Modesty in children

[CardiacCoug]

Where I disagree is in the implicit argument in the bolded sentence above that a woman's responsibility ends there. We teach our daughter (and in our stake our YW leaders teach the young women) that they should try not to dress in such a way as to be stumbling blocks for the young men, who are wired differently than the young women are. This is pretty tame advice, I think. But I know many dislike it strongly.

Isn't "slutty" dressing mostly a cultural idea, though? That's what bothers me about this concept.

What seems entirely wholesome to Mormons would be absolutely slutty to an Islamic fundamentalist.

What seems entirely wholesome to a secular humanist European is absolutely slutty to a lot of Mormons.

My grandpa (born in 1901) thought that no endowed LDS person should ever wear shorts, even knee length -- that it was a violation of a temple covenant.

This stuff just seems so arbitrary to me -- women should dress however they want to dress and not worry about what creepy guys may be thinking about them.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Here come the responses:

http://putdowntheurinalcake.com/2013/09/dear-mrs-hall-regarding-your-fyi-if-youre-a-teenage-girl/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FiveKidsIsALotOfKids+%28Five+Kids+Is+A+Lot+Of+Kids%29

I made a phone call on this one, just to double check with one of the most rule-following, law-abiding, deeply-rooted-in-Christian-culture men I know… my father, former Marine, former missionary. And he said two things that stood out like flashing neon signs: 1) Although men certainly retain memories of seeing exciting things – “like I’ll never forget seeing my first Ferarri!” he said – it’s demeaning to men of any age to presume they can only see a woman as a sexual object once they’ve seen her in a state of undress, and 2) This shifts an unreasonable burden of responsibility to young women for ensuring men don’t view them sexually.

Yes. What my dad said, exactly. I’m raising a young man, too — three of them, actually, though only one’s a teen so far — and I want him to learn that once he sees a young woman as a sexual object (which he undoubtedly will, what with being human and a sexual being, just like all men and women), he can look with new eyes and see her also as a friend, as a member of his community, as someone worth championing, as someone with talents and gifts, as someone to learn from, and maybe even, eventually, as a romantic interest. Because the real goal, of course, for all of us, is how to stop objectification and to start seeing people.

[Jeff Lebowski]

And another:

http://unchainedfaith.com/2013/09/04/fyi-if-youre-a-mom-of-teenage-boys/

[woot]

I know that you and many here don't buy that line of thinking, but do you also recognize that it's an issue on which reasonable people disagree?

In a well-known GC address, DHO said:

"And young women, please understand that if you dress immodestly, you are magnifying this problem by becoming pornography to some of the men who see you."

I'm sure the mom who authored that essay , which was reprinted in the DNews today, simply agrees with Elder Oaks. [EDIT: I personally think DHO's statement is a little harsh.]

Oy vey! Nothing like a creepy old man confessing his lustful thoughts to motivate the youth.

[woot]

Where I disagree is in the implicit argument in the bolded sentence above that a woman's responsibility ends there. We teach our daughter (and in our stake our YW leaders teach the young women) that they should try not to dress in such a way as to be stumbling blocks for the young men, who are wired differently than the young women are. This is pretty tame advice, I think. But I know many dislike it strongly.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you clarified the implications of this. I think the reason your logic is extremely problematic is not necessarily because it's entirely without merit, it's just that we've seen where this type of logic leads -- blaming rape victims, forcing women to wear burqas, etc. That doesn't mean there isn't a place to consider prudent female dress, but it would seem important to couch such arguments carefully so as to emphasize that a male's actions are entirely his own responsibility.

[CardiacCoug]

http://theirondaisywrites.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/fyi-if-youre-a-teenage-boy/

Funny!

[LA Ute]

Perhaps it would be helpful if you clarified the implications of this. I think the reason your logic is extremely problematic is not necessarily because it's entirely without merit, it's just that we've seen where this type of logic leads -- blaming rape victims, forcing women to wear burqas, etc. That doesn't mean there isn't a place to consider prudent female dress, but it would seem important to couch such arguments carefully so as to emphasize that a male's actions are entirely his own responsibility.

Fair point and I am happy to clarify. There is less daylight between you and me on this than you think. I think men and boys have 100% of the responsibility for their sexual behavior (assuming they're not mentally ill, etc.). Dressing provocatively does not excuse assault of any kind or any similar behavior, period; nor does it justify burquas. All I am saying is that from a religious (LDS) standpoint, girls and women ought to avoid making chastity more difficult for boys and men. I.e., give the boys a break, and while you're at it, respect yourself by not using your body to attract attention. I think that is a pretty modest argument (pun intended).

[Jarid in Cedar]

That does surprise me a little but it's not relevant to me.



He said:



I think these statements are true.



This is excellent advice and could have come from an GA.

Where I disagree is in the implicit argument in the bolded sentence above that a woman's responsibility ends there. We teach our daughter (and in our stake our YW leaders teach the young women) that they should try not to dress in such a way as to be stumbling blocks for the young men, who are wired differently than the young women are. This is pretty tame advice, I think. But I know many dislike it strongly.

The problem with that advice is that it reinforces the notion that girls are nothing more than viewing objects for boys. It also reinforces the idea that there is only one way to get attention from boys. Not getting enough attention from the boys at school? show some more skin. It doesn't set up healthy thought processes for many girls who already have skewed views of their image.

[LA Ute]

The problem with that advice is that it reinforces the notion that girls are nothing more than viewing objects for boys. It also reinforces the idea that there is only one way to get attention from boys. Not getting enough attention from the boys at school? show some more skin. It doesn't set up healthy thought processes for many girls who already have skewed views of their image.

You're right that those are the wrong notions to reinforce. I think that if taught properly, the principles I'm talking about actually combat those destructive ideas. When taught properly, the basic idea that women are daughters of God and of infinite worth encourages very healthy thought processes. When taught improperly that idea causes all kinds of emotional and psychological havoc - like the infamous "chewed gum" analogy.


"It's men in shorts."

-- Rick Majerus

[Jarid in Cedar]

You're right that those are the wrong notions to reinforce. I think that if taught properly, the principles I'm talking about actually combat those destructive ideas. When taught properly, the basic idea that women are daughters of God and of infinite worth encourages very healthy thought processes. When taught improperly that idea causes all kinds of emotional and psychological havoc - like the infamous "chewed gum" analogy.


"It's men in shorts."

-- Rick Majerus

And you get there by eliminating any reference to boys. There are plenty of good points to make about modesty that have nothing to do with the opposite sex.

[LA Ute]

Modesty in children

This is a tough room. . Seriously, I think the impact on boys is a minor part of the teaching. You'll notice that in the Oaks talk that aspect of the subject got one sentence.


"It's men in shorts."

-- Rick Majerus

[Jeff Lebowski]

Where I disagree is in the implicit argument in the bolded sentence above that a woman's responsibility ends there. We teach our daughter (and in our stake our YW leaders teach the young women) that they should try not to dress in such a way as to be stumbling blocks for the young men, who are wired differently than the young women are. This is pretty tame advice, I think. But I know many dislike it strongly.

The last thing we need to do is teach that YM are wired differently and therefore the YW are partially responsible to keep them in control. That is sexist and problematic on many levels.

[LA Ute]

The last thing we need to do is teach that YM are wired differently and therefore the YW are partially responsible to keep them in control. That is sexist and problematic on many levels.

But Jeff, there's so much evidence that males are visually stimulated, much more so than females. Or do you dispute that?


"It's men in shorts."

-- Rick Majerus

[pellegrino]

This is a tough room.


"It's men in shorts."

-- Rick Majerus

LA, it's just a matter of realizing that persisting with past attitudes and behaviors aren't cutting it, and in many many cases they're damaging.

[myboynoah]

Here come the responses:

http://putdowntheurinalcake.com/2013/09/dear-mrs-hall-regarding-your-fyi-if-youre-a-teenage-girl/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FiveKidsIsALotOfKids+%28Five+Kids+Is+A+Lot+Of+Kids%29

I made a phone call on this one, just to double check with one of the most rule-following, law-abiding, deeply-rooted-in-Christian-culture men I know… my father, former Marine, former missionary. And he said two things that stood out like flashing neon signs: 1) Although men certainly retain memories of seeing exciting things – “like I’ll never forget seeing my first Ferarri!” he said – it’s demeaning to men of any age to presume they can only see a woman as a sexual object once they’ve seen her in a state of undress, and 2) This shifts an unreasonable burden of responsibility to young women for ensuring men don’t view them sexually.

Yes. What my dad said, exactly. I’m raising a young man, too — three of them, actually, though only one’s a teen so far — and I want him to learn that once he sees a young woman as a sexual object (which he undoubtedly will, what with being human and a sexual being, just like all men and women), he can look with new eyes and see her also as a friend, as a member of his community, as someone worth championing, as someone with talents and gifts, as someone to learn from, and maybe even, eventually, as a romantic interest. Because the real goal, of course, for all of us, is how to stop objectification and to start seeing people.

Exactly. And the advice is simple: If you present yourself with your boobs and booty hanging out, you objectify yourself and make it more difficult for others to see and experience these other talents and gifts.

Let's not kid ourselves, the young ladies presenting the pouty, posed, arched-back pictures are doing it because they want to attract the sexual attention of others, not because they desire someone to experience their other talents and gifts (ultimately I guess they want the latter, but think they can only get through the former--how sad). The advice is don't sell yourselves or those whose attention you seem to be so desperately seeking, short. You're worth more than that. But if you're going to continue to do it, I'm going to have to block you, because we get enough of this outside our home.