Is Modesty Actually Damaging To Self-Worth?

[Stroopwafel]

I found an article that was quite thought provoking (modesty, provoking, get my drift? yea, sorry...) and I wanted to share it here to see what kind of discussion we could get going. It is about modesty, and how its effects may actually be quite different from what we may generally suppose. Though this account may be anecdotal, there are probably some women / girls out there who could identify with the substance of this article.

http://rhrealitychec...ty-made-me-fat/

Here are a couple of quotes from it:

"Modesty taught me that what I looked like was what mattered most of all."

"Modesty made me objectify myself."

"When you argue that what’s modest and what isn’t is a valid concern for women, you tell them that their appearance matters most. You objectify them."

"You cannot consider women full human beings unless you recognize that their lives do not revolve around the male sex drive."

Now, to get sort of a common ground understanding of what is understood by modesty, here is an excerpt of what the Church's website has to say about it:

Modesty is an attitude of propriety and decency in dress, grooming, language, and behavior. If we are modest, we do not draw undue attention to ourselves. Instead, we seek to “glorify God in [our] body, and in [our] spirit” (1 Corinthians 6:20; see also 1 Corinthians 6:19).

[...]

Our clothing expresses who we are. It sends messages about us, and it influences the way we and others act. When we are well groomed and modestly dressed, we can invite the companionship of the Spirit and exercise a good influence on those around us.

Central to the command to be modest is an understanding of the sacred power of procreation, the ability to bring children into the world. This power is to be used only between husband and wife. Revealing and sexually suggestive clothing, which includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, and shirts that do not cover the stomach, can stimulate desires and actions that violate the Lord's law of chastity.

In addition to avoiding clothing that is revealing, we should avoid extremes in clothing, appearance, and hairstyle. In dress, grooming, and manners, we should always be neat and clean, never sloppy or inappropriately casual. We should not disfigure ourselves with tattoos or body piercings. Women who desire to have their ears pierced should wear only one pair of modest earrings.

Language and Behavior

Like our dress and grooming, our language and behavior are expressions of our character. Our words and actions can have a profound influence on us and on others. We should express ourselves through clean, positive, uplifting language and in actions that bring happiness to those around us. Our efforts to be modest in word and deed lead to increased guidance and comfort from the Holy Ghost.

We should avoid the filthy language and the casual, irreverent use of the Lord's name that are so common in the world, and we should withstand any temptation to participate in extreme or inappropriate behavior. The irreverent nature of such language and behavior impairs our ability to receive the quiet promptings of the Holy Ghost.

We see in the first paragraph that modesty is considered in the Church not only in matters of dress, but in language and behavior as well. So I guess we could say that the Church has sort of a broader approach. However, I think that modesty is typically understood and conceptualized primarily in terms of dress and grooming, and that those are the particular aspects most emphasized in Church settings.

Here are some questions that may help the discussion (pick whichever):

Was this woman wrongly taught about modesty? If you think so, could you elaborate on what was wrong with the way she was taught and what would have been a better way?

Are there different ways to teach modesty, and is there a better way to teach it?

Do you think it would have mattered at all how this woman was taught about modesty? Meaning, would she have perceive modesty in the same way in the end no matter how it would have been taught?

Don't feel you have to stick to those questions, and feel free to contribute with any (relevant) comments.

[Maidservant]

I personally think this is an important topic and this is how far we got with it not too long ago:

[Maidservant]

I think where the author says that if we even have a modesty debate, women have already lost (although I would frame this a little different--men and women can't lose at different times; if one loses, they both lose. Modesty of women impacts men too and how they are taught to think of themselves.)

I study a lot of Islam, so I am also confronted with veiling there (although I would say that Islam itself does not ask for veiling, it is nevertheless deeply entrenched in certain cultures that don't often themselves make the distinction) and many think veiling is an issue for Muslims only, but it is not, it challenges all women all over the world, especially women like myself who also have modesty rules in our own religions and cultures. Because if I am 'righteous' and 'protected' and 'kind to men' by how much fabric I am wearing, well, by golly, shouldn't I get REALLY righteous and wear a burka? Why stick with my telestial knee-length skirt and short sleeves when I could be REALLY celestial and wear a burka? I'm not being funny--I really think this stuff. And then it brings me around to what I see so far as the absurdity of all modesty arguments or philosophies--they are based on more or less arbitrary fabric lengths and I really have a problem with that. I am hoping I can come to a personal peaceful understanding on it, but I'm not there yet.

[EllenMaksoud]

I found an article that was quite thought provoking (modesty, provoking, get my drift? yea, sorry...) and I wanted to share it here to see what kind of discussion we could get going. It is about modesty, and how its effects may actually be quite different from what we may generally suppose. Though this account may be anecdotal, there are probably some women / girls out there who could identify with the substance of this article.

http://rhrealitychec...ty-made-me-fat/

Here are a couple of quotes from it:

"Modesty taught me that what I looked like was what mattered most of all."

"Modesty made me objectify myself."

"When you argue that what’s modest and what isn’t is a valid concern for women, you tell them that their appearance matters most. You objectify them."

"You cannot consider women full human beings unless you recognize that their lives do not revolve around the male sex drive."

Now, to get sort of a common ground understanding of what is understood by modesty, here is an excerpt of what the Church's website has to say about it:

We see in the first paragraph that modesty is considered in the Church not only in matters of dress, but in language and behavior as well. So I guess we could say that the Church has sort of a broader approach. However, I think that modesty is typically understood and conceptualized primarily in terms of dress and grooming, and that those are the particular aspects most emphasized in Church settings.

Here are some questions that may help the discussion (pick whichever):

Was this woman wrongly taught about modesty? If you think so, could you elaborate on what was wrong with the way she was taught and what would have been a better way?

Are there different ways to teach modesty, and is there a better way to teach it?

Do you think it would have mattered at all how this woman was taught about modesty? Meaning, would she have perceive modesty in the same way in the end no matter how it would have been taught?

Don't feel you have to stick to those questions, and feel free to contribute with any (relevant) comments.

I was Muslim until I encountered Sister Missionaries in Kirtland, Ohio. In Islam, the Modesty, or the practice of Hijab is the single most important issue for a woman. Hijab is not just the head scarf but the way you conduct yourself, your demeanor before men; not looking them in the eyes, being submissive, and chaste. So, in Islam if a woman is raped, it is often she who is punished or even killed. It is less so now days, but when I was growing up, if you were attacked, you were asked where you were, was it dark, were you alone, what were you wearing and many things that made you feel you were guilty. Even if you were not directly accused, it was insinuated.

I am still not very sympathetic to a woman wearing a mini, walking down a road alone at 2:00 AM.

So, it has taken me since March of 2011 to finally begin to return to American culture for women. I am American. It was a painful process. First to go was the Hijab (head scarf). I felt like whore if I left the house without it. There was so much pressure from others in the church that it felt awful at times. I would still dress like NUN but that just draws attention. People stupidly think you are still Muslim.

One thing that men do not know, is that women are under a lot of pressure from other women to look alike, or at least non competitive, I've easily been able to see that for women, there is a sort of "Mormon Uniform". First is your neck. Wearing a too low neck line reveals you as one of those "Un-endowed", and there is of course the prohibition from revealing your um garments. Next is your sleeve length. NO tank tops, always at least cap sleeves, and of course the next is hem length. It was extremely difficult for me to relax my standards to conform to LDS custom.

Even if you wear complete Niqab, the men still look at you, and after I became involved in American culture again, it is still difficult at times to be looked at, and I am 66 for pete sakes.

Edited May 1, 2013 by EllenMaksoud

[pmccombs1]

I once encountered the following passage in an early American primer on the topic of ethics:

Purity is freedom from all such thoughts, words, and actions as modesty and delicacy condemn; it is to avoid these things our selves and

never willingly to witness them in others

. (Emphasis mine)

At the time, I was somehow surprised at this idea that immodesty has something to do with those who witness it. Modesty is about purity of thought, word, and action, and these things are affected by what we see. Nevertheless, the "impurity" happens only when a connection is made between two things.

And yet, I submit that there are places in this world where the most outrageous immodesty goes practically unnoticed; that it almost entirely fails to elicit any impurity at all--and therefore is completely innocent and modest in a practical sense. What would happen were we to visit these people with our standards? What if we began to cover their bodies and teach them that, by showing certain parts, an unbidden sexual response might be the result?

Such a thing suggests to innocent minds a connection heretofore absent: A connection between a common visual and a formerly uncommon vice. Things once visible are now hidden from the eyes, the connection made by the standard is repeated and taught to all, and then one day... someone shows a part that is now off limits. What is the response to this? Just what the new standard predicted it should be. Immodesty is born. The impure are turned out in droves, all of them in desperate need of a savior.

Taboos usually bring their own vice with them, for they suggest new possibilities at the same time they are forbidden. When legion are the taboos among a people, legion are their hidden sins.

[Rivers]

_{As a man, I can vouch for the fact that women being dressed immodestly can be very distracting. Even attractive women who are dressed modestly can be distracting for men. So if the puropose of modesty is to keep men from having certain kinds of feelings, then the muslims have the right idea by having burkas.}

[EllenMaksoud]

I think where the author says that if we even have a modesty debate, women have already lost (although I would frame this a little different--men and women can't lose at different times; if one loses, they both lose. Modesty of women impacts men too and how they are taught to think of themselves.)

I study a lot of Islam, so I am also confronted with veiling there (although I would say that Islam itself does not ask for veiling, it is nevertheless deeply entrenched in certain cultures that don't often themselves make the distinction) and many think veiling is an issue for Muslims only, but it is not, it challenges all women all over the world, especially women like myself who also have modesty rules in our own religions and cultures. Because if I am 'righteous' and 'protected' and 'kind to men' by how much fabric I am wearing, well, by golly, shouldn't I get REALLY righteous and wear a burka? Why stick with my telestial knee-length skirt and short sleeves when I could be REALLY celestial and wear a burka? I'm not being funny--I really think this stuff. And then it brings me around to what I see so far as the absurdity of all modesty arguments or philosophies--they are based on more or less arbitrary fabric lengths and I really have a problem with that. I am hoping I can come to a personal peaceful understanding on it, but I'm not there yet.

I think a lot of Middle Eastern modesty originated with the weather conditions. In some of the harshest conditions, men and women cover everything but their eyes. Along the way, I think that at least some of the time, excessive covering when not actually needed can be driven by the men and if fetishistic. Years ago, I was on Skype, a Moroccan called me, and before I turned on camera, I put on Hijab. Later he said I should wear Niqab, so I put it on. He told me how beautiful I was and all that and then he told me to take off all my clothes but Niqab. I ended call. The religious requirement came later. In the Middle East now, women are expected to cover up because men can not control themselves. Any of you women remember being told by your boyfriend when you were in High School, that he could not control himself? Many young women have fallen to this ploy by randy young men trying to manipulate them.

[EllenMaksoud]

_{As a man, I can vouch for the fact that women being dressed immodestly can be very distracting. Even attractive women who are dressed modestly can be distracting for men. So if the puropose of modesty is to keep men from having certain kinds of feelings, then the muslims have the right idea by having burkas.}

That is sexist! Read my last post. Even when women are completely covered men still yield to their desires and blame women !!!! Believe me, I have had that experience. I now carry.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

_{As a man, I can vouch for the fact that women being dressed immodestly can be very distracting. Even attractive women who are dressed modestly can be distracting for men. So if the puropose of modesty is to keep men from having certain kinds of feelings, then the muslims have the right idea by having burkas.}

As a man, you are responsible for your own thoughts. Period. [edit -Based on Calmoriah's comment below, I believe I misread that]. Since a picture is worth a thousand words:

It's gotta be those toes they are checking out??

Edited May 1, 2013 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Calm]

Are there different ways to teach modesty, and is there a better way to teach it?

I highly doubt that it was modesty that caused these women to feel that way, but rather the way it was presented and/or received. Sometimes even the best teacher is misunderstood because of the background with which the student approaches it. Especially with children, in my experience, it can be hard to anticipate the construction they may place on things they learn or observe. How many children assume that they are the cause of their parents' fighting and if they would only be more 'good' that it would solve the family's problems when nothing could be further from the truth?

[Calm]

That is sexist! Read my last post. Even when women are completely covered men still yield to their desires and blame women !!!! Believe me, I have had that experience. I now carry.

I think River may be saying that no matter what a woman does (since he states that even modest women may trigger inappropriate thoughts) a man will have certain thoughts....iow, he is saying it is the man's responsibility and not the woman's, that men are wired that way. I assume he also would agree that because it is the man's wiring, it is also the man's responsibility to control those thoughts once triggered.

I believe he is suggesting that the purpose of modesty is not to prevent men from having certain thoughts (because it is impossible to prevent men from having such thoughts).

He can correct me if I am wrong, but going from his history I think I am correct.

Edited May 1, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

I am still not very sympathetic to a woman wearing a mini, walking down a road alone at 2:00 AM.

When there are other choices, I would suggest it is unwise for a woman completely covered in pants and a trench cost to walk down a road alone at 2 AM or for a man to do the same these days, just as I would suggest that it is unwise to leave the door unlocked, park in a place without a light at night, travel in neighbourhoods that are known for their violence, etc. etc. etc. It is not about modesty, it is about being safe in my view and making stupid decisions. Edited May 1, 2013 by calmoriah

[EllenMaksoud]

I think River may be saying that no matter what a woman does (since he states that even modest women may trigger inappropriate thoughts) a man will have certain thoughts....iow, he is saying it is the man's responsibility and not the woman's, that men are wired that way. I assume he also would agree that because it is the man's wiring, it is also the man's responsibility to control those thoughts once triggered.

I believe he is suggesting that the purpose of modesty is not to prevent men from having certain thoughts (because it is impossible to prevent men from having such thoughts).

He can correct me if I am wrong, but going from his history I think I am correct.

Um Sorry, I had meant to insert smiley to soften the blow, but did not.

My stepfather and brothers used to get all "interested" in women in movies even if they were wearing Southern Bell clothing. Mother would sigh and let it go. I think that modesty is in the head not on the body.

[Calm]

I think that modesty is in the head not on the body.

I agree, but I would state it as 'the attribute of modesty is mental (in the head), but is expressed in a physical and emotional way (on and by the body)'.

[EllenMaksoud]

I agree, but I would state it as 'the attribute of modesty is mental (in the head), but is expressed in a physical and emotional way (on and by the body)'.

I think the issue of Modesty was much easier for me as Muslim. I just opened my closet and put everything on. Now that I have choices, even at my age ...

[teddyaware]

I found an article that was quite thought provoking (modesty, provoking, get my drift? yea, sorry...) and I wanted to share it here to see what kind of discussion we could get going. It is about modesty, and how its effects may actually be quite different from what we may generally suppose. Though this account may be anecdotal, there are probably some women / girls out there who could identify with the substance of this article.

http://rhrealitychec...ty-made-me-fat/

Here are a couple of quotes from it:

"Modesty taught me that what I looked like was what mattered most of all."

"Modesty made me objectify myself."

"When you argue that what’s modest and what isn’t is a valid concern for women, you tell them that their appearance matters most. You objectify them."

"You cannot consider women full human beings unless you recognize that their lives do not revolve around the male sex drive."

Now, to get sort of a common ground understanding of what is understood by modesty, here is an excerpt of what the Church's website has to say about it:

We see in the first paragraph that modesty is considered in the Church not only in matters of dress, but in language and behavior as well. So I guess we could say that the Church has sort of a broader approach. However, I think that modesty is typically understood and conceptualized primarily in terms of dress and grooming, and that those are the particular aspects most emphasized in Church settings.

Here are some questions that may help the discussion (pick whichever):

Was this woman wrongly taught about modesty? If you think so, could you elaborate on what was wrong with the way she was taught and what would have been a better way?

Are there different ways to teach modesty, and is there a better way to teach it?

Do you think it would have mattered at all how this woman was taught about modesty? Meaning, would she have perceive modesty in the same way in the end no matter how it would have been taught?

Don't feel you have to stick to those questions, and feel free to contribute with any (relevant) comments.

It seems the woman who wrote the article was raised in an atmosphere of extreme religious fanaticism. It's no wonder her upbringing messed with her mind and heart. I don't believe her experience is very similar to the life experiences of most LDS women. An LDS gal can dress and groom modestly and still be a "knockout." There's a refined and delightful middle-road that lies between Amish or Islamist female attire and Britney Spears on stage.

Edited May 1, 2013 by teddyaware

[TAO]

Yes, I prefer that women wear modest clothing. I will also keep my thoughts modest. By hitting the problem at both ends, things work out much easier, or so it has been in my experience.

Edited May 2, 2013 by TAO

[Wanderer7]

The church also made me recognize that other sins are a result of natural man. If it wasn't for the church, I would have blissfully unaware of my natural man tendencies.

[juliann]

When it gets to the point that the Ensign is photo shopping sleeves on the dresses of toddlers, the modesty pitch has gotten completely out of control. We are so accustomed to hearing it we no longer think about it and I think it is very troubling that girls are hearing it at younger and younger ages. It seems to be centering on female shoulders for some reason, they must be covered. I think it is as ridiculous as telling men to wear a sack over their head to keep their thoughts pure. This would actually be a more economical solution all around, BTW.

Oh, and the most damaging message for girls and boys is that young men can't control their own thoughts regardless of surroundings...and shouldn't be expected to.

Edited May 2, 2013 by juliann

[cinepro]

I have two daughters, and when I look at what the "world" teaches them about their bodies through magazines, television, movies, billboards, and peers at school, and then I see what the Church teaches them about their bodies through parents, church lessons, and The New Era, I'm not worried about them getting overwhelmed by the frequency, nature or volume of the Church side of things.

[Traela]

www.Beautyredefined.net/modest-is-hottest-the-revealing-truth has an interesting take on this. Basically, focusing on modesty in the wrong way still puts way too much emphasis on the body as an object to be seen.

[Buzzard]

Well, you have to start somewhere. I wholeheartedly agree that women are more than their bodies, no matter what they are wearing. But an attractive woman of any age in a revealing outfit doesn't allow either her or the men around her to get to the next level of appreciating woman for what they are rather than how they look. This is true for men as well, though not to the same extent.

So let's just use common sense and dress, no matter which gender so that the opposite gender has a chance to appreciate what we bring to the table intellectually and spiritually rather than spend the whole time fighting the urge to stare at our bodily endowments.

[volgadon]

www.Beautyredefined.net/modest-is-hottest-the-revealing-truth has an interesting take on this. Basically, focusing on modesty in the wrong way still puts way too much emphasis on the body as an object to be seen.

I rather despise the saying modest is hottest, as it misses the point entirely. I cringed whenever I heard missionaries say it.

[MorningStar]

Well, I guess either way we're objectifying our bodies - if we dress like bimbos or if we dress modestly. We can't win!

What we wear is an advertisement of who we are, whether we like it or not. I wouldn't wear a Budweiser shirt because I don't want people thinking I drink beer. The idea of modesty has changed over time and in certain situations. If I wear a one piece bathing suit to the beach, it's modest. If I wear that same bathing suit to church or work, I would be dressed immodestly. It's about the way you present yourself. For practical reasons, we wear bathing suits in the water, but there isn't a reason to wear them all over the place. Gymnasts wear leotards so their clothing won't get caught on objects and so their spotters can grab them rather than their clothing.

[thesometimesaint]

As a wise man once told me. "If you are not selling don't advertize. I wear clothes for essentially two reasons. One is for warmth, and the other is not to scare the public".