We’ve explored some of the answers members have posted on the mormon.org site in the church’s new profiles campaign. So far, we’ve discussed member answers to questions about polygamy, women& the priesthood, politics, parenting, prophets, and priesthood ban. Today, let’s see what members had to say about chastity & modesty.
Here’s the FAQ: How are modesty and chastity related? How can parents teach their children to be modest in dress, language and behavior?
This sounds like another question nobody asked us, but hey, let’s answer it anyway. However, it might be a good way to see how Mormons raise their kids and what Mormons believe about chastity and modesty I suppose. Personally, modesty is the thing that always sets my mo-dar off (especially at Disneyworld): families with great white teeth wearing knee-length stuff with sleeves and no bare midriffs in 100-degree weather.
Answers I liked:
- Attitude vs. Clothes. I like the idea that modesty as it relates to chastity is a state of mind, not just what you wear and how you affect others’ states of mind. I also liked those who acknowledged that they like cute clothes. Otherwise we sound like a bunch of stuffy Amish people who claim we love our drab rags.
- “In my opinion, modesty isn’t only defined by the clothing worn by a person; it’s an attitude of being unassuming and humble.”
- “if we dress sexy, we tend to act sexy and often think sexy.” So, should married people dress immodestly to encourage healthy sex lives?
- “Modesty is an attitude of humility and decency in dress, grooming, language, and behavior.” That quote is from a gospel reference book called “True to the Faith.” The way that you dress is a reflection of your inner self and how you view yourself.”
- Self-esteem advice. OK, I really could have gone the other way on this one (especially as most of these assumptions seem directed only at girls), but as a parent, I actually liked some of the advice about immodesty being one way for teens to seek attention. It’s definitely not the only one, but especially in a conservative environment, I think parents should notice signs that their children need attention.
- “a young teen who needs more attention than that may resort to unnatural hair colors or argumentative attitudes or picking on a younger child or spray-painting graffiti.” Also nice that it’s a boy example and one that’s not just about dress!
- “I do remember being angry at my parents when they addressed only the symptoms of my teenaged cries for attention instead of fixing the gaping hole in my heart.” I love this.
- “I like feeling attractive while modest.” I think it’s important that modesty should not mean you never feel sexy or attractive.
- “I’ll be honest this one is a struggle for me. I love cute clothes, and how they can flatter your figure and having all eyes on you let’s face it–it’s great!” Keepin’ it real at least.
- “Dressing modestly shows confidence.”
I felt mixed about this type of answer:
- Parents’ Examples. This just seems like foolhardy advice. Are teens modest because they want to dress like their parents? I thought the point of being a teenager was to rebel against your un-hip parents. I would wager that if parents were immodest, more teens would dress modestly because they would be so grossed out.
- “Parents teach best by example, but should also be active in their children’s lives to give them good counsel on how to live, but not be overbearing.” I actually think this person got it right.
- “Rules seem too much like limitations without purpose, an order from someone in authority which make us bristle and resist. What to wear, for example, is largely molded by peers and media. Parental rules which go against media models are questioned by our children.” Nicely put.
- “Parents have to be an example to their children, teaching them from a very young age how to dress and encouraging them to stay modest even though the world is now.” Is now what?
- “Because I respect my parents, an easy way for me to judge what choices to make was to not do anything that I would be embarrassed to tell my parents about.” Aw! I want one of these.
Things I didn’t love:
- Girls Only! Especially when it’s a man saying it, this just strikes me wrong, like women are being held responsible for male sexual response or like a defense for blaming the victim is being set up. Girls aren’t to blame when guys have no self-control.
- “Rule number one for clothes: if it’s not on sale – don’t advertise it!” Ouch. So, immodesty = prostitution? Good to know.
- “To girls, young women, women, wives, & mothers: Firstly, men are attracted to you no matter what. If you feel that you are not noticed…you are. Isn’t that liberating?” Not so much liberating as creeping me out. But at least a woman wrote it.
- “I was talking to a good friend on Sunday. He is single, 26, a really good man, but very discouraged. “Is it too much to ask a woman to dress modestly? Does she not think enough of herself? The tightness of clothing worn by some women is very disturbing. Why wear anything at all if it’s going to be that tight?”” This guy is creeping me out.
- “Elder Oaks was initially talking to the men of our church about the evils of pornography but then he added this warning to the women, “And women, please understand that if you dress immodestly, you are magnifying this problem by becoming pornography to some of the men who see you.”” Ick.
- “I want to feel gorgeous but I try to think of how it makes me feel when another woman is dressed showing waaaaaay too much in front of my husband. What is she trying to say to me and especially to him???” Maybe you should scratch her eyes out.
- Immodesty is Sloppiness? I’m a little floored by this notion. Certainly, I’ve seen some bare midriffs that had no right to be so, or tank tops with bra straps showing, but to me, it’s equally sloppy to go out in public in sweatpants. Yet, it’s not immodest. On the contrary, if you have a cheese doodle stuck to your shirt, you are more likely to turn off sexual attention, not attract it. You may attract flies, though.
- “People who are not modest, who don’t care how they dress, or how they talk, or how they treat each other, don’t live up to their best. And worse still, they tend to drag other people down with them.” I’ve seen loads of frumpy modest people and loads of stylish immodest people.
- “When dressed lazily, we act lazily. When dressed formally, we act formally; and likewise, when we are dressed immodestly, we are inclined to act immodestly.” Perhaps she is not equating immodesty with laziness, but it sure sounded like that.
- “I don’t ever want to be “walking pornography.”” Well, who does?
- Little Kids. I am not a fan of sexualizing our very young (prepubescent) children with restrictions on sundresses or making shorts be knee-length or the notion that everyone needs to be dressed as if they are already wearing garments when they are not yet, so they can “be ready.” Their lives will be over soon enough.
- “I have three young girls, and have made it a point to teach them from a young age what modesty looks like and feels like.”
- “If you start with they are infants then as they grow and mature acting and dressing modestly is a habit.”
- “It is also increasingly difficult to find modest clothing in stores, even for a four year old!”
- “I think modest should be taught at an early age. Even with little girls at a young age should dress modestly so they will be use to it.”
- Live in Isolation. [Shaking head].
- “Associate yourself with same faith friends and those who will HELP you live your standards of living, dress, use appropriate language.” So, every member a missionary, except my kids because I don’t want them associating with the rabble?
- “Surround the family with other families who share the same beliefs and the children will follow what they see being emulated around them.” Only families with the same beliefs are modest? No Mormon kids are immodest or ever break the law of chastity? Hmmm. See how that works out for ya.
- Humor Alert! Some of the things people said just sounded funny.
- “When we dress to show off the private parts of our body we are sending the wrong message and we attract the wrong people and the wrong situations.” Tee hee! She said ‘private parts.’ I’ve seen some immodesty in my day, but I’m still pretty sure private parts were not hanging out.
- “When we dress immodestly in pervokes bad thoughts in others around us.” Pervokes? Is that a cross between “provokes” and “perverts”?
What I might say:
- Being committed to chastity is something that will affect your attitude and demeanor. For example, you probably will decline to star in Basic Instinct.
- It’s possible to be sexy and modest, under all this clothing. Likewise, being sexy is a state of mind.
- Teens are especially vulnerable to immodest and unchaste attitudes that erode self-esteem, so open communication is critical.
How would you answer this question? Do you think Mormons are too obsessed with modesty? Do you think it’s a good or bad question? Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
Pervokes? Is that a cross between “provokes” and “perverts”?
refudiate
One thing that really needs to be defined is what exactly is modesty? I’m pretty sure that most people in church would say that if it doesn’t cover your g’s, it’s not modest. But like you said, children, who are not wearing garments, well…. is it immodest to wear a sleeveless shirt? I really don’t think so. Actually, I don’t think shoulders are a “private part” and I think the wearing of tank tops or sleeveless shifts by unendowed members shouldn’t be looked down upon.
Thanks for the FAQs. I really enjoyed reading them.
I for one think refudiate is a much better ‘word’ than repudiate. F sounds better than P.
It’s a bad portmanteau IMHO…
I agree that shoulders are not a “private part”. Having watched my wife try to buy a dress (quite modest) that doesn’t have her garments hang out the “arm hole” it is very difficult. And seeing the layers that women have to suffer through is crazy (garment, bra, undershirt to cover the garment because the “normal” shirt is too something, regular shirt, etc).
I don’t know why they couldn’t make a camisole garment top for women. It would require removing around 2″ of fabric from the sleeve. They have already removed probably 18″ from the sleeves since the garment was instituted, so it isn’t really that much more. And all of the marks could still be in the same place.
Pornography is a combination of elements: the intentions of those who produce it and the intentions of those who view it. No one would consider Gray’s Anatomy (the actual medical book, not the TV series) to be pornographic, but I’ll bet it’s been the source of fantasizing for many a teenage boy. In this case, the publishers of the book may not have had pornography in mind, but in the hands of some 14 year old boys, it becomes pornographic.
So what Elder Oaks says is very true: women who dress immodestly do become pornography to some of the men who see them. The woman may not have intended it, but there are some men out there who see it that way. And it needs to be understood that men are wired differently than women. Men are visually stimulated. Women may thing something is “cute”, but men do not see it that way.
Now we get into the whole “natural man” issue, he being an enemy to God. The man who has put off the natural man has a much easier time with this than the man who has not. The story is told of David O. McKay, who upon seeing some young women walking about in what others considered immodest, commented on how lovely they were. Most men, including MANY in the Church, would have lecherous thoughts! Even in the Church, many men would look just a little too long, or sneak a second (or third) look. That is the natural man! It is a lifelong effort for most to attain a level whereby one could look upon such a display and not even have a fleeting, INSTINCTIVE thought enter their mind.
Cornponebread- some women may be “porn” to men who see them, but some men might be turned on by my feet too. Women are not responsible for making sure no man is ever turned on by them.
I would have answered that modesty means we act and dress appropriately for the activity we are participating in.
(I don’t mean to say that we shouldn’t be considerate about how we dress and how it affects those around us, we just can’t be teaching YW that they are responsible for the purity of the YM)
Yes! I have a couple of tops that looked like they covered my g’s completely, and then got home to find they show from underneath the arm hole a little or a little off to the side of the sleeve. It’s so frustrating!
Alice: Agreed. I actually considered addressing fetishism, but went “big picture” instead. Fetishes fall outside the instinctive, and as such are a separate issue (albeit a very real one). “Appropriate for the activity” is a good rule of thumb. There is an old French saying which (roughly translated) says “A man never sees a dress, he only sees that which lies beneath.” I submit that with the natural man, the enemy to God, this is true.
I agree, by no means should women be responsible for how men see them, but armed with a bit of knowledge as to how MOST men might react to what they see, is it possible that a woman might choose to give her dress a little more thought? As a male, I can’t speak to that, so I am interested in your response.
cornponebread – I’m not Alice, but I do agree that hearing that I might be walking porn might impact the way I dress, but not so much for Christian reasons as being grossed out. But that’s just me. OTOH, I also think it’s a valid point that my hotness shines through even in a burlap bag. It’s a curse, really.
Great new blogsite!
Have responded to this topic on mormonmatters.org
The human body, both gender versions, is of itself beautiful. Context and intent determine what is to be displayed.
A 15-yr old walking to school in short shorts and a halter top should provoke nothing but a wee smile. If her 37-yr old mother (assuming she is attractive) is accompanying her, while her attributes may be attractive, it should provoke concern why she should dress that way.
“Body modesty,” meaning that modesty which deals with the covering up of the body with clothing, is not a gospel principle.Body modesty is a man-made societal norm that changes over time to suit the conditions among men, their customs, cultures, climate, biases, preconceived notions and so on and so forth. It has no basis in the gospel of Jesus Christ. So how did this philosophy of man get mingled with scripture? Well as is usually the case these ideas can be traced back to the doctrine of devils.
Our first parents, Adam and Even “were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.”
“And I, the Lord God, said unto Adam: Who told thee thou wast naked?” (Moses 4: 17)
Let’s answer the question. Who told them that they were naked? Who taught them to be ashamed of their nakedness? Who originated body modesty?
LUCIFER: See–you are naked. Take some fig leaves and make you aprons. Father will see your nakedness. Quick! Hide!
Satan did. But why did he do it? I think Bette Davis said it best:
“I often think that a slightly exposed shoulder emerging from a long satin nightgown packed more sex than two naked bodies in bed.”
She is right, of course. And Satan knew this from the beginning. It is his intention to have everyone break the law of chastity. If everyone were naked, the law of chastity would be broken less, not more. He needed to first cover our parents up and create the illusion of shame, so that the enticement of sin could allure people into uncovering “the sinful parts,” followed by the guilt of acting shameful.
Satan works by using secrets. Occult knowledge is secret knowledge. Secret combinations can only work in the dark. Devilish logic follows that genital parts must become “secret parts.” Thus, we have the (apparently) strange command of the devil to our first parents to abide by the principle of false modesty!Notice, though, that now the devil has made even the breast a “secret part.” Adam and Eve originally covered up only their genitals with fig leaves. Now, man has added onto the doctrine of the devil with his own logic. “Modern” society will have us believe the exposure of the female (not male) breast is immodest. But God’s ways are not our ways and His thoughts are not our thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8)
The Lord looks upon the heart.
But the Lord said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart. (1 Samuel 16: 7)
Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do. (Hebrews 4: 13)
Such truth, though, is not very useful to the devil. So, clothing is used to entice, to create the illusion of sexiness, to flaunt power and prestige and money, to say I am better than you, more beautiful than you. It is used to create situations of judgment, so that mankind judges each other based upon what they are, or are not, wearing. It is used to despise the poor who cannot afford the better garments, or any garments, at all. Etc.
The Lord, though, uses clothing for other, righteous purposes. Clothing can protect from the elements, hence we find the Lord making coats of skins for Adam and Eve so that when they enter the fallen world they can survive. It can convey spiritual symbolism, hence the priesthood garment. And there are other righteous purposes, as well, that do not necessarily equate to “hiding one’s nakedness”, which was Satan’s deceptive intention for clothing.
Glad to see you here!