well. It took amazing bravery for the woman to answer Jesus’ direct question, “Who touched me?” (Mark 5:31).

In that throng of townspeople hurrying through the village to Jairus’ home, she showed her faith, courage, and humility; “When the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately” (Luke 8:47). Jesus offered no reproach for her breaching social propriety—instead he praised the depth of her faith: “Your faith has brought you salvation” (Luke 8:47, ABT). And then Jesus offered a departing blessing, “Go in peace” (Luke 8:48).[22] (http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2015-fairmormon-conference/christs-emancipation-of-women-in-the-new-testament#_edn22) In this poignant story, Jesus defied the cultural norms that marginalized women. By acknowledging, touching and healing this woman, He set a new standard for the way women should be treated.

I don't think the Savior would ostracize someone for dressing outside For the Strength of Youth guidelines.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

We had a combined YM/YW pool party activity last night. The only thing immodest was the guy's pool we held it at. It's a good thing he's a Ute.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/08/20/291f1891b25ca0b549b4c322e50f8ac2.jpg

[Two Utes]

We had a combined YM/YW pool party activity last night. The only thing immodest was the guy's pool we held it at. It's a good thing he's a Ute.

http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/08/20/291f1891b25ca0b549b4c322e50f8ac2.jpg

Nightmare maintenance and care.

[mpfunk]

I think mp lives in Utah County, where the worst excesses in Mormondom occur. I guess we have company with some Baptists, who think showing a clavicle is immodest. I haven't seen that one in Mormon circles yet.

I like the idea of teaching men -- starting when they're young -- that their response to the way women dress is up to them. They (we) are going to be dealing with that challenge all our lives, so why not just confront that need?

That said, modesty belongs in the conversation somewhere. No one (well, almost no one) would deny that people should not walk around naked. So where do we draw the line? How much coverage is enough?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't live in Utah County. The incident in question occurred in Murray, Utah. It was in Portland, Oregon that a singles ward bishop felt it appropriate to comment on the size of my future wife's breasts when he told her that she was wearing shirts that were too low cut.

As for the walking pornography comment, that wasn't a local leader, that was Dallin H. Oaks.

[Sullyute]

We had a combined YM/YW pool party activity last night. The only thing immodest was the guy's pool we held it at. It's a good thing he's a Ute.

:blink: Plastic surgeon or personal injury attorney?

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

:blink: Plastic surgeon or personal injury attorney?

Owns a painting company. :dunno:

[Sullyute]

Owns a painting company. :dunno:

I thought you were going to come back with... welder.

[UBlender]

I don't live in Utah County. The incident in question occurred in Murray, Utah. It was in Portland, Oregon that a singles ward bishop felt it appropriate to comment on the size of my future wife's breasts when he told her that she was wearing shirts that were too low cut.

As for the walking pornography comment, that wasn't a local leader, that was Dallin H. Oaks.

Where at in Murray? I need to know who I know among your old ward/stake leaders so I can mock them appropriately.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

I thought you were going to come back with... welder.

Those guys never invite me over.

[LA Ute]

Nothing new here but I imagine most of us agree with what the writer is saying. I do.

http://www.ldssmile.com/2015/05/27/how-mormons-need-to-change-when-it-comes-to-sex-education-lessons-from-elizabeth-smart/

[LA Ute]

Man, I have not heard anything about "chewed gum" or similar analogies since one occasion in high school. If people are still saying that hurtful nonsense they need to stop. Now.

http://www.sltrib.com/home/4304322-155/elizabeth-smart-discusses-purity-culture-feminism

[Solon]

Man, I have not heard anything about "chewed gum" or similar analogies since one occasion in high school. If people are still saying that hurtful nonsense they need to stop. Now.

http://www.sltrib.com/home/4304322-155/elizabeth-smart-discusses-purity-culture-feminism

i find it hard to believe that a seminary or church teacher would use that analogy WITH SMART IN THE ROOM.

Those analogies are always a bad idea but, gee whiz, have a little sensitivity towards the most well-known rape victim since Helen of Troy.

[LA Ute]

i find it hard to believe that a seminary or church teacher would use that analogy WITH SMART IN THE ROOM.

Those analogies are always a bad idea but, gee whiz, have a little sensitivity towards the most well-known rape victim since Helen of Troy.

I think she said it happened when she was younger. But if it happened after her ordeal then someone really blew it.

[Rocker Ute]

I think she said it happened when she was younger. But if it happened after her ordeal then someone really blew it.

The article I read she talked about, "Are you really saying that with me here?..." So I'm fairly certain it was after.

Like you I haven't heard those analogies well until I read about it on message boards, neither had my wife.

However, because of hearing about their widespread use I've on a couple of occasions, when asked to teach the youth, brought them up. Then I explain how utterly false they are and how those analogies fly in direct contradiction to what we know of the Atonement of Christ.

To date nobody has heard those analogies either but if or when they do, they'll be able to see through it quickly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

The article I read she talked about, "Are you really saying that with me here?..." So I'm fairly certain it was after.

Like you I haven't heard those analogies well until I read about it on message boards, neither had my wife.

However, because of hearing about their widespread use I've on a couple of occasions, when asked to teach the youth, brought them up. Then I explain how utterly false they are and how those analogies fly in direct contradiction to what we know of the Atonement of Christ.

To date nobody has heard those analogies either but if or when they do, they'll be able to see through it quickly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kids today need to hear about the Atonement over and over and in depth, from various perspectives. That's always been true but it's never been more necessary than it is today. It's such a tough world for them.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

Walking into church this morning, my 9 year old daughter froze right at the door to the building.

-I forgot my sweater at home.
-It's 105 today. I think you'll be fine.
-But my dress doesn't have sleeves.
-Really? Are you worried about that?
-Sometimes when girls don't have sleeves, people at church say something to them?
-Other kids say something when kids don't have sleeves?
-No. The grown ups say something about being modest.
-I'm in primary with you and I've never heard someone say anything like that. Are you sure?
-Not in this ward but in our last ward someone did.

So, when my daughter was 7, a grown up in Primary made a comment to her about her showing too much arm. Now she has PTSD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Walking into church this morning, my 9 year old daughter froze right at the door to the building.

-I forgot my sweater at home.
-It's 105 today. I think you'll be fine.
-But my dress doesn't have sleeves.
-Really? Are you worried about that?
-Sometimes when girls don't have sleeves, people at church say something to them?
-Other kids say something when kids don't have sleeves?
-No. The grown ups say something about being modest.
-I'm in primary with you and I've never heard someone say anything like that. Are you sure?
-Not in this ward but in our last ward someone did.

So, when my daughter was 7, a grown up in Primary made a comment to her about her showing too much arm. Now she has PTSD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sigh.

[UtahsMrSports]

Walking into church this morning, my 9 year old daughter froze right at the door to the building.

-I forgot my sweater at home.
-It's 105 today. I think you'll be fine.
-But my dress doesn't have sleeves.
-Really? Are you worried about that?
-Sometimes when girls don't have sleeves, people at church say something to them?
-Other kids say something when kids don't have sleeves?
-No. The grown ups say something about being modest.
-I'm in primary with you and I've never heard someone say anything like that. Are you sure?
-Not in this ward but in our last ward someone did.

So, when my daughter was 7, a grown up in Primary made a comment to her about her showing too much arm. Now she has PTSD.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow.....

[LA Ute]

We need a Dieter Uchtdorf talk on this in General Conference.

[LA Ute]

We need a Dieter Uchtdorf General Conference talk on this.

[NorthwestUteFan]

https://www.lds.org/liahona/1999/03/object-lessons-that-motivate?lang=eng


I shared my own favorite object lesson. Nearly 40 years earlier a bishop’s counselor passed a clean, new piece of candy around a group of deacons. Then he offered the handled and somewhat sticky piece of candy to anyone who wanted to eat it. No one did. This wise teacher challenged us to remember the lesson when we were old enough to begin dating. We needed to keep ourselves morally clean and to respect our dates. It was a lesson on chastity I never forgot.

[LA Ute]

The trick is to balance two key teachings. On the one hand, to be consistent with church doctrine we have to teach kids that living the law of chastity will bring them peace and happiness and is what a loving God has asked them to do. On the other hand, we have to teach them about an infinite Atonement, also the gift of a loving God, which is fundamental to our religion, and the "chewed gum" analogy flies in the face of that belief. We have to teach both principles without giving kids the idea that they can go ahead and do whatever they want because they can always repent later. The chewed gum/licked cupcake lesson is just the wrong way to teach either principle. People need to stop using it.

(BTW, NWUF, good catch on the 1999 Ensign article. It is, however, from 1999 and is about teaching skills, and refers to a lesson the writer saw 40 years earlier. I think the institutional church still deserves a break here. This is a cultural problem, not something that the church's leaders are teaching or asking to be taught.)

[UtahsMrSports]

https://www.lds.org/liahona/1999/03/object-lessons-that-motivate?lang=eng

I can understand and appreciate where they are trying to go with the 'chewed gum' analogy and others similar to it. But its soooooo bad as to be a slap in the face to what the lds church teaches about the atonement.

I've shared it here before but when I was out spreading the good word, we had a very nice young lady come to church one day. She was from what we would affectionately call the ghetto. She didn't have much.

When she arrived, her dress was not "for the strength of youth" approved but it wasn't horrible either. Almost immediately after she entered, my companion took off his suit jacket and awkwardly threw it around her, saying "I just don't want you to get cold.".

Well, we literally never saw or heard from her again. I regret it all these years later, not taking control and preventing that.

To be fair, we were on thin ice with that ward as two weeks earlier we had brought a drunk guy to church who had yelled during the sacrament and had yelled at a speaker for mentioning Donnie and Marie.

Now that I think about it, my companion told me that while I was getting ready for the day, he had called this drunk guy and had been told that he was drunk and looking for a fight and had sent someone to pick him up anyway. ...maybe that companion was just a tool......where am I going with any of this???

Oh yeah.....chewed gum analogies suck. Between a person who became chewed gum but is a person who loves everyone and tries to make the world a better place and my companion who was a putz, is rather have my daughter marry the former.

[NorthwestUteFan]

This is an amazing and poignant video, and should be the message we teach our children and tell ourselves:

YFvFEOXkvMA