Double standard

So, I could be wrong, but it seems like swimming promotes immodesty. It’s a socially acceptable way to wear clothes that would be sooo inappropriate anywhere but the pool. Walking around on campus with nothing but a swimsuit on? Not going to happen. And I’m not just talking about speedos and bikinis (though personally, I think bikinis are inappropriate for any Latter-day Saint woman or girl, no matter her age) — even what we term a modest one-piece suit (for girls) would be a social faux pas at the bank or the grocery store.

Now, I try hard not to be a prude from the Victorian era. And yes, I know I often fail. ;) It doesn’t take much brains to realize that swimming in normal clothes is hard. Possibly even deadly, if you’re wearing jeans. :)

But I still feel uncomfortable at swimming pools. It’s just awkward seeing so much flesh. Awkward as in gross. Disturbing. Stomach-turning. And so I avoid swimming pools. I’m not afraid of the human body, but we do have clothes for a reason, thank you very much.

Anyway, I thought I’d add one more eccentricity to the list. (You are keeping track, aren’t you?) Now I’ve just got to figure out what my next one will be… :P

Yup. You are definitely a freak. :D

You are definitely cool! ;)

While I do agree that most swim suits are gratuitously showy, I do think there is a time and a place for conservative swimsuits or other attire that would be considered immodest for everyday wear. For example, what about the ballet? We certainly wouldn’t expect to see people buying their Doritos in a leotard, but it would be awfully hard to dance in jeans (since that’s the comparison item of choice). Another example might be for the very elite athletes who choose to wear those extremely skimpy shorts (in the name of reducing friction and wind resistance, etc.) We could add ice skating, gymnastics, volleyball (both indoor and outdoor), cheerleading, etc.

What’s the solution, then? Are swimming and ballet, etc. things that shouldn’t be done? Or, should there be some universal switch in the attire used during such things? It makes me think of President Kimball’s talk he gave at BYU in 1951 called “A Style of Our Own” when he condemns immodesty and specifically sites majorettes or drill teams or something of the like.

I am a 100% advocate for modesty, but I still have to ask, is there a place for admiring the grace of the human body (such as in dance or gymnastics…) that is in no way provocative, but sill appropriate? Do such situations exist?

For the record, Ben, I completely agree with you, but I’d like to know more about what you think.

Ben,

You are so on target in your thinking here. I owned several martial arts academies for eleven years. Martial artists wear a Gi when they work out. The workout is rigorous and the Gi is very modest (you can wear them on campus or to the bank – I’ve done both) and you can perform at an extremely high level physically when wearing them (I won 5 national championships.)

When I see basketball shorts and jerseys, track shorts and bare chests on men and other sports attire I am not amused. I know that sports can be effectively participated in while wearing modest clothing. Likewise ballerinas can dance in modest clothes. I used to own a scuba diving academy and loved swimming in a dive suit. They were made of ¼ inch thick neoprene and they definitely covered my full body including my feet and head. Modesty is an option…the current sportswear is a convention.

I love the book A Style of Our Own. The pamphlet For the Strength of Youth was taken mostly from this book. In the speech that Carma referred to, Prophet Kimball identified Satan’s reason for promoting immodest dress regardless of any guile on the part of the wearer. It is to encourage immorality in thought (as a man thinketh).

Satan understands how chemistry works. He knows that alluring make-up, dress and actions promote sexual chemistry that clouds judgment and leads to inappropriate choices with eternal consequences. There is no excuse - only lack of courage, understanding, self-respect, or desire for going along with an immodest trend. It is a choice; there are alternatives.

Are you sure you’re not afraid, or, rather, ashamed of the human body?

Anna,

Adam and Eve (a married couple) were running around the Garden of Eden naked and unashamed when God told them to get dressed and set the standard for all mankind. What is wrong with living the standard that the Lord has set or at least allowing others to do so without ridicule? Are you afraid or ashamed to live the standard?

Liz: Hurray! :)

Holly: Hurray! :)

Carma: I do think it’s possible to admire the grace of the human body in appropriate ways, but part of the problem is that we have men with hormones, and silencing them (the hormones, not the men) can be troublesome. If we could just turn hormones off, then maybe immodesty wouldn’t even be an issue. But since that’s impossible, we don’t want to be putting dirty thoughts into anyone’s heads. (And if you go too far along that road, you end up with pornography which then creates rapists and serial killers and all sorts of muck that kills society dead.) As for the solution, well, the world’s going to go on its merry way, so we need to be thinking about what we as Latter-day Saints are going to do, not about universal changes, since those won’t happen. But we can stand up for what we believe in, even if it means being different and weird and (gasp) peculiar. I don’t know what the solution is, but I do think we all too often cave in and go with societal norms when we really ought to be sticking to our guns.

J: I’m glad to hear it! And that book sounds like it just slipped into my to-read list. :)

Anna: Yup, pretty sure. :) The human body is a beautiful thing, a miraculous thing, and I think it’s safe to say that I love the body. It’s practically perfect. (Granted, individuals may not be so, but the Platonic ideal — or rather celestial, glorified ideal, I should say — is awesome. In the old sense.) But we do have societal restraint for a reason, and so while I do appreciate the beauty of the human body, I also appreciate the need for clothing and modesty. Perhaps that need will melt away in the next life; I don’t know. But for now it’s the rule of the game, so we really ought to play along. :)

I think I’d really like to see someone run a marathon, win at curling, or perform a 3 hour ballet in either a 1/4 inch thick neoprene full body suit or karate uniform.

It’s interesting how one might want to blame others for their immodesty when in reality it would be more realistic, helpful, and responsible to focus on controlling one’s own thoughts, rather than on controlling the dress code of sport and the world at large.

I think you’re right that we can’t blame others. What we can do is control our own thoughts (as you said), but we can also be aware of what we ourselves wear, and that’s the point I was trying to get at. We can’t force the world to change. But we can be examples, and hopefully that goodness will rub off and encourage others to be like us. Maybe it won’t, but all that really matters is that we do our part.

I don’t think anyone really needs to strip down for a leisurely swim at the local pool, though. :)

As an athletic swimmer, I must say that I agree with what you have said, Ben, to a certain extent. Yes, swimming can be an uncomfortable experience when swimsuits tend to come with very little about them. I was always rather annoyed that we paid upwards of $40 for a suit that covered maybe 20% of my body. Okay, maybe a bit more but you get the idea.

However, I think that there is definitely a way TOO be modest about wearing a swimsuit. For one, girls tend to wear board shorts which covers a great deal of their hip area and some will even wear a shirt over the top when swimming outdoors. Many of the guys I swam with were required to wear speedos at a meet (the really skimpy suits, speedo is a brand not a type, actually) but they would simply remove their long trunks before their race, then put them right back on once they climbed out. Girls too. I always wore a ‘drag suit’ over the top of mine when I wasn’t competing directly and those are extremely modest suits for athletes.

I don’t profess to be the most modest person but I have enough self-doubt in my own figure not to want to flaunt it all the time. Swimming was not the most comfortable situation I could have put myself in while in High School. But I was surrounded by respectful and modest people who understood these important values and did the best with what they could.

I was really just poking mild fun at Ben’s description of swimming pools as awkward to the point of gross. It’s fine with me if Ben–or anyone else–doesn’t feel comfortable in swimming suits or seeing other people in swimming suits. I’ve often found it a little bit hilarious that Latter-day Saints are so stringent about wearing modest clothing, but a swimming suit suddenly tosses all of those clothing standards out the window simply because of the association with water.

I’m absolutely willing to live the standard. Well, at least today’s standard as determined by garment design. Not the standard as determined by the design of temple garments, say, 70 years ago. Or 100 years ago, which I’m guessing is a change from the standard of modesty given to Adam and Eve. Seems that it’s alright for temple designs–and thus the definition of modesty–to shift depending on the times and society, at least to some extent. Could it be that swimming suits could also be deemed modest based on similar application and re-designation of what constitutes modesty based on a particular situation?

I don’t believe that modesty consists necessarily of ensuring that my clothing covers a certain amount of my skin, but is rather a frame of mind. Immodesty occurs when the body is being flaunted. Modesty, to me, is associated with humility and also with a sense of the beauty and the sacredness of the body, which is also the standard that I think that God gave Adam and Eve (as opposed to their shame at being naked), and is the standard that I am willing to uphold.

Just to play devil’s advocate, it was Satan who first told Adam and Eve to get dressed. God didn’t tell them to put their clothes on until after they had fallen–He seemed to be fine w/ their nakedness, until they suddenly felt a need to cover up.
In other words: if BYU is really the Lord’s university, it needs to go all nude, all the time.
Just kidding. That would be, as Ben says, gross. :)

e,
I didn’t suggest controlling anyone or changing the standard for sports to require Gis or dive suits. I have seen beautiful modest ballet costumes and track attire and simply noted that one can perform at a high level and maintain modesty. As Ben noted, we all come equipped with a chemistry set built in. There are many that are skilled at the art of seduction. Some come in the form of fashion designers, others as choreographers for dance and drill teams. Some are naive innocent children of God who are trying to be popular or fashionable. Regardless of origin or motive, it is wise to be aware of matches when guarding your own chemistry set even if it means not hanging out at the neighborhood pool and I commend Ben for his personal insight, integrity and diligence in this regard.

Anna,

Modesty is a mindset, but there has to be integrity between actions and thought. I cannot judge whether or not your argument has integrity – That is between you and the Lord. But I will say that no one is justified in poking fun at someone else’s efforts to promote modesty. There are enough people in this world anxiously engaged in mocking standards – they don’t need any more helpers.

On the other hand, members of the church made a covenant with their Heavenly Father at baptism to become his agents. We have been asked to follow the council of the prophets. Dallin H. Oaks gave an interesting talk on pornography in April of 2005. In his final point Elder Oaks pleads with the young ladies of the church, “Please understand that if you dress immodestly, you are magnifying this problem by becoming pornography to some of the men who see you.”

Many young people today can debate the particulars of the council we have received on dress standards until they turn blue, but integrity should be at the heart of these debates. Shame for the body is not the issue. Rather we are promoting respect for the sacredness of our second estate and demonstrating our gratitude to God for the precious gift of our bodies.

There are better standards out there than what American designers promote. There are higher standards to uphold. You can choose to uphold any standard you want. In fact, I support anyone in their efforts to have standards, but don’t ridicule others for upholding their standards in a different manner. “Poking mild fun” at someone’s beliefs is not humorous.

I agree. I apologize, as I did not mean to offend, but obviously did.

Anna,

I doubt that Ben is that easily offended but it is important to understand that there are others out there that are weak, searching and vulnerable to mockery. It isn’t a frivolous thing to be called to become a standard bearer.

I know a woman who was on a church employee tour of the vault. When the group was told a fact about the vault she made a light hearted comment. The tour guide stopped the tour, everyone was silenced and then he looked at her and said, “Sister, that isn’t funny!”

It is a hard lesson in life to learn that we are accountable for every word that proceeds out of our mouths. I wish that I had learned this much earlier in my life. Unfortunately, one of the side effects of Ongoing Lifespan Disorder (OLD) is greater accountability due to the volume of verbiage that we have had the opportunity or misfortune to produce.

I didn’t want to write any more on this thread, since it seemed as if I was causing more offense than anything else, but I feel that there is a need to clarify what I meant. Please be aware that I absolutely respect the opinions of everybody who has written, and respect the right that each person has to hold his or her own convictions. Whether or not I agree with opinions expressed has no bearing, for me, upon the right of each person to believe in whatever he or she feels is correct and valid for himself or herself.

That said, I must admit that I lied earlier. In an obviously misguided attempt to defuse a potentially volatile situation, I wrote that I was poking mild fun at Ben. I was hoping that by casting my comment in a humorous guise, it would be tossed aside as it was causing consternation. Obviously this approach was incorrect. In reality, I was asking Ben a serious question. I do not doubt for one moment that there are people who really do feel that swimming suits, even one-pieces for women, are immodest, along with leotards and whatever else. I don’t want to attack that position at all, and I do not want to insinuate that anyone who feels uncomfortable in a swimming suit or seeing others in swimming suits is a prude or somehow misguided. But when I read an expression of feeling such as “But I still feel uncomfortable at swimming pools. It’s just awkward seeing so much flesh. Awkward as in gross. Disturbing. Stomach-turning…” I wonder–without condemnation or attack–whether or not that person is afraid or ashamed of the sheer physicality of the human body. There is no judgment expressed in that wondering; I am simply curious.

It is one thing to believe that the human body is wonderful when it is only conceived of and accepted as a Platonic Form, perfect and exalted as an Idea. But I find that often, when people generally express disgust at the human body or a desire for it to be constantly covered, they are ashamed or afraid of the physicality of the actual body and the potential sexuality that physicality suggests. I am not saying that fear or shame is necessarily right or wrong, and I am not declaring Ben, or anyone else, to feel that way. I was simply trying to push deeper into the reasoning behind Ben’s absolutely valid opinion, and, I suppose, trying to raise the question, which I think is germane, whether or not recognition of sexuality and physicality in the here-and-now is actually morally wrong. How much of the push towards greater modesty comes from a recognition of the body’s sacredness, and how much of it comes from fear? I make no pretense to answer that question, as I believe that the answer varies from individual to individual.

Anyway, I don’t want to get into that debate. I simply wanted to clarify my intentions, and apologize for any and all offense that I caused, inadvertently. I make no judgment as to the standards that anybody feels are correct, and attack–or mock–no one for holding those standards.

Anna,

Undoubtedly, there are a few individuals out there who scream modesty out of disgust for the mortal body. However, I seriously doubt that this is a problem here. There is such a thing as a wise innocent. The human body, a sacred gift that all of us have been blessed with, has become objectified in the crudest way possible to promote the sheer physicality and sexuality of the human form. As a result, people are forgetting that our bodies are a symbol of our divinity and that mankind was created in the image of our Heavenly Father. It saddens me to see so many people unaware or forgetful of their intrinsic worth.

To be quite frank, it makes my stomach turn to see people reduce such a precious gift into a fleshy display of misguided “confidence.” When a person truly understands that the body is a fundamental ingredient to the soul they start to recognize the value of their body. When they understand that protecting the sanctity of their body is an integral part of protecting their spiritual health, they start to value their body. When someone understands that their body is a transcendental gift beyond price, they learn to treasure it.

What does one do with a priceless treasure? One guards it. What happens when someone flashes a role of $100 bills? Most likely, that someone is robbed, tricked, or cheated out of a worldly “treasure.” That is the common outcome of casting a pearl before swine. Likewise, people who understand the value of modesty are not under obligation to act like swine when pearls are cast. Why do people guard worldly treasures while they flaunt eternal treasures that are beyond price?

It seems to me that the issue is not someone’s comfort in viewing the display of the sexuality and physicality of the body. Rather it is the wisdom and care some people choose to take in protecting and encouraging others to protect their eternal assets. It is not a matter of fear or lack of comfort with ones own sexuality, but it is a matter of wisely choosing to defend their innocence in thought, word and action so that they can celebrate the creative powers of the body in the right time, place and context.

What happens when one knows their worth and takes precautions to respect and guard its value? They become more beautiful. Their patience and caution protects them from scheming individuals and preserves them for a wise and sacred purpose.

Ben,

It’s been a long time, just thought I’d read what was up and then decided to make a comment. I hope you’re well.

First, Anna, I didn’t find your comments to be out of line at all–and you don’t deserve to be picked on for them. In the context of Ben’s comments, you certainly weren’t picking on on him.

Second (my real point):

As a part of my studies at BYU I went to Cairo, Egypt to study Arabic. I lived there for several months. I developed a great respect for that people and that land, which though not perfect, has many people who ernestly strive for the right.

Dressing standards were significantly different, and much more severe than in the west. What every woman writing on this blog wears everyday is considered exceptionally loose and immodest. Likewise, many men (any who wear shorts!) are also dressed immodestly. I remember the Mormon girls being offended when they were told bluntly that they looked “just like other westerners.” Here they are regarded as paragons of modesty–and are. Even today I often feel under dressed in anything other than long-pants outdoors. Kind of like how I always have to pour other people water before myself (read: Thailand).

While in Cairo I traveled to Alexandria (on the Mediterranean). We went to the beach and I found it somewhat of a surprise to see Arab women, dressed from wrist to head to toe, with only their faces uncovered in the water. No doubt, some even more austere clergymen believe that the female form, though covered but wet, is immodest because it makes their clothing cling to their bodies. One of the girls with us, who got in, though wearing a long sleeved shirt and long pants was groped by somebody while in the water. This is mostly because of the eastern perception that western women are… well I won’t explain this all the way. This comes from movies, as well as frequent disregard for the culture by tourists.

There is much more to this story, but no space to tell it. Indeed, books have been written on related subjects. I am NOT trying to attack Egyptian society and culture. I almost didn’t write this, because it seems a travesty to leave out so much that is good and beautiful and give only a small portion which will almost certainly be incorrectly understood due to lack of context. But I hope the point I am getting at will be somewhat clear.

What I am getting at is that this is a subject which needs to be treated with a great deal of deference and respect. It is easy to go overboard in either direction. There are general guidelines found in the “For the Strength of Youth” pamphlet.

For one, feel grateful that we can choose how we dress and what we are comfortable with.

For another, feel grateful that we can choose who we associate with on the basis of whatever we like.

I, for one, am so grateful for the LDS woman and all she does and is. I mean this, and I would not change her. I’m also so glad they don’t run around with only their faces or even just eyes uncovered! I’m so glad that they can enjoy the pool like I do in the summer (however they choose to do it). As you might imagine, few women dare the water in Egypt.

One last thing: don’t confuse loneliness with hormones. That leads only to self disappointment, rather than comfort which is needed and which the Lord wants us to have. I speak from experience, not by way of insult. We’re all in the same boat. “It is not good for man to be alone.”

Cheers! Or should I say, “ma’a salaama”

(PS: I will not reply to any statements regarding this post–if I have offended, I apologize, “it was kindly meant.” If I have uplifted, I am glad. I have used enough space and time of others possession.)

There are reasons that the modesty Lord has requested includes dress, behavior, thought and conversation. When did it become acceptable to question anyone’s comfort level with their own sexuality? That is a common ploy that Satan uses to conquer the pure in heart. If a body is working properly, the way God intended for it to respond, there are switches that turn on sexual responses. For an innocent guy, that can present very embarrassing results. Inappropriate sexual stimulation of the body can produce confusion and unwarranted guilt. If the way we dress becomes pornography to some that observe us, as Elder Oaks suggested, then there is a problem. Pornography is mental rape. How each individual chooses to deal with this seems to me to be no ones business but their own.

I do think it’s unfortunate when men and women use swimming as an excuse not necessarily to wear things they ordinarily wouldn’t, but to assume attitudes they ordinarily wouldn’t–to be sexually provocative. I find it admirable when young men and women who could use swimming as an excuse to be provocative counter this by covering up a bit more than is the norm. People who feel provocative wearing a bathing suit should be careful. People who have unworthy thoughts when they see people in bathing suits should also of course be careful. But modesty, as Anna has said, has more to do with one’s attitude than the percentage of one’s body that is covered.

My concern with your line of thinking, Ben, is that by focusing on the sexual aspects of an uncovered body, it sexualizes the body. An uncovered body is not a sexual object unless someone perceives it that way, which seems to be evidenced by Adam and Eve’s nakedness in the Garden. I think it’s healthy to avoid temptations, but I don’t think it’s healthy to be preoccupied by them–so much so that you avoid normal human situations and interactions (such as swimming). If you (I’m using “you” in the general sense) associate a naked body with sexuality, then you’ve lost your ability to look at things with a critical eye. When you do encounter an uncovered body, rather than seeing this body as a person, you will automatically see this body as a sexual object and thus automatically have sexual thoughts. You’ve given this situation the power to affect you more than it might otherwise would. That’s my concern. That said, I’m not advocating throwing people into tempting situations. I just think that becoming preoccupied with avoiding potentially tempting situations can be problematic and paradoxically make the temptations worse.

(warning: tangent ahead)

What we should probably focus on, rather than prescribing a set of hemlines and necklines (though these guidelines can be helpful), is cultivating a modest attitude in men and women. It seems to me that the young men and women who take advantage of swimming situations to flaunt their bodies are usually not maintaining modest attitudes in their normal attire, even if their normal attire is considered “modest” by North American LDS standards. But we tend to ignore this fact and are generally satisfied with a young woman as long as she’s wearing clothing that most men don’t find tempting. If she’s not tempting to men, then she must be modest, right? I think we can do better than that. Immodesty, especially for women, isn’t a sexual issue so much as it’s a confidence issue. Cultivating self-respect and self-confidence in women will do more to encourage them to cover up than will telling them that their uncovered bodies are sexually provocative. I don’t have a problem with giving young women an easy hemline/neckline/sleeve line set of guidelines to follow. I’ve found it to be quite useful. But it would be nice if more people were willing to address the deeper issues that are merely manifested throught immodest attire.

I took a speech class my first year of college. Among other things we were taught to make sure our dress was appropriate for the intended audience. When pitching a business plan to a multimillionaire wear a business suit, not holy jeans. When painting a fence wear the holy jeans or other clothes that can get ruined, not a business suit. The list goes on, and yes, swimsuits are appropriate for visits to the beach or the swimming pool.

But some of us have volunteered for a lifetime calling as a member of the LDS church. Part of the promise made at baptism is to stand as a witness of God at all times, in all things and in all places. A dress code is implicit in this. If you don’t agree with this assertion you can track down the two boys from my junior high who asked me about our magic underwear. They can tell you all about it.

I am not saying that we should wear a burka to the swimming pool, but I am saying that in every setting we have a broader audience that we have promised to be a witness to. As very little of what we communicate is verbal (or written) I personally believe the majority of our promise is fulfilled through what we do, wear and the example we set.

Isaiah 3-4 speaks to the “daughters of Zion” about their dress and grooming habits. I would recommend reading it. Please note the intended audience and the group of people being discussed. Now personally, I would rather humble myself than experience some of the things in store, but it is the promise of what we can have if we follow his council that I would like to emphasize: “And the Lord will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defense” (Isaiah 4:5). Modesty in dress brings the spirit and acts as a defense.

Now obviously, some people did not appreciate my comments. That is okay. I love dialogue because it teaches us more about ourselves, each other and other cultures than we could ever learn from interacting with a group of people that agree on every point of conversation and action. I also appreciate frontal assaults when people want to debate. But there are some elements of this debate that I view as sacred. So let me reassure some of you – I have said all I intend to on the subject in this context.

The only sad part about this post, Ben, is that you avoid swimming pools. Swimming is so refreshing and is my favorite work out! Much easier on most joints than my second favorite - running.

Goodness, I really didn’t expect this many comments, but I guess it follows in suit with my other top two posts, Lip-locked lust and A return to modesty. Funny how they all sort of revolve around the same theme. :)

Molly: I agree that one could easily take modesty to an extreme, or at least something that the rest of society calls an extreme. But I don’t really know that that’s bad. It doesn’t hurt anyone else, so if someone feels like that’s what’s appropriate for them, I say more power to them.

Anna: First off, I took no offense. :) Humor is quite okay here, and for that matter my tongue is in my cheek half the time. Now, I do agree that immodesty is more about attitude, but I think that regardless of one’s attitude, there is still some clothing (or lack thereof) that is immodest. Walking around nude is definitely gross, even if you’re a full-fledged believer in the nudist philosophies and you’re not doing it to show off. :) There’s a balance. As for my expression of disgust, it was purely aesthetic — most bodies fall short of that Platonic ideal. But that’s based on a first glance, which is all one usually gets (or wants) at the swimming pool, since I for one would feel uncomfortable staring down some lady in a bathing suit. In other situations, though, even non-Platonic bodies have a beauty to them that’s transcendent and goosebumpy. Familiarity can work wonders. I’m pretty sure my disgust (which was partly tongue-in-cheek, I might add) wasn’t stemming from a fear of any potential sexuality, since as far as I can tell, I don’t look on sexuality with disgust, but rather with caution tape.

J: Yes, we need to beware of lightmindedness. I don’t think, though, that this was a situation where that line was crossed.

Heather: I agree that dialogue and disagreement are great. Truth can stand up against a battery of opposition, and since that’s what we’re all seeking for, a host of devil’s advocates can only get us nearer our goal.

Nathan: While I do think that the Egyptian dress code is a bit old-fashioned and provincial, at the same time I’m 100% for them keeping it if they really believe in it, and by “they” I mean the women. If it’s a male oppression thing, then I say bag it. But if the women are doing it out of religious or even cultural belief, that’s completely fine by me, and I can respect that even though it’s “extreme” by my own standards.

Katherine: I agree with you in principle. Constraints often do create a stigma around the banned thing that makes it even more desirable. (Girls want what they can’t have, right? :P) But at the same time, you do have to take into account male hormones, which seem to run on their own account. Yes, maturity is learning how to deal with those drives in appropriate ways, but there are plenty of younger boys (I’m thinking primarily of teenagers here) who are still figuring that out, and I don’t think it’s entirely fair to parade scantily clad women in front of boys who get turned on and don’t know how to react in appropriate and moral ways. I mean, they’ll come across enough of that on their own, in the normal course of life. Why make it harder for them?

Bart: LOL, but running is so…painful! :P I don’t think I mind swimming itself, if I can just go without all the immodesty attached. I was a pretty good swimmer as a kid, actually. (Now, though, I have contacts, and if I wear them I’m afraid they’ll slide off when I open my eyes underwater, and if I don’t then I can’t see anything.)

Um, are you for real? A swimsuit is not immodest. The human body is a beautiful thing. I can understand the bikinis, but, the one peice makes you unconfortable?

I for one, don’t like seeing bikinis, I rather they have a one peice. but, I don’t feel ashamed about that.

We were born without clothes, not with them.

As for sports, it is apperant you have never tried to run. When I ran track there were bathing suit uniforms for some of the high schools. The less clothes you wore the better. Any extra weight would slow you down alot. And the breathing of the fabric was nice too. It allowed a good amount of sweat to evaporate.

It is not easy to play hard with street clothes.

Another thing comes to mind. Art. I know this is a tangent, but, With your current thought process, it is no wonder BYU students were mortified when the greatest sculpure of the modern era had some statues here. The RoDin statues were art, but the students at BYU were childish about it. Particullary of The Kiss.

How unfortenate.

You are so ashamed of the human body you can’t look on art without blushing.

Do you not realize that some of our greatest lds artist drew *gasp* nudes? Greg Olsen, James Christensen, Doug Seegmiller (a professor at BYU) draw nudes! Oh no! Lets go burn their houses down, because if the lord wanted us nude we would have been born nude, not with clothes.

I personally have drawn nudes, and can tell you its all business. No one is making jokes, or staring at anyone. No one is getting horny. And this is with no clothes on.

So a one peice I do not have a problem with. And you shouldn’t either.

Hilary Resolution #134: Buy Ben swim trunks and take him swimming asap.

Bundy: :)

Hilary: We’ll work on that. :)