Women's Dress and Men's Thoughts

[Meadowchik]

10 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

Wow 34 pages when it's pretty simple. Men are stimulated visually and women are not. 

This isn't mansplaining either this after a discussion with my wife  of 46 years.

Wow, that's not even the point. The topic is the impact of modesty rules, and btw, women can be stimulated visually as well. 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Have you not been following the thread!? Several examples from the limited sample of posters have been shared. 

I admittedly jumped in early and then again some 30 pages later. I conclude from those who answered my question directly that it is rare enough to consider these an aberration from, rather than a part of, BYU culture. I shared my thoughts about the several personal (and not cultural) issues this kind of behavior could possibly reflect, and I invite you to follow those.

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

I haven't made any comments on this thread, nor have I read every comment.  This is because there is really nothing that needs to be said.  Women are not in any way responsible for how a man behaves or any thoughts he might have.  The MAN is responsible for his own thoughts and actions.  Period.  

No matter what a woman wears, there will always be someone that finds what she is wearing as alluring.  I keep thinking of a quote I heard many years ago by Apostle Matthew Cowley.  He was talking about the Navajo women who dressed full length velvet dresses.  He was commenting on their modesty and then say this. "They leave everything to the imagination."  Think about that.  He was basically saying that no matter what a woman wears, some men, in this case an apostle, will look upon a woman as a sex object.  

I can also say this.  I have never seen a woman dressed in a way that provokes me in a sexual way.  Yes I am gay.  But doesn't that tell you that the problem is with the men who are sexually attracted to women and has nothing to do with what they are wearing?  

Would you please clarify what looks to me like a contradiction?  Is a woman's clothing alluring, or not? You say there will always be someone who thinks "what she is wearing" is alluring and then you say the problem has nothing to do with what women are wearing.

I take it as a given that we all understand that what a man wants when he sees a woman that is alluring to him is that woman's body, for sexual purposes, rather than wanting to have her clothing.  Clothing that looks good only helps to enhance a woman's appearance.

If no men wanted to have sex with women then we would have a completely different problem. As it is we're just trying to prevent men from wanting to have sex with women they are not married to, or to at least wait until they are married before they have sex with them.

Clothing that helps women to appear more attractive to men can help to increase the population on this planet but we want to somehow prevent the creeps from reproducing themselves, therefore modest clothing helps to curtail the population and enthusiasm of the creeps.

If there were no creeps on this planet we probably wouldn't need to worry about modesty at all, since no man would want to have sex with any woman unless he was married to her.

 

[pogi]

11 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Just an F.Y.I. Most likely, if you approach a woman, a parent of a teenage girl, or a teenage girl and comment that her clothing choices are inappropriate, most women will assume you are the pervert. I would avoid doing that. 

Only if done like the examples given in this thread. 

I think it would be perfectly reasonable where there are clear and undeniable violations of the standards as outlined in the youth pamphlet, for a leader (male or female) to approach a parent and/or teenager to review the standard and ask the parent and/or child if they feel like an article of clothing is in-line with that standard.  And if not, what they feel should be done about it.  I would in no way accuse my daughters young woman leader or bishop of being a pervert for approaching it in that way.  Teach the standard and let them decide if what they are wearing is appropriate or not.  Most of the time, if it is a clear violation, they will acknowledge the mistake and violation of the standard on their own and will know what to do about it.   I think bad experiences in the past are clouding peoples judgment of how it could and should be done. 

[MiserereNobis]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

but we want to somehow prevent the creeps from reproducing themselves, therefore modest clothing helps to curtail the population and enthusiasm of the creeps.

😂

[CV75]

3 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Wow, that's not even the point. The topic is the impact of modesty rules, and btw, women can be stimulated visually as well. 

I would say the impact follows a bell curve based on personal factors far more than external factors, and based on how well the actual rules are taught and received. This topic is also very specific to what posters have seen at Church, BYU, etc. I don't think your daughter's experience has much to do with that specifically, but I am positive you are well-versed in the very good helps out there that mentor young women in empowering themselves and responding to bullying, sexual harassment, etc. These might, with proper parental guidance help them in put Church mores into a proper, healthy perspective. Young men would certainly benefit from this kind of information as well. These kinds of skills can also be taught in a youth activity.

[bsjkki]

8 minutes ago, pogi said:

Only if done like the examples given in this thread. 

I think it would be perfectly reasonable where there are clear and undeniable violations of the standards as outlined in the youth pamphlet, for a leader (male or female) to approach a parent and/or teenager to review the standard and ask the parent and/or child if they feel like an article of clothing is in-line with that standard.  And if not, what they feel should be done about it.  I would in no way accuse my daughters young woman leader or bishop of being a pervert for approaching it in that way.  Teach the standard and let them decide if what they are wearing is appropriate or not.  Most of the time, if it is a clear violation, they will acknowledge the mistake and violation of the standard on their own and will know what to do about it.   I think bad experiences in the past are clouding peoples judgment of how it could and should be done. 

I would suggest you not do that. I would continue to teach them the gospel and let the spirit teach them. I have found, group lessons without singling out anybody is better than one on one reprimanding. Welcome them with love and acknowledge, as a leader, you really don't know what is going on in their personal life and what struggles they are going through. Your approach just builds resentment. 

 

[pogi]

58 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I would suggest you not do that. I would continue to teach them the gospel and let the spirit teach them. I have found, group lessons without singling out anybody is better than one on one reprimanding. Welcome them with love and acknowledge, as a leader, you really don't know what is going on in their personal life and what struggles they are going through. Your approach just builds resentment. 

 

I think that in general that is a really good first step approach if a kid just seems ignorant, and hopefully kids are listening and actually are inspired by it and want to follow what you teach, but lets be realistic, we are talking about teenagers here.  What do you do when you teach the standard, you know they know it, and they continue to violate it?  I come from a background of working with troubled youth in residential treatment.  Kids who really are struggling (and many, many youth really are struggling in our church) would walk all over you if you take that approach and NEVER say anything to them directly.  They need direct attention and clear boundaries and expectations with patience, compassion, and understanding.  They WANT/NEED direct guidance and leadership.    I recognize that not all youth are troubled, but I do feel that kids in general thrive on direct, individualized attention, clear boundaries and expectations, and education and assistance in correcting wrong behavior in a non-judgmental or shameful way.   They may have misunderstood a principle or standard and simply need clarification in private, or they may be outright rebellion.  Either way, they need direct attention.  If they are rebelling, they are basically crying for it. 

And honestly, I feel like one on one (or perhaps more appropriately with parents or other leaders to avoid talking about potentially sexual things alone with a youth) is much more effective and less shaming.  The point is that our youth need direct, individualized attention.  To teach a lesson about dress standards in a group where one is continually breaking a standard or is known for dressing a certain, it could be terribly uncomfortable and embarrassing for them - it is almost a form of public shaming.   I understand what you are saying about caution, but as a principle, if a child is clearly violating standards (not just in regards to dress, but in general), and they appear to be oblivious, ignorant, or out right rebellious, then something needs to be said directly to them, at least sometimes.   To say that we should NEVER say anything I think is too black and white, while our kids are nuanced and may need an individualized approach.

Edited October 31, 2019 by pogi

[bsjkki]

7 minutes ago, pogi said:

I think that in general that is a really good first step approach if a kid just seems ignorant, and hopefully kids are listening and actually are inspired by it and want to follow what you teach, but lets be realistic, we are talking about teenagers here.  What do you do when you teach the standard, you know they know it, and they continue to violate it?  I come from a background of working with troubled youth in residential treatment.  Kids who really are struggling (and many, many youth really are struggling in our church) would walk all over you if you take that approach.  They need direct attention and clear boundaries and expectations with patience, compassion, and understanding.  They WANT/NEED direct guidance and leadership.    I recognize that most youth are not like that, but I do feel that kids in general thrive on direct, individualized attention, clear boundaries and expectations, and education and assistance in correcting wrong behavior in a non-judgmental or shameful way.   They may have misunderstood a principle or standard and simply need clarification in private, or they may be outright rebellion.  Either way, they need direct attention.  If they are rebelling, they are basically crying for it. 

And honestly, I feel like one on one (or perhaps more appropriately with parents or other leaders to avoid talking about potentially sexual things alone with a youth) is much more effective and less shaming.  The point is that our youth need direct, individualized attention.  To teach a lesson about dress standards in a group where one is continually breaking a standard or is known for dressing a certain, it could be terribly uncomfortable and embarrassing for them - it is almost a form of public shaming.   I understand what you are saying about caution, but as a principle, if a child is clearly violating standards (not just in regards to dress, but in general), and they appear to be oblivious, ignorant, or out right rebellious, then something needs to be said or they will never feel like anything is expected of them and therefore will never try to live up to your expectations. 

We are talking about church. Leave the parenting to parents. In most instances commenting on the dress of a teenage girl, is never your place. 

[pogi]

9 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

We are talking about church. Leave the parenting to parents. In most instances commenting on the dress of a teenage girl, is never your place. 

And when the parents are checked out?

Is it not a leaders role to lead and teach "church" principles?  Is it not a leaders role to influence, inspire, and, yes, even correct (as outlined in the D&C) violations of true principles?  

Surely you would speak up if a youth was continuously using foul language around other youth, sharing porn, bullying, vaping, etc. Or should we simply leave parenting to parents?  

 

Edited October 31, 2019 by pogi

[juliann]

1 minute ago, bsjkki said:

We are talking about church. Leave the parenting to parents. In most instances commenting on the dress of a teenage girl, is never your place. 

As in NEVER. It is a guarantee that the girl will not come back and there are plenty of testimonials to that result.

Why oh why we still have men who think they should be looking at girls and evaluating their bodies is icky beyond belief. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Men are stimulated visually and women are not. 

This is a persistent and damaging myth.  You are a good man, Rod, but wrong.  Sometimes women aren’t even aware consciously that their bodies are responding, but respond they do and that then will affect the woman's emotions and thoughts  

Do you think I have been lying about being turned on by men shirtless or in crisp white shirts?  Or that I am not a woman?  Or that I can’t tell what arousal is?  Or that the other women here are the same?

(I am being very blunt in hopes this takes because there was plenty of examples given earlier on this so I am surprised you still think this)

Do I really need to put up studies that show women are physically aroused when viewing what they see as sexuality?  They measure it among other things by lubrication of the vagina (preparing for sex, Iow).  I can get more graphic if needed. 

Just as with men, how reactive a woman is to stimuli varies. Some men and women are asexual, others respond very limited ways. Culturally women have been taught they are not visual responders, so so many have ignored, suppressed, or otherwise understood their sexual response differently.  Your wife may not be visual. This doesn’t mean the majority of women aren’t as well though.  

We are. The science shows it if our word is not enough. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Calm

[juliann]

Just now, pogi said:

And when the parents are checked out?

Is it not a leaders role to lead and teach "church" principles?  Is it not a leaders role to influence, inspire, and correct (as outlined in the D&C) violations of true principles?  

Surely you would speak up if a youth was continuously using foul language around other youth, sharing porn, bullying, vaping, etc. Or should we simply leave parenting to parents and none of that is our responsibility?  

 

Our? As in men evaluating teen girl’s bodies? NO! 

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

I don't know, do you think that the proper solution for the problem brought up in the OP for women to not show their nipples and/or vagina (the definition of flashing)?  Because from where I sit, that solution doesn't seem to really address the issues of the OP at all.

If everyone means everyone, which would include men if it does, then we all learn and act appropriately. 

[Rain]

5 hours ago, Ahab said:

How do you determine what is your business and what isn't your business?  When I see something that I perceive to be a dangerous situation, where somebody else could possibly get hurt, I consider it to be my business to try to prevent that person from being hurt, if I can.

Would you consider that to be your business, too?  Or would you just stay out of it entirely because you wouldn't consider it to be any of your business?  

You can determine what is your business in some other way than I do but I am not bound by how you determine what your business is.  My business in that case would be none of your business but it would still be my business to try to prevent something bad from happening.

 

So how many people have you approached to warn who were smoking?  Or chewing tobacco? 

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

And when the parents are checked out?

Is it not a leaders role to lead and teach "church" principles?  Is it not a leaders role to influence, inspire, and correct (as outlined in the D&C) violations of true principles?  

Surely you would speak up if a youth was continuously using foul language around other youth, sharing porn, bullying, vaping, etc. Or should we simply leave parenting to parents and none of that is our responsibility?  

 

What do you think the result will be? Most likely you will never see the girl again if her parents aren’t pushing it. Why not just love the girl as she is and let the gospel change her? 

[pogi]

5 minutes ago, juliann said:

Our? As in men evaluating teen girl’s bodies? NO! 

No, as in priesthood leaders leading.

[Calm]

27 minutes ago, pogi said:

What do you do when you teach the standard, you know they know it, and they continue to violate it

Then something more complicated is going on that should be addressed rather than the symptom. 

[Jake Starkey]

13 minutes ago, pogi said:

And when the parents are checked out?

Is it not a leaders role to lead and teach "church" principles?  Is it not a leaders role to influence, inspire, and, yes, even correct (as outlined in the D&C) violations of true principles?  

Surely you would speak up if a youth was continuously using foul language around other youth, sharing porn, bullying, vaping, etc. Or should we simply leave parenting to parents?  

 

No, Pogi, it is not your or a teacher's or a bishop's place.  End of story.

[Jake Starkey]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

No, as in priesthood leaders leading.

Inappropriate meddling is what I am getting out of this.

This is a parent's place, not the young women's or men's or bishop's place.

[Ahab]

20 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

We are talking about church. Leave the parenting to parents. In most instances commenting on the dress of a teenage girl, is never your place. 

You say in most instances, which implies there are some instances where it would be appropriate for a person who is not their parent to say something about it.  Please elaborate a little more.

[bsjkki]

15 minutes ago, pogi said:

And when the parents are checked out?

Is it not a leaders role to lead and teach "church" principles?  Is it not a leaders role to influence, inspire, and, yes, even correct (as outlined in the D&C) violations of true principles?  

Surely you would speak up if a youth was continuously using foul language around other youth, sharing porn, bullying, vaping, etc. Or should we simply leave parenting to parents?  

 

I would never comment on clothing. That’s the topic of this thread.

 

 

 

[pogi]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

Then something more complicated is going on that should be addressed rather than the symptom. 

Very true!  But you still always treat the symptoms of the disease, and if it is contagious, you protect others by not allowing them to bleed all over the place.  You bandage them up, even if it just superficial.

[pogi]

4 minutes ago, Jake Starkey said:

No, Pogi, it is not your or a teacher's or a bishop's place.  End of story.

Guess that settles it.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Only if done like the examples given in this thread. 

There will be a good chance if anything is done it will cause a girl or woman to wonder. 

My dad one time used “voluptuous” to describe me. I am sure he thought he was being complimentary.  It freaked me out that he was looking at me as sexually appealing***. There was nothing he ever did before or since that ever gave me a hint of him viewing me sexually and it is possible he wasn’t in that moment, but for those that are concerned about communication, if a man draws attention to a woman’s appearance in a sexual context in our church culture, every woman and girl I have known will interpret as looking at her sexually.

***I see this as an overreaction on my part. Guess where I think I was primed to overreact? Not by my parents who never criticized us about what we were wearing or showed any sexual hang ups, I am pretty sure. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by Calm