- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Our girls in the stake did there girl’s camp last week. I heard that it was pretty good except that there was some hurt feeling on what the girls could wear. They were aware that short shorts were not allowed and so some girls brought their yoga pants and the main leader told the girls that had shapely figures that they could not were them, it then go into a debate about what shapely meant and who determined it. It caused some hurt feeling so they said that yoga pants were band from the camp. Many members including myself find this so strange and stupid. So, do we say something or because it is over for this year just put it on the back burner. It is the little things like this that makes it hard to try to stay because most of the big issues I have found just don’t work for me much anymore, but my wife wants me to go and I still like the fellowship with some of the members. I put that down to overzealous local leaders who lack judgment. There was an article once about kids turned away from a church dance because their skirts were above the knee — above the knee by 1″. It’s people TRYING to live their standards, but doing so in a way that puts people second, in my view.
Had another situation where a non-member came to a singles dance, and the YSA leaders approached my friend, a high councilor, about asking them to either leave the dance or go home and change. He refused to do it, indicating it was teaching moment for the member who brought the non-member to the dance. He also said there is an appropriate time and place for such teaching, and felt the non-members’ first exposure to the LDS church at a dance, when not prepared for the unofficial standards wasn’t the place for it.
I thought that was a very good example of sensitivity and good judgment.
To solve this problem, my stake’s girls camp said no shorts of any kind, including for leader. Also, no two piece swimsuits no matter how modest. But, yoga pants are acceptable because I saw them. At least we have yoga pants. 
I guess shapely figures tempt other girls to become lesbians. 🙄 We really botch modesty badly, and this might be the poster child example.
More broadly, there always will be extremist zealots among us – both inside and outside the Church. Personally, I would talk privately with the Stake President about it – calmly but seriously. I think it’s an important issue, especially the discrimination against some of the girls – and I choose that word intentionally. I would frame it in those terms, to avoid some of the confrontational aspects that probably would arise if I focused on the leader. I would mention that issues like what can be worn or not worn need to be spelled out clearly beforehand – and that NOTHING should be subject to the personal views of individual leaders.
Ray,I thought about talking to the SP but it was his wife that made the rule and that is why the other leaders didn’t speak up even more. I think our bishop was talked to by some parents. Old-Timer wrote:I guess shapely figures tempt other girls to become lesbians.
🙄 We really botch modesty badly, and this might be the poster child example.
More broadly, there always will be extremist zealots among us – both inside and outside the Church. Personally, I would talk privately with the Stake President about it – calmly but seriously. I think it’s an important issue, especially the discrimination against some of the girls – and I choose that word intentionally. I would frame it in those terms, to avoid some of the confrontational aspects that probably would arise if I focused on the leader. I would mention that issues like what can be worn or not worn need to be spelled out clearly beforehand – and that NOTHING should be subject to the personal views of individual leaders.
Yes. Another important issue that goes along with the discrimination is body image. By telling some girls they are too shapely to wear yoga pants, they are in effect telling the rest of the girls that they are not shapely. This sort of thing can cause long-lasting damage to the way a girl views her own body. This is something I would bring up with your SP along with everything Ray said.
I don’t think enforcing modesty at a church-sponsored activity is over-zealous or extreme. However, it would have been better to set expectations before the girls showed up at camp (even though every girl who attends church had already been taught about short shorts and tight clothes), and it was wrong to say only girls with “shapely figures” could not wear yoga pants. I really don’t understand this yoga pants trend among Mormon women. They are very tight and form-fitting and I find it inappropriate to wear them. I don’t mind if I get some flak for saying that. I say dressing modestly is good – not because immodesty might be a temptation to men, but because I want women and girls to feel good about themselves and not flaunt their bodies around.
Wait, there’s more. I do think being kind and considerate is more important than enforcing modestly, and it should be enforced only in appropriate times and places. Also, I don’t agree with all church teachings about modesty, like covering shoulders. Count me in the opposite camp from Shawn. I don’t get the vitriol against yoga pants in the slightest. To me, they are like sweatpants – perhaps needlessly casual, but I don’t see them as in any way intentionally flaunting one’s body. They cover you. They are frankly too hot to wear 8 months of the year here in AZ. But they are just casual pants. Jeans can be equally form fitting. Either way, you aren’t allowed to touch someone else without permission, so what is the big deal? It’s a dumb restriction IMO no matter where it’s being restricted (unless because they are too casual), but beyond stupid for an all-girls camp. That is fricken ridiculous. Let the girls wear what they have that’s comfortable, including tank tops, shorts, two piece swimsuits, etc. They should be able to be themselves without judgmental eyes. How can the male gaze STILL be relevant at a GIRLS CAMP???? Not to rant here, but I will wear whatever I damn well please.
Shawn wrote:I say dressing modestly is good – not because immodesty might be a temptation to men, but because I want women and girls to feel good about themselves and not flaunt their bodies around.
I think I get what you are saying Shawn. I too believe that one should not cheapen their body by turning it into a medium of exchange for attention or anything else. I believe that one’s body should be respected. Unfortunately one’s intent cannot always be known. What one person may wear to titillate or “flaunt their body” another person might wear just because it is hot out and the particular clothing is very comfortable.
I also agree with you that I want women and girls to feel good about themselves and their bodies – I just don’t see modesty standards doing that.
With my own children I focus on how amazing the body is in operation. All the cool things that it can do for us and even does while we are sleeping. My 8 yr. old daughter swims competitively and a fair degree of the body talk is centered on athletics. The need to get practice time in and enough sleep before a big meet and eating properly for energy but not something that will sit in your stomach and make you feel sluggish. At swim meets there are bodies everywhere in tightfitting swimsuits – but that is not the point. These bodies are pushed to the limits to do amazing things. It is a test of skill and athleticism. There are multiple body types and nobody is ashamed. That is where I hope my children’s body image will come from.
I haven’t heard any vitriol against yoga pants. Disagreement, yes; vitriol, no. If jeans are as form-fitting as the yoga pants I see in my neighborhood, then they are equally inappropriate and must be quite uncomfortable and very difficult to put on. Men do attend girls camp, but that’s not the point – tight yoga pants are inherently inappropriate outside of the home so it doesn’t matter who is or isn’t looking. There are better clothes that are also comfortable.
I know I appear to be judgmental. I disagree with the choice of some to wear yoga pants and other super tight clothing, but it’s their choice and please know I do not look down on anyone or judge their worthiness for what they wear.
hawkgrrrl wrote:How can the male gaze STILL be relevant at a GIRLS CAMP????
Because Girls Camp is a camp for young women, run by adult women, under the supervision of adult males. The girls who the camp is FOR must be careful not to titillate the men who are there serving a figurehead purpose.
Joni wrote:Because Girls Camp is a camp for young women, run by adult women, under the supervision of adult males. The girls who the camp is FOR must be careful not to titillate the men who are there serving a figurehead purpose.
It may be titillating to men, but I think there is noble intent when church leaders teach about modesty.I agree the intent is good – but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. I’m NOT saying the issue with yoga pants is “hellish” or damnable. What I’m saying is that the people who create these particular hedges around the law don’t understand the damage they sometimes do – nor do they realize how hidden behind a particular letter of the law the spirit of the law has become in so many cases.
I also agree with Hawk that the standards at Girls’ Camp should be different than the standards outside of Girls’ Camp. If the men who are there can’t handle yoga pants and two-piece swimsuits, they shouldn’t be there. Them not attending is WAY better than such restrictions on the girls, imo.
From my Mormon Jargon definitions: “Modest (adj.) showing off one’s righteousness and superiority by wearing extra clothing as opposed to showing off one’s body by wearing less clothing” Why do I wear yoga pants? Because they are comfortable and casual. I wear them at home, but I have worn them to the store also. Why not? I’m not even remotely trying to show off my body or attract sexual partners or whatever other ridiculous thing men like to imagine. They are pants. It’s not a g-string and pasties. They are full coverage pants.
The schools here in AZ have just said that they are no longer allowed in the high school, nor are leggings or short shorts. But tight jeans are of course fine as always. What is the difference between them? Most of the girls aren’t wearing them for sexual reasons but because fashion norms change over time. Women usually dress for their peers, not for men. So I have to ask myself, what is the school trying to accomplish? To reduce what exactly? If it’s inappropriate sexual actions, that’s already not allowed no matter what people wear. If it’s to reduce distraction, then why not just go to school uniforms (which I would support)? This is just really dumb stuff, and it’s always ineffective because teachers will never enforce it. It also disproportionately affects the girls every single time.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.