Have you guys seen this evolution of the swimsuit video yet? It's been bombarding my facebook news feed for a while, mostly by people I know/knew from church. I understand why this would be a huge hit in the LDS community; we love when "science" catches up to things we have been teaching in the church, like when scientists figured out in the 60's (at least I think it was the 60's) that tobacco is really bad for you after the Word of Wisdom (the part of LDS doctrine that tells us tobacco, alchohol, coffee, etc. is bad for us) had been a thing for more than 100 years. This time, instead of confirming the Word of Wisdom, "science" has apparently confirmed the importance of "modesty."
For those of you who have not seen the video yet, Jessica Rey, who is an investor (I think) for a "modest" line of swimsuits, describes the history of the bikini and her "repentance story" as a former bikini wearer. She, then, explains a study in which men were shown pictures of women wearing bikinis while hooked up to equipment that would measure their brain activity. Alarmingly, after seeing these pictures, the part of the brain that utilizes tools lit up, but the part of the brain that deals with figuring out motivation, etc. of other people, like the women in the bikinis, in some of the men did not. This means that the men were thinking of the women as tools for pleasure (ooh she is so hot! I wonder what it would be like to do x,y, or z thing to her. I bet it would feel soo good) instead of as humans with motivations and feelings (hmm..she's apparently been working out and is proud of her ab muscles). This proves that wearing bikini's dehumanizes you, and if you continue to wear them, than you can't hold that one man responsible for thinking dirty things about you, or sexually harassing (or full-on assaulting) you.
What does this say about a LDS missionary serving abroad in an area where women do not normally dress "modestly"? Does that make him entitled to seeing the woman he should be serving as tools? How about to touch them inappropriately? Absolutely not. We expect our missionaries (and all of the priesthood holders within the church) to see these women as precious daughters of our Heavenly Father and to treat them with respect!
The argument that men's thoughts and actions are completely dependent on what women wear also contradicts the doctrine of free agency. All children of Heavenly Father, including the male ones, are designed to be very capable of making their own choices, independently of what other people around them have chosen, and all of us including men will be held accountable for their choices. I strongly believe that this includes the choice of a man to lust after, harass, or assault one of His daughters, regardless of what she is wearing.
In a facebook comment feed on a former teachers post (yes, I am friends on facebook with a few of my teachers from college and I think even one from high school), she referred to an old definition of modesty, "freedom from vanity." In this perspective, modesty is no longer limited to scantily dress, or even really to sexual attention seeking behaviors in general. By this definition, gossiping about the woman who showed up to church with tattoos and a mini-skirt is immodest, because it suggests that the gossiper has excessive pride in his/her attire.
Instead of teaching our youth (boys too) that modesty is about protecting men from a woman's scant dress, we should teach them that modesty is about respect. Girls who have respect for themselves don't feel the need to inflate their pride, to put others down to make themselves feel better, or to dress or behave in a way to get lustful attention from men; Women who respect men will treat them like men, not like animals who are incapable of self-control. Men who respect themselves will not need to assert their power and sexual prowl to prove their manliness, and men who respect women will behave like a gentlemen regardless of attire or appearance.
No comments:
Post a Comment