Advice on nonconformity

[Moksha]

I was glancing a closed thread that asked which of two prom dresses they should get. To me, both dresses looked great. The other respondents thought that both were too immodest for Mormons.

So, am I missing the boat? Is it because I was not BIC?

Sometimes I suspect that I am in Utah but not of Utah, if you know what I mean.

Advice?

http://www.lds.net/forums/general-discussion/23560-prom-dress-should-i-wear.html

[Yates]

the church guidelines are that you should not wear what you could not wear if you were wearing temple garments. Hope this helps

[EruditioSalvatus]

Huh, I don't see a problem with 'em. I used to do prom photography and currently work in a fashion store so I've seen much worse.

You're not missing the boat, 'acceptable modesty' is a social moray that varies greatly not only from region to region but person to person.

[beefche]

It's likely that both dresses show more cleavage than the pictures show. Typically, sleeveless and barely there sleeves hang on the girl by her ya-ya's. Which means the dress will slip all the time...which means the girl will have to adjust it all the time....which means teen boys will have their eyes and minds directed to the girl's ya-ya's all the time....heck, even without directing their eyes there, the boys would notice.

The dresses are nice....if my daughter wanted to wear them, I would have her try them on, have her jump around in it to see how much it'll fall and how much cleavage would be shown. If it's too much--she can find another dress. If I find it appropriate, then we will find a shrug or sweater to wear around her shoulders (and which she WILL not remove even when it's steamy--the price women pay to look nice).

I found that the garment idea was good for me. I never had to adjust to garments much because the majority of my clothes already were garment ready. My only problem were my shorts--and they weren't short shorts--just shorter than garment bottoms. If you raise children with the expectation that they will wear garments with their clothes, you don't have as much a fight with them.

[Wingnut]

Never lower your dress standards for any occasion. Doing so sends the message that you are using your body to get attention and approval and that modesty is important only when it is convenient.

Immodest clothing includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, shirts that do not cover the stomach,

and other revealing attire. Young women should wear clothing that covers the shoulder and avoid clothing that is low-cut in the front or the back or revealing in any other manner. Young men should also maintain modesty in their appearance. All should avoid extremes in clothing, appearance, and hairstyle. Always be neat and clean and avoid being sloppy or inappropriately casual in dress, grooming, and manners. Ask yourself, “Would I feel comfortable with my appearance if I were

in the Lord’s presence?”

Someday you will receive your endowment in the temple. Your dress and behavior should help you prepare for that sacred time.

http://www.lds.org/youthresources/pdf/ForStrengYouth36550.pdf

[NeuroTypical]

Yeah, we're trying to raise our girls with the notion that if it won't cover the eventual garment that we hope they eventually choose to wear, ya shouldn't wear it.

It's a modesty thing, and a "let's make the adjustment to endowed life as easy as possible" thing. It might be a Utah culture thing too, but I despise much of Utah culture and fled to Colorado many years ago.

LM

Edited July 15, 2009 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[Wingnut]

It might be a Utah culture thing too...

I saw more immodest formal gowns in my one year at BYU than I saw in my six years in the youth program in my non-Utah wards.

[ryanh]

I’m not sure I follow the connection between the tile “nonconformity” and the body of the post. Is dress choice for you all about the issue of conformity vs nonconformity? Are there not other factors to consider when determining what dress is appropriate for onself?

Or are you actually asking about modesty factors and what is appropriate?

which means teen boys will have their eyes and minds directed to the girl's ya-ya's all the time....heck, even without directing their eyes there, the boys would notice.

Yes, us pigs don’t need a dress, or adjustments of said dress to draw attention to “ya-ya’s”. It comes all too natural. Sad, but true.

[beefche]

ryan, I don't think men are pigs for noticing women's bounties. I think it is hard wired into the male gender's identity and it certainly doesn't help when girls and women flash it every chance they get. I think women have just as much responsibility (maybe a little more) to be congnizant of this and dress appropriately to help men control their thoughts.

[ryanh]

When my early-teen son recently had visited some inappropriate webpages, and we had a long talk about that, I told him something that has crossed my mind many a time before. When I meet HF, one of the first questions I want to ask is why was the drive for some of us men hard wired to be so strong? It wouldn't have taken 1/2 so much to drive for us to seek a mate and stay with her. LOL Yes, it is hard wired, and I trust it all fits nicely into HF's plan even if I can't understand it fully.

Re the thought about a woman's responsibility: my thought is that when she is single she has greater responsibilities to herself to not attract the wrong type. I've seen friends end up in misery because of their beauty - they attracted the most aggressive guys, which weren't always the best for long-term relationships, nor did those guys have the eternities on their mind!

Edited July 15, 2009 by ryanh
missed a word

[Moksha]

I guess I don't see these two dresses as particularly titillating (no pun intended - honest). I do indeed see Beefche's point about them possibly being more revealing from alternate angles. That part about bouncing up and down to see what falls out seems very important. From listening to the Letterman and Leno shows, I know some women even have to use tape to keep these unfortunate slippages from happening.

These dresses look like something from a current fashion magazine. Times change. You never had to worry about fashions like these in Victorian times. Women covered from wrists to ankles. Even with this covering, I bet the boy's thoughts remained on what was underneath! Some things never change, even if fashion is continually changing.

I had never thought about the urge to have daughters trained to be future garment wearers. Do you keep them from wearing shorts in the summer too? That doesn't happen in my ward with the boy's or the girls. Do you feel that girl's need a bit more indoctrination? Seems the boys would need that too with all that raised bar stuff.

Hearing this usage of the term ya-yas adds new mealing to that Patti Labelle song, Lady Marmalade.

:)

.

[pam]

Do you keep them from wearing shorts in the summer too?

No but I have taught my daughter about appropriate length of shorts as well.

[beefche]

Boys are a little easier because the only problem with fashion for them seems to be either not wearing a shirt or having their pants so low that their undies show. That's easily taken care of (besides the smack on the head)--wear a shirt and wear pants that fit or use a belt.

Girls are more difficult because the fashion is so revealing. Just trying to find appropriate clothing for girls is a challenge. When I shop for my friend's teen girls for a present--it's hard.

There are clothes out there for teens to wear that are modest. It's just you have to be creative (if the straps are spaghetti--meaning thin--then wearning a shirt over it or something helps). Or you have to look long and hard. But a girl can be dressed modestly and fashionably.

[Wingnut]

Do you keep them from wearing shorts in the summer too?

No. You teach them to wear knee-length shorts.

There are clothes out there for teens to wear that are modest. It's just you have to be creative (if the straps are spaghetti--meaning thin--then wearning a shirt over it or something helps). Or you have to look long and hard. But a girl can be dressed modestly and fashionably.

A friend in my ward has a business that sells "t-lets" to go under slightly-less-than-modest shirts. You know how sometimes you find a v-neck or scoop neck shirt that's great, except that it's too deep? Wearing a tank top can just add extra heat with the layers, but a t-let gives you the modesty you need up top while keeping you cool because it only goes to just below your bust. I haven't gotten any yet, but I really need to, especially with the humidity where I live. (I don't think I'm allowed to link to the site here because it's promoting a business, but if you want the website, PM/email me. Or if I'm allowed to post it here, can a mod please let me know?)

[pam]

Wingers you can post the link under LDS resources weblinks etc.

[Dravin]

Unless I am misunderstanding things it's okay to provide a link in a situation like you're doing, helping another member find a product. The problem is when you stand to gain financially from such a situation/you are using the board as advertising (beyond the rules already set in place such as links in signatures and the like).

So you are free to link in situations like this, I did in the thread to link to a coffee substitute for somebody on Amazon. So by my Modly authority I give you permission, if I've misread things I'll take the heat.

[Misshalfway]

I guess I don't see these two dresses as particularly titillating (no pun intended - honest). I do indeed see Beefche's point about them possibly being more revealing from alternate angles. That part about bouncing up and down to see what falls out seems very important. From listening to the Letterman and Leno shows, I know some women even have to use tape to keep these unfortunate slippages from happening.

These dresses look like something from a current fashion magazine. Times change. You never had to worry about fashions like these in Victorian times. Women covered from wrists to ankles. Even with this covering, I bet the boy's thoughts remained on what was underneath! Some things never change, even if fashion is continually changing.

I had never thought about the urge to have daughters trained to be future garment wearers. Do you keep them from wearing shorts in the summer too? That doesn't happen in my ward with the boy's or the girls. Do you feel that girl's need a bit more indoctrination? Seems the boys would need that too with all that raised bar stuff.

Hearing this usage of the term ya-yas adds new mealing to that Patti Labelle song, Lady Marmalade.

:)

.

As an LDS woman (born and raised), I can tell you that modesty is taught in the church in the YW's program. We are taught about how our clothes should fit and cover our bodies. Seeing the immodesty of these two dresses is a no brainer for most faithful LDS families.

And in my experience, the HG really does guide my purchases as I shop for my girls.

I think the boys are taught to control the dragon within, while the girls are taught not to wake that dragon up!

[Dravin]

I think the boys are taught to control the dragon within, while the girls are taught not to wake that dragon up!

There is some of that, but as a former (or current boy depending on how you parse things and who you ask) the stress was mostly on not being a slob and being presentable as standard men's/boy's fashion doesn't trend towards the revealing as girl's/women's does. If the current trend for boy's fashion was sprayed on or otherwise revealing clothing its probably get more mention. Of course things may be different now, I've not been in Young Men's in a while.

We were taught to keep a handle on our thoughts, but that was a chastity lesson rather than a modesty one (connections between the two aside).

Edited July 15, 2009 by Dravin

[Misshalfway]

There is some of that, but as a former (or current boy depending on how you parse things and who you ask) the stress was mostly on not being a slob and being presentable as standard men's/boy's fashion doesn't trend towards the revealing as girl's/women's does. If the current trend for boy's fashion was sprayed on or otherwise revealing clothing its probably get more mention. Of course things may be different now, I've not been in Young Men's in a while.

I think the boys are taught to keep their shirts on and their pants up!!

Which reminds me.....I was walking in the mall the other day and there is this teen whose pants were belted BELOW his bum. I wanted to yank 'em up and say "didn't you mother ever teach you what a belt was for??"

[beefche]

I think the boys are taught to keep their shirts on and their pants up!!

Which reminds me.....I was walking in the mall the other day and there is this teen whose pants were belted BELOW his bum. I wanted to yank 'em up and say "didn't you mother ever teach you what a belt was for??"

Ha! My parents would have shown me what that belt was for....right across the backside.

[Dravin]

I think the boys are taught to keep their shirts on and their pants up!!

My brother has that issue, drives my mother nuts. What even more interesting is they have pants out there with false boxers, so you can wear them higher, sport the look but not actually be showing your undies.

[Misshalfway]

K....this is gross....but in high school there was this boy who wore his torn up blue jeans to school WITHOUT his boxers and I will let your imagination figure out where the holes were. GROSS!

[pam]

K....this is gross....but in high school there was this boy who wore his torn up blue jeans to school WITHOUT his boxers and I will let your imagination figure out where the holes were. GROSS!

EWWWWWWWW

[pam]

Unless I am misunderstanding things it's okay to provide a link in a situation like you're doing, helping another member find a product. The problem is when you stand to gain financially from such a situation/you are using the board as advertising (beyond the rules already set in place such as links in signatures and the like).

So you are free to link in situations like this, I did in the thread to link to a coffee substitute for somebody on Amazon. So by my Modly authority I give you permission, if I've misread things I'll take the heat.

I undeleted it Dravin as I agree with you.

[Elgama]

Ok my view is the first one the overall appearance is more modest and appropriate than the bottom one. BUT for me both are too 'old' for a teen and that is what makes them inappropriate and immodest

For someone pre temple I think overall appearance is important - personally when I first got my garments had dresses that covered everything to make them modest but garments kept peeping round the shoulders (they had tshirt type tops and were ankle length), whereas my very low top covered my garments. Overall appearance of my dresses was incredibly modest but garment incompatible, Overall appeance of my knee length skirt and low top was lot less modest but garment compatible.

I want my daughter to choose her clothes because they are modest rather than cover the garments