13 Articles of Healthy Chastity

[TripletDaddy]

You still don't get it. DDD's assessment was dead on.

LA Ute comes from a different generation, so it may not be entirely his fault. His unwillingness to recognize his error in certain areas is all his own doing, however.

You are correct, he does not get it.

Even his answer to me was a subtle display of sexism. You basically told him the same thing, as did rosebud. Yet he responds to me with "utter nonsense." He treats you with kid gloves. Form of sexism.

[Pheidippides]

You still don't get it. DDD's assessment was dead on.

And if you want to take a different view on the issue, I'd rather my boys satisfy their visual lust by admiring the beauty of the YW than by circumventing my Internet filters to find Ass Sluts 5 on demand.

I think it's entirely appropriate for the YM to find the YW sexy and desirable. If the YW aren't, somebody else will be. One thing my dad did very well was to teach me that appreciation of the attractive female form - LDS or no - was nothing to be ashamed of in and of itself and was healthy and normal for an adolescent boy.

I'm not saying I'm going to allow my daughters to dress like whores but it has nothing to do with the YM.

[Sleeping in EQ]

LA Ute comes from a different generation, so it may not be entirely his fault. His unwillingness to recognize his error in certain areas is all his own doing, however.

You are correct, he does not get it.

Even his answer to me was a subtle display of sexism. You basically told him the same thing, as did rosebud. Yet he responds to me with "utter nonsense." He treats you with kid gloves. Form of sexism.

Agreed.

[wuapinmon]

Maybe because you are a Ute, you haven't read some of the crazy letters that get sent to the Daily Universe regarding modesty and the effect it can have on the minds of men. Apparently one-strap backpacks can lead men to sinful thoughts. Really? If a woman chooses to wear her purse diagonally across her chest, she is setting a "trap" for a young man? What if her shoulders are exposed--she's wearing something sleeveless--just another boy trap? Where does the female's responsibility end and the male's responsibility start?

Do you mean like this one?

BYU Daily Universe on September 9, 1999.

Dear editor:
Since when is skin "in" here? As I understand the Dress and Grooming standards of the Honor Code, clothing is inappropriate if it is revealing, sleeveless, strapless or form-fitting. As I walk to and from my classes everyday, I am shocked at the blatant disregard that students have for themselves and for the Honor Code.

Both sexes are guilty. Girls seem to buy shirts that are too small for them, because I've seen more tummies and bellybuttons on campus than I ever thought possible. A shirt is too small if when you raise your hands above your head, it goes up as well. If you show any skin on your stomach, I think most people would consider that to be "revealing" clothing. Form-fitting clothing means tight clothing. Buy your jeans bigger. Sure, it looks sexy to wear tight clothes if you are in shape, but what does it profit you? When you cheapen yourself by wearing immodest clothing you affect those around you as well.

Guys, you may need to wear less clothing while exercising, but that doesn't mean that you can jog down 900 East showing off your chest to all the people walking home to King Henry and Roman Gardens.

Ladies, a sports bra and some Spandex shorts are immodest if you're going to go jiggling down Canyon Road.

The Honor Code is to be kept both on and off campus. Some people need to recommit themselves to living a code that they agreed to keep while a student here. I hate to shave too, but I do it because I said I would.

Mac Williams
Woodstock, Ga.

I still can't believe that they printed "jiggling!"

[Sleeping in EQ]

And if you want to take a different view on the issue, I'd rather my boys satisfy their visual lust by admiring the beauty of the YW than by circumventing my Internet filters to find Ass Sluts 5 on demand.

I think it's entirely appropriate for the YM to find the YW sexy and desirable. If the YW aren't, somebody else will be. One thing my dad did very well was to teach me that appreciation of the attractive female form - LDS or no - was nothing to be ashamed of in and of itself and was healthy and normal for an adolescent boy.

I'm not saying I'm going to allow my daughters to dress like whores but it has nothing to do with the YM.

Indeed. There's nothing wrong with being attracted to someone, and males (and some females) are wired to "look." What the Church could do here is teach respect as a component of healthy attraction. Everyday experience teaches the difference between noticing--when a guy gives a woman "the once over"--and leering. The one is respectful, the other is not.

Teaching people to feel guilty about hard-wired nature is stupid, and is probably unhealthy. In reference to the letter to the Daily Universe, obsessing about form-fitting clothes and such is asinine and might be neurotic.

[Pheidippides]

Indeed. There's nothing wrong with being attracted to someone, and males (and some females) are wired to "look." What the Church could do here is teach respect as a component of healthy attraction. Everyday experience teaches the difference between noticing--when a guy gives a woman "the once over"--and leering. The one is respectful, the other is not.

Teaching people to feel guilty about hard-wired nature is stupid, and is probably unhealthy. In reference to the letter to the Daily Universe, obsessing about form-fitting clothes and such is asinine and might be neurotic.

I have it on good authority that the letter was a troll.

[UtahDan]

Poor LA is getting dog piled! I think I understand where he is coming from which is the idea that some times you don't do things, even if they are otherwise okay, because they might create a stumbling block for someone else. I believe he has shared with me a scripture from maybe Romans on this point when we were talking about the white shirt issue. There is merit to that idea in some contexts.

I think the problem here that everyone is jumping on is that it is just as easy to teach girls to be modest for reasons having nothing to do with boys, and thereby avoid giving them the messages about young men and about themselves that are not desirable. I am actually somewhat in the camp that the myth of the teenage male libido may not actually be a myth. But to me this is something for us to address with our fine young fellows (who are already being told the girls are more spiritual than they are) by teaching them self respect, that they have spirituality they can access to assist them and teaching them that it is within their power to bridle their passions (another tip of the hat to LA!).

[TripletDaddy]

Poor LA is getting dog piled! I think I understand where he is coming from which is the idea that some times you don't do things, even if they are otherwise okay, because they might create a stumbling block for someone else. I believe he has shared with me a scripture from maybe Romans on this point when we were talking about the white shirt issue. There is merit to that idea in some contexts.

I think the problem here that everyone is jumping on is that it is just as easy to teach girls to be modest for reasons having nothing to do with boys, and thereby avoid giving them the messages about young men and about themselves that are not desirable. I am actually somewhat in the camp that the myth of the teenage male libido may not actually be a myth. But to me this is something for us to address with our fine young fellows (who are already being told the girls are more spiritual than they are) by teaching them self respect, that they have spirituality they can access to assist them and teaching them that it is within their power to bridle their passions (another tip of the hat to LA!).

what is this myth?

[Mrs. Funk]

I think there's inherent danger in teaching young women that they are the "keepers" of male chastity. I heard variations on the theme during my years in YW. No, really. The reverberating message we received is that men are animals and can't control themselves, so you're the one in charge of keeping them from humping every square inch of you like a dog in heat. (Though never expressed so baldly, it's the message nonetheless.)

I think scare tactics regarding modesty are equally damaging. Rhetoric like, "You don't know what boys are thinking when you dress like X" is unhelpful. I heard language similar to, "If you dress like a skank, men won't be able to control themselves." Which basically seems a teaching to me that women who wear revealing clothes are either asking for sex or asking to be raped. The most scantily dressed woman is not deserving of or asking for rape.

Many (most?) YW know EXACTLY what boys are thinking when they wear low-cut shirts. However, it doesn't take YW wearing tight or provocative clothing for YM to think about sex. I think the church either doesn't acknowledge or doesn't believe that YW ever have sexual thoughts or desires. It's an overwhelming prospect to be in charge of both her own chastity and the chastity of all the YM around her.

Anyway, I'd like to see a shift to lessons about modesty centered on respect one's own body and honoring the divinity of our Heavenly Mother that is in each woman.

[marsupial]

I think there's inherent danger in teaching young women that they are the "keepers" of male chastity. I heard variations on the theme during my years in YW. No, really. The reverberating message we received is that men are animals and can't control themselves, so you're the one in charge of keeping them from humping every square inch of you like a dog in heat. (Though never expressed so baldly, it's the message nonetheless.)

I think scare tactics regarding modesty are equally damaging. Rhetoric like, "You don't know what boys are thinking when you dress like X" is unhelpful. I heard language similar to, "If you dress like a skank, men won't be able to control themselves." Which basically seems a teaching to me that women who wear revealing clothes are either asking for sex or asking to be raped. The most scantily dressed woman is not deserving of or asking for rape.

Many (most?) YW know EXACTLY what boys are thinking when they wear low-cut shirts. However, it doesn't take YW wearing tight or provocative clothing for YM to think about sex. I think the church either doesn't acknowledge or doesn't believe that YW ever have sexual thoughts or desires. It's an overwhelming prospect to be in charge of both her own chastity and the chastity of all the YM around her.

Anyway, I'd like to see a shift to lessons about modesty centered on respect one's own body and honoring the divinity of our Heavenly Mother that is in each woman.

Well said, though saying that Heavenly Mother stuff during a YW lesson will put you on the fast track to getting released.

[shoganai]

I'm the ref, and here is how I rule on the woot/shogani standoff:

shogani makes a good point that sex can affect people emotionally. For better or worse, our culture has loaded sex with a lot of emotional baggage, to the point that 'casual sex' is often not nearly as 'casual' as all of the participants might think. It is like I always tell Little Robin, "If you want to have sex with someone, make very sure that you both understand what that means to each other, and that you are not taking advantage of someone who is looking for a sexual affirmation of their self-worth." There are people out there for whom casual sex is truly casual, but there are more people who claim that it is casual, when in reality it comes with many emotional strings attached.

That said, woot wins the round, because the emotional impact of consensual sex that doesn't result in the emotional nourishment the participants were hoping for is NOT that big of a deal.

A rope! A tree! Let's hang the referee!

[Mrs. Funk]

Well said, though saying that Heavenly Mother stuff during a YW lesson will put you on the fast track to getting released.

You think even mentioning that we are in the image of our Heavenly Mother and we should honor Her though dressing modestly would get you released?

Man, things are even worse than I thought.

[TripletDaddy]

I think there's inherent danger in teaching young women that they are the "keepers" of male chastity. I heard variations on the theme during my years in YW. No, really. The reverberating message we received is that men are animals and can't control themselves, so you're the one in charge of keeping them from humping every square inch of you like a dog in heat. (Though never expressed so baldly, it's the message nonetheless.)

I think scare tactics regarding modesty are equally damaging. Rhetoric like, "You don't know what boys are thinking when you dress like X" is unhelpful. I heard language similar to, "If you dress like a skank, men won't be able to control themselves." Which basically seems a teaching to me that women who wear revealing clothes are either asking for sex or asking to be raped. The most scantily dressed woman is not deserving of or asking for rape.

Many (most?) YW know EXACTLY what boys are thinking when they wear low-cut shirts. However, it doesn't take YW wearing tight or provocative clothing for YM to think about sex. I think the church either doesn't acknowledge or doesn't believe that YW ever have sexual thoughts or desires. It's an overwhelming prospect to be in charge of both her own chastity and the chastity of all the YM around her.

Anyway, I'd like to see a shift to lessons about modesty centered on respect one's own body and honoring the divinity of our Heavenly Mother that is in each woman.

The entire concept is a moving target. Basically, any clothing could arouse a guy (as well as no clothing...rowrrr!). As SIEQ pointed out, guys are hard-wired to think about sex. Nothing women do will prevent it or mitigate it.

How can you identify the clothing that might arouse a man? How do you hold a moonbeam in your hand? How do you pin a wave upon the sand?

[pellegrino]

You think even mentioning that we are in the image of our Heavenly Mother and we should honor Her though dressing modestly would get you released?

Man, things are even worse than I thought.

it would depend entirely upon the situation (bishop, YW, and their parents), but I think there is good reason for sup's paranoia.

[Surfah]

I wish my HS girlfriend took more blame as the keeper of my chastity.