Modesty for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

They may be loosely connected but vanity and immodesty are not the same thing. Using humility and modesty interchangeably is incorrect. 

I trust the scriptures more than some random poster on the internet, especially one who simply proclaims they are right without documentation.

 

Edited July 9, 2023 by Calm

[Rain]

4 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

They may be loosely connected but vanity and immodesty are not the same thing. Using humility and modesty interchangeably is incorrect. 

You are right that they are not the same thing, though they are closely related.

How would you define modesty?

[Grug the Neanderthal]

1 minute ago, webbles said:

The amount of clothing that one is wearing is not a valid way to determine whether you are modest or not.  

I disagree. Obviously a woman breastfeeding is one thing, but overall the amount of clothing a person wears and what type of clothing they wear is a significant factor in how modest they are. 

[Grug the Neanderthal]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

I trust the scriptures

Okay please show me where the scriptures and the words of modern prophets (scripture for our day) use modesty and humility interchangeably. Please show me were they say that people can wear whatever they want and as little as they want as long as they are "humble."

Edited July 9, 2023 by Grug the Neanderthal

[webbles]

4 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

I disagree. Obviously a woman breastfeeding is one thing, but overall the amount of clothing a person wears and what type of clothing they wear is a significant factor in how modest they are. 

Do you consider a woman who is wearing a very nice dress (and it covers all of the garment), wearing heals, nice makeup, etc to be immodest or not?  What if she was trying to seduce you?  What if her intent was to just look nice?  What if her intent as to incite sexual thoughts in the men around her?  Does any of that have a factor in whether she is modest or not?

What about a man in the same situation?  If he is wearing a very nice suite and he is wearing it to seduce a woman, is he immodest?

[The Nehor]

32 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

I don't know what you're asking, nor how it's relevant to my comment.

If you have never been attracted to men why are you so certain your thoughts are right?

33 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Such as? Please elaborate. 

The huge gap you imagine that exist between men and women. The idea that society is pressuring all women to dress in the clothing you describe is ripping a lot of agency away from women. Maybe they like dressing that way? The idea that women choose to dress the way they do primarily to mess with male brains is part of the problem. Everything is about men and how it impacts them. The impact on the male gaze is the primary factor in everything.

Then again you seem to think high heels and lipstick are ‘slutty’ distractions so who knows what booty shorts do to your brain?

Also men can and do dress in similar ways. Just only rarely around you. Straight men find those kinds of displays uncomfortable so they are mostly kept out of the public eye because the comfort of insecure straight men is of course paramount. A lot of women like those displays too. 😈

[Calm]

37 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Please show me were they say that people can wear whatever they want and as little as they want as long as they are "humble."

I have never claimed scriptures say this.  Stop creating strawmen.  The scriptures have quite a few condemnations of those who wear rich attire.

Edited July 9, 2023 by Calm

[Pyreaux]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

Totally serious question - if you knew a woman was having sexual thoughts about you at work would you ever think "that's my fault.  I should have buttoned up the collar button on my shirt.  If she hadn't seen my adam's apple she wouldn't feel that way"?  I ask this because I find men's Adam's apples crazy attractive and it would never even occur to me to ask them to cover it or blame them for leading me on because of it.

It seems to be a matter as to whether the advances are unwanted. I've been confronted by gay men, it took a longtime to understand what the odd questions they asked were about; they were asking me if I was gay. I politely turned them down, later I felt very objectified and embarrassed, taste of what women go through when they think they are talking to a nice guy but and it's just a front by someone trying to have sex with you. I did feel responsible, if I knew how I could have prevented the situation I found myself in, I would have.

I understand that you can't blame the victim or control the actions of others. So, I certainly don't want to reassign the blame on women for what men might do. Some men mug women, if a woman walks down an alley at night and gets mugged, its ultimately the mugger who is to blame. I'm not sure if it's an insult or wisdom to suggest to her that she shouldn't have been walking through an alley at night. When I said about being "responsible", I'm not meaning taking the blame, I'm trying to describe taking control over choices that might have possible consequences, and I can't seem to articulate it very well. Maybe I shouldn't delve into matters I can't articulate well.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Pyreaux

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Nah, I think this is just a cop out. I’m not trying to convince anyone here to agree with me any more than you are any one else is.

You are telling me to write the first presidency to tell them that I think the new modesty teachings are too vague, but you didn’t write them complaining about the old teachings you believed were too rigid, that’s a double standard. All you’re trying to do is distract from the issue at hand. 

Ok.  You can think that.  I'm good with it.   

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

No.  Women are not responsible for what you think.  How can we be?  Men will think of women sexually even when we cover head to toe.  Do not put that on us.  This attitude has done damage to us and we will not accept this further. 
 

 

Amen to all of that.  

It's also damaging to men.

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

It seems to be a matter as to whether the advances are unwanted. I've been confronted by gay men, it took a longtime to understand what the odd questions they asked were about; they were asking me if I was gay. I politely turned them down, later I felt very objectified and embarrassed, taste of what women go through when they think they are talking to a nice guy but and it's just a front by someone trying to have sex with you. I did feel responsible, if I knew how I could have prevented the situation I found myself in, I would have.

There is a joke in the LGBT community about how many straight men’s greatest fear is having other men treat them the way they treat women. There is a lot of truth in the joke. I don’t do it often but there are a few times I have been in a venue where my female friends were being repeatedly harassed by an aggressive guy and I retaliated. The mildest flirting from me scares them away.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

I disagree. Obviously a woman breastfeeding is one thing, but overall the amount of clothing a person wears and what type of clothing they wear is a significant factor in how modest they are. 

Not really. What people wear is more about culture than modesty.

[Grug the Neanderthal]

37 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Not really. What people wear is more about culture than modesty.

So God’s standard on modesty in dress is dictated by whatever the current culture says? I don’t think so. 

[Calm]

Scripture references used by the Church under the topic of Modesty:
 

Quote

Matthew 6:22

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

Quote

1 Corinthians 6:19–20

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

Quote

1 Timothy 2:9

In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

Quote

Alma 5:53

And now my beloved brethren, I say unto you, can ye withstand these sayings; yea, can ye lay aside these things, and trample the Holy One under your feet; yea, can ye be puffed up in the pride of your hearts; yea, will ye still persist in the wearing of costly apparel and setting your hearts upon the vain things of the world, upon your riches?

Quote

Doctrine and Covenants 42:40–41

And again, thou shalt not be proud in thy heart; let all thy garments be plain, and their beauty the beauty of the work of thine own hands;

And let all things be done in cleanliness before me.

Quote

Doctrine and Covenants 121:45

Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presenceof God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distil upon thy soul as the dews from heaven.

Quote

Articles of Faith 1:13

We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

I am seeing references to prideful behaviour as immodest and condemning of rich, extravagant clothing and lots about focusing one’s thoughts on godly things; revealing attire not that much.

A better translation of Tim 2:9 (Thomas Wayment’s 2nd edition of the NT, page 381; highly recommend it) if “shamefacedness” confuses you since that usually means “guilty embarrassment” and somehow I don’t think the verse wants all women to automatically feel guilty about their adornment even when making modest choices (as in the plain and clean clothing referred to in D&C 42:

Quote

Likewise, the women in appropriate dress with modesty and moderation, not with braided hair, gold, pearls, and expensive clothing.

What is so revealing about braided hair, I wonder?

Edited July 10, 2023 by Calm

[Rain]

44 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

It seems to be a matter as to whether the advances are unwanted. I've been confronted by gay men, it took a longtime to understand what the odd questions they asked were about; they were asking me if I was gay. I politely turned them down, later I felt very objectified and embarrassed, taste of what women go through when they think they are talking to a nice guy but and it's just a front by someone trying to have sex with you. I did feel responsible, if I knew how I could have prevented the situation I found myself in, I would have.

I understand that you can't blame the victim or control the actions of others. So, I certainly don't want to reassign the blame on women for what men might do. Some men mug women, if a woman walks down an alley at night and gets mugged, its ultimately the mugger who is to blame. I'm not sure if it's an insult or wisdom to suggest to her that she shouldn't have been walking through an alley at night. When I said about being "responsible", I'm not meaning taking the blame, I'm trying to describe taking control over choices that might have possible consequence, and I can't seem to articulate it very well. Maybe I shouldn't delve into matters I can't articulate well.

I think I understand (whoever really knows since we can't read each other's minds) as I at one time felt the way you do. I think it is wise to take precautions in situations that can mean danger, but by telling women they need to dress so a man doesn't have those thoughts isn't really having her be cautious.  It is saying she has control of his thoughts.  

You say you felt responsible.  Why?  What about the situation made you feel responsible?  Feeling responsible is not quite the same as being responsible, but sometimes our feelings don't always match up with what is logical.  

Quote

I'm not sure if it's an insult or wisdom to suggest to her that she shouldn't have been walking through an alley at night.

When you do something "dumb/wrong" and are facing consequences does it help you when people say "you shouldn't have done that wrong thing"?  I know it just makes me feel unsafe with them - not physically unsafe, more of "I don't trust them enough to share things with them". 

Better to be there when they need you, validate their hurt and love them.  At another time MAYBE you can share things that will help them be cautious like being aware of situations and feelings of fear and helping them protect themselves or offering them rides or an escort any time they need it. You know, things that will help them in the light as well. But always as a matter of helping them feel safe in the situations they will be in, not criticizing them for situations they were already in that hurt them 

 But to be clear choosing to walk in the dark should never be looked at as they are in the wrong.  Rather it should be looked at as a situation to be aware of.  

  

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, Rain said:

But to be clear choosing to walk in the dark should never be looked at as they are in the wrong.  Rather it should be looked at as a situation to be aware of.  

And how they were dressed likely had nothing to do with why they were assaulted.

The majority of clothing in this exhibit could easily be worn with temple garments:

https://dovecenter.org/what-were-you-wearing-exhibit/

I was going to suggest wearing camo might possibly help, but there is some in the exhibit, so strike that.  She was even carrying a gun.

https://www.boredpanda.com/what-were-you-wearing-sexual-assault-art-exhibition/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=organic

The one that really breaks my heart is a 5 year old’s fairy dress.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Calm

[Grug the Neanderthal]

2 hours ago, Rain said:

How would you define modesty?

It's not for me to define, but here is how the church defines and explains modesty:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/modesty?lang=eng

I agree with this definition and explanation.

[Rain]

58 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

It's not for me to define, but here is how the church defines and explains modesty:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/modesty?lang=eng

I agree with this definition and explanation.

I agree with the actual definition (first paragraph) as well. Glad we can agree on some things.

It seems to fit with the scriptures and thoughts calm has been sharing. Maybe you two agree more than you think?

Edited July 10, 2023 by Rain

[Grug the Neanderthal]

42 minutes ago, Rain said:

I agree with the actual definition (first paragraph) as well. Glad we can agree on some things.

Glad we agree on at least that. Do you accept or reject the rest of the Church's teachings on modesty from the article? It sounds like you and the rest of the women here reject it, particularly paragraphs 4-6:

 "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.

Central to the command to be modest is an understanding of the sacred power of procreation, the ability to bring children into the world. This power is to be used only between husband and wife. Revealing and sexually suggestive clothing, which includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, and shirts that do not cover the stomach, can stimulate desires and actions that violate the Lord’s law of chastity.

In addition to avoiding clothing that is revealing, we should avoid extremes in clothing, appearance, and hairstyle. In dress, grooming, and manners, we should always be neat and clean, never sloppy or inappropriately casual. We should not disfigure ourselves with tattoos or body piercings. Women who desire to have their ears pierced should wear only one pair of modest earrings."

48 minutes ago, Rain said:

It seems to fit with the scriptures and thoughts calm has been sharing. Maybe you two agree more than you think?

I'm sure that there's a lot that Calm and I agree on, though you probably can't tell because for most of my time on this board she has actively tried to undermine what I say and has rarely if ever expressed any agreement with me. I agree with all of the scriptures Calm quoted (which I believe are from the article I shared), but I find them to be in agreement with the rest of the article, but it doesn't sound like Calm does.

[Rain]

27 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Glad we agree on at least that. Do you accept or reject the rest of the Church's teachings on modesty from the article?

I agree everywhere it talks about principles. 

27 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

It sounds like you and the rest of the women here reject it, particularly paragraphs 4-6:

 "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.

 

 

Principles like the above.

27 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

 

 

Central to the command to be modest is an understanding of the sacred power of procreation, the ability to bring children into the world. This power is to be used only between husband and wife.

 

And the above here.

27 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

 

Revealing and sexually suggestive clothing, which includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, and shirts that do not cover the stomach, can stimulate desires and actions that violate the Lord’s law of chastity.

 

 

Here it used applications/behaviors. I am not against these applications listed here, I just think "true doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior" (Boyd K Packer).

Or in other words rather than teaching specific clothing rules it is more effective and long lasting to teach the doctrine of who God is and the principle of going to him to help us guide our behavior. 

Edited to add that I disagree with the implication that other peoples desires and actions are the responsibility of the person wearing the clothing.

27 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

In addition to avoiding clothing that is revealing, we should avoid extremes in clothing, appearance, and hairstyle. In dress, grooming, and manners, we should always be neat and clean, never sloppy or inappropriately casual. We should not disfigure ourselves with tattoos or body piercings. Women who desire to have their ears pierced should wear only one pair of modest earrings."

I'm sure that there's a lot that Calm and I agree on, though you probably can't tell because for most of my time on this board she has actively tried to undermine what I say and has rarely if ever expressed any agreement with me. I agree with all of the scriptures Calm quoted (which I believe are from the article I shared), but I find them to be in agreement with the rest of the article, but it doesn't sound like Calm does.

 

Edited July 10, 2023 by Rain

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

So God’s standard on modesty in dress is dictated by whatever the current culture says? I don’t think so. 

You think there is an eternal unchanging standard of modesty God approves of universally for all of time?

“His hands were naked and his arms also a little above the wrists. So also were his feet naked as were his legs a little above the ankles. His head and neck were also bare. I could discover that he had no other clothing on but this robe, as it was open so that I could see into his bosom.”

Moroni was quite the immodest dresser wasn’t he? Shameful.

[Grug the Neanderthal]

3 minutes ago, Rain said:

I am not against these applications listed here, I just think "true doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior" (Boyd K Packer).

I’m glad to hear that you are not against the teaching of the church that modesty includes avoiding wearing "Revealing and sexually suggestive clothing, which includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, and shirts that do not cover the stomach." 

Mustardseed is clearly against this teaching. It sounds like Calm, Bluebell, and Raingirl are also against it, but if they aren’t hopefully they will clarify their stance. 

 

[Grug the Neanderthal]

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You think there is an eternal unchanging standard of modesty God approves of universally for all of time?

That’s not what I said, but God’s standard of modesty is definitely not just whatever the current culture deems as acceptable. 

[Rain]

9 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

I’m glad to hear that you are not against the teaching of the church that modesty includes avoiding wearing "Revealing and sexually suggestive clothing, which includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, and shirts that do not cover the stomach." 

You are misunderstanding. I am not against choosing not to wear short shorts, skirts etc. If someone works that out with God I am totally ok with that. 

I do feel that rather than teaching those behaviors the church should be teaching doctrines and principles and how to find your own applications and behavior. You know, as the new FSOY teaches.

9 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

Mustardseed is clearly against this teaching. It sounds like Calm, Bluebell, and Raingirl are also against it, but if they aren’t hopefully they will clarify their stance. 

 

 

I think I probably closely match their thinking on this.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Rain

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

That’s not what I said, but God’s standard of modesty is definitely not just whatever the current culture deems as acceptable. 

His standard of immodesty always seems to mimic the latest moral panic.

From Mark E. Peterson:

“The miniskirt was a British creation. At first it drew the unanimous scorn of the fashion experts in Europe and the United States.

Particularly were the French designers outspoken in their condemnation of the new fad. They pointed out that such styles threw women’s clothes out of proper proportion and therefore were evidence of bad designing. Then they pointed out to the ugliness of the knees in general and of the fat ones and the bony ones in particular. Are there any others?”

“Americans scoffed at it for quite some time too, but here, as in Paris, the London styles swept everything before them, and many of our women now feel obliged not only to display their badly shaped knees, but their thighs as well.”

“No woman looks as lovely as when she is properly and fully clothed. What woman can suppose that ugly knees and bony shoulder blades can add luster to her charm?”

 

Why won’t women cover their hideous knees and disgusting shoulder blades?

I happen to find both attractive. Am I some sort of degenerate pervert?