Controversy Over Utah Pastor's Tweet Re: Woman Posting Pics of Themselves in Revealing Clothing

[smac97]

Pastor Causes Outrage After Saying Women Should Never Post Photos Of Themselves In Bikinis, Bra Or Underwear

Quote

A pastor in the U.S. has stirred controversy after urging women to stop posting certain kinds of photos online.

Brian Sauvé, who works at Refuge Church in Ogden, Utah, has been accused of being misogynistic towards women after he took to Twitter to seemingly urge "ladies" on behalf of all men about showing skin on social media.

 

“Dear Ladies, there is no reason whatsoever for you to post pictures of yourself in low cut shirts, bikinis, bra and underwear, or anything similar - ever," he tweeted. 

He continued: “Not to show your weight loss journey. Not to show your newborn baby. Not to document your birth story - Your Brothers.”

I'm interested in hearing your perspectives on this.  

Quote

Brian has received backlash for his tweet which has received more than 20,000 replies from users arguing against Sauvé’s sentiment. The pastor’s claim also prompted the creation of a now-viral #DearBrian trend. 

In a rebuttal, one user wrote: "Dear Gentlemen, There is no reason whatsoever for you to post pictures of yourself wearing a beard, a tight T shirt, shorts or anything similar - ever. Not to show your arms. Not to show your personal best. Not to document anything, ever. - Your Sisters."

American Author John Pavlovitz took a dig at Brian, tweeting: “Dear Brian, Pastors like you are why the Church is known for misogyny and the subjugation of women more than empathy and equity. You should try the sacred ministry of minding your own damn business."

I'm also curious as to reactions like these.

Quote

In a series of follow-up tweets, Sauvé defended and stood by his comment.

“Quite a few men and women who would likely identify as liberal feminists have recently taken quite the interest in my Twitter account,” he wrote. “Welcome! I’m glad you’re here.”

“Many of you likely use and promote the #MeToo movement — yet hundreds of you are sending me unsolicited sexual images and videos. Is that ok now? I thought your sexual ethic was all about consent? This seems like naked (pun intended) hypocrisy on your part,” he continued.

 

He added, “If a man were to send you unsolicited nude pictures or sexually explicit videos of himself, you would (rightly!) judge him as a sexually abusive pervert. But you can do it to me? How does the ethical math work out on that? Maybe your sexual ethics aren’t so ethical after all.”

Sauvé also told his Twitter critics that he doesn’t “hate you,” but we’re all “hypocrites, sinners, and moral vagabonds” and the “freedom from the crippling weight of your sin through Christ.”

Again, what are your thoughts on his response to the criticisms he has received?

For me, it seems like there are a few topics that are of such import, sensitivity, and about which there are such diversities of viewpoints and opinions, that they (the topics) should always be addressed with great care, with much tact, decorum, civility, and so on.  Public commentary about modesty in women's clothing, particularly by men, is one of those topics.

Here, I have some reservations about the time, place and manner of the pastor's comments.  They come across as unsolicited (being addressed to all women, everywhere), somewhat brash, and somewhat insolent.  And while I think he is correct to object to inappropriate reactions to his comments (sending him "unsolicited sexual images and videos"), I think he also should have remained focused on the subject matter.  Perhaps he could have found a way to advance and improve the discussion by responding to reactions that were appropriate.

This story has also caused some introspection for myself.  I need to consider some of the things I say that might likewise be brash, insolent, or otherwise inappropriate in terms of time, place and manner.

Anyway, thoughts all around?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Fether]

I would rather live in a world where everyone was in agreeance on Latter-day Saint modesty standards than in the world we live in now. But I would also live in this world over a world where Latter-day Saint modesty standards are enforced on all and we are shaming those who have differing standards.

You can’t expect someone to live a certain lifestyle if they don’t see that specific lifestyle as being worth living.

[Calm]

As long as he had the same directions for men, I wouldn’t be thinking it was inherently misogynist. If he only went after women, big problem. 
 

Nudity, partial or full, as well as minimal clothing is a different issue Imo. Given the way we communicate these days, I can see appropriate partial and maybe even appropriate full nudity online such as medical education. And minimal clothing may be very appropriate for the experience.  If these experiences could occur in public without issue, then why not online?
 

I have seen a powerful public service spot iirc of a shirtless woman who underwent a radical mastectomy making an appeal so her granddaughter doesn’t have to experience what she has. Doing the same without showing her scars just doesn’t have the same impact and there is nothing sexual about the presentation. 
 

There is also the issue that many different cultures are using the Internet. Many of those cultures have a less sexual view of nudity or limited clothing. To insist that one cultural view has the right to dictate to all others is silly, imo.

 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Calm

[LoudmouthMormon]

Now that I have been paying attention to cultural beliefs for 3+ decades, I've seen changes.  I was born into a culture with a majority who valued (at least publicly) chastity and modesty.  Our laws, policies, FCC rules and regulations, were all about drawing a clear line between modest and immodest, and enshrining that line in what was allowed on billboards, tv, checkout counter magazines, etc.    Between then and now, that majority is now in the minority.   The "new" majority (which came into power somewhere in the last 10-15 years) is run by folks who place a higher value on personal freedom than community standards. If a woman wants to show it, it ain't up to anyone, especially not a man, to tell her no.  "If you don't want to see it, don't look" is the ruling principle now.

And with social media, streaming services, unfiltered internet, and the downfall of broadcast television, there's not much in the way of public policy mandating standards any more.  Radio stations still adhere to "old" laws.

News from yesterday: 

CNN: Adidas tweets 25 pairs of bare breasts to sell a new sports bra

 

[Fether]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

There is also the issue that many different cultures are using the Internet. Many of those cultures have a less sexual view of nudity. To insist that one cultural view has the right to dictate to all others is silly, imo.

The issue with this argument is that we’re not talking about other cultures. We are talking about our own. 
 

If a culture somehow made the thumbs up sign sexual and erotic, I would say that culture should refrain from using the sign in the same way we should refrain from public displays of immodesty.

[Calm]

Just now, Fether said:

The issue with this argument is that we’re not talking about other cultures. We are talking about our own. 

He made a general comment about online behaviour. How is that not making a comment including other cultures?

[smac97]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

As long as he had the same directions for men, I wouldn’t be thinking it was inherently misogynist. If he only went after women, big problem. 

It looks like he did just go "after women."

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

Nudity, partial or full, as well as minimal clothing is a different issue Imo.

Different from what?  I'm not sure I understand.

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

Given the way we communicate these days, I can see appropriate partial and maybe even appropriate full nudity online such as medical education. And minimal clothing may be very appropriate for the experience.  If these experiences could occur in public without issue, then why not online?

Agreed.  There is no "sexualization" element to this.  

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

I have seen a powerful public service spot iirc of a shirtless woman who underwent a radical mastectomy making an appeal so her granddaughter doesn’t have to experience what she has. Doing the same without showing her scars just doesn’t have the same impact and there is nothing sexual about the presentation. 

Yes, I have seen that PSA.  It is distinctive.  And there is nothing sexual about it.

Here it seems like the pastor was speaking of posting pictures online that, though not amounting to "nudity," nevertheless are, or could reasonably be construed as, sexually provocative.  But as you point out, he apparently has nothing to say about men refraining from posting comparable photos of themselves.

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

There is also the issue that many different cultures are using the Internet. Many of those cultures have a less sexual view of nudity or limited clothing. To insist that one cultural view has the right to dictate to all others is silly, imo.

Certainly not "dictate."  But he surely has the right to share his viewpoint and invite others to accept it.

We seem to feel free to share our viewpoints about gender equality, sexual behavior, and a host of other topics, even though there are varied cultural viewpoints about such things.  I think those variances don't preclude sharing of viewpoints, though.

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

He made a general comment about online behaviour. How is that not making a comment including other cultures?

I’m all for encouraging modesty, but not when it’s only aimed at “ladies,” regardless of whose culture we’re talking about. 

[Fether]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

He made a general comment about online behaviour. How is that not making a comment including other cultures?

True… I don’t think I really internalized that but about being on the World Wide Web. There is no such thing as the Mormon Wide Web.

Man that is hard. The American culture today includes common use of social media. One can get by just fine without it… but it’s such a heavy part of our society. But when you venture online, you need to be ready to see other people’s cultural norms… 

 

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Different from what?  I'm not sure I understand.

From targeting women. 
 

The rest of my comments were in the context of applying to both men and women. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Certainly not "dictate."  But he surely has the right to share his viewpoint and invite others to accept it.

This was not an invitation.  This was an absolute statement dictating what was inappropriate behaviour. 

Quote

there is no reason whatsoever 

 

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, Fether said:

But when you venture online, you need to be ready to see other people’s cultural norms… 

And when you say “there is no reason whatsoever” you are ignoring all other cultural viewpoints and elevating your own.  And without explanation in this case unless there was more to the tweet than what was posted, which is quite possible.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Calm

[Fether]

26 minutes ago, Calm said:

There is also the issue that many different cultures are using the Internet. Many of those cultures have a less sexual view of nudity or limited clothing. To insist that one cultural view has the right to dictate to all others is silly, imo.

One other comment I’ll make. I’m speaking for myself but I imagine this goes for the vast majority of men. I’m not aroused by nudity from cultural norms. When I see a bunch of topless African tribe members on National Geographic’s, I’m not bothered. Same with medical situation and the sort. But the vast majority of immodesty I come across is not from these sources. I would argue 90%+ of the nudity and immodesty I come across is sexualized.

I don’t think “culture” and “educational” nudity is even worth considering in these topics because it makes up such a small minority and obviously come with a pass due to their exception.

[Fether]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

And when you say “there is no reason whatsoever” you are ignoring all other cultural viewpoints. 

I mentioned this above, but the VAST majority of nudity and immodesty I see is not culturally or educationally driven. And that small minority of nudity and immodesty I see that is culturally driven is entirely appropriate and gets an exception to the rule. 

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, Fether said:

I don’t think “culture” and “educational” nudity is even worth considering in these topics because it makes up such a small minority and obviously come with a pass due to their exception

Yeah…having lived in another culture while participating in primarily American conversations I disagree it is obvious and doesn’t need to be addressed if one is going to be making absolute/global comments.  It is insulting to be treated as if nonexistent just due to numbers.

And weight loss and pregnancy/delivery/postpartum pictures are not a small minority experience.  And he went after those. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Calm

[bluebell]

45 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Pastor Causes Outrage After Saying Women Should Never Post Photos Of Themselves In Bikinis, Bra Or Underwear

I'm interested in hearing your perspectives on this.  

I'm also curious as to reactions like these.

Again, what are your thoughts on his response to the criticisms he has received?

For me, it seems like there are a few topics that are of such import, sensitivity, and about which there are such diversities of viewpoints and opinions, that they (the topics) should always be addressed with great care, with much tact, decorum, civility, and so on.  Public commentary about modesty in women's clothing, particularly by men, is one of those topics.

Here, I have some reservations about the time, place and manner of the pastor's comments.  They come across as unsolicited (being addressed to all women, everywhere), somewhat brash, and somewhat insolent.  And while I think he is correct to object to inappropriate reactions to his comments (sending him "unsolicited sexual images and videos"), I think he also should have remained focused on the subject matter.  Perhaps he could have found a way to advance and improve the discussion by responding to reactions that were appropriate.

This story has also caused some introspection for myself.  I need to consider some of the things I say that might likewise be brash, insolent, or otherwise inappropriate in terms of time, place and manner.

Anyway, thoughts all around?

Thanks,

-Smac

I cringe whenever men tell women how to dress or what body parts to show to benefit men.  To me, it shows a lack of awareness and a self centeredness (as if men and there needs are the center of the universe) that is disturbing. 

It also annoys me when someone takes pictures that are obviously not meant to be sexual in nature (such as postpartum pictures, which can really help other women to understand and feel better about their own bodies postpartum), and make them sexual.  Again, it's an "my perspective is the only one that matters" way of being in the world that I think causes a lot of problems in general, and a lot of serious problems for women (when it comes from men) especially.

[bluebell]

33 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

 

News from yesterday: 

CNN: Adidas tweets 25 pairs of bare breasts to sell a new sports bra

 

I looked at that ad yesterday.  I'm on the fence about it.  It's not at all sexual (and useful on a certain level for men and women to understand), but neither do I think that it's a good way to sell sports bras.  

[Fether]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

Yeah…having lived in another culture while participating in primarily American conversations I disagree it is obvious and doesn’t need to be addressed if one is going to be making absolute/global comments.  It is insulting to be treated as if nonexistent just due to numbers.

And weight loss and pregnancy/delivery/postpartum pictures are not a small minority experience.  And he went after those. 

I really don’t think we should be witch hunting people we think are immodest.

Im just saying that most people who complain about immodesty and nudity are not talking about cultural and educational nudity. They are talking entirely about the sexualized nudity they see all over the internet. They don’t distinguish between sexualized and non-sexualized because the vast majority they see is sexualized

[Fether]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It's not at all sexual 

Do you think the marketing team was using their understanding of the American sexual fascination in boobs to draw in more attention? Or was the concept of using the sexual nature of boobs in the advertising not even considered?

[LoudmouthMormon]

Here- Imma say something true, and see if anyone has a problem with it:

Women can increase or decrease their risk of being sexually assaulted, in certain situations, by how they choose to dress.

What do you think folks?

[strappinglad]

If one browses you-tube or , heaven forbid , tic toc , one can see what attracts views and it ain't men in shorts( with socks and sandals ) 

 

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I cringe whenever men tell women how to dress or what body parts to show to benefit men.  To me, it shows a lack of awareness and a self centeredness (as if men and there needs are the center of the universe) that is disturbing. 

I think plenty of men who express concerns about the sexual objectification of women are not necessarily self-centered, but are expressing concern about the adverse impacts on society, particularly including women.

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It also annoys me when someone takes pictures that are obviously not meant to be sexual in nature (such as postpartum pictures, which can really help other women to understand and feel better about their own bodies postpartum), and make them sexual.  Again, it's an "my perspective is the only one that matters" way of being in the world that I think causes a lot of problems in general, and a lot of serious problems for women (when it comes from men) especially.

I'm curious as to your thoughts about this YouTube video by a woman named Sydney Watson.  The title is "The lie of female empowerment."  The hyperlink I am providing starts at the 4:49 mark because she is addressing the sexual objectification of women (including self-objectification), and points to a performace at the Grammys by singer Cardi B of one of her songs, which performance (and song) are very overtly sexual.  The remainder of the video (after 4:49) includes fleeting images of still pretty provocative stuff, but Sydney is showing these things to education, not to tantalize.  Nevertheless, be forewarned.

Sydney provides a viewpoint on this topic that I share pretty much across the board.  She also provides quite a few data points that merit some real attention.  Inasmuch as she is a woman, I am hoping she has "standing" to say things about this topic without the "coming from a man" objection.

I look forward to your response (no obligation, though).

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[sunstoned]

55 minutes ago, Calm said:

As long as he had the same directions for men, I wouldn’t be thinking it was inherently misogynist. If he only went after women, big problem. 
 

Nudity, partial or full, as well as minimal clothing is a different issue Imo. Given the way we communicate these days, I can see appropriate partial and maybe even appropriate full nudity online such as medical education. And minimal clothing may be very appropriate for the experience.  If these experiences could occur in public without issue, then why not online?
 

I have seen a powerful public service spot iirc of a shirtless woman who underwent a radical mastectomy making an appeal so her granddaughter doesn’t have to experience what she has. Doing the same without showing her scars just doesn’t have the same impact and there is nothing sexual about the presentation. 
 

There is also the issue that many different cultures are using the Internet. Many of those cultures have a less sexual view of nudity or limited clothing. To insist that one cultural view has the right to dictate to all others is silly, imo.

 

I do agree, but with religion it seems many times it is never the same directions for men.  In our own church, YM get many more modesty lessons that YM.  Many of the lessons seem to suggest that they are responsible for men's/boy's thoughts by way they look and dress.  Not only is this offensive to many women I know, it is also offensive to men.  

[Fether]

5 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Here- Imma say something true, and see if anyone has a problem with it:

Women can increase or decrease their risk of being sexually assaulted, in certain situations, by how they choose to dress.

What do you think folks?

I agree completely.
 

But that is a great comment more for a discussion or rape culture and not in a discussion about the morality of immodesty and nudity. We are kinda moving the goal post if we pursue this as a good answer to the current conversation.

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Imma say something true,

That is debatable:

Quote

Most research suggests men perceive women who dress in sexy attire as more willing to complete sexual activities, but no data suggests that women who dress in revealing clothes are sexually assaulted or raped more often. 

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/provocative-clothing-rape-causes
 

I don’t want to get into the research that shows this, so just putting up evidence it is debatable. 
 

Also because easy find:

https://www.huffpost.com/archive/ca/entry/what-were-you-wearing-exhibit-brussels_a_23333795

Edited February 10, 2022 by Calm