Modesty for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden

[Raingirl]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

In the past I've been a member of wards that had a policy to ask girls to leave an activity if they showed up in shorts that were too short.  What a horrible thing to do to a young woman trying to attend her church meetings.  Even done with good intentions, that is going to cause some scarring.

I wonder what the numbers are concerning girls being asked to leave for “inappropriate” dress as opposed to boys?

Every discussion I’ve seen of modesty within the church focuses almost exclusively on girls/women. 

[bluebell]

Just now, Raingirl said:

I wonder what the numbers are concerning girls being asked to leave for “inappropriate” dress as opposed to boys?

Every discussion I’ve seen of modesty within the church focuses almost exclusively on girls/women. 

And I think that's why this is such a tender topic for so many people.  About 4 years ago I was a YWs president and our stake had a zone conference where kids were going to be tubing a creek and also slip-n-sliding down a giant hill on a huge tarp. The girls were specifically told they could not wear swimsuits but the boys were not.

So we had boys in swim trunks and no shirts running all over the place having a blast and girls trying not to drown in the creek in their jean shorts and wet tshirts, and having their shirts riding up and showing off their bras on the slide, to the point that some stopped trying to do either activity.  That was the activity where I decided that I would never enforce such standards again and would respectfully fight to keep others from enforcing them as well.

The disparity is real and harmful.

[Grug the Neanderthal]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I suppose it might have just been you peacocking about how devoted you are to following the apostles and so the whole thing didn’t make sense beyond that.

Or you may have seen some booty shorts and lost your train of thought.

Nope. Try again.

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

In the past (and sometimes even now) the church has tried to enforce modesty standards and in my opinion it has done more harm than good.  I know of more than a few women who have very poor feelings about the church as adults that largely began by being policed by leaders at church activities and camps.  Not to mention, requiring girls to wear t-shirts and shorts over swimsuits is a huge safety hazard in a lot of water activities.

I think the church is starting to realize the harm that good intentioned modesty enforcement has done and has reassessed that.  The guidelines in the FSOY pamphlet leave the policing in the hands of the individuals, for example, which was a needed change.

(and for the record, I don't think they are doing that but secretly meaning "but you'd better still follow the old standards or you need to repent".)

Very true, I think the church is seeing the light, or whomever. 

I remember in my ward years ago, there was a young woman in tears because at the ward picnic and pool party at the Farmington Pool her mom didn't take her to get a one piece swim suit and she was in tears because she wanted to be modest. I guess she wore a t-shirt over her two piece.

Today one of my FB friends posted this, I thought was important and shows how something said to a youth will last a long time, if it was something about their bodies. 

https://www.facebook.com/elysemyersofficial/videos/197586099602121

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Very true, I think the church is seeing the light, or whomever. 

I remember in my ward years ago, there was a young woman in tears because at the ward picnic and pool party at the Farmington Pool her mom didn't take her to get a one piece swim suit and she was in tears because she wanted to be modest. I guess she wore a t-shirt over her two piece.

Today one of my FB friends posted this, I thought was important and shows how something said to a youth will last a long time, if it was something about their bodies. 

https://www.facebook.com/elysemyersofficial/videos/197586099602121

What a horrible experience for her, but sadly not unique. I’m still dealing with some comments made about my body when I was in middle school, and I’m 46. And that’s from comments meant to be flattering. Comments meant to address a perceived flaw would be even harder I think. 

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

What a horrible experience for her, but sadly not unique. I’m still dealing with some comments made about my body when I was in middle school, and I’m 46. And that’s from comments meant to be flattering. Comments meant to address a perceived flaw would be even harder I think. 

I'm such an idiot sometimes, I am worried that I shared the FB video and maybe people will see my FB photo in the top right hand spot that I see it. But hopefully not, or do I really care anymore, except for being hunted down and who knows, lol. 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Nope. Try again.

Nah, this is dull.

I am tempted to tell a very immodest story about how I met one woman I dated while we were both wearing very little just to make this thread more interesting but that would probably get me thread banned.

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'm such an idiot sometimes, I am worried that I shared the FB video and maybe people will see my FB photo in the top right hand spot that I see it. But hopefully not, or do I really care anymore, except for being hunted down and who knows, lol. 

No worries it doesn’t connect to you at all. 😊

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

No worries it doesn’t connect to you at all. 😊

Thanks bluebell.

[Grug the Neanderthal]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Nah, this is dull.

You sound like a middle schooler who complains that the classwork is too boring because they either don’t want to to do the work or aren’t bright enough to do it.

But here, I’ll help you out. Please try to pay very close attention this time. 

My point is that the 1st Presidency and the apostles have the duty and responsibility to deliver the word and will of the Lord to the members of the church. They hold the keys.  We have covenanted to sustain them. It is literally their job to teach us God’s will in regards to modesty. If you want to disagree with them, label them as misogynists, or whatever, that’s your right. You do you.

But to mock me by accusing me personally of just wanting to control what women wear for supporting the teaching of the brethren on modesty is asinine. It’s asinine whether the brethren are right or wrong. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by Grug the Neanderthal

[Grug the Neanderthal]

6 hours ago, Rain said:

6 hours ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Your answer is a bit confusing, but I gather that you do believe that someone can be perfectly modest while wearing booty shorts and a crop-top as long as they don’t do it for the purpose of elevating themselves above others. 

Expand  

Can be? Yes. Definitely is?  No.

6 hours ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

My follow up question is if you believe that it’s possible for an individual who has been correctly taught what modesty means to wear booty shorts and a crop-top and still be perfectly modest in God’s eyes?

Lets not over complicate things. A simple yes or no would be great.

I hope what I said above suffices

Your answer is sufficient, thank you.

Since you believe that there are circumstances in which a woman who is an active Latter Day Saint who has been taught the correct version of modesty can wear booty shorts, crop-tops, bikinis, strapless dresses, etc., I have a follow up question for you.

In your opinion under what circumstances would a Latter Day Saint woman who has been taught the correct version of modesty be perfectly modest in God’s eyes wearing booty shorts, a crop-top, etc.? Please try to be as specific and clear as possible. 

[Grug the Neanderthal]

6 hours ago, Vanguard said:

I want to call attention to my understanding that modesty is very much a function of culture. It so happens that we have directives in our LDS culture that draws its own general 'line ranges' about attire as informed by our general leadership (presumably with the blessing of the Godhead). We all know and have discussed the notion that certain attire expectations vary greatly among cultures and time periods though those cultures who allow for more skin are not necessarily erring in ignorance against God's standards. It simply is not an issue nor should it be.

I disagree that modesty is entirely tied to culture. I think God does have certain standards regardless of culture. Hence the temple garment being the same for endowed members regardless from what culture they are from. However, I also don’t think that God’s standard for modesty is 100% rigid unchangeable. I believe that the principles and the standards can be adapted to fit the culture to a degree. 
 

6 hours ago, Vanguard said:

All of these arguments, however, do not address what I believe is very important, that being, how does a culture enforce these expectations without unnecessarily harming the legitimate sensitivities of its members? We had discussed issues of modesty some time ago and this question was not answered to my satisfaction. Or are there those who believe there should be no enforcement short of allowing the individual's sense of propriety as informed by their Spirit and the example of others to be the sole enforcer?

When it comes to enforcing God’s standard of modesty, it is not the culture enforcing it. It is God’s servants whose job it is to see that no iniquity take hold of the church “enforcing" it. 

As for how to avoid "unnecessarily harming” or offending people while "enforcing" God’s standard of modesty, I think that this must be done delicately. People are at different stages of progression, understanding, and spirituality. I don’t think that standards of modesty should be enforced with an iron fist. Instead the Lord’s standards and expectations on modesty should be clearly taught lovingly and with patience and long suffering. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by Grug the Neanderthal

[The Nehor]

22 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

You sound like a middle schooler who complains that the classwork is too boring because they either don’t want to to do the work or aren’t bright enough to do it.

But here, I’ll help you out. Please try to pay very close attention this time. 

My point is that the 1st Presidency and the apostles have the duty and responsibility to deliver the word and will of the Lord to the members of the church. They hold the keys.  We have covenanted to sustain them. It is literally their job to teach us God’s will in regards to modesty. If you want to disagree with them, label them as misogynists, or whatever, that’s your right. You do you.

But to mock me by accusing me personally of just wanting to control what women wear for supporting their teaching of the brethren on modesty is asinine. It’s asinine whether the brethren are right or wrong. 

This is your victorious and condescending masterstroke?

[MustardSeed]

1 minute ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

I disagree that modesty is entirely tied to culture. I think God does have certain standards regardless of culture. Hence the temple garment being the same for endowed members regardless from what culture they are from. However, all also don’t think that God’s standard for modesty is not 100% rigid unchangeable. I believe that the principles and the standards can be adapted to fit the culture to a degree. 
 

When it comes to enforcing God’s standard of modesty, that is not the culture enforcing it. It is God’s servants whose job it is to see that no iniquity take hold of the church. 

As for how to avoid "unnecessarily harming” or offending people while enforcing God’s standard of modesty, I think that this must be done delicately. People are at different stages of progression, understanding, and spirituality. I don’t think that standards of modesty should be enforced with an iron fist. Instead the Lords standards and expectations on modesty should be clearly taught lovingly and with patience and long suffering. 

It sounds as though you believe God designed the garment and directed all the changes to the garment that have evolved through the ages? 

[Grug the Neanderthal]

5 hours ago, webbles said:

I served a mission in Manaus, Brazil (literally in the middle of the Amazon jungle).  On our first day in the mission field, the Mission president, his wife, and the two APs took all of us new missionaries to a baptism that evening.  At the baptism, there were many members of the ward.  Some of the women were wearing clothing that would probably be considered immodest (crop-top, bikini top, etc).  These were women who where active members in the ward.  It was a bit of a culture shock for us American missionaries.  I remember one of the sister missionaries commenting, privately, on the clothing.  But the mission president (who was American and from Utah), nor his wife, nor the APs, nor any other church leader there made any comment, then or later.

After having been out on the mission for a little longer, I learned that modesty was much more linked towards what the person meant vs what they actually wore.  Many women, including active members in leadership positions, would wear clothing at home and around town that would probably be considered immodest by your standards.  Yet I believe they were definitely modest.

So, yes, an individual who has been correctly taught what modesty means can be perfectly modest in God's eyes when wearing booty shorts and a crop-top.

Thank you for sharing this experience.

I disagree that under these circumstances the Latter Day Saint women were being completely modest wearing bikini tops, crop tops, and booty shorts in public, whether the mission president or anyone else said anything about what they were wearing or not.

[The Nehor]

18 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

In your opinion under what circumstances would a Latter Day Saint woman who has been taught the correct version of modesty be perfectly modest in God’s eyes wearing booty shorts, a crop-top, etc.? Please try to be as specific and clear as possible. 

When working at Hooters is the only way to feed themselves.

[Grug the Neanderthal]

7 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

It sounds as though you believe God designed the garment and directed all the changes to the garment that have evolved through the ages? 

Yes, I firmly believe that God designed the garment. In this dispensation the design of the garment was given to Joseph Smith from God by revelation.

As for as the changes from the original go, I believe that they generally constitute a move away from what God intended and how things should be, but believe God likely authorized at least some of the changes. 

[MustardSeed]

1 minute ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Yes, I firmly believe that God designed the garment. In this dispensation the design of the garment was given to Joseph Smith from God by revelation.

As for as the changes from the original go, I believe that they generally constitute a move away from what God intended and how things should be, but believe God likely authorized at least some of the changes. 

That makes a lot of sense then. Thanks. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks bluebell.

I don’t see anything either.   

[Calm]

28 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

As for as the changes from the original go, I believe that they generally constitute a move away from what God intended and how things should be, but believe God likely authorized at least some of the changes. 

Do you wear the long sleeve and pant version of the garment in order to try and keep as close to the revealed pattern as possible? (I assume they still offer it, but it has been a couple of years since I checked; I used to special order them in all cotton to sleep in).  I had a neighbour in Canada who did that.  I found that out because I was the one who called the paramedics for him as his wife was on a trip.  His grandson came and got me.

Edited July 11, 2023 by Calm

[Grug the Neanderthal]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

Do you wear the long sleeve and pant version of the garment in order to try and keep as close to the revealed pattern as possible? (I assume they still offer it, but it has been a couple of years since I checked).

No, I wear the standard garment. It’s the one I covenanted to wear. 

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Your answer is sufficient, thank you.

Since you believe that there are circumstances in which a woman who is an active Latter Day Saint who has been taught the correct version of modesty can wear booty shorts, crop-tops, bikinis, strapless dresses, etc., I have a follow up question for you.

In your opinion under what circumstances would a Latter Day Saint woman who has been taught the correct version of modesty be perfectly modest in God’s eyes wearing booty shorts, a crop-top, etc.? Please try to be as specific and clear as possible. 

Why are you asking?

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

No, I wear the standard garment. It’s the one I covenanted to wear. 

So you have apostasized from the true and living original garment? REPENT HERETIC!

[mfbukowski]

Really?

Just REALLY?

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Really?

Just REALLY?

I think we need to define what “real” is before we can answer that question.