Emphasis on Modesty=Rape Culture in Utah

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

It appears that  you are opposed to the idea that we should help one another keep the commandments.

 

No, i'm opposed to teaching girls that they are responsible for lustful or inappropriate thoughts that boys have if they dress immodestly.

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

Cheerleaders uniforms need to be short: so they can perform?

Naah, I don´t think so.

Cheerleaders couldn´t do their job....without showing as much of their legs as possible...because.....

How come the male cheerleaders wear long legged gym pants? 

How about when they do their flips, but I guess the guys wear long pants for that, dunno.

[Jeanne]

Clothes really don't matter..(unless extreme)...NFL players are fullly clothed..but when they are in a huddle...I look at their buns..shoot me.

[Rain]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Those are excellent points. What is the doctrine of modesty and why do we emphasize it? Is it simply that we are children of God and we respect our bodies?

There is no doctrine of modesty.  Elder Bednar says doctrine:

Quote

a truth- a truth of salvation revealed by a loving Heavenly Father. Gospel doctrines are eternal, do not change, and pertain to the eternal progression and exhalation of Heavenly Father's sons and daughters. Doctrines such as the nature of the Godhead, the plan of happiness, and the Atonement of Jesus Christ are fundamental, and comprehensive. The core doctrines of the gospel of Jesus Christ are relatively few in number.

Gospel doctrines answer the question of "why?" For example the doctrine of the plan of happiness answers the questions of why we are here upon the earth, why marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and why the family is central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children. The doctrine of the Godhead helps us understand why we are to become perfect even as our Father in Heaven and His Son Jesus Christ are perfect (see Matt 5:48; 3 Nephi 12:48). The doctrine of the atonement explains why Jesus Christ is our mediator and advocate with the Father...

Bednar, Increase in Learning pages 151-152 

 So if a wise teacher sees that modesty is a problem he/she would study and pray to figure out what doctrine the students are not understanding.  Give a lesson on that or those doctrines, help the students understand the doctrines and then help the students understand principles that go with it ( "a doctrinally based guideline for the righteous exercise of moral agency...Correct principles always are based upon and arise from doctrines, do not change and answer the question of 'what?'") and then help the students discover how to apply the doctrines and principles on their own ("Applications are the actual behaviors, action steps, practices, or procedures by which gospel doctrines and principles are enacted in our lives...Applications answer the question of "how".")

In other words modestly is an application of doctrines such as God being our Father. There are others that could apply in any given situation.  It depends upon the person.

Why do we emphasize it?  Because lack of it is a symptom and we don't think out of the box to realize it is only a symptom of not understanding a doctrine. We think that if we fix the symptom then things will be ok. 

Edited September 15, 2016 by Rain

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

In my schools (junior and senior high schools), an outfit in the style of the cheerleaders' uniforms worn by a non-cheerleader would be a violation of the dress code. Why the double standard? Are dress codes an evidence of "rape culture?"

Not at all, just when the young men or men are taught that the women should dress modestly or they will get bad thoughts, as if it's the woman's fault. In some countries, like France, it seems to be more healthy. A body isn't sexualized as much in my opinion, it's just a body to be admired I guess, in a healthy way. Not that you need to have sex with it. 

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Do you agree with how this article on Modesty at lds.org teaches the reason to be modest?  I can see why some would suggest this promotes rape culture. https://www.lds.org/topics/modesty?lang=eng   "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."

Do you agree clothing choices are responsible for how "others act."  Does attire influence those around you? Does the Mormon standard of immodest attire invite rapey thoughts in others?  Where I live, Mormons are a small minority in the high school.  Isn't it more important to teach people to be responsible for their own thoughts and actions?  My daughter had a young man tell her he thought her shorts were too short.  They were not.  A mother in my RS could not understand why a father was upset with her because she told him her daughters did not dress modestly enough and were not helping her sons have clean thoughts.  Is this appropriate?  These young men will be around girls who are not Mormon most of the time. The Strength of Youth guidelines mention "short skirts" and "short shorts."  There is no standard for how this will be interpreted.  The mother and father, in my example, most likely had a different standard of length they found appropriate.  Does how a girl dresses, influence a boy to rape her?  There is a reason so many times in court cases, how the girl was dressed was asked by the police and others to determine if a rape occurred.  I would say an over emphasize on clothing choices and modesty does objectify girls and does lead to rape culture--because it has been and continues to be an excuse for justifying rape.

Rape victims are still asked the question, "what were you wearing?" http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/student-gets-her-own-warrant-for-alleged-rapist-after-university-and-prosecutors-refuse-to-act/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.html

Many advocates for BYU say the Honor Code helps prevent rape.  If a girl is not dressing to honor code standards, does that mean she is inviting rape?

If what you say is true, what messages are sent by cheerleader costumes? What influence are they exerting? If a person advocates for modesty or adheres to a dress code, how is that evidence of a "rape culture?"

 

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

If a boy can't handle a cheerleader uniform, he has much bigger problems and needs some counseling.  Are you suggesting women are a stumbling block for weak men? There will never be enough clothing. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/burqas-reveal-more-about-men-than-women-20141020-118mce.html  I teach my kids to dress modestly.  I do think it is good counsel but it is over emphasized and has morphed into a modesty monster.  It is stressed too much and is used to judge and sort and "other" those not of our faith.  Just like most things, I think the pendulum has swung too far on its emphasis when clearly, just a few short decades ago it was not at stressed as much. I found this article very informative. https://bycommonconsent.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/blakesley.pdf

 

 

Why do you teach your children modesty? 

[Tacenda]

22 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I'm really confused by this article. It reads as though a rumor ran amuck and I have no idea what actually happened. How did the coach get such a memo if the school didn't give it?...I feel there was more noise than there was facts involved in this.

as for rape culture and modesty as well as wearing cheer outfits. On the cheer outfits it sounded like it was done on game day. My guess is that it's seen as a way to rally and bring up school spirit. Which is what would differ their allowance for wearing it v another sport.

on rape culture, modesty in and of itself isn't enough. Particularly if we're used in the way it initially shows up in scripture as (non-gendered and focused less on skirt length and more in costly apparel and the likes). That said directing ones clothing based on another persons expectations or feels can be. I've heard of at least one case wear the woman raped was asked by an authority what she was wearing when this happened. And similar comments from a general populace that infers that in a sense they were "asking for it" because of how they were presented. It shifts accountability to the victim instead of the perp. It also maintains the message that women are responsible for men's thoughts. If they're uncomfortable or sexually triggered it's women's fault. This can lead to excusing rape as inevitable. Ergo maintaining rape as an event that's bound to happen. 

Personally I don't mind dress codes if they're fairly equal in standards. But women often get the bigger stick in this expectation (see here: http://time.com/3892965/everydaysexism-school-dress-codes-rape-culture/) 

I've had my moments of irritation with dress codes. My first happened as a young teen. I wore mid-thigh Jean shorts that a male teacher docked me for. I went to the office and they insisted I change into my gym shorts. Which were ironically shorter and more...uh...flattering. And increased the attention. 

Another at BYU that comes to mind. I stopped going to the pool because of it. I would wear a modest tankini/one that my own mother didn't have a problem with and I'd at times get pulled from doing lanes. I would walk out in a towel get in and mind my business. But after a time I would get pulled they would try to have me put on this heavy bag of a shirt and I would go back out and wear one of my own undershirts from the locker. On the way I would usually see one other girl who was also in violation. It brought this feeling that if I looked less appealing or noticeable in this, I probably wouldn't be chosen. I had bought another swimsuit hoping specifically that it would meet standards. It didn't. And around then I gave up. 

The other was funny. It was a passive aggressive DL elder who was irritated that I didn't agree with his vision for my area...or even pretend to. He began to nit-pick everything my companion and I violated in the white handbook...there wasn't much. So once he told me my shoes weren't  attractive enough. In the white handbook it states women's shoes should be comfortable/useful with no more than an inch heel and "attractive." Whatever that meant. 

for me I've seen that standards can be unfairly or irrationally imposed and it also irritates me that modesty is one of the few values others feel they have a right to critique others over. And the critique is usually towards women.

Lastly it's come up in therapy with a couple of my porn addict clients that I've triggered. When it first happened I found myself questioning the old montage of dressing in a way to help a brother. My clothes were attractive cuts but not ever anything I couldnt wear garments under. In general I dress as I please for appropriate settings. I've never cared if I gave others "impure thoughts." But these were people I knew and cared for. As I watched them progress, the triggers slowed, the odd distortions/beliefs  that had led to the triggers were worked out, and I realized, for some, anything could trigger them. ANYTHING. I realized that dressing to appease their problems wasn't helping but enabling their anxiety and shame. It maintains an attitude that others should cater to their "needs." Instead of helping it felt more like enabling.

these men were in no danger of being rapists (though some were sexually coercive). But I do believe that the attitude can effect others who do/have. To lessen the sense of culpability or to expect your feelings or actions are others fault. Either way it can lead women to have an unfair amount of the burden to live up to modesty standards.

 

with luv, 

BD

 

Once again, a very sound voice on the matter. Thanks BD!

[BlueDreams]

8 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Not at all, just when the young men or men are taught that the women should dress modestly or they will get bad thoughts, as if it's the woman's fault. In some countries, like France, it seems to be more healthy. A body isn't sexualized as much in my opinion, it's just a body to be admired I guess, in a healthy way. Not that you need to have sex with it. 

I don't know if I would use france as a great example. They shock and visceral reactions just happen to be currently in the reverse order (look up burkini and france). One may say, well that's too conservative or is a symbol of repression. But this isn't necessarily so, is what the women feel comfortable in, and is still dictating what women can or cannot wear.

 

WIth luv,

BD

[bsjkki]

26 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I'm really confused by this article. It reads as though a rumor ran amuck and I have no idea what actually happened. How did the coach get such a memo if the school didn't give it?...I feel there was more noise than there was facts involved in this.

as for rape culture and modesty as well as wearing cheer outfits. On the cheer outfits it sounded like it was done on game day. My guess is that it's seen as a way to rally and bring up school spirit. Which is what would differ their allowance for wearing it v another sport.

on rape culture, modesty in and of itself isn't enough. Particularly if we're used in the way it initially shows up in scripture as (non-gendered and focused less on skirt length and more in costly apparel and the likes). That said directing ones clothing based on another persons expectations or feels can be. I've heard of at least one case wear the woman raped was asked by an authority what she was wearing when this happened. And similar comments from a general populace that infers that in a sense they were "asking for it" because of how they were presented. It shifts accountability to the victim instead of the perp. It also maintains the message that women are responsible for men's thoughts. If they're uncomfortable or sexually triggered it's women's fault. This can lead to excusing rape as inevitable. Ergo maintaining rape as an event that's bound to happen. 

Personally I don't mind dress codes if they're fairly equal in standards. But women often get the bigger stick in this expectation (see here: http://time.com/3892965/everydaysexism-school-dress-codes-rape-culture/) 

I've had my moments of irritation with dress codes. My first happened as a young teen. I wore mid-thigh Jean shorts that a male teacher docked me for. I went to the office and they insisted I change into my gym shorts. Which were ironically shorter and more...uh...flattering. And increased the attention. 

Another at BYU that comes to mind. I stopped going to the pool because of it. I would wear a modest tankini/one that my own mother didn't have a problem with and I'd at times get pulled from doing lanes. I would walk out in a towel get in and mind my business. But after a time I would get pulled they would try to have me put on this heavy bag of a shirt and I would go back out and wear one of my own undershirts from the locker. On the way I would usually see one other girl who was also in violation. It brought this feeling that if I looked less appealing or noticeable in this, I probably wouldn't be chosen. I had bought another swimsuit hoping specifically that it would meet standards. It didn't. And around then I gave up. 

The other was funny. It was a passive aggressive DL elder who was irritated that I didn't agree with his vision for my area...or even pretend to. He began to nit-pick everything my companion and I violated in the white handbook...there wasn't much. So once he told me my shoes weren't  attractive enough. In the white handbook it states women's shoes should be comfortable/useful with no more than an inch heel and "attractive." Whatever that meant. 

for me I've seen that standards can be unfairly or irrationally imposed and it also irritates me that modesty is one of the few values others feel they have a right to critique others over. And the critique is usually towards women.

Lastly it's come up in therapy with a couple of my porn addict clients that I've triggered. When it first happened I found myself questioning the old montage of dressing in a way to help a brother. My clothes were attractive cuts but not ever anything I couldnt wear garments under. In general I dress as I please for appropriate settings. I've never cared if I gave others "impure thoughts." But these were people I knew and cared for. As I watched them progress, the triggers slowed, the odd distortions/beliefs  that had led to the triggers were worked out, and I realized, for some, anything could trigger them. ANYTHING. I realized that dressing to appease their problems wasn't helping but enabling their anxiety and shame. It maintains an attitude that others should cater to their "needs." Instead of helping it felt more like enabling.

these men were in no danger of being rapists (though some were sexually coercive). But I do believe that the attitude can effect others who do/have. To lessen the sense of culpability or to expect your feelings or actions are others fault. Either way it can lead women to have an unfair amount of the burden to live up to modesty standards.

 

with luv, 

BD

 

This article has a bit more information.  http://www.people.com/article/utah-cheerleaders-body-shamed and this one http://www.inquisitr.com/3505653/utah-high-school-cheerleaders-squad-reportedly-told-not-to-wear-uniforms-because-a-boy-had-impure-thoughts/  Do you think this quote has merit?  I don't think so--" While the Utah high school cheerleaders have unequivocal permission to continue wearing their uniforms to class as per tradition, it is unknown what backlash they may face in their local Mormon communities for coming forward with their story."

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/3505653/utah-high-school-cheerleaders-squad-reportedly-told-not-to-wear-uniforms-because-a-boy-had-impure-thoughts/#XB93fGDYmrf7K06X.99

This complaint should have been dismissed and should not have required a meeting.  Possibly, miscommunication took place but the girls did not wear their uniforms to school one day and they would not have done that if they were not told not to wear their uniforms.

Edited September 15, 2016 by bsjkki
Added quote

[Rain]

47 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

I actually think it is stressed too much in my local area.  I have issues with my girls not being able to wear ANY shorts to girls camp and having to wear t-shirts over their swimsuits.  On the 4th year hike, no shorts are allowed, due to "safety."  My issue is the boys do not have these same "safety" rules.  How many times on a scout hike, are the boys allowed to rip their shirts off but if a girl wore a tank top it would be scandalous. There are a plethora of images of lds scouts hiking in the woods in shorts. My two examples in my first post really did happen.  In a RS lesson, it was mentioned that girls who dress immodestly lack self esteem and don't value themselves.  For church sports, the girls were all wearing knee length shorts or sweatpants and I thought it was ridiculous.  My frustration could be because of my local area and how modesty is used to judge others.  Hopefully, many don't have these problems.  I don't look at young women from my many non-mormon friends and think their attire is "slutty" or their sleeveless dresses and fashionable attire means they are sending the wrong message.  

Thought of a few more--No flip-flops on Sunday (for some this is the only non tennis shoe they own), no-leggings to make a dress modest, and at standards night we were taught dresses should come below the knee.  It just gets tiresome.

My daughter wasn't allowed to wear shorts/capris of any length to camp or YW stake sports for "safety" reasons.  Funny that we both got the same word as the reason. Yep, they loved playing basketball and volleyball in their jeans (because very few teen girls have sweats now days). The boys could wear them to both camp and sports.

[bluebell]

17 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

But these were people I knew and cared for. As I watched them progress, the triggers slowed, the odd distortions/beliefs  that had led to the triggers were worked out, and I realized, for some, anything could trigger them. ANYTHING. I realized that dressing to appease their problems wasn't helping but enabling their anxiety and shame. It maintains an attitude that others should cater to their "needs."

with luv, 

BD

 

This.  It's exhausting, as a woman, trying not to ever be too sexually pleasing in view of a male.   And, more importantly, it's impossible.  Unless you purposefully try not to look good or attractive there is no way to stop it.  You never know what the man next to you is into or what body part they care about most (hello, even having attractive feet can be too much for some guys!).  

I know of a guy who can't look at any woman in the eye right now because he's actively trying not to have sexual thoughts about anyone but his wife and seeing women in any kind of clothes leads to him fantasizing about them inappropriately.  It's messed up enough that we women have to deal with guys like that out there walking among us.  Don't ask my daughter or my sister or me to worry about it being our fault.

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

I teach my girls to where the appropriate clothes for the activity and place. I see a danger on over emphasizing Mormon modesty standards to young men and women because, as Mormons, we live in this world.  Young men and women are going to be constantly bombarded with people who do not think showing shoulders and or a mid-calf length dress is sending the message that they are 'slutty.' Wearing a cheerleader uniform on game day has been acceptable behavior at this school for years.  It is not sending the 'wrong message.' The fact that one complaint can cause this kind of uproar is ridiculous and the complaint should not have been, in anyway, taken seriously. I don't have a problem with our standards of modesty but I do think it can lead to some members making bad assumptions about people not of our faith.  

What makes clothing "appropriate?" Why would something in one situation not be appropriate in another? What would be inappropriate about wearing your bathing suit to church or school? What assumptions are you making?

[BlueDreams]

11 minutes ago, Rain said:

There is no doctrine of modesty.  Elder Bednar says doctrine:

 So if a wise teacher sees that modesty is a problem he/she would study and pray to figure out what doctrine the students are not understanding.  Give a lesson on that or those doctrines, help the students understand the doctrines and then help the students understand principles that go with it ( "a doctrinally based guideline for the righteous exercise of moral agency...Correct principles always are based upon and arise from doctrines, do not change and answer the question of 'what?'") and then help the students discover how to apply the doctrines and principles on their own ("Applications are the actual behaviors, action steps, practices, or procedures by which gospel doctrines and principles are enacted in our lives...Applications answer the question of "how".")

In other words modestly is an application of doctrines such as God being our Father. There are others that coupld apply in any given situation.  It depends upon the person.

Why do we emphasize it?  Because lack of it is a symptom and we don't think out of the box to realize it is only a symptom of not understanding a doctrine. We think that if we fix the symptom then things will be ok. 

I wonder if it would be better to teach modesty as it actually shows up in scripture and share it's scriptural antonym: Vanity. Lack of it is a symptom of growing pride or a focus on things that have no eternal value. Technically a person may be more modest, scripturally, in a sleeveless work shirt and shorts that they bought at a discount while working to help the needy or other good works than someone wearing designer clothes that cover our current modesty standards but hasn't done much to help/lift others around them.

 

With luv,

BD

[Danzo]

22 minutes ago, bluebell said:

No, i'm opposed to teaching girls that they are responsible for lustful or inappropriate thoughts that boys have if they dress immodestly.

Is only one or the other?

Is teaching people that they can help others automatically keep the commandments the same as saying they are responsible for others thoughts and behaviors?

[Bernard Gui]

34 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

This is what I should have said in the first place, geez!  

What you said was that this is evidence of "rape culture." 

"This is pretty interesting, I guess the voice of one young man trumps the school's cheerleading squad. Talk about rape culture."

Do you think this is evidence of "rape culture" in Utah and in the Church as promoted by the article you linked?

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

" While the Utah high school cheerleaders have unequivocal permission to continue wearing their uniforms to class as per tradition, it is unknown what backlash they may face in their local Mormon communities for coming forward with their story."

That quote is a really good way of saying nothing factual at all. But  it accuses the "local Mormon communities" of doing something "unknown", but probably terrible!

Edited September 15, 2016 by Danzo

[Tacenda]

15 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I don't know if I would use france as a great example. They shock and visceral reactions just happen to be currently in the reverse order (look up burkini and france). One may say, well that's too conservative or is a symbol of repression. But this isn't necessarily so, is what the women feel comfortable in, and is still dictating what women can or cannot wear.

 

WIth luv,

BD

Maybe I had the image in my mind of France and their naked statues or commercial signs (name escapes).

Edited September 15, 2016 by Tacenda

[Tacenda]

14 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

This article has a bit more information.  http://www.people.com/article/utah-cheerleaders-body-shamed and this one http://www.inquisitr.com/3505653/utah-high-school-cheerleaders-squad-reportedly-told-not-to-wear-uniforms-because-a-boy-had-impure-thoughts/  Do you think this quote has merit?  I don't think so--" While the Utah high school cheerleaders have unequivocal permission to continue wearing their uniforms to class as per tradition, it is unknown what backlash they may face in their local Mormon communities for coming forward with their story."

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/3505653/utah-high-school-cheerleaders-squad-reportedly-told-not-to-wear-uniforms-because-a-boy-had-impure-thoughts/#XB93fGDYmrf7K06X.99

This complaint should have been dismissed and should not have required a meeting.  Possibly, miscommunication took place but the girls did not wear their uniforms to school one day and they would not have done that if they were not told not to wear their uniforms.

Makes sense!

[bsjkki]

9 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

If what you say is true, what messages are sent by cheerleader costumes? What influence are they exerting? If a person advocates for modesty or adheres to a dress code, how is that evidence of a "rape culture?"

 

Modesty standards are evidence of rape culture if they are used to suggest the victim is partly responsible for being raped.  These days, cheerleaders are athletes. I don't think the costume exerts influence or is sending inappropriate messaging in high schools. People need to be responsible for their own thoughts.  Teach young men to respect young women no matter their attire.  These young men live in the real world (and we can't change the world) and need to learn strategies to control impure thoughts. 

[Danzo]

13 minutes ago, Rain said:

My daughter wasn't allowed to wear shorts/capris of any length to camp or YW stake sports for "safety" reasons.  Funny that we both got the same word as the reason. Yep, they loved playing basketball and volleyball in their jeans (because very few teen girls have sweats now days). The boys could wear them to both camp and sports.

probably just depends on who is in charge.  My daughter wore shorts to girls came (as did most of the other girls).

[Tacenda]

9 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I wonder if it would be better to teach modesty as it actually shows up in scripture and share it's scriptural antonym: Vanity. Lack of it is a symptom of growing pride or a focus on things that have no eternal value. Technically a person may be more modest, scripturally, in a sleeveless work shirt and shorts that they bought at a discount while working to help the needy or other good works than someone wearing designer clothes that cover our current modesty standards but hasn't done much to help/lift others around them.

 

With luv,

BD

Perfect analogy!!

[Bernard Gui]

36 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I'm really confused by this article.

these men were in no danger of being rapists (though some were sexually coercive). But I do believe that the attitude can effect others who do/have. To lessen the sense of culpability or to expect your feelings or actions are others fault. Either way it can lead women to have an unfair amount of the burden to live up to modesty standards.

It is confusing. That's why I brought it up. We reject the notion that dressing modestly because immodesty may "cause" a man or boy to think impure thoughts, but we have no rational substitute. If the article is correct, a boy who objected (diversity?) is part of the Mormon "rape culture" because of what he is taught at Church. Heaven forbid that we should address the visual aspect of male/female attraction. Girls are "guilted" into dressing modestly by oppressive leaders, but if immodest dress arouses inappropriate interest among the brethren (with which they should learn to cope), and we can offer no rational reason for them to dress modestly, there appears to be a dilemma. Or maybe a conundrum. 

 

[bluebell]

12 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Is only one or the other?

Is teaching people that they can help others automatically keep the commandments the same as saying they are responsible for others thoughts and behaviors?

I really don't know.  I don't know how to teach girls that they can help boys keep their thoughts clean without also teaching them that if they don't help boys keep their thoughts clean they are bad.

[Bernard Gui]

36 minutes ago, bluebell said:

No, i'm opposed to teaching girls that they are responsible for lustful or inappropriate thoughts that boys have if they dress immodestly.

Then why should they dress modestly?