For the Strength of Youth 2012

[Moliere]

Prophets of God have always continually counseled His children to dress modestly. The way you dress is a reflection of what you are on the inside. Your dress and grooming send messages about you to others and influence the way you and others act. When you are well groomed and modestly dressed, you invite the companionship of the Spirit and you can exercise be a good influence on those around you others. Your dress and grooming influence the way you and others act.

It's interesting that they are using "continually" instead of "always". Maybe we are getting away from the correlated concept that these standards permeate time and are evidenced in the scriptures even by OT prophets (which stance is usually unsupportable). Good change IMO. I also like the removal of the direct correlation between dressing and acting. It's now more subtle and I like it. There is definitely a correlation between how you dress and act, but I think it's more subtle than usually referenced in church materials.

They should choose appropriately modest apparel when participating in sports. The fashions of the world will change, but the Lord’s standards will not change.

Whoops, maybe the correlation committee forgot about the change above. Standards have definitely changed. Just compare the acceptable modesty standards of the 1800s to today.

Do not disfigure yourself with tattoos or body piercings. If girls or Young women, if you desire to have their your ears pierced, they are encouraged to wear only one pair of modest earrings.

This change is interesting. They used to have the "one-pair of earrings" counsel addressed to both women and young women. Now the language is only to YW. I bet they made the change more for the fact that this is a pamphlet for the youth so I'm pretty sure they aren't giving the green light to women to wear more than one pair of earrings.


After reading through these changes I think I know what my biggest problem is with this pamphlet (note that I like the pamphlet although I think it could be more principles based...but whatever). My problem is the mixing of commandments and counsel. You have a section on Sexual Purity, which is full of commandments, sitting right next to the section on Dress and Appearance, which is full of counsel. The mixing of the two in one pamphlet gives the appearance that ones spirituality and righteousness is as much dependent upon the number of earrings you wear as it is your sexual activity. This is obviously the same issue I have with the honor code.

[SteelBlue]

When you are well groomed and modestly dressed, you invite the companionship of the Spirit and you can exercise be a good influence on those around you [COLOR="DarkOrchid"]others.

This doesn't sit right with me. The spirit sure seems to have a lot to keep track of doesn't he? The notion of good grooming inviting the companionship of the Spirit is humorous. Sorry poorly groomed people of the world, the Spirit is hanging with those that look nice.

[UtahDan]

This doesn't sit right with me. The spirit sure seems to have a lot to keep track of doesn't he? The notion of good grooming inviting the companionship of the Spirit is humorous. Sorry poorly groomed people of the world, the Spirit is hanging with those that look nice.

I think having an elaborate list of things you need to do to have the spirit is like having an elaborate magical incantation. It does two things. First if you do all of those things you feel more entitled for it to work (believing is seeing). Second, if it doesn't work, there are lots of things you can potentially blame.

If God really does withhold the full influence and help he would otherwise give over dress and grooming, he is sort of a jerk isn't he?

[TripletDaddy]

This doesn't sit right with me. The spirit sure seems to have a lot to keep track of doesn't he? The notion of good grooming inviting the companionship of the Spirit is humorous. Sorry poorly groomed people of the world, the Spirit is hanging with those that look nice.

This reminds me of a package I received on my mission. It was one of the few things my mom (NoMo) sent me while I was out. I guess she went to the local LDS bookstore and decided to take a stab at a few gifts a missionary would enjoy. One of them was a calendar with pictures of latter-day prophets. I remember her commenting that the pictures of the men were "scary." That made me laugh because I had been diligent in explaining to my mom that these men were prophets, that they spoke to God, etc. But even I couldn't deny the terror in that calendar. They truly were awful looking pictures of wrinkly people in bad facial hair.













The FTSOY pamphlet is correct.....the way you look can cause people to judge you.

[Indy Coug]

Disobedience limits the influence of the Spirit.

[woot]

Disobedience limits the influence of the Spirit.

If that's all it is, aren't the brethren deliberately reducing the influence the spirit can have by instituting silly rules for people to disobey?

[Moliere]

If that's all it is, aren't the brethren deliberately reducing the influence the spirit can have by instituting silly rules for people to disobey?

It's only disobedience to commandments, not to the rules or counsel. THankfully commandments don't change that much although they do change more frequently than the average Mormon will admit.

[Indy Coug]

If that's all it is, aren't the brethren deliberately reducing the influence the spirit can have by instituting silly rules for people to disobey?

Probably not as large a reduction as there is due to people pissing and moaning about rules that are incredibly easy to obey.

Having trouble with some of the "bigger" rules? Then take solace by being able to obey gently lobbed softball rules like grooming.

[woot]

Probably not as large a reduction as there is due to people pissing and moaning about rules that are incredibly easy to obey.

Having trouble with some of the "bigger" rules? Then take solace by being able to obey gently lobbed softball rules like grooming.

But what about the people who don't have problems following the bigger rules, but resent the leadership's desire to control people on the micro level as well?

[woot]

It's only disobedience to commandments, not to the rules or counsel. THankfully commandments don't change that much although they do change more frequently than the average Mormon will admit.

I was just responding to Indy, who used that as an explanation for the grooming stuff.

[Indy Coug]

But what about the people who don't have problems following the bigger rules, but resent the leadership's desire to control people on the micro level as well?

If you view it that way, then there are much more serious fundamental issues at play.

[Indy Coug]

You would think after thousands of years and a wide variety of different rules at different times it would become obvious that the issue isn't what the rules are specifically, it's whether or not someone has the willingness to be obedient.

[woot]

If you view it that way, then there are much more serious fundamental issues at play.

Well obviously my issues are pretty "fundamental". I've just seen a lot of faithful members feeling the same way. I guess I don't see what the church is trying to accomplish with that stuff.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Young women should wear[/STRIKE] clothing that covers does not cover the shoulder and avoid clothing that shoulders or is low-cut in the front or the back or revealing in any other manner.

I can't believe that we promote the notion that a bare shoulder is immodest. Years ago I was watching a halftime show with my daughter and she was scandalized that the drill team was dressing immodestly because their shoulders were uncovered. That led to some awkward deprogramming sessions.

There is a woman in our ward who jogs in a tank top (or she did when it was warmer). Several of the women in the ward were shocked by it and gossiped about how immodest she is.

[Moliere]

The fashions of the world will change, but the Lord’s standards will not change.

You would think after thousands of years and a wide variety of different rules at different times it would become obvious that the issue isn't what the rules are specifically, it's whether or not someone has the willingness to be obedient.

You are not in line with the brethren. Standards (rules) apparently don't change.