I hate modesty posts. This is my first modesty post. I appreciate how it is a big issue with some people, and I think the church often goes overboard, but it’s just not that interesting of a topic to me. However, I want to share with you a situation that happened with my sister just a few weeks ago.
First a little background. I have 3 sisters, all 3 very active, temple married, good Mormon girls. Older two have served in RS presidencies, (one passed away from a brain tumor.) Third sister just was released as Young Women’s President. Her ward is a fairly poor ward in Davis County (about 20 min north of Salt Lake City), with lots of inactive young men and women. It’s all she can do to get these inactive girls to come to church, and she has put in a lot of effort to do that. Now comes Girl’s Camp, and since the stake is in charge, they make the (stupid) rule that all swimsuits must be covered by a t-shirt, all in the name of modesty. Mind you there are no boys around, because it is GIRLS CAMP. No boys allowed, except for the obligatory bishopric/stake presidency members.
My sister is sitting on the beach with one of her counselors and the Stake Young Women’s president. They notice a girl who seems to be struggling in the water a bit, probably due to this stupid t-shirt that makes it even harder to swim. They are looking on concerned, and the counselor is a life guard and she thinks it’s probably time to do a water rescue. Instinctively, she attempts to pull off her shirt to do a rescue swim, and the Stake YW President tells her not to take off the t-shirt in the name of modesty. Who cares if this young girl dies (or the rescuer) because they are literally drowning in modesty?
If I were in that situation, I think I would not have held my composure and yelled “F-U, I’m saving this girl’s life.” Feel free to release me after I save this girl’s life. I mean really, this is a safety issue. Everyone knows it’s not a good idea to swim with your clothes on, as you get waterlogged and it is much more difficult to swim. This is especially true if you are trying to save a drowning victim who is likely panicking and thrashing around. I’m no lifeguard, but jeez, isn’t this common sense?
Now the girl was alright. No rescue was needed, but my Hell, this is a stupid, and potentially life threatening rule of modest stupidity. Or to rephrase, this is SEVERE, LIFE-THREATENING STUPIDITY, there’s nothing modest about this t-shirt rule. It needs to go yesterday. No a decade ago. No it should never have been implemented anywhere, at any time. It’s stupid and serves no worthy purpose. If you’re going to do a swimming activity, wear a bathing suit without a t-shirt. Dress appropriately for the activity or don’t allow swimming at all, because people’s lives are potentially at stake.
It seems like common sense, but as Mark Twain once said, “Common sense isn’t always common.” Modesty should not be an impediment to saving a person’s life. This is beyond ludicrous. Please tell me that this kind of stupidity only happens in Utah. Thoughts?
Wheat & Tares 
No some of the mormos outside Utah seem to try to out Utah the Utahans. We had a YSA Convention in Australia where the women were required to wear knee length shorts as well as t shirts in the pool. Most of them boycotted the pool activities and went to the nearby beach where they could wear swimwear,
Unbelievable! Seriously ridiculous–and dangerous. I’m sorry but the Stk leader should be released immediately as she clearly lacks judgement.
My kids are grown–all boys–so thank goodness I didn’t have to deal with this issue as a mother. But I think this hyper-focus on modesty–and my response–would’ve been the same as yours.
I probably mentioned on another post about our Stk Primary presidency attempting to teach a lesson on modesty during Sharing time–and asking the primary kids
‘”What parts of our body should we keep covered?” No one answered–including the Stk leaders. I hate the focus on modesty.
Having grown up in UT, I know how church culture sometimes results in stupid thinking. But, sadly, it is not confined to just Utah. I’ve encountered poor thinking skills in the places we’ve lived outside Utah.
What really grinds my gears is that dollars to donuts, that same stake sent young men swimming at camp without shirts on. It’s not just that modesty is overblown, it’s that it’s overblown at just one gender.
This deserves a call to the General YW and RS Presidency. Absurd.
I’m actually afraid to ask how things were done at girl’s camp in our stake. My daughter declined to go, as her interest in anything church-related is at an all-time low. This is in part due to this kind of idiocy.
However, I think someone (preferably some woman, maybe a doctor or nurse or swim instructor) should have a serious talk with the stake leadership about that situation in particular, and about that stupid rule in general. I think it would be of slim consolation to a grieving parent to have someone say at their daughter’s funeral, “Well, at least she died modest.”
In a practical sense, there’s a lawsuit in there somewhere. I hope. If that’s what it takes to shock some sense into these people.
It is not unique. I think I recall from a daughters in Mormonism podcast some years back the exact same thing. In this case it was in Texas. The same thing. The only males around were the few older men (dads) asked to come and “protect” the women-folk. One of the podcast hosts said something, “If a bunch of teenage girls in swimsuits causes issues with an older man having bad thoughts, then that is HIS issue”. Amen. This mother had contacted the YM leader in charge and said this wasn’t good and didn’t make sense. This leader waved their hand in the Jedi master manner and said, “I have prayed about it.”
With so many responses of Church leaders to everyday situations leaving people bewildered,(this one certainly does), I carry a mental checklist to hopefully isolate where the leader is coming from. It goes something like this: Church member states a position/rule/belief and I ask
Is that Revelation? OR
Is that Scriptural? (not all revelation is) OR
Is that Inspired Counsel? OR
Is that authoritative instruction/guidelines? OR
Is that simply personal preference/opinion?
I haven’t had any instances as severe as MH’s sister, but there have been some that I confronted with my checklist. “We shouldn’t ride Roller-Coasters, it doesn’t invite the Spirit” “If a hymn is not in our (LDS) book, it’s not a real hymn” “We don’t issue awards for that (a proposed talent show), it causes hurt feelings for those who don’t win”.
My daughter had a pool party for her 16th birthday, which we had at a condominium complex of a friend because it had a nice clubhouse and pool. One of her closest friends, from an active LDS family, almost wasn’t allowed to attend because her mom was concerned that there would be men/boys there who might look at her daughter in a swimsuit. She compromised by letting her daughter wear a long t-shirt over her (already incredibly modest, I’m sure) swimsuit, even when she was in the pool. The only males at the party were me and my 10 year old son. This was a birthday party with a bunch of teenage girls and my family, and the mere presence of males was literally enough for her mother to consider not letting her daughter attend. Morals aside, I cannot wrap my brain around the thought process that leads these adults to think they’re actually doing these kids a favor.
That’s just crazy. I’m all for teaching modesty (as I’ve made clear), but unbalanced fanaticism doesn’t help. Don’t these leaders realize that when they get all crazy like that, those girls are going to throw out the baby with the bathwater? Good grief.
Seems like everything these days has to go to extremes, and any moderates trying to broker peace in the middle are simply going to be hated by both sides.
I told this story a few years ago in this post: https://bycommonconsent.com/2013/09/09/drowning-in-modesty-guidelines-at-girls-camp/
It’s very similar to yours. When we lived in Singapore, the youth conference was going to be at a resort in Malaysia. The stake guidelines stipulated that tee shirts and shorts had to be worn over swimsuits. My son was very unhappy about ruining a tee shirt like that (living abroad sometimes meant it wasn’t that easy to replace clothing items), but he finally sucked it up and went. When he got back he said that 1) that rule only applied to the girls anyway, even though nothing in the documents said that–and which he also thought was unfair, and 2) the resort refused to allow it. Wearing regular clothes in the swimming pools can mess with the chemicals because the dyes are not the same. They only allow swimwear. So the stake’s rule went out the window and suddenly the kids were free to have fun like normal people.
So glad I only had boys. It seems to me the concept of appropriateness has eluded some leaders. Clearly, if you are planning on swimming , a swimsuit is appropriate attire, not a ballgown. I attended a high school choral event where a singer wore a Disney princess gown- appropriate to the song – her mother made her wear a black tee shirt under it for the sake of modesty. It looked ridiculous! The deeper issue is the question of who these girls are being protected from. If Stake or Ward leaders cannot view someone in a swimsuit without completely losing control perhaps they should be issued the chastity belt. It
I remember many years ago going swimming occasionally at church-owned Deseret Gym near downtown Salt Lake City. Never, ever was I required to wear a t-shirt when swimming in the pool (with boys/men).
What’s next? burkinis?
It’s just dumb
I went sailing with the boy scouts in the Bahamas a couple months ago. The other adult on the trip is a certified SCUBA diver and strong swimmer, competitive in college. But still as part of being prepared I worked out for many months in the pool twice a week for an hour swimming more than a mile each time as hard as I could without stopping.
A few days before departure we had a little bruhaha about reef friendly sun screen. Was it really required or was it a scam? ( The captain of our sail boat forbade us from bringing it on his boat because it makes such a mess). So as sort of a tongue-in-cheek protest, I dressed like they do in the middle east with thick cotton towels to avoid any sun exposure without requiring any sun screen. The scouts thought it was hilarious and we went out in the middle of the sea of Abaco where nobody could see us.
I took the prank one step too far. The captain required us to do a swimming test the first day, Swim around the 40 ft boat 3 times. Easy. I tried it wearing my costume and no goggles. The sea water stung my eyes so I was swimming pretty much blindly and mostly away from the boat. I got tired surprisingly quickly. I suddenly found myself hundreds of feet away from the boat alone and exhausted in choppy water. So I ditched the damn costume and returned, swimming on my back or I might have drowned.
The other adult was my safety buddy but he was distracted watching the scouts since some of them barely passed the swim test taken weeks before the trip. He didn’t realize I was the one most at risk because of my stupid stunt of trying to swim only a short distance fully dressed.
Drowning was once the second most common cause of death nationally on scout activities after automobile collisions. The scout policies got pretty militant about swim safety. I would not have said” F-U, I’m saving this girl’s life.”. No, after getting her to safety I would have simply dragged this Peter Priesthood down past the waters edge and did about 15 or 20 baptisms for the dead in quick succession on him, skipping the associated prayer. I think this is a sport called waterboarding on some island near the Bahamas ( Gitmo or something like that). We might have sailed near it, those little rascal scouts got us pretty lost a few times in the holy name of boy leadership.
I believe I have heard “the Lord’s standard of modesty does not change” preached a few times from the pulpit in General Conference. My question, what is “the Lord’s standard of modesty”? Even the most modest female swimwear (with or without a t-shirt) would have been considered scandalous in 1920! So, where is the line drawn for modesty? 1860? 1900? 1920? 1950? 1970? As the song says, “a glimpse of stocking was looked on as something shocking”!
I understand that in the old days, all the men and boys swam naked. At the church-owned Deseret Gym in Salt Lake City, male swimming was nude. Even George Albert Smith, President of the Church, swam in the nude.
This tells me that modesty standards change over time, and are not eternal.
I wish the church would focus more on modesty as an attitude and a way of life and less on modesty as a dress code. For me, modest means humble and effective–not calling attention, but getting the job done well. People can act modestly, dress modestly, decorate homes modestly. I think we would do well to focus on the attitude. Then we’ll dress more modestly, even if we show ankles.
Nude swimming at the DG with the prophet??? Talk about a change in standards.
In my humble opinion, bare shoulders on a woman are not erotic or immodest. They only become so when a person or group decides that they are and socializes this to be the norm.
ji: Yes, that’s true. My FIL talked about swimming nude in gym class in his SLC high school. That’s how times have changed.
I understand that at the current EFY in Provo they are telling the girls they should not wear shorts ever. You would think that one or two people in Utah might be aware that other places have higher temperatures or higher humidity making such pronouncements unsafe. Teaching them to wear what’s appropriate to the activity makes sense. Prohibiting shorts in all situations is absolutely not.
I was also talking with a woman at Beehive clothing recently about the new fabrics that are coming out for women’s garments. She said something positive about the Carinessa, and I mentioned that it’s literally impossible to wear those in hot states like AZ without health risks: overheating, but also they don’t breathe and can cause women yeast infections. I know women like them because they are like Spanx and hold in your jiggly parts, but they are really not safe in the heat. The Beehive worker agreed. She said a woman in her ward who is a doctor said the same thing, that they really aren’t safe for (as she called it) “extreme temperatures.” Well, hello, lots of live in NV and AZ or in the south or the east (humid places). Is 3/4 of the country “extreme”?
There’s a lack of care for the individual evident in most of these mandates, and the individual is invariably female.
There’s a lack of care for the individual evident in most of these mandates, and the individual is invariably female.
I note that in the original posting and all examples in these comments, the mandate-imposers are also female — not nefarious or malevolent females, I suppose, but females nonetheless. Thank goodness males aren’t driving this train.
There are two parts to the problem: first, there are too many people eager to make pronouncements; and second, there are too many people eager to enforce the pronouncements of others. I understand the need for minimal standards, but I like the notion of teaching correct principles and letting people govern themselves — and I like the notion of teaching principles and doctrine, rather than talking about behavior.
ji: “I note that in the original posting and all examples in these comments, the mandate-imposers are also female — not nefarious or malevolent females, I suppose, but females nonetheless. Thank goodness males aren’t driving this train.” As Alice Walker said “One tree said to another in the forest, I have seen the ax, and the handle is one of us.” Women are also enforcers of patriarchy, but don’t confuse that with men having nothing to do with it. Men are still the only ones with power, the ones in decision making roles in a patriarchal system. The women who are enforcing these hedges about the laws (and it’s not all women, contrary to what you are observing), are doing so as a sign of their devotion to the things men have labeled important hallmarks of loyalty.
My sons were told to wear a tee shirt when swimming so the girls could not see there nipples. They looked at the church leader and said are you stupid, no way and jumped into the water. Nothing more was said for the rest of the trip. And we wonder why our youth struggle when they leave the modesty bubble and venture out into the real world. If the church was really serious about modesty they would tell sisters to stay away from those doctors selling silicone enhancing opportunities.
Keeping up appearances is more important than common sense and life safety. Why are parents not absolutely outraged when they hear about these policies from Salt Lake City? It’s proof that blind obedience is dangerous because it disconnects you from reality in the moment.
I think we need to start life out on the right foot when it comes to modesty. I mean, it is a disgrace that we have all been born naked! The thought (or is it a repressed memory?) makes me shutter with shame. This most sacred experience; when we step from the spirit world and the presence of our heavenly father and mother and wiggle squawking into the birthing room, with all of its intimidating medical contraptions, must not be contaminated with nudity.
I think babies could be modestly dressed a few minutes before the final stage of childbirth so that they enter the world in proper attire. If doctors can perform heart surgery on babies before they are born, surely it would only be a minor inconvenience to dress them in garment compatible cloths. And as an added benefit, boy babies would not even directly touch skin-to-skin the birth canal (you know the v word) on their way out if properly dressed. And mothers must be kept properly covered up during the entire process.
Reminds me of the Saudi girls that died in a fire because the morality police would not let them escape to the street. Evidently they weren’t sufficiently modest at the time.
My daughter went to the camp that was organized by our stake this year. Her packing list included ‘appropriate shorts’. It also included a bathing suit–modest, not a 2 piece. I asked this morning as to whether girls were required to wear T-shirts over their swim suits. As long as their swim suit was a one piece and not high cut on the legs, they did not have to wear a t-shirt over it. Those who did have 2 piece suits or who did have a high cut style were required to wear T-shirts. Hooray for the YW leaders in our stake.
I thought I would note many pools ban t-shirts for health reasons:
https://www.quora.com/Why-cant-you-wear-cotton-in-the-pool
A conversation from earlier today, talking about a two-ward combined activity at a nearby lake:
me: How did you enjoy the combined activity?
son: It was great!
me: Did everyone go swimming/
son: Yes.
me: Did you have to wear a t-shirt?
son: No.
me: Did the girls?
son: [with a tone of incredulity] No. Do some wards do that?
me: Apparently so.
Over-zealous modesty can be hazardous to your health. And not just in hot dry places like Arizona. The temperature is only half of the picture. Humidity is the other half. Temperatures near 120 F with low humidity (and ample water consumption) are no more dangerous than temperatures of 95 F and high humidity. http://weathersafety.ohio.gov/SpringSummerWeatherTerms.aspx
Let us do a rough comparison of where most of the members of the church live and a summary of the summer climate.
1. Utah- somewhat hot and dry (Utah Dixie- like Az/Nv)
2. California- variable but much of it quite hot and dry
3. Idaho-not very hot and quite dry
4. Arizona, N.Mex.- extremely hot and dry
5. Nevada –extremely hot and dry, north- less so.
6. Colorado, Wyoming Montana etc not very hot and quite dry.
7. Washington, Oregon, Northern California- mildly warm and more humid.
8. Texas, extremely hot, extremely dry to extremely humid west to east.
9. Midwest –hot and humid seasonally.
10. South- hot and extremely humid for up to twice as long as Midwest
11. Mid Atlantic, New England- less hot but often humid seasonally
12. Canada- warm and dry except Ontario- like the Midwest (and the Atlantic cool and humid)
13. Mexico- hot and dry, further south more humid.
14. Brazil- extremely hot and extremely humid most of the year.
15. Chile, Argentina- like California.
16. Most of the rest of Latin America- hot and humid
17. Asia- almost all of it with sizeable membership- hot and humid or worse.
18. Africa- most of it hot and humid, except South Africa-like Europe.
19. Europe- mildly warm and variably humid (north) or like California (south).
20. Australia- hot and dry to humid in the north (New Zealand – pleasant)
21. South Pacific – hot and humid
The data that would be great to have and integrate would be actual membership numbers sorted at the county level (or equivalent internationally) and correlated with Koppen climate classes. But even my rough guestimate above is showing that outside of Northern Utah/Idaho with its huge membership numbers and disproportionate influence, probably about 80% of the membership of the church lives in places where Utah modesty and garment zealotry are not compatible with the summer climate. Factor in the availability of air conditioning and poverty and it gets even uglier.
Rich old guys in offices cooled with A/C in dry climates with only rare heat waves and cool canyon breezes at night are telling poor people many in poverty without A/C living in hot climates with variable humidity (but usually high) that can last up to all year, how to dress. What we see described here is only the tip of the international iceberg of Mormon stupidity about modesty. And with global warming it is only going to get worse.
I had to laugh when I friend, father of an extremely tall, thin young woman, complained about a “no 2-piece swimsuit” rule that if his daughter wore a one piece, it would stretch the neckline down to her navel and be far less “modest” than a 2-piece. He hypothesized that perhaps she needed to wear both a 1-piece and a 2-piece! The problem is really not funny, but it is a good illustration of the often ignored general rule that there is no such thing as one-size-fits-all, whether we’re talking about clothing or other aspects of life or church or whatever.
Oh gosh. I live in a ward outside Utah and the YM and YW get together all the time.
Grew up Mormon, not one any longer, but my daughter went to a Christian camp where they made girls wear tshirts over their swimsuits to go down to the waterfront. Swimsuits were not allowed to be two piece- no matter that tankinis can be more modest than one-pieces. Anyway, the boys weren’t required to do such a thing. A couple of the comments on this post “glad I raised boys…” because no one is concerned with boys without shirts causing girls to stumble? lol. At least the church doesn’t seem to be as concerned with that…
I agree with others who said that it’s only an issue because people make it out to be one as these kids are growing up. Is it any wonder that so many of the sexual predators in society happen to have some religious upbringing where everything is taboo- including shoulders and belly buttons!?