To quote from LDS Living:
“We understand the desire to clearly and strictly enforce a dress code for young women who are slammed with messages telling them their value lies in their sexual appeal above all else.
But dress codes like this one don’t help that cause, and might inadvertently do more harm than good.
Here’s why: They inadvertently sexualize young women as a collection of inappropriate body parts, positioning them as threats to be mitigated at any cost.”
http://www.ldsliving.com/One-Important-Aspect-About-Body-Image-We-Sometimes-Forget-When-It-Comes-to-Dress-Codes/s/87636?utm_source=Facebook [url displayed in full to make the source clear][They draw on this source.]
What evils have you seen with dress codes?- What positive things can dress codes provide? [School uniforms seem to have a lot of positives. Can you think of other positives?]
- What is a better way to approach modesty?
- How often do dress codes merely act to harm women and objectify them rather than serve any useful purpose?
- What other thoughts do you have about dress codes?
- How do we have standards without objectifying?
Images from Free Stock Art.
This is a narrower topic than some we have had before — think of it as a bite sized part of the same issues addressed in earlier posts.
Wheat & Tares 
I agree with the comments that you quoted. And when I think of how it sexualizes young girls to have a less than health relationship with their body. It can drive a feeling (with young women and young men) that the worth of a girl is in the shape of her body and this evil body has to power that men can’t resist. This can put a lot of shame around normal desires in young men and young women as they go into adulthood. This generally does not serve them well.
I don’t think that having standards is bad, but when we start placing too much focus on them and making the standards and obedience to them THE main point, I think we are starting to be come like the Pharisees.
I don’t mind a dress code. I don’t mind when critics point out (correctly) that LDS morality codes don’t seem to be based on any permanent, divine revelation but simply seem to lag 20-50 years behind “world” standards. I don’t mind that we attempt to be a peculiar people. Concept of dress code is fine. What’s wrong is when it gets overbearing. 20 years behind might be OK. 150 years behind is not. And when it becomes too much of a focus, ie long, dramatic explanations and warnings and demands to have a dress pre-approved, ie as illustrated in that Church Prom announcement. They are bad when they are overly policed. And of course when the dress code is sexist, ie when the standards and emphasis and enforcement are unequal between the boys and girls.
Consistent standards are hard to come by, which is why Jesus bemoaned the servant who must be commanded in all things. As Angela C said in another post, absent behavior that presents actual physical danger, maybe we should just allow social costs to modify behavior.
churchistrue – so taking your “it is OK to be 20 years behind the rest of the world”, then would you agree that BYU beard ban is way overdue in being retired?
Dress codes harm when leaders of the church get up in General Conference and make statements telling women and girls they are walking pornography “if they aren’t careful”. I am still so angry about that one.
Stephen,
Quick thoughts about the good from uniforms and dress codes. I am around Doctors when they are in uniform – Scrubs with or with our white lab jackets. I am also with them at conferences with suits and after hours by the pools. It is noticeable how different they are treated and how they treat their peers and others when depending on how they are dressed.
Concerning their interaction with fellow doctors. In the past 15 years when they are dressed in scrubs and surgical attire I see a change in both their attitudes and interactions then when they are at the pool. I have also watched their interactions with patients and families during the week and then on casual Fridays where staff is allowed to wear jeans. The interaction is strikingly different.
Personally I will not have surgery on a Friday. There is not as much focus as during the other days of the week. This is probably one of the reasons the new Dean of Medicine is slowly phasing out casual Friday. Too many problems both with patients and staff occur on Friday when the Physicians and staff are not in their role related uniforms.
HH yes, beard banning is long overdue.
Mark: that’s a work uniform. What’s the appropriate uniform for the job of “teen attending a social event,” and what metrics are adversely affected when participants do not adhere to the uniform?
This happened in my ward last year: A non member girl taking the discussions went to Mormon Prom with her member date but she arrived with a skirt a couple of inches short and they made her wear some sort of additional skirt that covered her legs. She simply left with her date and stopped taking discussions. Two negative things happened in this case – the couple left and did who knows what somewhere else and the girls wants nothing to do with judgmental Mormons.
I suspect she will remember this her whole life – both the shame and the dislike of Mormons.
The irony is that she could have gone to the temple and attended church in that dress, but not attended Prom.
Dress codes can be important and valid – they can signal competence or other information. When my daughter was preparing to undergo surgery we changed doctors because we thought one surgeon dressed unprofessionally for an appointment. I hire software engineers and only the most confident arrive to an interview without a tie, but it shows a certain level of confidence. In fact I had a professor once tell me never go to an interview with a tie for a coding position. I often hire coders based on their self confidence (proxy signal for ability) even though they aren’t dressed appropriately. An consequence of hiring a coder showing up to an interview in a tshirt may be that he or she expects flexible hours and can be hard to manage. However, I would never hire an attorney who showed up in a tshirt.
Dress codes seem to encourage us to play a certain role or signal something. We need to think about what role we want kids to play while considering unintended consequences. Kicking a couple out of a dance because of a dress code may mean they just go somewhere and get themselves into trouble.
Sorry, a couple of comments have rubbed me a little wrong. 2 of you mentioned that if they weren’t at the dance they were somewhere else getting into trouble.?? So if I’m not dancing at the dance, I’m somewhere else dancing in the sheets? When I was dating, I did a ton of fun things with girls that didn’t involve getting into “trouble”. So the dances are just the preliminaries to the trouble they’re going to get into? This is just so symptomatic of our infantilizing youth, that if they aren’t in groups, chaperoned by responsible adults, they will immediately go for sex. Our church culture is sick with this thinking.
These kinds of dress codes are harmful because, while they are framed as being part of “God’s unchanging standards”, they are in fact arbitrary and man-made (literally, these rules are often made and enforced by men disproportionately upon women and girls). We still unfortunately promote the idea that blessings come through obedience to made-up rules and making sacrifices associated with keeping those rules (missionaries get hung up on this a lot). Ultimately, I don’t think there are any consequences for a young woman to wear a strapless gown to prom, or a 2-piece swimsuit at the beach–nor does God care one way or another.
Makes you wonder what other aspects of LDS belief or practice that are often trumpeted as being of divine origin are actually just made up.
My perception is that the irony about our obsession with “modest” dress has gotten more restrictive over time. When I was at BYU in the early 2000s the Wilk had a row of portraits of homecoming queens from the 60s and 70s. Most if not all of them had sleeveless dresses that were not “garment appropriate.” We have staked our claim on covering shoulders and one-piece swimming suits being cultural boundary markers. At some point, how many more boundary markers do we need? As Jack said, these things are framed as God’s standards. But, we run into trouble when people discover they have changed and are not necessarily of God. My reading of the New Testament is that Jesus came to show people that finding God was less about obeying and creating more rules and more about living a higher and more difficult gospel of inclusion, service and generosity. We as a people seemed to have reverted back to the very kind of religious that Jesus sought to liberate us from. I hope that we can actually adopt what he taught and get on to things that are more important than how many fingers between a hemline and a knee, or as he said straining at gnats.
Or as J. Golden Kimball colorfully said, “sweeping up mouse turds.”
I’ve probably mentioned this before, if so, I apologize for the repeat.
The hyper-focus on modesty is out-of-control IMHO. Last year we had Stake Primary leaders teaching a lesson about modesty to the Primary (ages 3-12) where they posed the question: “what body parts should be covered with clothes?” Holy cow–what/how is a primary child going to answer that question?
First, I think the adults–parents–rather than the youth–ought to receive the non-stop lessons on modesty so they can guide and direct their children’s dressing habits. Primary children and most young people do not select AND pay for their own clothes. Secondly, if we were really focused on modesty why aren’t we more welcoming of women wearing pants to church? There are many weeks I wish the little girls in my Primary class were dressed in
pants rather than dresses/skirts because they have a hard time keeping their legs down so that they aren’t flashing their underwear.
I have unreconciled viewpoints on modesty. On the one hand, telling women to cover up for men’s sake is sexist and selfish. On the other, immodest styles seem driven by men’s entitlement to sexualize women. Early feminists decried “immodesty” as catering to the male gaze. I don’t know how to balance those two ideas.
I do think the church is 20-150 years behind in modesty standards, and I see that as problematic. Jesus told us to distinguish ourselves by loving one another (“By this shall all man know that ye are my disciples…”), not by a pharasaical one-upping the rest of society. The Amlicites of the BoM set themselves apart from society through their appearance, and this was conveyed as a bad thing. And if the purpose of these arbitrary standards are to set us apart, it’s especially problematic to be turning away a non-Mormon girl for failing to demarcate herself as Mormon.
There’s that Kimball quote that women will be drawn to the church “to the degree that the women of the Church reflect righteousness and articulateness in their lives and to the degree that the women of the Church are seen as distinct and different—in happy ways—from the women of the world.” From this I take it that it’s not being different so much as being different in meaningful ways. Two inches from the shoulders and knees is not meaningful at all. And arbitrarily limiting their wardrobes certainly is not going to make many women happy.
It’s easy to see how dress codes can be evil when Orthodox Jews are throwing rocks at schoolgirls for wearing simply their school uniform* or the Taliban are beating women for their hair showing, but harder to see when we are the ones shunning girls for two-inches-too-short skirts.
* https://jezebel.com/5871293/orthodox-israelis-spit-on-whorish-8-year-old-girl-for-going-to-school
When my wife and I were called to be the dance directors for our region’s youth dances we saw firsthand a couple of problems with a dress code. One was the arbitrariness of the code itself. Another was the occasional uncharitable enforcement of the standards by the different chaperones provided by the nine stakes in the region.
We initially used dress standards passed on to us from the previous host stake. Presumably, that’s how each host stake adopted and passed on the standards though the decades. My wife quickly noticed how the young women had more instructions then the men, who basically were instructed to “wear a tie.” Things came to a head when a chaperone at one of our dances refused entry to a young woman wearing a perfectly modest dress that happened to not have sleeves. The young woman was devastated and in tears. The problem, my wife pointed out to me, was the young woman took the refusal as a very public judgment of her morality. And yet she was wearing a dress that no one would bat an eye at had she worn it to a Sacrament meeting. My wife and I were heartbroken for the unnecessary humiliation endured by this young woman at a dance we were responsible for.
Since no one could tell us the origin or authority of the standards we were using, my wife and I rewrote them, after that dance, into one line “Sunday dress should be worn”. We then gave chaperones the instruction that if they had a concern, they weren’t to discuss it with the youth, instead they were to just notify my wife or I and we would take care of things. We let the youth govern themselves and ultimately never refused anyone again – even if we got the occasional complaint from a chaperone that a dress was too short or a young man wasn’t wearing a tie. No one ever wore anything we hadn’t seen previously in a Sacrament meeting.
Dave–your idea was radical and revolutionary and I love it! Reminds me of something someone once said about letting people govern themselves and something in the scriptures about not being commanded in all things. You treated the youth like people with brains who could make good decisions and they stepped up!
Bro. Jones: That is the point. We all are wearing a uniform of sorts. Some are easy to see such as the military and police. Some take a little more thought such as Doctors and other professions. As soon as people accept clothes make statements and others will treat them accordingly much of the rancor about dress codes is seen a little clearer. I’m not sure if you are ever on public transport but if you come to Portland take a ride the MAX (our train system). Watch who wears who. Notice who is on the train and how they are treated and what happens when they board the train at a different time and how they are then treated.
You asked, “What’s the appropriate uniform for the job of “Teen attending a social event,”… Admittedly wrestling is probably not the event you were thinking of but the coach at the local High School understands this principle. His team wears ties to school prior to a meet. He does this because of two reasons. First they are better students. Second he maintains they wrestle better if they are dressed up before a match.
Somebody did an experiment in NYC. They had a guy dressed in a suit, and then sloppy jeans and a t-shirt cross against a red light in a crosswalk. They counted how many people followed him. You can guess the answer. Almost nobody followed him as a slob, but he had many followers as a business man in a suit (he looks important, so it must be OK to cross now…..)
There is a thing called enclothed cognition that explains why a uniform or lab coat actually does imbue a person with more attention to detail or more power. However, that’s not the same as skirt length or shoulders being covered, neither of which is part of a uniform.
I don’t like that the boys are basically told, “don’t look sloppy,” and the girls are told, “don’t look sexy.”
And instructions for boys can be summed up in about three short sentences; the girls’ is a book by comparison.
I’m not saying clothes don’t matter, but when well-dressed, “normal”, modest women all over the Western Hemisphere wear sleeveless shirts and dresses, our panic over them looks a little crazy. Same for skirt length.
Dave: Love your idea. Will suggest “Sunday dress” as good wording if this ever crosses my purview.
We recently had some dances in my region, and language ranged from not saying anything at all to “Nice Casual Dress” which I liked. I’m on the East Coast of the US.
Angela,
Thanks for bring up “enclothed cognition”. Most web site on the subject suggest there is much more then lab coats and to some degree or another we all are wearing uniforms and are impacted positively or negatively by the things we wear. Take this web site for example. This website : https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103112000200
Nobel Prize winning author Isaac Bashevis Singer asserts that the clothes we wear hold considerable power and sway. In line with this assertion, bestselling books such as Dress for Success by John T. Molloy and TV shows like TLC’s What Not to Wear emphasize the power that clothes can have over others by creating favorable impressions. Indeed, a host of research has documented the effects that people’s clothes have on the perceptions and reactions of others. High school students’ clothing styles influence perceptions of academic prowess among peers and teachers (Behling & Williams, 1991). Teaching assistants who wear formal clothes are perceived as more intelligent, but as less interesting than teaching assistants who wear less formal clothes (Morris, Gorham, Cohen, & Huffman, 1996). When women dress in a masculine fashion during a recruitment interview, they are more likely to be hired (Forsythe, 1990), and when they dress sexily in prestigious jobs, they are perceived as less competent (Glick, Larsen, Johnson, & Branstiter, 2005). Clients are more likely to return to formally dressed therapists than to casually dressed therapists (Dacy & Brodsky, 1992). And appropriately dressed customer service agents elicit stronger purchase intentions than inappropriately dressed ones (Shao, Baker, & Wagner, 2004)…….
We argue that just like physical experiences, the experience of wearing clothes triggers associated abstract concepts and their symbolic meanings. In particular, we posit that wearing clothes causes people to “embody” the clothing and its symbolic meaning. Consequently, when a piece of clothing is worn, it exerts an influence on the wearer’s psychological processes by activating associated abstract concepts through its symbolic meaning—similar to the way in which a physical experience, which is, by definition, already embodied, exerts its influence.
Great post Mark A Marsh. Got to love science.
Bro Jones,
We did have two casual dances a year and “Nice Casual Dress” was the standard then.
You mention you are on the East Coast of the US. Somewhat off-topic, I grew up outside of Utah (except 5th and 6th grade) so I experienced youth LDS dance culture outside Utah. I was living in Alaska during my junior and senior years of High School. We had monthly stake dances and they were the place to be, even for a large contingent of non-members. I also spent a majority of my career outside of Utah and whenever I worked with youth, the dances were popular among all the teens. That hasn’t been so for the regional dance I worked with in Utah.
The Utah dances are mainly attended by 14 and 15 year olds, many of the older youth wouldn’t be caught dead attending. I couldn’t even bribe my youngest daughter with $20, when she was 16, to attend. My oldest daughter, however, attended all the dances when we lived in Texas and also brought two of her best friends from high school, both non-members. The disdain for the church dances in Utah even pervades the attitudes of much of the adults in the region – except the ones who happened to grow up outside of Utah. I don’t know why this is. I figure the high Mormon population in schools here, providing forums for significant interaction among LDS youth, is probably a factor.
One thought I have is, with the exception military uniforms, most dress codes/ uniforms outside of the LDS purview don’t tend to be laden with moral judgement. The Temple Recommend interview makes dress a condition of worthiness. As noted above, that moral judgement gets extended to the non endowed – in primary, youth dances, and unfortunately, via my experience, some LDS attitudes towards non-members. It’s why I prefer not to see an emphasis on dress codes, even with the endowed, in the church. It’s not that I disagree that dress shapes other’s attitudes, it’s that the moral condemnation associated with LDS dress codes isn’t justified.
I was almost turned away from a BYU dance because, in spite of the dress meeting every criteria, the opaque silver fabric my roommate had hand-sewn into the coordinating lace shrug (small sweater) wasn’t obvious enough for on-lookers to know FOR SURE they weren’t seeing my shoulders under the lace. I watched her take hours to sew the lining in – she owned the dress. So the outfit was opaque, but someone glancing at it might not think it was opaque, so therefore it was immodest. It was completely mind-blowing for me as a sheltered, rule-following kid think, “I am following every blasted rule. I am 100% covered up in every way I’ve ever been taught to be. I would be totally comfortable in God’s presence. I meet every LDS criteria for modesty I’ve ever been taught. But this man is standing there telling me my dress is not appropriate.” Even on appeal, I was only grudgingly let in. I had never experienced the disapproving stares and judgments like that, and it was absolutely infuriating because I *knew* I didn’t have anything to apologize for. But if I *did* become convinced I’d broken a rule? Heck yeah I would be embarassed and ashamed, because following the LDS rules of modesty had been such a big thing growing up. That was the first time it clicked just how arbitrary and “in the eye of the beholder” those rules could be.
There is a time and a place for dress codes, but when it comes to women’s bodies, we tend to have some problems.
With regard to modest dress standards, I think the Savior would be less focused on the length of a skirt and more concerned with the cost of the material used to make it. We need to remember that modesty is more about being humble and not ostentatious then it is about porn shoulders or facial hair. Until then, our culture will continue to be unchristian.
Actual wording included on the one page code of conduct that my teenage daughter had to sign before signing up for girls camp this year: “Young Women are expected to maintain the standards found in the “For the Strength of the Youth” pamplet. Clothing must cover the shoulders and the stomach and be neither low-cut nor tight fitting (no leggings). Shorts are to be knee-length Swimsuits are to be modest and one-piece. For safety reasons shoes must be sturdy and closed-toe. No rolling up or tying of sleeves. When walking to and from the pool or other water activities, shorts, shirt and closed-toe shoes must be worn.”
Actual words said by my teenage son when he returned from last summer’s 5 day high adventure where they hiked, camped, and kayaked: “I took my shirt off right when we got there and didn’t put it back on until we got in the car to drive back home.”
Boys get to enjoy all of the great things their bodies can do. Girls get to feel ashamed about even having bodies at all. I’m having a harder and harder time justifying raising my girls in the church.