- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I just posted the following on Facebook:
Quote:Can we please eliminate the phrase, “Modest is the Hottest”, so it never is uttered again among us?
1) It’s a contradiction, in and of itself. “Modest” means “moderate”. “Hottest” is an extreme. Thus, linguistically, “modest” cannot be “the hottest”.
2) Modesty is about WAY more than how we dress – and obsessing exclusively over clothing when talking about modesty destroys the comprehensive meaning of the word itself.
3) We should not be telling our young women (or young men) that dressing modestly is about looking hot. “Hot” has direct reference to how someone feels when looking at something and/or energy being emitted by someone – and another phrase that connotes the same thing is “turned on” (as in “smoking hot” and “Baby, light my fire.”). We should not be teaching that the purpose of our dress standard (used almost exclusively about young women) is making young men feel “turned on” by it.
Women are objectified sexually enough in our broader modern culture. We don’t need to add to that objectification by linking modesty with “hotness” – or to tacitly accept the societal rule that how young women dress is part of a beauty contest, designed to emit more energy in order to attract men.
The first comment was a bit funny, since it skewered an ill-considered action by someone who thought she was protecting decency:
Quote:could I take a moment and express my opinion about the mom who bought all the tshirts out of a pac sun store? (I totally agree with your post by the way)…that woman has no Idea (!!) how retail works. When a store sells out of an item (in record time), guess what happens? they get Twice the Shipment next time…yea. that works. Only in theory.
I think that’s a deft approach for a Facebook crowd. Because that phrase has made the rounds and everyone knows it. It’s worth discussing how to give it up already, regardless of feelings about the Callister talk. If women wanted to be completely modest they could wear sack-like boiler suits like the Chinese in the cultural revolution. Ann, I am trying to address ten points of concern from Elder Callister’s talk without actually referencing him and the talk, since I want the conversation to focus on the points I want to make and not get derailed by “religious partisanship” threadjacks. SamBee wrote:If women wanted to be completely modest they could wear sack-like boiler suits like the Chinese in the cultural revolution.
Sounds hot.
Love that b/c hearing “Hottest is modest” makes me want to vomit for the exact reasons you mentioned. Thank you for putting it so much more eloquently than I could have. Curtis wrote:
Quote:Women are objectified sexually enough in our broader modern culture. We don’t need to add to that objectification by linking modesty with “hotness” – or to tacitly accept the societal rule that how young women dress is part of a beauty contest, designed to emit more energy in order to attract men.
:clap: :clap: :clap: I saw your FB post, and I approve this message! I also pointed out the supply & demand problem on another friend’s wall about the Pac-Sun buying mom. I agree with her that the shirts were out of line (the shirts themselves weren’t even well designed – they just slapped a picture of a porn star butt facing outward on a crappily designed shirt, marketed to teen boys), but buying them all just sends the message sex sells. Even if they are returned, it is doubtful that the store ties returns that closely to purchases, and it is also questionable whether the store will accept the returns. I actually don’t think that modest is a good description of what we are trying to convey with the term. Any better terms out there? Ultra-hot 
[img]http://theeveningharold.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/niqab.jpg?w=300&h=199 [/img] SamBee wrote:Ultra-hot
[img]http://theeveningharold.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/niqab.jpg?w=300&h=199 [/img] Especially if they’re standing in the sun!
Interestingly, Callister’s original talk was lightly edited for the Ensign. This excerpt was removed from his original devotional: Quote:“If it is too low or too high or too tight it may prompt improper thoughts, even in the mind of a young man who is striving to be pure. Elder Matthew Cowley once commented on the long flowing dresses of the Native American Indians—as I recall he said, “
How beautiful—how modest—they leave everything to the imagination.”” Now perhaps that passage was deemed racist and therefore removed. But I would like to point out the utter creepiness of the bolded passage. It’s like saying “My fantasy of you is oh so much better than your reality of you.”
If that entire passage was removed, that is a good move. Terrible quote. Even if it was normal for that time, it shouldn’t be repeated now. Nice if it hadn’t been said at all, but deleting it is a start. hawkgrrrl wrote:Interestingly, Callister’s original talk was lightly edited for the Ensign. This excerpt was removed from his original devotional:
Quote:“If it is too low or too high or too tight it may prompt improper thoughts, even in the mind of a young man who is striving to be pure. Elder Matthew Cowley once commented on the long flowing dresses of the Native American Indians—as I recall he said, “
How beautiful—how modest—they leave everything to the imagination.”” Now perhaps that passage was deemed racist and therefore removed. But I would like to point out the utter creepiness of the bolded passage. It’s like saying My fantasy of you is oh so much better than your reality of you.”
It undercuts his contention that women “get” the man they dress for – by proving that clothing that leaves
everythingto the imagination just makes the imagination work harder. This line of talk gets burqa-crazy. hawkgrrrl wrote:Interestingly, Callister’s original talk was lightly edited for the Ensign. This excerpt was removed from his original devotional:
Quote:“If it is too low or too high or too tight it may prompt improper thoughts, even in the mind of a young man who is striving to be pure. Elder Matthew Cowley once commented on the long flowing dresses of the Native American Indians—as I recall he said, “
How beautiful—how modest—they leave everything to the imagination.”” Now perhaps that passage was deemed racist and therefore removed. But I would like to point out the utter creepiness of the bolded passage. It’s like saying “My fantasy of you is oh so much better than your reality of you.”
Years ago I heard a recording of Cowley giving the talk that this quote is from and he got a huge laugh from the congregation. It’s got to be more than 50+ years ago and I still remember it clearly. Clothes do more than anything to objectify people and to have a negative affect on body acceptance that it’s no wonder that young people, especially young women, have so much trouble
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.