Swimsuits, Dresses, Garments, and Modesty

[ruthiechan]

And that's the question that never seems to get answered. What are those "certain activities" where wearing garments is not necessary? Again, what about tennis? Do you really need to take them off when going to the gym? If taking them off at the gym is about sweating, then what about jobs where people sweat profusely? Again, I'm just trying to understand where the line is drawn on all of this.

What is an activity? Are all activities sports?

Hm, situations where garments are not worn.

1: the shower (I've met people who thought we only do sponge baths! Weird!)

2: Sex.

3: A sauna, which is basically a sweaty shower.

4: Swimming. What makes swimming so different from other sports is that the more clothes you have on, and the looser the clothes (since that equals more cloth) the more bogged down you get in the water because cloth holds water, so you can't move smoothly through the water if you have tons of clothes on.

In my opinion, there's little excuse to not wear garments with other sports and exercise activities. The only reason why I do not say there is NO excuse is because unless you're in an all Mormon school we do not have control over our uniforms. I think it's BS that BYU sport uniforms are not designed for the wearing of garments.

Some people may think I'm crazy, thinking of Gymnastics or ice skating, but you know, we have wet suits, we can have something like that for other sports. . .

Edit: to the OP the second dress is nicer looking. Also, you're going to get tons of eye candy at the hotel. In your private time with your wife she can be as scantily clad, or not clad as the case may be or become, as much as, and for as long as, you and she wants!

Edited March 20, 2010 by ruthiechan

[Guest adverdelex]

There are many varieties of swimwear by which you can go fast in the water. Swimmers sported various body and leg suits at the 2000 and 2004 Olympics, culminating with Speedo's LZR Racer in 2008. Speedo claims that this is the fastest suit on the market.

[miztrniceguy]

don't forget to close this one too, Pam!!

[FunkyTown]

So if doing activities that are merely deemed as "fun" is an excuse for taking off our garments, then why wouldn't other fun activities qualify also?

Have you considered that maybe it's none of our business what you take off your garments for?

I have a theory: If I have to wear something that would show the garments(Like swimming, for instance), then I shouldn't wear the garments.

[UrbanFool]

I have never liked swim suits. Just don't like the way it feels on plus you're out in public... to tight and shows to much. It must be at least 18 years since I have worn one. I always wear shorts and a shirt to the beach. More comfortable. I'll leave the tight fitted stuff for the bedroom

You do realize what happens to your shirt after you've gone swimming, right? It molds a lot tighter and transparent than most bathing suits.

[ADoyle90815]

What is an activity? Are all activities sports?

Hm, situations where garments are not worn.

1: the shower (I've met people who thought we only do sponge baths! Weird!)

2: Sex.

3: A sauna, which is basically a sweaty shower.

4: Swimming. What makes swimming so different from other sports is that the more clothes you have on, and the looser the clothes (since that equals more cloth) the more bogged down you get in the water because cloth holds water, so you can't move smoothly through the water if you have tons of clothes on.

In my opinion, there's little excuse to not wear garments with other sports and exercise activities. The only reason why I do not say there is NO excuse is because unless you're in an all Mormon school we do not have control over our uniforms. I think it's BS that BYU sport uniforms are not designed for the wearing of garments.

Some people may think I'm crazy, thinking of Gymnastics or ice skating, but you know, we have wet suits, we can have something like that for other sports. . .

Edit: to the OP the second dress is nicer looking. Also, you're going to get tons of eye candy at the hotel. In your private time with your wife she can be as scantily clad, or not clad as the case may be or become, as much as, and for as long as, you and she wants!

I guess the BYU cheerleaders would be considered immodest, especially at games. After all, they're wearing extremely short skirts just like other cheerleaders do. I'm not LDS, but I could imagine that garments are longer than those cheerleader uniform skirts.

[jodywolfe1985]

I am probably too late for join the conversation but I can say no problem at all if woman wear swimwear, these days even fat lady wear plus size nzswimwear!

[Rob Osborn]

On 8/9/2010 at 0:31 PM, ADoyle90815 said:

I guess the BYU cheerleaders would be considered immodest, especially at games. After all, they're wearing extremely short skirts just like other cheerleaders do. I'm not LDS, but I could imagine that garments are longer than those cheerleader uniform skirts.

Kind of ironic that they have such a double standard at BYU. Its always bothered me. Not sure why we have to conform to the world.

[paracaidista508]

"Kind of ironic that they have such a double standard at BYU. Its always bothered me. Not sure why we have to conform to the world."

 

yes that is a double standard...of course watching the cheerleaders is fun so I guess it is ok.

 

[paracaidista508]

Re bathing suits...we had a ward swim party where we had a couple teen girls and a mom show up in bikinis. That was all fine and dandy till another sister in her late 30s was there in an extremely modest one piece and all I can say is all eyes were on  her. Oh my.

I'm sure no one forgot that sight. Made Victoria secret models look pitiful.

Good thingame she was in a one piece or the women would have been checking her out too..lol

 

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

Kind of ironic that they have such a double standard at BYU. Its always bothered me. Not sure why we have to conform to the world.

Sports wear is designed for efficiency.  The same reason the BYU cheerleaders wear the outfits they wear is the same reason why the BYU football team wear the uniform they wear and the same reason why the track team wear the outfits they wear.

For example:  The BYU swim team wears this or they won't have a chance at winning.  Of course, the BYU swim team allows Mormons to compete.

These 2 women were married at the temple while working as professional athletes wearing non-garment-friendly dancer outfits everyday:

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by anatess2

[The Folk Prophet]

4 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Sports wear is designed for efficiency.  The same reason the BYU cheerleaders wear the outfits they wear is the same reason why the BYU football team wear the uniform they wear and the same reason why the track team wear the outfits they wear.

These 2 women were married at the temple while working as professional athletes wearing non-garment-friendly dancer outfits everyday:

 

IMO, these two women and the outfits they wear are in no way representative of what is and is not appropriate for temple endowed LDS women.

[anatess2]

34 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

IMO, these two women and the outfits they wear are in no way representative of what is and is not appropriate for temple endowed LDS women.

And these endowed LDS women's work outfit too?

So you're saying, endowed LDS members should not choose professions such as these?

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by anatess2

[The Folk Prophet]

22 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

So you're saying, endowed LDS members should not choose professions such as these?

Did I say that?

[anatess2]

10 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Did I say that?

That's what I got out of this statement as a response to my post on BYU cheerleaders.

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

IMO, these two women and the outfits they wear are in no way representative of what is and is not appropriate for temple endowed LDS women.

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by anatess2

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

Sports wear is designed for efficiency.  The same reason the BYU cheerleaders wear the outfits they wear is the same reason why the BYU football team wear the uniform they wear and the same reason why the track team wear the outfits they wear.

For example:  The BYU swim team wears this or they won't have a chance at winning.  Of course, the BYU swim team allows Mormons to compete.

These 2 women were married at the temple while working as professional athletes wearing non-garment-friendly dancer outfits everyday:

 

I hardly call cheerleading a sport but whatever. The two dancers really prove the point of being a part of the world instead of separate from the world. Are they gonna dance in front of Jesus like that? Doubtful.

[The Folk Prophet]

46 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

That's what I got out of this statement as a response to my post on BYU cheerleaders.

 

Of course I was only referring to the specific example of the two ballroom girls. The rest you're reading into it.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

I hardly call cheerleading a sport but whatever. The two dancers really prove the point of being a part of the world instead of separate from the world. Are they gonna dance in front of Jesus like that? Doubtful.

And therein lies the problem.

Cheerleading... especially in college... IS a sport.  Complete with an International standards governing body, Olympic funding, competitive tournaments, and everything. 

NFL Cheerleading... I'll agree with you on that one.

And about dancing infront of Jesus like that... Are you gonna play football infront of Jesus like that?  Are you gonna go MMA-fighting infront of Jesus like that?  Are you gonna watch TV infront of Jesus like that?  Are you gonna spend all those hours commenting on Mormonhub infront of Jesus like that? Sigh.

Edited April 25, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

54 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Of course I was only referring to the specific example of the two ballroom girls. The rest you're reading into it.

Context, TFP, context.

[Rob Osborn]

12 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

And therein lies the problem.

Cheerleading... especially in college... IS a sport.  Complete with an International standards governing body, Olympic funding, competitive tournaments, and everything. 

NFL Cheerleading... I'll agree with you on that one.

And about dancing infront of Jesus like that... Are you gonna play football infront of Jesus like that?  Are you gonna go MMA-fighting infront of Jesus like that?  Are you gonna watch TV infront of Jesus like that?  Are you gonna spend all those hours commenting on Mormonhub infront of Jesus like that? Sigh.

Good grief. You wont see that dancing at any LDS youth dance let alone in front of God. Need I say more?

Feminists are right with one thing and that being we have sexualized women. So how do we combat that? By following the prophets counsel to wear modest clothing. We live in such a morally degraded society. The forces of evil are always at work, constantly chipping away at morality, pushing the limits until eventually anything will be acceptable in the public, even sexual acts.

[The Folk Prophet]

6 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Context, TFP, context.

It is contextual. Frankly I think you're biased in the matter and therefore blinding yourself a bit. The fact that SOME outfits that are REQUIRED or even highly beneficial for SOME activities (like swimming) does note equate to all outfits for all activities are acceptable and justifiable. The fact that a swimmer wears a swimsuit to swim in does not mean that it's okay for a ballroom dancer to wear a midriff-exposing, cut-to-the-crotch-short dress to perform in. Now where the line for ballroom costumes should be drawn is another matter and another debate. But the idea that because two "Mormon" girls on Dancing with the Stars choose to stretch propriety in regards to "LDS" modesty because of their places there (and this is my real point), does NOT mean that example represents what others should do. There, is, in my opinion, some gray to the matter. There is also common sense. Claiming that because it's reasonable and sensible for a swimmer to wear a swimsuit when swimming does not equate to let's-throw-modesty-out-the-window for all other sports and activities as well. I don't believe it's reasonable to expect ballroom dancers to wear costumes that they could wear garments beneath necessarily (though there is an argument that could be made for such I suppose), but neither do I think it wise, or in any way exercising common sense to determine, accordingly, that bikini style outfits or similar are perfectly acceptable as long as one is a pro ballroom dancer.

Incidentally, one of the actresses on the original Baywatch was active LDS. And I don't think that "job" validated her wearing of skimpy bikinis in episodes of that show either. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Packard). (I won't post a link to googled images of her here for propriety reasons as well...but feel free to so google if you question this in any regard.)

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

Good grief. You wont see that dancing at any LDS youth dance let alone in front of God. Need I say more?

Feminists are right with one thing and that being we have sexualized women. So how do we combat that? By following the prophets counsel to wear modest clothing. We live in such a morally degraded society. The forces of evil are always at work, constantly chipping away at morality, pushing the limits until eventually anything will be acceptable in the public, even sexual acts.

Okay, I'll bite.

So, females should not engage in sports that require non-garment-friendly outfits because "we have sexualized women"?  Do you only apply this to women or do you demand the same of men too?

[anatess2]

31 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

It is contextual. Frankly I think you're biased in the matter and therefore blinding yourself a bit. The fact that SOME outfits that are REQUIRED or even highly beneficial for SOME activities (like swimming) does note equate to all outfits for all activities are acceptable and justifiable. The fact that a swimmer wears a swimsuit to swim in does not mean that it's okay for a ballroom dancer to wear a midriff-exposing, cut-to-the-crotch-short dress to perform in. Now where the line for ballroom costumes should be drawn is another matter and another debate. But the idea that because two "Mormon" girls on Dancing with the Stars choose to stretch propriety in regards to "LDS" modesty because of their places there (and this is my real point), does NOT mean that example represents what others should do. There, is, in my opinion, some gray to the matter. There is also common sense. Claiming that because it's reasonable and sensible for a swimmer to wear a swimsuit when swimming does not equate to let's-throw-modesty-out-the-window for all other sports and activities as well. I don't believe it's reasonable to expect ballroom dancers to wear costumes that they could wear garments beneath necessarily (though there is an argument that could be made for such I suppose), but neither do I think it wise, or in any way exercising common sense to determine, accordingly, that bikini style outfits or similar are perfectly acceptable as long as one is a pro ballroom dancer.

Incidentally, one of the actresses on the original Baywatch was active LDS. And I don't think that "job" validated her wearing of skimpy bikinis in episodes of that show either. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Packard). (I won't post a link to googled images of her here for propriety reasons as well...but feel free to so google if you question this in any regard.)

I'm not going to discuss this any further because... one thing I really dislike in full measure is men (including non-Mormons) deciding a sport is not valid because of what they think of the sport's outfit when men can run around in spandex and smack their butts around.  But let me just say this one thing for the people who are clueless about the intricacies of the sport.

Ballroom dancing, like figure skating, and gymnastics, and swimming, etc., have technical efficiencies that the costume is designed for.  They don't just wear X because... whatever.  For example, a Salsa will not show the intricacies of the minute differences in body mechanics that differentiate one expert salsa dancer from another expert salsa dancer without the enhancement provided by the direction of the fling of a salsa's stringy costume.  A swimmer does not have to worry about anything else except for touching the wall at the shortest amount of time possible.  The body mechanics is not judged.  Only the buzzer is.  Could they wear long johns and full sleeves?  Of course!  The only concern is the wall.  But, if you wear long johns and sleeves you can pretty much just kiss the competition goodbye because that minute difference in clothing puts you at that big of a disadvantage in reaching that wall.  The ballroom dancer costume functions THE EXACT SAME except that the competition does not just rely on the buzzer.  It relies on every single minuscule technical movement of the entire body... which if you hide inside clothing will be invisible.  So, if swimmers are fine and ballroom dancers aren't... you might just need to take up some ballroom dancing lessons to understand me.

Edited April 25, 2017 by anatess2

[The Folk Prophet]

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

I'm not going to discuss this any further because... one thing I really dislike in full measure is men (including non-Mormons) deciding a sport is not valid because of what they think of the sport's outfit when men can run around in spandex and smack their butts around.

Like I said....biased.

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Ballroom dancing, like figure skating, have technical efficiencies that the costume is designed for. 

You don't know what you're talking about. (I, on the other hand, met my wife ballroom dancing and we competed together for years and years and have both taught and judged ballroom. This is not an appeal to authority however. It is an appeal to "you have no understanding, having apparently very little if any experience or training, and therefore you're off-based"). What you're saying is wrong. Nothing in ballroom dancing requires biking styled outfits. In fact at certain levels they are forbidden. Girls could very easily dance in slacks if they so choose. And dancing in slacks, just as with the men, perfectly shows how well one has the technique down or not. In point of fact, probably better. The costumes are MEANT to distract. They are partially used to bias the judges by the glitter and performance. People with really great costumes can do better in competition. It is not because their technique gets hidden otherwise. Just the opposite.

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

They don't just wear X because... whatever.

True. They wear X because it makes them look sexy and other people like sexy and so it helps them to look sexy.

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

 For example, a Salsa will not show the intricacies of the minute differences in body mechanics that differentiate one expert salsa dancer from another expert salsa dancer without the enhancement provided by the direction of the fling of a salsa's stringy costume. 

If that were the case then men would need to wear the stringy costumes too.

14 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

The ballroom dancer costume functions THE EXACT SAME.

In that the judges like seeing sexy girls you are correct. A sexy costume can help some people do better in competition. 

Edited April 25, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[anatess2]

14 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Like I said....biased.

You don't know what you're talking about. (I, on the other hand, met my wife ballroom dancing and we competed together for years and years and have both taught and judged ballroom. This is not an appeal to authority however. It is an appeal to "you have no understanding, having apparently very little if any experience or training, and therefore you're off-based"). What you're saying is wrong. Nothing in ballroom dancing requires biking styled outfits. In fact at certain levels they are forbidden. Girls could very easily dance in slacks if they so choose. And dancing in slacks, just as with the men, perfectly shows how well one has the technique down or not. In point of fact, probably better. The costumes are MEANT to distract. They are partially used to bias the judges by the glitter and performance. People with really great costumes can do better in competition. It is not because their technique gets hidden otherwise. Just the opposite.

True. They wear X because it makes them look sexy and other people like sexy and so it helps them to look sexy.

If that were the case then men would need to wear the stringy costumes too.

In that the judges like seeing sexy girls you are correct. A sexy costume can help some people do better in competition. 

This entire post makes me question your ballroom dancing claim.  Seriously.  Men should wear stringy costumes too... and you call yourself a ballroom dancer... you don't even know the difference between a man and woman on the dance floor.

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by anatess2