Codifying Dress & Grooming


Carborendum
 Share

Recommended Posts

I had noted in another thread that religion codifies things in a manner that government really shouldn't do.

So, that got me to thinking about other things that are in some way codified by other sources.  But they would be wholly inappropriate for government to get involved in.  I was considering whether dress and grooming would fit in that category.  If so, is that a good thing?

It seems that our pop culture is using Hollywood and commercial marketing as the method of codifying things like that.  It seems to be effective.  But is that a good thing?

The reason why it even matters:

When we dress and groom, it sends a message to people around us.  How we dress says whether we have confidence -- just as much as how we square our shoulders or slouch or...  We naturally have physiological reactions that govern how we hold our bodies.  So, there isn't much need for codifying such a thing.  It is a natural biological reaction.  But dress and grooming?  Not so much.

We dress in certain ways to send messages that we are strong, weak, happy, depressed, playful, stressed, disciplined, etc.  The care with which we take in our dress & grooming also says that we care about how we associate with others.  Perhaps this is cross-over with the "presence" thread I had a short while back.

I intend this thread to be more about dress and grooming than about physical beauty.  But I expect that we will probably drift into the physical beauty aspect as well.  I want to state right now that "dress & grooming" is separate from "physical beauty."  Dress & grooming is much more subjective and fluid than physical beauty.  While physical beauty always has a subjective component, it tends to be a lot more objective and consistent than we give it credit for.  Only through tremendous propaganda can this needle be moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like reading your posts @Carborendum – like the one above and the thinking of it.  They make me think.  I do believe that government does have a very important play in codifying dress and grooming.  Much more than religion because religion and religious thought can and should be allowed to vary across society.

This is one of the primary reason that I believe uniforms should be required in schools – especially public schools.  I believe boys should have a uniform and grooming standards different than girls in school so there is no question, what-so-ever who is a boy and who is a girl.  Absolutely no confusion.

I also believe that there ought to be standards of behavior.  Again different standards for boys and girls.  This includes how boys interface with boys, girls with girls and girls with boys (and vice versa).  All this should be clearly defined, taught and expected.  I believe that such should and ought to be part of education as required and enforced in teaching children. 

Part of the reason I believe in such standards in schools is because I believe schools should concentrate on the teaching and rigors of learning without the distractions of children being children and treating each other poorly.  When teaching math, girls ought not to worry about what other girls (or boys) are wearing, appearing and such – they need to be focused on math.  Likewise with boys.  Kids ought to be learning and not concerned with who appears better than who.

I became convinced of such while in the army.  That uniforms and grooming standards allow individuals to focus on winning battles and not worried about individual appearances.  In addition the rank of individuals made it clear to all – who is in charge in what places and conditions.  But it seems our current society would rather be confused about things that should not be confusing.

It is my thinking that if children have a clear understanding of such things – we do not have to concern ourselves so much concerning adults.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sometimes show up to clinic in jeans and a Carhartt T-shirt.

Some of my patients like it and some of the patients are offended.  The ones that are offended expect to see me in slacks, a shirt, and a tie.

But then again.  If I show up to clinic in my polyester PJs (scrubs) no one cares.

Sometimes I show up to church without a tie (and get looks).  But I have showed up to church in my PJs before and everyone seems to accept that and even respect me for it. 

I can’t imagine Jesus in a 3 piece suit.  Just saying.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless

For most of my adult life, my work attire has consisted of beer/band T-shirts, jorts or cargo shorts, and a pair of vans. One brewery I worked for even made metal-themed shirts for the staff (they were very much NOT a metal brewery).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thinking - what people would wear if they knew in advance that they were meeting someone extremely important? - like a member the G-dhead? or if one does not believe in G-d - perhaps a head of a galactic Kardashev type III civilization? I would wear my best white shirt, tie and suit.  I am quite certain my wife would be quite careful concerning her dress – likely to purchase something new.

I would also shower and clean up – not so much to attempt to impress as to show respect.  My first mission president was adamant that missionaries do not dress to impress but to show respect. 

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Just thinking - what people would wear if they knew in advance that they were meeting someone extremely important? - like a member the G-dhead? or if one does not believe in G-d - perhaps a head of a galactic Kardashev type III civilization? I would wear my best white shirt, tie and suit.  I am quite certain my wife would be quite careful concerning her dress – likely to purchase something new.

I would also shower and clean up – not so much to attempt to impress as to show respect.  My first mission president was adamant that missionaries do not dress to impress but to show respect. 

 

The Traveler

1 Samuel 16: 7 But the Lord said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart.

I could care less what clothes I was wearing.  But, Id be on my knees scuffing up my pants thats for sure. If I had forewarning of meeting the Savior, the last thing I would be concerned about is a shower, shave, and wardrobe.

See also Luke 10: 38-42

08BFB659-6BC9-49BB-9746-446C67C8CD3C.thumb.jpeg.574a54f515a1c54aabcee9f21e66a131.jpeg

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is interesting to hear these responses.  I get the points you're all making.  They seem to be of two varieties.

  • I don't give a flea's eyeball about how I dress or groom.
  • The Lord doesn't look upon the outward appearance.  Why should I?

These are perfectly fine by themselves.  But if that is the end all and be all, I think that is quite naïve.

On the supporting side, we have plenty of examples where people are misjudged (both positive & negative) because of their outward appearance.  And that is a shame.  On the other side, you're completely ignoring common human psychology and expecting everyone to bend to your attitudes.  Well, good luck with that.  The way many people find success in life is threading the needle between bowing to everyone's wishes vs. ignoring what anyone else expects.

For all of you who think your clothing shouldn't matter, do you groom your hair and beards (or shave)?  Why?  Shouldn't that same mentality carry over and say that you should be perfectly fine with bed-head all day long?  How many of you do that?

We do these things because whether we want to admit it or not, we care about how we look.  The reasons for it may vary.  But we care.  And because we care about how we dress and groom, we also care about others doing so as well.  And there are perfectly valid reasons for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

The Lord doesn't look upon the outward appearance.  Why should I?

People responding this way to the idea of "outward appearance" strikes me as pretty short-sighted.

The Lord looks upon the heart...and how we interact with outward appearance is an indication of the state of our heart (as most things are).

Obviously if one is concerned with outward appearance in terms of pride, then it's based on a prideful heart, which the Lord looks upon unfavorably. Obviously, if one is concerned with outward appearance in terms of humility, then it's based on a humble heart, which the Lord looks upon favorably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

 

It is interesting to hear these responses.  I get the points you're all making.  They seem to be of two varieties.

  • I don't give a flea's eyeball about how I dress or groom.
  • The Lord doesn't look upon the outward appearance.  Why should I?

These are perfectly fine by themselves.  But if that is the end all and be all, I think that is quite naïve.

 

Well, its not a military forum.  

Scriptures are a reasonable response.

I think that bathing and clean attire are important. But grooming as a word gives me the heebie-geebies.

About 30% of the women in our last ward had breast augmentation surgery.  Fashionable attire and lots of leather knee high boots.

My wife once asked me (after our 8th child) if she could have a tummie tuck.  I told her no.  I know too many plastic surgeons.

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Well, its not a military forum.  

Never said it was.  Military purposes for uniforms is not the subject here (except for Traveler).

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Scriptures are a reasonable response.

I never said otherwise.  But when they are misapplied... well... they're misapplied.

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

I think that bathing and clean attire are important. But grooming as a word gives me the heebie-geebies.

If you're talking about "pedo-grooming" yes, I get your point.  But what other efficient word is there to describe the same thing?  So, just work with me a bit on terminology.

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

About 30% of the women in our last ward had breast augmentation surgery.  

My wife once asked me (after our 8th child) if she could have a tummie tuck.  I told her no.  I know too many plastic surgeons.

Surgery is on a completely different plane.  Not even close to dress and grooming.  No need to conflate them.  OFF TOPIC!!!

14 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Fashionable attire and lots of leather knee high boots.

This could mean a wide variety of things.  I don't see a problem with these things unless there is much more to it than what you've written.

One could take this statement to be hypocritical.  I know several women in my ward (my wife included) that simply like to wear knee high boots.  They like the look.  They like the comfort and function.  They like how they can work well with many different outfits without having a huge collection of footwear.  They simply like it.  Is there something wrong with that? 

You apparently don't like wearing a tie.  I like ties.  They're fun.  I even started wearing a waistcoat.  I just like it.  I'm not trying to look fancy or opulent.  It was a $15 waistcoat.  I just like it.  Is there something wrong with that? 

But you seem to take pride in the fact that you didn't wear a tie and you felt slighted when some people didn't seem to appreciate that at church.  Yet it seems like you're turning your nose up at those 30% women.  So, what's the difference between your attitude towards these 30% women you described, vs what others did to you because you didn't wear a tie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some interesting points from scripture.  When the children of Israel were led into the promised land by Joshua (which is the Hebrew translated to English – the Greek translation into English of the same name is Jesus) they came to a spot on the Jordon river where all the people were washed and anointed.  What is interesting is that scholars tell us that this in the location where John the Baptist baptized Christ.  Anciently before going to the temple the children of Israel would bathe and put on special temple attire.   Those priests with official duties at the temple put on “appropriate” attire with sacred purpose.

I would point out that in all examples that we LDS are given as symbols when attending the temples to be taught concerning “true” worship that there are no examples of either poor or excessive grooming.  I sometimes wonder if people deliberately use the excuse of excessive grooming to justify poor, sloppy or careless grooming.  I am one of those that was taught that when involved in sacred duties – one ought to be dressed and groomed appropriately when possible.  I was thought that such is proper not to impress but to show respect.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I knew that the Savior were coming in person to visit my home, I'm sure I would pick up the place, do the dishes, and vacuum. Heck, if I knew that my deceased parents were coming to visit my home, I would do the same. It's not a matter of trying to impress. It's a matter of showing respect and esteem by cleaning up before they come.

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I like ties.  They're fun.  I even started wearing a waistcoat.  I just like it.  I'm not trying to look fancy or opulent.  It was a $15 waistcoat.  I just like it

My youngest, who will be 17 in a few weeks, started wearing a three-piece suit to Church six or eight months ago. He has the pocket handkerchief going, pocket watch with fob, the whole nine yards. It's a lot of fun, though I wonder what part of my recessive genome he inherited to take such sartorial care. I enjoy it, he enjoys it, his priest quorum enjoys it, the young women enjoy it, his leaders enjoy it. As long as he doesn't get obsessive or become vain about such thing, I don't quite see the harm. It's not like me, but frankly, I wish I cared a bit more about my appearance.

2 hours ago, zil2 said:

Without my glasses on, you all look pretty much identical.  Just sayin'...

All Mormons look the same. There. I said it.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Vort said:

All Mormons look the same. There. I said it.

Well, actually, without my glasses, all humans look pretty much the same - I *might* be able to distinguish skin color (if it's different enough) or gender (maybe), but really, you're all just blurs of vague colors.  If you stand still enough and blend in, I might not even know your a person, as opposed to furniture...  It's not unusual for me to remove my glasses during Sacrament meeting, just so the visual isn't distracting (my eyes find it restful anyway)...  But don't worry, I never remove my glasses while driving. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, the underlying principles are simple and have not and will not change:

  • Clean (with recognition that the possibilities here vary by region)
  • Well-kept (i.e. in good repair; see recognition above)
  • Modest (that is, not designed to draw attention to oneself, whether sexually or otherwise)

The rest is just cultural sensibilities.  My primary considerations (beyond the above) are comfort and laziness.  I hate shopping for clothes.  When I find something I like, I buy multiple so I can avoid shopping for the next decade or more - if it "goes out of style" (whatever that means), oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Carborendum said:

But you seem to take pride in the fact that you didn't wear a tie and you felt slighted when some people didn't seem to appreciate that at church.  Yet it seems like you're turning your nose up at those 30% women.  So, what's the difference between your attitude towards these 30% women you described, vs what others did to you because you didn't wear a tie?

Sometimes I do wear a tie.

I have no issues with a good plastic surgeon.  They do flaps for us on occasion and cleft lip / palate surgeries can be life changing.

And if a woman feels the need to have a surgery because one breast is smaller than the other or they have reconstructive surgery after breast cancer, thats totally reasonable.

But..

If on the other hand, the augmentation is done to display the work to the world over modified garments… 

I’m not a fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zil2 said:

Modest (that is, not designed to draw attention to oneself, whether sexually or otherwise)

This is an interesting thing to actually consider. Is never wearing something that is designed to draw attention to oneself always wrong? And is that really what "modesty" is about.

One might well ask...can one modestly wear something to draw attention to themselves?

Can one modestly wear something to draw attention to themselves sexually?

Can someone be immodest without meaning to be?

I'd say yes, yes, and yes.

Frankly, the whole modesty discussion in the church has become pretty muddled. I'm not sure, in many cases, the discussion makes sense any longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The newspaper I work for doesn't have a particular dress code. 

Instead, during the summer months you'll see a lot of us, including the publishing editor, in shorts to help beat the heat. 

We only doll up if we've got a VIP to interview or are otherwise going to a place where casual dress is required. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

This is an interesting thing to actually consider. Is never wearing something that is designed to draw attention to oneself always wrong? And is that really what "modesty" is about.

One might well ask...can one modestly wear something to draw attention to themselves?

Can one modestly wear something to draw attention to themselves sexually?

Can someone be immodest without meaning to be?

I'd say yes, yes, and yes.

Frankly, the whole modesty discussion in the church has become pretty muddled. I'm not sure, in many cases, the discussion makes sense any longer.

IMO, you're making it a lot more complicated than the dictionary, and more than it needs to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, zil2 said:

IMO, you're making it a lot more complicated than the dictionary, and more than it needs to be.

IMO I'm doing the opposite of that and the problem is that others have made it more complicated than it actually is.

I thought that would be an interesting discussion. But if not....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Vort said:

If I knew that the Savior were coming in person to visit my home, I'm sure I would pick up the place, do the dishes, and vacuum. Heck, if I knew that my deceased parents were coming to visit my home, I would do the same. It's not a matter of trying to impress. It's a matter of showing respect and esteem by cleaning up before they come.

I like this example.

Last week was my daughter's birthday. I had a gaggle of kids coming over. I work from home, which has helped in my housekeeping... But I still took the day off to clean up and prepare. Why? I wanted these kids to be comfortable and have a good time. Yes, there was a certain desire to not have them tell their parents about the household and have the health department show up, but it was largely about that respect for my guests.

I don't even care for school uniforms after experiencing a school with them, but a certain level of quality in dress goes far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share