Most Women Get The Type Of Man They Dress For - March 2014 Ensign

[Gray]

Being judged by appearances is a fact of life (whether right or wrong).  Get used to it. If you are teaching people not to worry about appearances, you are doing them a disservice. 

 

It's a fact of life but it's not a value to uphold

[SeekingUnderstanding]

As opposed to our “healthy” obsession over thirteen (13) words in a magazine article?

Those words are delivered by a general authority, in an official venue, being passed off as the "Lord's standard of Morality "and trumping "all the opinions of the lower courts, whether uttered by psycholo­gists, counselors, politicians, friends, parents, or would be moralists of the day." Given such, these few words must be really important to understand appropriately.

[Gray]

Someone has to judge in order to know whether or not anyone has 'crossed the line'.

 

Where does this idea that we can never ever make any kinds of negative judgments against anyone?  It's certainly not in the scriptures.

 

Is it your business if someone "crosses the line"?

[Calm]

I wish they would teach young women and women what high heels can do to your feet:

http://www.osteopathic.org/osteopathic-health/about-your-health/health-conditions-library/womens-health/Pages/high-heels.aspx

http://www.riversideonline.com/health_reference/Articles/WO00114.cfm

Look up hammertoes and bunions and tell me those are attractive in any way.....

Edited February 19, 2014 by calmoriah

[Danzo]

I disagree with nothing in this post. If we are just teaching our young woman to dress in a way that sends a positive message, I can get 100% on board with that.

 

Then We are in agreement.

[ERayR]

Sane rational people aren't immune from unhealthily obsessing about other people's bodies and clothing 

 

On whose authority? Are you asking me to make an argument from authority?

 

If you want an example I think the idea that four year olds can't wear sundresses or the notion that female angels depicted in art need to have their shoulders digitally covered.

 

I am not asking to make an argument from authority.  I just have a problem with someone making an all encompassing, regal pronouncement and expecting everyone else to acquiesce.  

[Danzo]

ETA: Again my point is that teaching women that they might "prompt" men to have bad thoughts and become walking pornography is pointless. It is an impossible standard. Some women will "prompt" some men to have bad thoughts regardless of what they are wearing. The teaching causes needless guilt and body issues for women and is unnecessary to teach modesty. It ought to stop.

 

I think it is wise to be aware of the effects one might have on others, again this not about "Blame", or "Shame" or "fault".  It is about using your ability to communicate (by what you wear) in a positive way.

 

If a young women (or young man, or anyone) wants positive results, positive messages are helpful. 

 

If I wear a shirt with a confederate battle flag on it, I will probably offend people whether I want to or not.  Maybe I don't care, its not my fault they are offended, their thoughts are not my responsibility, Maybe, I am from another country, bought the shirt at a thrift store and have no idea what the message is.

 

Once I become aware of the message it is sending,  I should probably change my shirt. (Assuming I am a nice person and if I want positive reactions from people)

Edited February 20, 2014 by Danzo

[ERayR]

FWIW my wife currently serves as YW President.  She feels that many in the ward have an unhealthy obsession with modesty (particularly the modesty of others) which has hurt many of the YW she serves.

 

FWIW I currently serve in a Bishopric as Ward Clerk and in the last four and one half years I have not heard my Bishop express the sentiment that many in the ward have an unhealthy obsession with modesty.  FWIW it is my NSHO that those who think others have an unhealthy obsession with modesty have a pressing need to examine their own standards on modesty. Just my .02 worth.

[Danzo]

My apologies. The general guideline I've heard at church is knee length (perhaps from my BYU days). Perhaps I should get away from a line in the sand and just ask for some general guidlines.

 

This reminds me why I never wanted to go to BYU  

[ERayR]

Brother Brigham was also appalled that ballet dancers didn't wear long dresses. 

 

That is irrelevant.  Brother Brigham's (fears and prophecy) seems to have been born out. 

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I wish they would teach young women and women what high heels can do to your feet:

http://www.osteopathic.org/osteopathic-health/about-your-health/health-conditions-library/womens-health/Pages/high-heels.aspx

http://www.riversideonline.com/health_reference/Articles/WO00114.cfm

Look up hammertoes and bunions and tell me those are attractive in any way.....

Bunions? Is that an onion bun? Like on the beef 'n cheddar? Yummy.

 

 

Oh wait....

[ERayR]

I think this really shows a major flaw with the way we teach and talk about modesty.  It has become a "check-the-box" commandment, so there isn't much thought into what is modest and what is immodest beyond checking the boxes.  Unfortunately, we as saints seems to love this sort of thinking because it makes it easy for us to judge others.  

 

I think modesty depends on the situation.  What is modest at the beach may not be modest at church.  What is modest for prom may not be modest for church.  Seems like the "hooker pump" shoes fall into that category.  I would say hooker pump shoes are immodest for church not because they show too much skin (which is the usual concern about modesty), but because they unduly call attention to themselves.  Those same shoes might be entirely appropriate for a nice evening out with your spouse.   

 

Who said anything about a "check-the-box" commandment?  I am a firm believer that with a few reminders (such as Elder Callister's admonitions) most can govern themselves.  For those who want to get offended at such admonition . . .

[ERayR]

No.  Women often take such comments as a personal insult, even when coming from a priesthood leader.   Teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves. 

 

As an aside, sounds like a great opportunity to teach your daughter about personal revelation and personal righteousness.  

 

Hence the article in question

[Deborah]

FWIW I currently serve in a Bishopric as Ward Clerk and in the last four and one half years I have not heard my Bishop express the sentiment that many in the ward have an unhealthy obsession with modesty.  FWIW it is my NSHO that those who think others have an unhealthy obsession with modesty have a pressing need to examine their own standards on modesty. Just my .02 worth.

 

In fact a couple of weeks ago in stake conference we had one of the presidency talk about how bad it's gotten and he went through specifically what is appropriate and what isn't. The lady I was sitting next too and I looked at each other and said that's what I've been saying. Too many young women and their mothers are trying to dress with the fads and even for me it is hard to think spiritual thoughts when everything is hanging out.

[Mystery Meat]

A few years back in my stake, there was a growing trend of "cougars" and not the BYU variety, who were getting a lot of work done and dressing more and more worldly. It was very apparent. It was not uncommon to see these women playfully, and seemingly innocently, flirting with the priests at the sacrament table before sacrament meeting started. Sad story short, there were more then a few couples from this one ward that were excommunicated for vile indiscretions. My point of sharing this story is not that immodesty will lead to sexual transgression. But I have never met a girl who was casual when it came to modesty who was simultaneously deeply spiritual. Maybe I need to get out more.

 

A scripture I have been pondering lately I think is applicable to the topic and should be considered when deciding how any of us are going to dress and the message we send to others (and thereby the reactions we MAY incite):

 

"Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:4.

Edited February 20, 2014 by lvjd66

[cinepro]

I haven't waded through all the responses here, but I think some are over-reacting to the article. Of course the way we dress affects how we behave and how others behave toward us. Does that mean we shouldn't look beyond the outer appearance? No, but it does mean first impressions have a tendency to stick.

 

Years ago there was a book called "Dress for Success." Anyone in business will tell you this is true. When my son was a teenager he had an earring and wore a tee shirt and sunglasses applying for jobs. He quickly learned if he wants a job he'd better dress like he wanted it. Out went the earring and he cleaned up his act.

 

Because one dresses seductively doesn't mean they are inviting rape and most men wouldn't even think this. But there are those sick individuals who don't need much incentive to go after someone whom they consider more available. Often someone just doesn't know that the way they look is showing poor esteem and often dressing trashy shows exactly that. And yes I know what I am talking about. As someone who has been single a long time and loved to go out and party with friends I have seen a lot of how one dresses affects the response of others.

 

The dress for success theme is still important as seen in this: http://www.dressforsuccess.org/

 

 

 

Those are great points, and if Elder Callister had said anything close to that, it would have been a rather unremarkable article.  You can't defend a stupid argument by saying something that isn't stupid but is also different than the original argument.

 

Unless you told your son to take out the earring because some interviewers (male or female) might have uncontrollable sexual thoughts about him, of course.

Edited February 20, 2014 by cinepro

[cinepro]

I would also point out that Elder Callister's comment might not be the most unusual teaching about "modesty" in the March 2014 Ensign.  Because there's also this about Rebekah in the Old Testatment on page 41:

 

Arriving at the home of Rebekah’s family, the servant asked if they would consent to her marriage to Isaac. The family left the decision up to Rebekah, who responded in simple faith, “I will go.”

 

Rebekah veiled herself upon seeing Isaac. This act, one writer observed, “was a sign of her virtue, reverence, humility, and modesty and showed respect for her future spouse.”

 

Such qualities indicated Rebekah’s “readiness for a covenant marriage.” 2

 

So it could be worse.

[MorningStar]

No. Absolutely not.

Of course, and I would never say something to anyone, but a gentleman or a lady will take great care to make sure they wear something appropriate to sacrament meeting, where we remember the atoning sacrifice of our Savior, rather than pushing the limits and making people feel uncomfortable. 

[bluebell]

Is it your business if someone "crosses the line"?

It can be. It depends on the circumstance.

In regards to inappropriate clothing at church, it becomes my business when someone who is being held up as a good example to my children models bad behavior.

This doesn't mean the person is horrible or anything, or that my kids can't interact with them and have a relationship with them, but it does mean I have a responsibility to speak to my kids and point out why I believe they aren't being a good example in whatever the issue is.

And yes, doing that is my business.

[Yirgacheffe]

I think this really shows a major flaw with the way we teach and talk about modesty.  It has become a "check-the-box" commandment, so there isn't much thought into what is modest and what is immodest beyond checking the boxes.  Unfortunately, we as saints seems to love this sort of thinking because it makes it easy for us to judge others.  

 

I think modesty depends on the situation.  What is modest at the beach may not be modest at church.  What is modest for prom may not be modest for church.  Seems like the "hooker pump" shoes fall into that category.  I would say hooker pump shoes are immodest for church not because they show too much skin (which is the usual concern about modesty), but because they unduly call attention to themselves.  Those same shoes might be entirely appropriate for a nice evening out with your spouse.   

I'd like to see an example of a hooker pump.

[Yirgacheffe]

If you can explain to me why you think the line should be drawn at the knees and not the ankles I'm listening.

Considering all the censure over shoes it seems that to the floor should be the rule.

[BCSpace]

In March 2014 Ensign we have the following statement:

http://media.ldscdn.org/pdf/magazines/ensign-march-2014/2014-03-00-ensign-eng.pdf

As the father of an 11-year-old girl I of course encourage her to dress modestly. But I'm disturbed by the message that: "...most women get the type of man they dress for."

So if a woman who wears a short dress or low top ends up in an abusive relationship, is it her fault? Did she get the man she dressed for?

 

 

I think there's truth to it though it's not absolute.  There is enough truth in it to ask that everyone be modest all the time much as not everyone would have difficulty with alcohol and yet the Word of Wisdom forbids it to all.

 

A woman would have to dress in a long flowing carpet and cover her face to ensure men do not have 'improper' thoughts seeing her.  But the more immodest (according to societal standards) the dress, the more that signals to men her willingness and desire to have sex whether she intends to or not.  I believe most women intuitively know this and the 'natural woman' tends to dress toward that end in the same way thoughts come unbidden into a man's mind.

 

The main complaint women seem to have is are they responsible for sending the wrong signals to men and men possibly acting on them.  The Church's answer is they indeed share in that responsibility.  Of course men should control their thoughts and actions.  But why should a woman not care whether or not she makes it more difficult for a man to do so unless sex is her goal?

 

This is NOT reinforcing any stereotypes, it's reacting to the reality of nature which God has created and making an appropriate assumption that the reader is interested in what God (LDS) wants.

[Calm]

Considering all the censure over shoes it seems that to the floor should be the rule.

All the more likely to get tangled up in and break an ankle. Not a good mix, high heels and long skirts.

[Calm]

"A woman would have to dress in a long flowing carpet and cover her face to ensure men do not have 'improper' thoughts seeing her"

With some men, you could point to an empty refrigerator box and say there is a woman in it and they would have inappropriate thoughts.

[Yirgacheffe]

All the more likely to get tangled up in and break an ankle. Not a good mix, high heels and long skirts.

Every one I've ever know who mixed the two had no trouble.