Modesty Lesson for Sharing Time

[Linked]

I still haven't figured out my exact stance on modesty overall, I'm learning about the idea of rape culture and the role modesty lessons play in it, but my current common sense says that sexuality is real and our clothes, especially women's clothes for better or worse, play a big role.

Well, we had a modesty lesson for sharing time in Primary yesterday. I teach 3 and 4 year old children. The primary president read from the Strength of Youth pamphlet with detailed instructions about girls keeping covered up and the one sentence about boys. It was ridiculous. Most of the kids in there, including my 6 year old, are incapable of understanding the meaning of modesty. Now they have another rule they have to follow for reasons they can't comprehend. Modesty is meaningless without sexuality. These kids are not sexual. This lesson was inappropriate and stupid.

[Anon70]

Grrr!! Modesty is not a conversation for 6 year olds! Being respectful of your body and others, yes.

I had a weird conversation about this with a friend last week. She said, my girls aren't going to wear bikinis while they lived in my home! (my girls wear bikinis) I asked, why? just a simple question. She couldn't answer it. After a bit, she said, well, I want them to respect themselves. I said why would wearing a bikini mean they don't? No answer.

I asked her what she thought about modesty being about attitude and behavior? no thought. I asked why women are responsible for men's thoughts? no answer.

I told her about this article and the comments: http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org ... mfortable/

but I doubt she'll read it. It made me sad--I know there were times I let the church do the thinking for me and I just spouted sound bites--boy I'm glad I'm over that. It made me see her and the old me in a sad light.

[Give It Time]

Alas, on NOM 1.0, did an excellent job of educating us about how, to a rapist, modesty actually transmits shame and that a woman who is ashamed of her body is less likely to resist being raped and less likely to report.

Now, for some anecdotal stuff:

1. When we were dating, my ex admitted he would commit the legal definition of rape (I didn't realize it, at the time, I just thought it was something guys said because most of the guys I knew said it).
2. When we were married, my ex-husband raped me. It wasn't forcible, but I was reasonably saying no to sex and he persisted. There's more to this story, I don't want to focus, here.
3. He told me that if we had to postpone our wedding, he would have raped me.
4. We had a couple of other quick excanges in which he blatantly admitted her would commit rape.

Rather than dwell on how stupid this all was, I want to consider the gift of having known someone like this so intimately for so long, because there is insight, here. Now, he is only one person. However, when we were dating, I was wearing a modest skirt and sweater. It was fashionable, for the time, but not form fitting. Not to the floor, some skin exposed, definitely garment friendly. He got very upset at what I was wearing. Be started beating the skirt like it suddenly had tons of lint on it and no brushing was hard enough to get it off. He wanted to know why I was ashamed of my body that I would hide it. I kept trying to explain the concept of modesty to him. He would not drop the idea that I was hiding my body because I was ashamed of it. I finally told him to stop arguing with me and take it up with the powers that be next time we women get a modesty lesson.

This was an idea that he held onto for more than twenty years. He probably still holds it. I know that men like to see women's bodies, but this particular viewing modesty as shame, I found very peculiar. It's only recently, I've connected these dots. He considered himself a rapist and he viewed modesty as transmitting shame.

There are two things I've learned about rape: it happens because the rapist has a sense of sexual entitlement and the rapist chooses his victim by who is vulnerable at that moment in time. Not how she's dressed, not overly flirtatious behavior (that projects confidence and strength), vulnerable. Is she overly trusting? Is she old? Can I slip a roofie in her drink? Is she comatose? Is she alone? Can I get her alone? It's not how she's dressed. It's whether or not she can easily be dominated at that moment.

As for modesty? I believe it is an important trait in a human being, but is apparent in so much more than dress. If one were to go to the Met Gala dressed like an FLDS polygamous wife, rather than in some fabulously outrageous concoction, one would be immodest, because one would be standing out unnecessarily and calling attention to themselves by how their dress differs from the normative standard of dress for the occasion.

I agree with that post at fMh, BTW. And, I'll say it again, if the church really wants to prevent rapes (without changing the doctrines), they would do well to teach the young women martial arts. This will make it so the young women will be vulnerable in so many fewer ways, it'll do a lot more good than all the modesty lessons ever could.

[trophywife26.2]

Ooookaayy. I am so torn here. I want to respond to this, but I don't have that emotional labor available.

Instead please read Josh Weed's currently viral post about how asinine the concept of modesty is. For reference Josh Weed is a semi-known/famous practicing Mormon who is openly gay and in a mixed orientation marriage. He's got a great Mormon Stories interview if that peaks your interest.

[ulmite]

What do you do when you can't fit a complex notion into one tweet? Send 21 of course!
I think modesty is important, as long as we define it correctly. The problems with my idea are that
(1) there is continuum of clothing from a burka to a birthday suit, and so it is very hard to draw a clear line.
(2) My view of modesty is probably pretty messed up by my cultural upbringing

I am going to stick my neck out here and give prescriptive rules :
- Cover up your privates and your rear end
- Don't try to show as much cleavage as possible
- Free pass for children under the age of 3
- Nobody cares if you are showing your shoulders or knees or thighs or navel, everyone has those.

It is sickening to ascribe rape to the victim, even partially. I think that scantily clad people are neither asking for rape nor being respectful of their own bodies or of the people around them. I hope that I am not horrendously wrong.

[Give It Time]

Trophy,

That is one of the most excellent things I've ever read about men taking responsibility for their own arousal.

[redjay]

Agreed modesty for young kids is daft - although swimsuit rules and private areas are something kids should be aware of.

For older kids I think modesty is important, not the silly porn shoulders stuff, but I find it disconcerting when young teens dress in what could be considered an overtly sexual way - have had two teen daughters who you would think I was asking them to wear a burka, when I told them I didn't like their short short school skirts. It's a tough one to call because on one hand I don't think that teenagers should feel pressured to be sexualised, on the other hand teenagers are sexualised beings, so you can be restricting their self-expression, and their desire to conform to societal norms.

I'm not a total kill-joy and one of my kids wore a backless dress to prom and she looked great, and I did not object at all. So sometimes it's about time and place.

It has been gratifying to see one of my girls join the world of work and she goes to work in an office every day - usually she wears trousers and when she wears a skirt it's twice as long as the ones she used to wear to school. I think she realises that if she wants to be taken seriously then low cut tops and super short skirts are best kept to Saturday nights out. (She's inactive and does not give a hoot about church.)

[Linked]

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses.

I had a weird conversation about this with a friend last week. She said, my girls aren't going to wear bikinis while they lived in my home! (my girls wear bikinis) I asked, why? just a simple question. She couldn't answer it. After a bit, she said, well, I want them to respect themselves. I said why would wearing a bikini mean they don't? No answer.

I asked her what she thought about modesty being about attitude and behavior? no thought. I asked why women are responsible for men's thoughts? no answer.

I love that conversation! That was awesome.

Alas, on NOM 1.0, did an excellent job of educating us about how, to a rapist, modesty actually transmits shame and that a woman who is ashamed of her body is less likely to resist being raped and less likely to report.

That is really interesting, I had never considered it from that perspective. I guess I'm not a rapist. Phew. But the church is grooming girls for those that are, that's messed up. And your ex sounds really awful, I'm sorry you went through that.

As for modesty? I believe it is an important trait in a human being, but is apparent in so much more than dress. If one were to go to the Met Gala dressed like an FLDS polygamous wife, rather than in some fabulously outrageous concoction, one would be immodest, because one would be standing out unnecessarily and calling attention to themselves by how their dress differs from the normative standard of dress for the occasion.

I think this mixes modesty and dressing appropriately for an event. I think they are different. I am happy to teach kids how to dress appropriately while leaving the implicit sexuality of modesty out of it. In the lesson the primary president mentioned that wearing a shirt with a spaghetti stain on it to a birthday party would be immodest. I thought that was confusing. Of course in your example appropriate attire would be considered immodest by LDS standards, so the two are conflated.

Ooookaayy. I am so torn here. I want to respond to this, but I don't have that emotional labor available.

Instead please read Josh Weed's currently viral post about how asinine the concept of modesty is. For reference Josh Weed is a semi-known/famous practicing Mormon who is openly gay and in a mixed orientation marriage. He's got a great Mormon Stories interview if that peaks your interest.

Tweetstorm

This guy is absolutely right. There is no excuse at all to blame a woman for the actions of a man.

But I think this oversimplifies the social situation we are in. Certain things are sexual in our culture. I don't know if that is necessarily a bad thing. Maybe it is. In LDS culture the aggressive modesty makes shoulders and lower thighs sexual. Outside of LDS culture there are still things which are culturally sexual. In some ways having those boundaries between sexual and non-sexual is helpful so we can show someone we are interested. I don't know.

[Linked]

What do you do when you can't fit a complex notion into one tweet? Send 21 of course!
I think modesty is important, as long as we define it correctly. The problems with my idea are that
(1) there is continuum of clothing from a burka to a birthday suit, and so it is very hard to draw a clear line.
(2) My view of modesty is probably pretty messed up by my cultural upbringing

I am going to stick my neck out here and give prescriptive rules :
- Cover up your privates and your rear end
- Don't try to show as much cleavage as possible
- Free pass for children under the age of 3
- Nobody cares if you are showing your shoulders or knees or thighs or navel, everyone has those.

It is sickening to ascribe rape to the victim, even partially. I think that scantily clad people are neither asking for rape nor being respectful of their own bodies or of the people around them. I hope that I am not horrendously wrong.

Defining modesty sounds like an impossible task. Just having the concept of modesty places responsibility on how someone is dressed and opens things up for victim shaming. Though I personally am good with your rules. Except for the age of 3. I would probably bump it up to 6 or 7. But I think this highlights the problem, who are we to set rules for everyone?

[MoPag]

The problem with teaching young kids about modesty is that it can make them judgmental. They will start to think all people who don't dress "modestly" are doing something bad and must therefore be bad. I remember after our primary sharing time on modesty I had to do damage control in my class. I had to remind my kids that Jesus loves everyone no matter what they are wearing. He loves people even if they have tattoos and piercings. And he wants us to love them too. Some of my kids seemed shocked by this concept.

[Linked]

The problem with teaching young kids about modesty is that it can make them judgmental. They will start to think all people who don't dress "modestly" are doing something bad and must therefore be bad. I remember after our primary sharing time on modesty I had to do damage control in my class. I had to remind my kids that Jesus loves everyone no matter what they are wearing. He loves people even if they have tattoos and piercings. And he wants us to love them too. Some of my kids seemed shocked by this concept.

+1

[MoPag]

Defining modesty sounds like an impossible task. Just having the concept of modesty places responsibility on how someone is dressed and opens things up for victim shaming.

Amen to this. I think it is also teaching that it okay to objectify someone. And the interesting thing is that the LDS concept of modesty probably wouldn't be a thing if they didn't shame boys for being aroused. What if they just taught you guys that arousal is a normal part of being a human being and when you get aroused, no big deal, just move on with your life? Instead it has turned into this horrible shame cycle, it reinforces rape culture and it is one of the many way the church objectifies women.

[Give It Time]

Bad example on my part, I was going with the definition of modesty being not calling undue attention to yourself. In this case, dressing as an FLDS polygamous wife at a pool where everyone is dressed to show more skin, but appropriate for the circumstances would be immodest.

In terms of dress, I prefer to use the terms class or refinement. That leaves the interpretation open for individual style, but a certain amount of restraint will be employed in the service of good taste, rather than not inciting animal instinct rioting.

[trophywife26.2]

If modesty/hyper sexuality is a cultural construct then what would it take to change the culture? Exposure and social change. This is why all of my female exmo friends have said they allow their kids to see them naked so they can see/view the human form as nonsexual. Also why I wear a bikini swimming with my kids, let them see anatomy books, have nude artwork/books in our home: to normalize the human body.

Women go topless in many countries and the men somehow learn how to control themselves, and the reason is: cultural norms.

I can't change Utah (or America) alone, but I can try to move a few cups of dirt from the mountain.

Beauty Redefined https://beautyredefined.org/guys-guide- ... t-objects/ is a great LDS resource for combatting rape culture.

[Not Buying It]

I run a real risk of being misunderstood here, so please believe me when I say that I am not sexist and am certainly not trying to be demeaning to women. I certainly agree that women shouldn't feel like they have to dress modestly because men can't control themselves. It's a messed up way of thinking, that because men have a problem women have to be the ones who adjust their behavior.

But...men have a problem. At least some of them. Show a lot of cleavage and some men - not all, but some - are going to sneak a peek and maybe stare. Even nice guys who respect women are going to try to get a look. Not to mention the creeper guys you are going to suddenly find standing next to you when there are plenty of other places to stand, finding excuses to be around you, etc.

That doesn't mean women should be forced to dress "modestly" because some men can't control themselves. But there are some men who aren't going to change no matter how much you educate them. It is true that in some cultures women run around topless and the men don't even notice, but those are cultures where men saw topless women all the time growing up so it's no big deal - unless all women are going to go around topless for a few decades until men get used to it, in our culture cleavage is always going to attract attention.

Women should be able to wear whatever they want without judgment. I'm not disputing that at all. But there are men who should be able to stop themselves from gawking and staring, but won't. Don't change your behavior because of them, but know that a lot of them aren't going to change their behavior either. That's just reality.

[Give It Time]

If modesty/hyper sexuality is a cultural construct then what would it take to change the culture? Exposure and social change. This is why all of my female exmo friends have said they allow their kids to see them naked so they can see/view the human form as nonsexual. Also why I wear a bikini swimming with my kids, let them see anatomy books, have nude artwork/books in our home: to normalize the human body.

Women go topless in many countries and the men somehow learn how to control themselves, and the reason is: cultural norms.

I can't change Utah (or America) alone, but I can try to move a few cups of dirt from the mountain.

Beauty Redefined https://beautyredefined.org/guys-guide- ... t-objects/ is a great LDS resource for combatting rape culture.

Thank you. I only had time to read the essay, but it's excellent. It does look like a great resource.

[MoPag]

We know you are not sexist NBI. Thank you for adding your perspective.

But...men have a problem. At least some of them. Show a lot of cleavage and some men - not all, but some - are going to sneak a peek and maybe stare. Even nice guys who respect women are going to try to get a look.

To me, that's not the problem. Looking, or having and instinctual reaction to seeing another person is not a problem. It's normal. It's where you go from that point that matters. This is the point where ideally a guy would just move on with his life. "Oh she has nice boobs, now I'm going to move on with my life."

Not to mention the creeper guys you are going to suddenly find standing next to you when there are plenty of other places to stand, finding excuses to be around you, etc.

This is where we have a problem. Creeper Guy in your example has seen Cleavage Girl and THINKS HE HAS A RIGHT TO HER BODY And not necessarily in the sense that he thinks he can rape her. But he sees himself as an entitled being that is going to act on a lesser being. He demonstrates this by hovering closer and invading her personal space. Other creeper guys might say things like "nice tits." When TBMs creepers tell her to go put more clothes on, they are demonstrating that they think they have a right to her body, which they do not.

So to sum up, having an instinctual human reaction does not make you bad, it makes you human. It is where you go from there that counts.

[trophywife26.2]

I run a real risk of being misunderstood here, so please believe me when I say that I am not sexist and am certainly not trying to be demeaning to women. I certainly agree that women shouldn't feel like they have to dress modestly because men can't control themselves. It's a messed up way of thinking, that because men have a problem women have to be the ones who adjust their behavior.

But...men have a problem. At least some of them. Show a lot of cleavage and some men - not all, but some - are going to sneak a peek and maybe stare. Even nice guys who respect women are going to try to get a look. Not to mention the creeper guys you are going to suddenly find standing next to you when there are plenty of other places to stand, finding excuses to be around you, etc.

That doesn't mean women should be forced to dress "modestly" because some men can't control themselves. But there are some men who aren't going to change no matter how much you educate them. It is true that in some cultures women run around topless and the men don't even notice, but those are cultures where men saw topless women all the time growing up so it's no big deal - unless all women are going to go around topless for a few decades until men get used to it, in our culture cleavage is always going to attract attention.

Women should be able to wear whatever they want without judgment. I'm not disputing that at all. But there are men who should be able to stop themselves from gawking and staring, but won't. Don't change your behavior because of them, but know that a lot of them aren't going to change their behavior either. That's just reality.

We agree on many things, but disagree on others. I mentioned that my feminist minded friends focus on normalizing the human form with their children (future generations) not creepy men on the street. So we are in agreement there it takes time to change.

I disagree that even nice guys who respect women are going to take a look though. Maybe those guys aren't so nice. Maybe they don't respect women as much as they think they do. I'm not saying they are criminal. I'm not saying they are rapists. I am saying if they can't stop themselves from looking at boobs, maybe they have an issue with sexual repression and/or objectification. That doesn't mean they should be dismissed or labeled as a bad person, it just means they have been programmed by their culture as to what the norms are. In American cultural it is "normal" for men to objectify women. If someone reading this finds these words upsetting, maybe take a look at the reason why. Cognitive Dissonance. We are most likely all familiar with that here. You may want to hold the belief, "I respect women," and the belief, "I like to look at strange women's boobs whenever I get the chance" in your mind as coexisting within your identity. If what I am saying is valid, now it becomes harder to hold those beliefs without dismissing what I have said. If what I have said is valid, then the, "I respect women," belief may have dimmer light than you once believed. That feeling (cognitive dissonance) may make you want to dismiss what I say.

No matter what you think of my points, I think the thing I had a hard time reading in your post Not Buying It, is for me, it reads as if there is no hope for change. America will just keep objectifying women forever. And there I have to disagree. If that is right, I may as well book a one way ticket to Sweden right now for my daughter and I so we can be equal. I have to keep believing that this can change. I have to keep fighting for it to change, because if I don't, then I live a life of objectification and no hope. That is something I cannot do. The current political climate is grim for women, but I HAVE to believe that it can change. That it will change.

[trophywife26.2]

I am sorry Linked for high jacking your post. I will not post on this thread anymore, but I will start a new post if I want to keep discussing rape culture/modesty issues.

[trophywife26.2]

To actually address the OP, that lesson sounds frustrating. I feel that modesty issues overall are actually about controlling women and men by controlling their sexuality. Either by shaming their form and very existence (women) or teaching men they are sinful and uncontrollable as they exist (men). I disagree with both of those ideas. These teachings ultimately hurt men and women both and serve to give power to others (possibly an organization like a church or government) over us.

I hope that is a more fair equal assessment. If modesty is truly about power then it makes sense for a power seeker to attempt to teach those concepts to young children.

That is not a charitable interpretation of the church though. It is possible that those who seek that power that can be gained by modesty teachings do it in a way that they believe they are lead by God or that it is for our good. The world is full of grey after all.