"Immodest" Dance Outfits: Much Ado About Nothing?

[Janice]

It isn't a cultural thing, but a spiritual thing

I believe it is both.

My four years of high school were split two in Saudi Arabia and two in Spain. In Saudi my mother, sisters and I could not legally step outside in western clothing or we would risk being arrested. In Spain, we would go the beach and not see a single female (including us and other LDS Church members) who was wearing a top.

I think those who say modesty is not cultural have not experienced other cultures. But I do agree, rameumptom, that what it boils down to is this:

Does God approve of how I am dressed/undressed?

Janice

Edited January 30, 2009 by Janice

[pam]

Furthermore, if we wear items that are to show off our class then we are immodest. Isaiah did not mention anything about people showing off too much skin -- besides, he ministered in the nude for a period of time (check out Chapter 20).

Okay so I went to Isiah Chapter 20 verse 2.

2 At the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.

In going to the foot note it states: IE without an upper garment, like a slave or exile.

So if we are going to use scriptures to prove a point....read all the footnotes.

Edited January 30, 2009 by pam

[Wingnut]

Personally, I think these scriptures are entirely irrelevant to this discussion. We are taught that the teaching and instruction of a living prophet supersedes that of a dead one. The living prophets has admonished us to cover ourselves and dress modestly. The times are also much different than they were when Isaiah walked the earth.

[Fiannan]

Okay so I went to Isiah Chapter 20 verse 2.

2 At the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.

In going to the foot note it states: IE without an upper garment, like a slave or exile.

So if we are going to use scriptures to prove a point....read all the footnotes.

Believe me, when I checked on this I did quite a bit of research. It seems most Biblical historians dealing with this topic take it literally since the point was to what happens when you are taken captive. It was common practice in ancient times (and even in modern times by the US military -- as in WW2) to strip a prisoner naked to make sure they aren't hiding weapons. In ancient times the prisoners were often not allowed to get dressed again which explains why a reference in chapter 20 to exposed behinds is used.

[pam]

Okay maybe in April we will get a statement from President Monson that it's wrong to view nudity or dress inappropriate....except in places where it appears to be the norm and it is not viewed as offensive.

[john doe]

I think those scriptures and your examples are certainly at the core of what I'd call immodesty. When I first found out what CTR rings were, I was shocked (really) at how immodest most (if not all) of them are.

Think about a modest home, a modest car, a modest lifestyle. Of modest means. A modest diet.

IMHO, for some people, modesty has been drastically reduced to a small portion (modest portion?) of its real meaning.

Uhhhhhh, what? CTR rings, the little trinkets that cost 5 cents each that they give to the kids in Primary are immodest? How so?

[john doe]

Okay maybe in April we will get a statement from President Monson that it's wrong to view nudity or dress inappropriate....except in places where it appears to be the norm and it is not viewed as offensive.

You mean, like on the internet?

[Guest ceeboo]

A very interesting thread !!!!

I have had serious struggles ( and continue to ) with this topic.

My daughter ( 14 now ) has competed in dance for several years now ( she absolutly loves it and to be honest she is very talented ). She has made the High School Varsity dance team and is also very active in a traveling dance studio.

I have been to SEVERAL competitions, both local and Nationals out of State.

I still have not come to a place of " peace " and continue to struggle on this but thought I would offer my observations for what they might be worth.

Warning : THE FOLLWING INFORMATION COMES FROM A VERY PROTECTIVE DADDY !!!!

T be blunt, if I may, I have been UTTERLY SHOCKED at the " outfit " choices of MANY MANY teams and solo's that I have seen over the last few years. I have no idea of what the answers are but I can tell you that IMHO, these young maturing ladies are dressed VERY PROVOCATIVE and adds nothing to the dance performance. In addition, I often wonder what the adult leaders and mentors( Teachers/Parents/) of these teen age girls are thinking and MORE IMPORTANTLY WHAT THEY MAY BE TEACHING THESE LADIES.

Sometimes I wonder if I am watching a dance competion or a " who is the sexiest teen " competition :(

I have and continue to struggle with this a great deal!!!

Peace,

Ceeboo

Peace,

Ceeboo

[Elgama]

Warning : THE FOLLWING INFORMATION COMES FROM A VERY PROTECTIVE DADDY !!!!

T be blunt, if I may, I have been UTTERLY SHOCKED at the " outfit " choices of MANY MANY teams and solo's that I have seen over the last few years. I have no idea of what the answers are but I can tell you that IMHO, these young maturing ladies are dressed VERY PROVOCATIVE and adds nothing to the dance performance. In addition, I often wonder what the adult leaders and mentors( Teachers/Parents/) of these teen age girls are thinking and MORE IMPORTANTLY WHAT THEY MAY BE TEACHING THESE LADIES.

Sometimes I wonder if I am watching a dance competion or a " who is the sexiest teen " competition :(

I have and continue to struggle with this a great deal!!!

Peace,

Ceeboo

That is exactly how I felt watching that ballroom dancing Ceeboo and I was a hormonal teenaged girl and not a protective parent then lol In fact I was watching an old CSI the other night and saw something that looked very like one of the outfits, it was a naked woman with flouresant (sp??) paint on her body, lapdancing.

I am entirely with you on this one.

-Charley

[Connie]

From the Old Testament institute manual:

"With the great importance attached to the clothing in the East, where the feelings upon this point are peculiarly sensitive and modest, a person was looked upon as stripped and naked if he had only taken off his upper garment. What Isaiah was directed to do, therefore, was simply opposed to common custom, and not to moral decency. He was to lay aside the dress of a mourner and preacher of repentance, and to have nothing on but his tunic; and in this, as well as barefooted, he was to show himself in public." (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 7:1:372)

Isaiah 20:3-4

"And the Lord said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;

So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt."

Please note the italicized word their, which i did not add, it's right in my Bible. I read this as "this will happen to you, only it will be worse 'cause you won't even have a tunic." I suppose i could be wrong, but i think that is what is being implied in these verses.

[pam]

I went and found that as well when I wanted to research this a bit more.

[ruthiechan]

A very interesting thread !!!!

I have had serious struggles ( and continue to ) with this topic.

My daughter ( 14 now ) has competed in dance for several years now ( she absolutly loves it and to be honest she is very talented ). She has made the High School Varsity dance team and is also very active in a traveling dance studio.

I have been to SEVERAL competitions, both local and Nationals out of State.

I still have not come to a place of " peace " and continue to struggle on this but thought I would offer my observations for what they might be worth.

Warning : THE FOLLWING INFORMATION COMES FROM A VERY PROTECTIVE DADDY !!!!

T be blunt, if I may, I have been UTTERLY SHOCKED at the " outfit " choices of MANY MANY teams and solo's that I have seen over the last few years. I have no idea of what the answers are but I can tell you that IMHO, these young maturing ladies are dressed VERY PROVOCATIVE and adds nothing to the dance performance. In addition, I often wonder what the adult leaders and mentors( Teachers/Parents/) of these teen age girls are thinking and MORE IMPORTANTLY WHAT THEY MAY BE TEACHING THESE LADIES.

Sometimes I wonder if I am watching a dance competion or a " who is the sexiest teen " competition :(

I have and continue to struggle with this a great deal!!!

Peace,

Ceeboo

And this is why I feel that Janice's friend is not completely bonkers. Swift to judge on the matter, but she does have valid concerns.

It is possible to have fairly modest leotards. Too much exposed back, spaghetti strap sleeves, low collar line, and with a bikini line in the crotch area to show more leg and hip, are NOT necessary in a leotard.

I wish people understood that you can still dress beautifully while being modest!

[MorningStar]

Okay so I went to Isiah Chapter 20 verse 2.

2 At the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.

In going to the foot note it states: IE without an upper garment, like a slave or exile.

So if we are going to use scriptures to prove a point....read all the footnotes.

Believe me, when I checked on this I did quite a bit of research. It seems most Biblical historians dealing with this topic take it literally since the point was to what happens when you are taken captive. It was common practice in ancient times (and even in modern times by the US military -- as in WW2) to strip a prisoner naked to make sure they aren't hiding weapons. In ancient times the prisoners were often not allowed to get dressed again which explains why a reference in chapter 20 to exposed behinds is used.

First of all, you're incorrect. Second, you're contradicting LDS official sources. Third, we live in a different day and age that doesn't allow for a lot of things people did in the Bible.

Would you seriously tell President Monson that he is wrong about the importance of modesty if he were here talking to us?

[Guest ceeboo]

And this is why I feel that Janice's friend is not completely bonkers. Swift to judge on the matter, but she does have valid concerns.

It is possible to have fairly modest leotards. Too much exposed back, spaghetti strap sleeves, low collar line, and with a bikini line in the crotch area to show more leg and hip, are NOT necessary in a leotard.

I wish people understood that you can still dress beautifully while being modest!

Hi ruthiechan :)

Completly bonkers, I agree that she is not. I wish I could have seen what was ahead. I am not saying I would have done anything different, I am simply saying I might have been more aware and possibly more prepared ( Whatever that means ).

I wish your description of " todays dancers " was accurate, sadly, IMHO, what I have seen has been MUCH MUCH worse.

This is just one example, of many, as to why Ceeboo is so very concerned with our society and how said society continues to lower the bar. It is also my opinion that we ( this country as well as the world ) continues to move further and further away from God.

Just my take of course, but I often wonder if there are reasons we ( America ) are in the current state we find ourselves in. SCARY TO ME TO SAY THE LEAST!!!!

Peace,

Ceeboo

[Maxel]

T be blunt, if I may, I have been UTTERLY SHOCKED at the " outfit " choices of MANY MANY teams and solo's that I have seen over the last few years. I have no idea of what the answers are but I can tell you that IMHO, these young maturing ladies are dressed VERY PROVOCATIVE and adds nothing to the dance performance. In addition, I often wonder what the adult leaders and mentors( Teachers/Parents/) of these teen age girls are thinking and MORE IMPORTANTLY WHAT THEY MAY BE TEACHING THESE LADIES.

Sometimes I wonder if I am watching a dance competion or a " who is the sexiest teen " competition

Ceeboo, my friend, you are on the money 110% (IMHO).

Being active in the theater, I've spent a lot of time struggling against the blatant immodesty present in modern 'art'. I've come to the conclusion that we as a society have become so hardened (on a general scale) as to the things of God that we can't feel emotions at the same level as previous generations were. Because of that, art has to go to greater lengths in the wrong direction to generate an emotional 'rise' out of the audience.

I look at the most of comedians featured on Comedy Central, and I think to myself, 'These guys aren't funny; they're just bigoted, profane, or overly sexual'. In these examples, the art of comedy has been warped and twisted by its practitioners until it barely resembles what it used to. C.S. Lewis talked about the different causes for laughter: one was Joy (the feeling of God in one's life), one was good humor, and one was uncomfortable laughter due to inappropriateness. It seems that today's society has become so accustomed to the last kind of laughter that we think it's the healthy, normal kind. In actuality, it's the unhealthy, abnormal kind.

Extrapolate that idea into any art form, and you've got the facts about a lot of modern art productions. As you said, the art of dance has been reduced to a contest of sexuality, with the winners often being mediocre (at best). I've heard it called 'shock entertainment'- a form of entertainment that doesn't activate the mind or inner emotions, but forces jarring images, sounds, and ideas onto the audience to create an emotional response. Pornography and overtly gory horror films fall into this category.

Edited January 31, 2009 by Maxel

[Elgama]

Hi ruthiechan :)

Completly bonkers, I agree that she is not. I wish I could have seen what was ahead. I am not saying I would have done anything different, I am simply saying I might have been more aware and possibly more prepared ( Whatever that means ).

o

This why I agree with you for a beginner class of preteen dances to start with that level of immodesty is unnecessary. Even a leotard is not necessary the dances could be taught in leggings and tshirt etc Its going to be a long time for most 6 or 7 year olds before they have any graceful curves to show anyway

-Charley

[john doe]

I don't have a problem with the tights and leotards. Dance, to me, is art, and the human form is a beautiful thing to watch if done in a tasteful way. What I object to is the dance studio which teaches their 10 year-old students dance moves which would be more appropriate in a strip club. Having a relative who owns a dance studio, and having been to few performances where other, more 'progressive' studios have performed as well, it shocks me that a parent would not see anything wrong with little Susie performing pelvic thrusts simulating sexual movements in public. Or even performing dances to music which is totally inappropriate to their age. I also object to it when junior high school kids are taught that it is acceptable to perform the Eartha Kitt version of 'Santa Baby' in their music class at school, with both the words and accompanying movements. Kids don't need to be taught that 12 year-olds should act like sluts.

[Wingnut]

I look at the most of comedians featured on Comedy Central, and I think to myself, 'These guys' aren't funny; they're just bigoted, profane, or overly sexual'.

That's why I love Brian Regan.

This why I agree with you for a beginner class of preteen dances to start with that level of immodesty is unnecessary. Even a leotard is not necessary the dances could be taught in leggings and tshirt etc Its going to be a long time for most 6 or 7 year olds before they have any graceful curves to show anyway

I think to some extent the leotard is essential to the art. Shorts and a t-shirt do not allow an instructor to see the precision that is so often required in many forms of dance. The precision is part of what makes the dance so beautiful, and without the form-fitting clothing, it cannot be seen. If a dancer plans to "make it big" or continue with dance in any way as she gets older, she needs to start working on this precision at a young age, not waiting until has curves.

I'm not saying bare it all (please view my other posts in this thread, if that's how anyone takes this), but I do see the virtue of the form-fitting leotard for dance classes.

Edited January 31, 2009 by Wingnut

[leming6]

This thread has been very interesting to read. I feel that you should teach modesty and expect your kids to dress modestly and act modestly. There are certain times where it is neccesary to wear uniforms for something that may not be able to cover garments, like dancing and sports. I was told in the temple this was okay. So I am willing to let my children participate in these activities while wearing their costumes, leotards, or uniforms for the appropriate activity as long as they don't walk around like that. While not participating, they are not allowed to wear anything that is immodest. I guess I figure if BYU allows their cheerleaders and volleyball players to where the uniform during the activity it should be okay for us and our children.

[pam]

I don't have a problem with the tights and leotards. Dance, to me, is art, and the human form is a beautiful thing to watch if done in a tasteful way. What I object to is the dance studio which teaches their 10 year-old students dance moves which would be more appropriate in a strip club. Having a relative who owns a dance studio, and having been to few performances where other, more 'progressive' studios have performed as well, it shocks me that a parent would not see anything wrong with little Susie performing pelvic thrusts simulating sexual movements in public. Or even performing dances to music which is totally inappropriate to their age. I also object to it when junior high school kids are taught that it is acceptable to perform the Eartha Kitt version of 'Santa Baby' in their music class at school, with both the words and accompanying movements. Kids don't need to be taught that 12 year-olds should act like sluts.

Just as a side note to JD's comment. The dance studio he refers to that a relative owns prides itself on modest costumes. In fact, that's one of the reasons it has become as successful as it is. Parents like the fact that their kids can perform in costumes that are modest. And yes they wear leotards and tights as well. But dance costumes for performances are modest.

Also another side note: This year in Salt Lake City's annual Festival of Trees which is a fundraiser for Primary Children's Hospital...one of the rules for the performers that performed: They could NOT use the music JD talks about.."Santa Baby" because of it's suggestiveness.

[MarginOfError]

From the Old Testament institute manual:

"With the great importance attached to the clothing in the East, where the feelings upon this point are peculiarly sensitive and modest, a person was looked upon as stripped and naked if he had only taken off his upper garment. What Isaiah was directed to do, therefore, was simply opposed to common custom, and not to moral decency. He was to lay aside the dress of a mourner and preacher of repentance, and to have nothing on but his tunic; and in this, as well as barefooted, he was to show himself in public." (Keil and Delitzsch, Commentary, 7:1:372)

Isaiah 20:3-4

"And the Lord said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;

So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt."

Please note the italicized word their, which i did not add, it's right in my Bible. I read this as "this will happen to you, only it will be worse 'cause you won't even have a tunic." I suppose i could be wrong, but i think that is what is being implied in these verses.

Be careful when reading the italics in the KJV Bible. They aren’t actually emphasized words. Those were words that were added by the translators to make the text more understandable/readable. Translation is an imperfect science, and to make a translation that carries all the same meaning often requires adding words or phrases to the literal translation.

For instance, if I remember correctly, Hebrew and Greek do not use articles (words like, the, a, an, etc). When translating from these languages into English, the articles have to be added to the translation, with the proper article being inferred from the text. When the KJV was translated, the additional words the translators gave were put in italics to make it clear that these were additional words not found in the literal translation.

Check these sites out for verification

Authorized King James Version - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (search for italics)

By Common Consent KJV Italics

Should the italicized words in the KJV be removed?

Okay so I went to Isiah Chapter 20 verse 2.

2 At the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.

In going to the foot note it states: IE without an upper garment, like a slave or exile.

So if we are going to use scriptures to prove a point....read all the footnotes.

Believe me, when I checked on this I did quite a bit of research. It seems most Biblical historians dealing with this topic take it literally since the point was to what happens when you are taken captive. It was common practice in ancient times (and even in modern times by the US military -- as in WW2) to strip a prisoner naked to make sure they aren't hiding weapons. In ancient times the prisoners were often not allowed to get dressed again which explains why a reference in chapter 20 to exposed behinds is used.

Fiannan, is there any chance you could tell us what resources you were reading that state that Isaiah was literally naked?

[pam]

MOE I think Connie made a good point though in showing that Isaiah wasn't literally naked. With or without the italics of the word "their."

[Maxel]

That's why I love Brian Regan.

Brian Regan ftw! I was thinking whether to cite him as a shining example of real comedy, but decided to keep it short'n'sweet.

From one Regan fan to another, thank you for keeping his good name out of the mud.

[Connie]

Thanks for the info, MOE! It was very interesting (what exactly is a 'Nacler?). I didn't know all that. But that doesn't surprise me as there is lots and Tons and WAY TOO MUCH that i don't know.

I still think the use of "their" is an important clarification, "their" meaning Egyptians and Ethiopians instead of his (Isaiah's). But even if i completely take that word out i think i would still read it the same. What do you think, MOE?

[Connie]

I agree with you, Wingnut, these things add very little to the topic. In my opinion, saying things like "Isaiah preached in the nude" or "the apostles fished in the nude" etc., are merely thrown out for shock effect.