Modesty Police verses Doctrine

[Guest]

Any girl or woman who thinks tight and/or low cut doesn't have any effect on the men and boys around her is drinking herself stupid with feminist kool-aid. No, their thoughts and actions are not her fault, per se, but for goodness sakes, can we not help them out a little in keeping those thoughts clean?

[pam]

One of the problems I've seen in discussions of this type that bring Ted Callister's talk into play is that they stop at one point of his talk to make a point.

 

The very next section states:  

 

Unclean Thoughts

It has been said, “You can watch the birds fly by; just don’t let them build a nest on your head.” There is nothing wrong with noticing the pretty young lady or handsome young man as they walk by—that is normal. But if those thoughts turn to lust, then the nest is being built.

We cannot avoid seeing every improper billboard or immodestly dressed person, but we can drive out the improper thought once it arises. The sin is not in involuntarily seeing something improper; the sin is in entertaining the thought once it comes. The scriptures tell us, “For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he” (Proverbs 23:7).

In essence, our thoughts become the seeds of our actions. We do have the power within us to take control of our lives and our thoughts. Good and evil thoughts cannot coexist in our minds any more than light and dark can exist at the same time and in the same place. At some point we must decide which will be our invited guest.

If we so desire, we can drive out every evil thought and immediately replace it with an uplifting song or poem or scripture. Just as darkness flees at the presence of light, so evil flees at the presence of good.

 

I think there are both sides to this.  I think women can dress modestly but still instill thoughts into the minds of the opposite gender.  But male or female, we have a responsibility to learn to adjust our thoughts.

[Still_Small_Voice]

I think a preacher said the following paraphrased that I found amusing:

 

I'd like to find that fruit that made Adam and Eve realize they were naked and pass it around to people again.

[mordorbund]

2. She felt an absence of the spirit in the lesson. 3. She instead wrote the thoughts the spirit prompted her with in her journal. 

 

Help me reconcile these two points.

 

 

 

4. She did not feel comfortable at all in sharing her thoughts as the men in the room and the teacher were expressing in various ways that the responsibility lies with the women to make sure they don't tempt the men.

 

If a woman is not responsible in the way she dresses for men's thoughts and lusts, how can the men in the class be accountable with their words for the discomfort your daughter felt? Both are forms of communication, apparently expressing a message.

[Just_A_Guy]

Some food for thought I happen to know the yoga pants are not allowed at BYUI even for working out. I fail to see how a girl wearing yoga pants in a gym is inappropriate.  

 

Maybe it's because I'm neither female nor athletically inclined; but I fail to see why it's necessary to wear skin-tight clothing to work out.

[MarginOfError]

Maybe it's because I'm neither female nor athletically inclined; but I fail to see why it's necessary to wear skin-tight clothing to work out.

 

Then again, I fail to see why it's necessary to wear clothing. 

[Guest]

I think that the OP makes a valid point when a lesson is taught putting the responsibility on women to help control men's thoughts. This is unacceptable and clearly not church doctrine.

 

I disagree.  It is an integral part of doctrine for women to sustain the Priesthood.  HELP is very much their responsibility.  We are equal partners here.

[classylady]

I have a question for the men.  If a very beautiful woman is dressed modestly, does your mind still "go there"?  It doesn't necessarily matter what she is wearing?  I know some women who are very well endowed, etc., and it doesn't matter what she wears, her physical attributes are still visible. Do men's minds still "go there"?  And, I'm not even sure what "go there" means. I know with my husband, it doesn't matter what I'm wearing. I could be dressed in some dowdy outfit, and he is still attracted to me.

[Guest]

I have a question for the men.  If a very beautiful woman is dressed modestly, does your mind still "go there"?  It doesn't necessarily matter what she is wearing?  I know some women who are very well endowed, etc., and it doesn't matter what she wears, her physical attributes are still visible. Do men's minds still "go there"?  And, I'm not even sure what "go there" means. I know with my husband, it doesn't matter what I'm wearing. I could be dressed in some dowdy outfit, and he is still attracted to me.

 

There's a very big difference between a person attracted to somebody for their spiritual qualities and a person getting lustful attraction for purely physical qualities.  One is eternal, the other purely mortal.  Godly attraction is spiritual attraction that drives the entire thing - including the physical aspect - so much so that the physical attribute is simply the vehicle for the spirit in the same manner that the white paint and beautifully designed cement is the vehicle for the spirit in the Temple.

[CrossfitDan]

Help me reconcile these two points.

 

If a woman is not responsible in the way she dresses for men's thoughts and lusts, how can the men in the class be accountable with their words for the discomfort your daughter felt? Both are forms of communication, apparently expressing a message.

 

Not sure what you are having a hard time reconciling. I am not sure what tone you are writing in, but it seems to be a little condescending and judgmental.

 

The spirit was not present in the lesson. She turned to her scriptures and previous talks on modesty, she then felt the spirit and wrote her thoughts.

 

True, and this was also my recommendation, she could have spoken up and she wanted to. But she didn't feel comfortable to do so. She felt the impression to first discuss it with her parents and better understand the concept then to interject in what was a very passion and one sided discussion that didn't feel like the spirit was present.

 

I believe in the future she is better prepared to respond. But you know as well as I do, even present in this thread how emotional and polar this topic is and she feared to create such a dynamic in a church meeting. I was impressed with her spiritual maturity and emotional understanding.

[Guest]

Then again, I fail to see why it's necessary to wear clothing. 

 

I know you are being funny (unless I'm mistaken)... but the biblical answer to this in Genesis is one of the important lessons in the Bible for me.

[estradling75]

I have a question for the men.  If a very beautiful woman is dressed modestly, does your mind still "go there"?  It doesn't necessarily matter what she is wearing?  I know some women who are very well endowed, etc., and it doesn't matter what she wears, her physical attributes are still visible. Do men's minds still "go there"?  And, I'm not even sure what "go there" means. I know with my husband, it doesn't matter what I'm wearing. I could be dressed in some dowdy outfit, and he is still attracted to me.

 

The answer is a solid maybe...  :)  For me my wife is 'fair' game and it doesn't matter what she wears my thoughts are allowed to "go there."   Everyone else is off limits and it is not allowed.  Which means I have to rein it in on everyone else I might find physically attractive.  Not every guy is going to be attracted to the same physical qualities, and each guy is going to have different levels of self control.  So some guys might have a problem even with modestly dressed women if they lack self control. Others will have no problem at all

[Just_A_Guy]

Then again, I fail to see why it's necessary to wear clothing. 

 

Well played, sir.

[MarginOfError]

I know you are being funny (unless I'm mistaken)... but the biblical answer to this in Genesis is one of the important lessons in the Bible for me.

 

I'm actually in that area between being funny and being serious.  I have no objection to clothing as fashion disappearing.  I think the nudists have the right idea.  Wear clothing when it is functional.  

[Just_A_Guy]

I have a question for the men.  If a very beautiful woman is dressed modestly, does your mind still "go there"?  It doesn't necessarily matter what she is wearing?  I know some women who are very well endowed, etc., and it doesn't matter what she wears, her physical attributes are still visible. Do men's minds still "go there"? 

 

Not as easily; but it's possible, yes.

[Just_A_Guy]

I believe in the future she is better prepared to respond. But you know as well as I do, even present in this thread how emotional and polar this topic is and she feared to create such a dynamic in a church meeting. I was impressed with her spiritual maturity and emotional understanding.

 

Honestly, I wish she had spoken up.  I believe (if you haven't guessed!) that the underlying point of the lesson is valid; but I think it should be balanced with a reminder that while, as a general principle, we are our brothers' (and sisters') keepers; ultimately we are each accountable for our own actions.

[Guest]

I'm actually in that area between being funny and being serious.  I have no objection to clothing as fashion disappearing.  I think the nudists have the right idea.  Wear clothing when it is functional.  

 

If we were not in this fallen mortal state, I'd go with the nudists.  It's the same sentiment I have for Communists.  If we were not in this fallen mortal state, Communism is perfect.

[MarginOfError]

If we were not in this fallen mortal state, I'd go with the nudists.  It's the same sentiment I have for Communists.  If we were not in this fallen mortal state, Communism is perfect.

 

Nothing says "party" like communists and nudists.

[The Folk Prophet]

The answer is a solid maybe...  :)  For me my wife is 'fair' game and it doesn't matter what she wears my thoughts are allowed to "go there."   Everyone else is off limits and it is not allowed.  Which means I have to rein it in on everyone else I might find physically attractive.  Not every guy is going to be attracted to the same physical qualities, and each guy is going to have different levels of self control.  So some guys might have a problem even with modestly dressed women if they lack self control. Others will have no problem at all

 

I agree. One always must follow Alma's advise to his son and "cross yourself in all these things".  The feelings are natural. Allowing oneself to dwell on them and to lust becomes the problem. When I see something that I find sexually alluring that is not my wife I turn my thoughts and my eyes away -- intentionally and with purpose. I have not always been successful at this, but I am getting better and better through the years. In my experience, the need to cross myself in these things is significantly greater around immodesty. Bikini laden situations leave me to constantly avert my gaze and my thoughts and purposefully focus on other things. Whereas a modestly dressed woman who may be large chested does not do so as frequently. Expose part of that chest and...yeah...effort must be applied.  But I'm sure it's different for everyone.

[The Folk Prophet]

If we were not in this fallen mortal state, I'd go with the nudists.  It's the same sentiment I have for Communists.  If we were not in this fallen mortal state, Communism is perfect.

 

*splutter* *choke* *cough*

 

Excuse me? Communism is perfect?

 

How...?  What...? I.....

 

Nevermind...

[Guest]

This thread got really creepy really fast. 

[MarginOfError]

This thread got really creepy really fast. 

 

That's because.....nothing says creepy like communists and nudists!

 

That works in so many ways.

[mordorbund]

Not sure what you are having a hard time reconciling. I am not sure what tone you are writing in, but it seems to be a little condescending and judgmental.

 

It's not my intention to sound condescending. I'm feeling a bit utilitarian at the moment, so I'm looking for the "so what" in this thread (and I don't mean that in flippant way, I really am trying to understand better to flesh out my own thoughts on this; and I'm also thinking I may be teaching the principle some time and this will come up, so what do I do then?). What I get out of it is that you and your daughter object to a particular rationale given in connection with the principle of modesty. It sounds like you don't object to modesty, just to the teaching that one reason for it is an because I am responsible for another.

 

Is this accurate? If so, then the question for me is whether or not it's a valid reason. If it is, then why the discomfort? If it is because it is only a partial treatment of the subject, then we need to ensure that the topic is addressed more fully. If I'm teaching, that means I need to discuss other valid reasons as well. If I'm a member of the class, that means I should be prepared to mention some of the other valid reasons as well, or provide a simple reference for others who are interested to study in their own time.

 

If the reason is invalid, then what do I do when false doctrine is getting taught? If I'm teaching I hope I get corrected, because I will probably teach it again otherwise. I may remain unconvinced, but as an instructor I need to know where class members come from if I am to properly minister.

 

From where I stand, the reason is valid. Men and women are both accountable for what they do to arouse others outside the bounds the Lord has set. I am my brother's keeper and I will be accountable for every idle word. I don't see how dress is outside of that principle.

 

Assuming I'm giving a standards fireside this Sunday on modesty, how should I teach this principle?

 

 

 

The spirit was not present in the lesson. She turned to her scriptures and previous talks on modesty, she then felt the spirit and wrote her thoughts.

 

Thanks for this. I was parsing it as, "the Spirit filled her with thoughts that she wrote down while she wasn't feeling the Spirit." As you've noticed, that's very different from "the Spirit confirmed the principles she found in talks but not in the lesson and thoughts being shared."

 

And just to clarify, the reason why I brought your daughter back into this discussion is because when some articles were mentioned about modesty, you mentioned that the context balanced out the isolated statements. I was just pointing out that that we don't have the full context of what was shared in the lesson. We are at the mercy of your telling of the lesson content which, besides being filtered through you, was also filtered through your daughter. That's not to say that either you or your daughter have some axe to grind, just that we don't have the full context of that lesson like we do with those articles.

[Still_Small_Voice]

I agree. One always must follow Alma's advise to his son and "cross yourself in all these things".  The feelings are natural. Allowing oneself to dwell on them and to lust becomes the problem. When I see something that I find sexually alluring that is not my wife I turn my thoughts and my eyes away -- intentionally and with purpose.

 

Job 31:1 reads: “I made a covenant with mine eyes. Why then should I think upon a maid?"

 

We men tend to be more visually stimulated than women.  Be careful what you let your eyes see.  Let the Holy Spirit guide you in how you should act.  One cannot prevent a bird from flying over his head, but he can prevent the bird from making a nest in his hair.

[The Folk Prophet]

Job 31:1 reads: “I made a covenant with mine eyes. Why then should I think upon a maid?"

 

We men tend to be more visually stimulated than women.  Be careful what you let your eyes see.  Let the Holy Spirit guide you in how you should act.  One cannot prevent a bird from flying over his head, but he can prevent the bird from making a nest in his hair.

 

Uh...what?