What is Modesty?

I'm not going to link to the stories about male BYUx students writing passive aggressive notes to females about how scantily they are dressed even when most of the time they are clearly not(and even if they are, it's none of the guys' business). We've heard the stories, and you can find them easily enough. I will, however, note that I have only heard about those things happening at BYUI and BYUU, not BYUH. Maybe it happens at BYUH, too, but my guess is that being in a warm climate with beaches and swimsuits abounding and many of the students working at the Polynesian Cultural Center (wearing native traditional dress) and/or being from the islands, the over-focus on modesty is less of an issue.

There are many other posts on this topic, but I'll just link to this one so you can get some context on the discussion surrounding modesty. On one side, you have people saying that women should cover up so as to help men have pure thoughts. On the other side, you have women saying they can wear whatever they want and no one should judge them for it. No one seems to be able to agree on what it means for a man to be modest, which multiplies the sexuality and sexism surrounding the term.

When it comes to modesty, I have to quote Inigo Montoya to both sides here.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

From True to the Faith:

Modesty is an attitude of propriety and decency in dress, grooming, language, and behavior. If we are modest, we do not draw undue attention to ourselves. Instead, we seek to “glorify God in [our] body, and in [our] spirit” (1 Corinthians 6:20; see also 1 Corinthians 6:19).

The section on modesty mentions sexuality but also tattoos, piercings, sloppy dressing, and language. There is so much more to modesty than how much skin someone is showing or the tightness of their clothes. The hyper-focus on women's clothing takes away from the greater message about us all being modest in all that we do and lets men off the hook completely.

Several of the priests in our ward have long hair. One in particular was being presented to the ward awhile ago when he turned 16. He's a high school football player. The Bishop made a joke about him cutting his hair after football season was over and Samson - the obvious connection being that he benefited from the extra strength when playing football. But the clueless look on his face made it obvious he didn't know who Samson was, so from the pulpit in front of everyone the Bishop tasked him with going home and reading the story. I think he was too clueless to even be embarrassed for being called out in front of the ward for not being familiar with one of the most well known bible stories. Returning to the hair - it grabbed attention away from what was happening, a young man advancing in the Aaronic Priesthood, and highlighted his lack of understanding in a somewhat awkward way. Going a level deeper, his casual approach to his appearance mirrored his casual approach to learning the gospel. His immodest hair (not sexual hair, but rather his attention-getting hair) is what made that point possible.

Just as his lack of modesty drew attention to himself in an unflattering way, and bikini-wearing women won't like this, so can women's swimsuit or other apparel choices draw attention to themselves in an unflattering way. Of course, a ridiculously large diamond ring sends a similar message, even though it is in no way sexual in nature. Women claim that they should be able to wear a certain cut of clothing or swimsuit because it's cute, comfortable, or functional, but I can't imagine a bikini being any of those three. A 2 carat diamond is certainly none of the three. A guy's pants precariously hanging off his butt is none of the three.

It is still not about what others think of you, though. Modesty is a reflection of the individual. That is where the point gets lost. We need to stop placing the blame for men's impure thoughts on women. Men will have impure thoughts no matter what women are wearing, and that is their load to carry. Just as the football playing priest's immodest hairstyle gave away his need to read his scriptures and pay better attention in Sunday School, a woman's choice to dress immodestly highlights something amiss in her priorities.

That said, I wrote a post awhile ago about how we should not judge others. If we do, that is our own fault (and a common one at that) that we need to deal with. President Uchtdorf must have read my post, because in the next conference, he gave us this instant classic:

This topic of judging others could actually be taught in a two-word sermon. When it comes to hating, gossiping, ignoring, ridiculing, holding grudges, or wanting to cause harm, please apply the following:

Stop it!

It’s that simple. We simply have to stop judging others and replace judgmental thoughts and feelings with a heart full of love for God and His children.

He followed that up by quoting a bumper sticker that read, "Don’t judge me because I sin differently than you."

Let us stop telling men they need to shave and cut their hair and pull up their pants. Let us stop telling women to cover up.

Instead, let us all consider our own behaviors and how we choose to present ourselves to others. Think about what message you are sending to others. The point here is that how others receive the message you are sending is not what we're talking about. It is about what message you are sending, regardless of how others interpret that message. Modesty is an attitude. What is your attitude? What is your intention? If you draw attention to yourself or something about you, why are you doing that? Are you glorifying God?

Answer those questions for yourself. Put your own house in order and stop judging others as they work on their own favorite sins.

I guess both sides have something to learn.

Only stick with something if you like it

There's an interesting post over on Segullah about piano lessons and whether or not to allow your kids to quit taking them.

I play the piano, although not much more than hymns. I was ward organist for a couple years, mostly because no one else could play, not because I was that great. (I used the bass coupler rather than playing with the pedals, although I did take an organ class to try to learn to play with my feet.) I think it's a life skill to play the piano. You tune other instruments to the piano. You accompany people singing and other instruments with the piano. You learn the notes, many styles of music, and possibly more than that - a little bit of discipline.

I do wish I was better at music theory and being able to do things like play jazz or make up songs on the fly or transpose music into another key on the fly. But I'm okay with being able to play most of the hymns and learning a song if I need to. I actually only took lessons for maybe 3 years. I don't remember wanting to quit or asking to quit or how lessons ended. It might have been a financial deal, as we didn't have a lot of money. I'll have to ask my parents. I just didn't take lessons anymore but kept up on my own. The first Sunday I turned 12, I was playing piano in priesthood meeting. Preparing a hymn and prelude for priesthood meeting was something that drove me to practice, because I needed to be able to play. I wasn't just practicing some scale for a piano teacher.

My wife quit when she was young and wishes she could play better. A lot of people feel that same way. I know a lot of people quit and don't feel bad. A lot of people don't quit and do feel bad, because they hate music and their parents for it. Everyone is different.

That said, I wonder about the culture that seems to be growing across the country, within and without the church to just embrace who you are and not try to push yourself to be something you're not. I get it, that we need to love ourselves, although not in a prideful way, and love others and accept them for who they are. That is great. But you can love and accept that you're not musical and still learn to play the piano. Whatever happened to seeking earnestly the best gifts? In 1 Corinthians 12 Paul lists a ton of gifts and points out that not everyone has same gifts, but then finishes up by recommending that we develop the gifts we don't have.

I don't pretend that piano is the be-all and end-all and that everyone really has to play, as my favorite line from Mulan goes, "Well, we can't all be acupuncturists." But back to the culture thing, the comments in the blog post I linked above are as telling as the post itself. One comment in particular says:

Why on earth would you force your children to do anything like that (music lessons, sports, whatever) if they don’t want to do it? Have them try different things and only stick with something if they like it. And you’re wrting about piano lessons as if every child takes piano lessons. That’s a rather odd thing to think.

No, not everyone takes piano lessons. All the more reason to be the person who does. Seek the best gifts. Be the one who steps up where others have been afraid to. On my mission, in one area I was teaching our branch president how to play the piano. My parents bought a little learning how to play kit the church had in the distribution center and sent it to me, including a simplified hymnbook, and I left it with him when I left the area. He played one verse, one hand of a very simple hymn in sacrament meeting and completely slaughtered it, but he was learning. I could have played most hymns much better, but I would be gone in a few months, and who knew if the next elders who came would be able to play.

The more disturbing part, however, is the first thought. Only do something if you like it. What if you don't like reading scriptures? Just stop reading them, I guess. What if you don't like cooking? Hope you marry someone who cooks well or get a good enough job you can afford to eat out all the time, I guess. What if you have a stubborn child who doesn't like doing anything you ask of them? Just stop asking them to do things, I guess.

As much as I disliked the old lesson manuals and rarely taught from them, one thing has stuck with me from one of the lessons. I'd have to search to find which manual and lesson it was, but the idea was that young children may not be experienced enough to be able to understand spiritual promptings. (Sometimes they're more in tune than we are, but that's a different discussion.) But as parents and leaders of youth, our job is to help guide and direct those in our care in the same way the Spirit should be guiding and directing us. That way the youth learn to seek and find answers and follow the guidance they are given from someone they trust, eventually being able to transition away from listening to us and towards listening to the Spirit.

Maybe it's the piano or maybe it's something else. Teach them to sacrifice and do things for others. Teach them to serve. Teach them a foreign language. Teach them to cook and clean up after themselves. Teach them to garden. Teach them to push themselves. Keep in mind, however, that your example is as important as what you're telling them. You practice the piano yourself, whether or not you already know how to play. I have a personal policy to not ask someone to do something that I'm not willing to do myself. Let them see that you're doing hard things, too, so they don't think we're just trying to live out our broken dreams through them or that we're being lazy and making them change a diaper just because we don't want to.

If we don't try to push them to do something that would be good for them, what they'll learn is that they don't have to stick with anything they don't like because that's just how they are. When the Spirit prompts them to do something they don't want to do, they will have learned from us to ignore that prompting, as it will eventually go away like our promptings did. That’s a rather odd thing to teach.

Missions

I was just thinking back on a recent post about agency, where I called out the fact that someone had placed not attending BYU in a list of other signs of apostasy, such as not going on a mission, not going to the temple, or not attending church. I started wondering if keeping the mission in that list is problematic.

I was reading somewhere just barely and unfortunately forgot where, so I'm negligently plagiarizing here, about issues with boys who don't go on missions. What they were writing specifically about was those for whom the bar has been raised too high and are not allowed to go. The unfortunate side effect for some of these boys is to become estranged from the church, especially when the rules changed, and they saw that they were disqualified from going where others who had done the same things or worse just a few years previously were allowed to go. It's been a few years since those rules changed (at least to my knowledge), so I don't know that the changing standard rears its ugly head as often. Surely there are enough differences among zealous local leaders who may disallow someone that another lay leader might have let through that there are still some discrepancies there. As much as we do standardize, there is plenty left to the whim of poorly trained local leaders, especially those who didn't go to BYU, but even more so those who did go to BYU.

Another group, of course, is those who choose not to go for whatever reason. I was talking with a brother who I home taught in one of my first visits with him. I asked him either where he went on his mission or if he had. He hadn't. The silence was uncomfortable for a second as I wasn't sure how to respond. I really wasn't judging him and still don't. It just took me by surprise, and I wasn't sure what to follow that up with. I still don't know why he didn't go but figure if at some point it is important, I will find out. Maybe he chose not to. Maybe he had a medical issue and wanted to but couldn't. He's a great guy and active member of the church with whom I've had some pretty deep gospel discussions, which is the way I think of him. More than anything, I wonder how it feels for him to have to deal with that question for the rest of his life no matter the reason for not going.

Agency

On the comment board of a story about the freak Warren Jeffs, the discussion was being held about agency. Obviously there is some crazy brainwashing going on in the FLDS compounds. One commenter posited that LDS families are doing the same things to our children. His point was lost, however, when he threw out there that Warren Jeffs himself may not have been equipped well enough to make appropriate decisions given the abusive environment he grew up in. As true as that may be, my understanding is that abusive practice multiplied when he took over leadership.

Regardless of whether Jeffs had enough knowledge of the outside world to make his own decisions, the question stands whether our children do.

An interesting reply to the above:

A large percentage of LDS boys don't go on missions. Large percentages don't go to BYU, or get married in the temple, or remain active after age 18. Many choose to leave the church. We don't throw them out of our families for making these choices. We continue to love them, pray for them, and be there for them whether or not we like their choices.

We teach them as well as we can while they are young, but it's their choice and their decision. Most of our kids go to public schools, watch TV, have internet access, etc. They have plenty of opportunities for hearing other viewpoints. Just look at the number of former LDS who comment on these boards!

The point generally speaking is a valid one. We love them and teach them; they make their own decisions. The part I'm a bit concerned about is the first half of the second sentence. What does going to BYU have to do with the rest of that paragraph? No mission? Check. No temple? Check. No church attendance? Check. No go to BYU? Sorry, but that's not the same as forsaking and/or declining to make covenants with the Lord.

Eagles and Driver Licenses

I can't imagine my boys not earning their Eagles or my daughters not earning their Personal Progress. I would like my boys to earn their Duty to God, although I'm not as worried about that.

I don't think it's appropriate to hold something like a child's driver license over earning such an award.

I like the idea of teaching our children correct principles, modeling those principles in our own lives, and then giving them enough rope to either be productive or hang themselves. Not literally. Obviously at some point you step in and take drastic steps to avoid major life changing issues.

Children who are rebellious, lazy, doing poorly in school (I'm thinking really poorly, not just like B average poorly, but to the extent where they are being irresponsible), bad drivers, or otherwise not deserving of a driver license should not receive their driver license. That's probably not the real list but rather one I just made up right now and am not going to think much about. The point is that each child is different, so when it becomes time that it is an issue, you work it out with each child individually.

I can see daughter #2 coming straight out and telling us she doesn't even want to drive even if deep down she is desperate to. If there is something she is worked up about related to some award she doesn't want to be pressured to get, everything else in the entire world, good or bad, can be stacked up on every side, and she will retain her laser focus on not wanting to earn the stupid award. She will even be convinced herself that she doesn't want to drive. Until she wants to, at which point she will forget that she just told us 5 minutes ago that she doesn't care if she can drive.

Daughter #1 will have her Personal Progress earned the first day it is possible to have it whether or not there is any external reward for it.

The kids will be expected to help shuttle their siblings around as part of earning the privilege of driving. My parents didn't make me pay for my portion of the car insurance, but I think it's a good idea for them to understand at a deeper level that the cost of a vehicle is more than just the gas you put into it. Better grades and no tickets means lower insurance costs. You have to find a job and balance your time wisely in order to keep your grades up and earn the money you need and still participate in family and school activities.

I want my children to be responsible. If they are, they will probably earn their oh-so-important awards anyway just because they are responsible. If they are not responsible, not earning their awards may be a sign of that. They may also be very responsible but simply have to make decisions about what is important to them and the Eagle or Personal Progress may not be that. With the kids in my troop, I can tell within a few weeks of working with them whether or not they will get their Eagle. I think I know my kids a lot better than that so there should be no surprise to anyone if they earn it or not.

The Lesser Law of Correlation

While I've heard or read a few different people talking recently about how boring, unspiritual, or somewhat stifling our church meetings are sometimes, especially sacrament meetings, I rarely feel the same way.

I feel like I get out of church meetings what I put into it. The best way to get something out of temple attendance, sacrament meeting attendance, participating in sunday school classes, scripture reading, prayers, etc. is to go into it with a question in mind. Whatever the topic, start thinking and asking questions about it, and very quickly everything you see will be focused around that topic. It's pretty amazing to watch.

One of our local leaders recently gave a presentation regarding how many of the changes coming from church headquarters are actually moving away from the bureaucratic, centralized direction of the past in favor of more direction from local leaders. Examples of this are the new church handbook, recent changes to the Duty to God program, the ward council structure, etc.

If anything, they are putting the ball in our court to see what we will do with it without being commanded in all things. If we're not ready for the higher law, we're going to go back to correlation and centralization. I don't think that's good for anyone, but if we're only ready for the lesser law at this time, it's all we're going to get.

Changing or Cheating

Some ward members started a fitness challenge, and I'm joining in. I do much better at keeping myself in shape when I have someone other than myself that I'm accountable to. The chance at winning cash doesn't hurt either. I've done well at a few of these challenges done through work or with family.

The funny thing is that I see the same behavior in some participating in this challenge as I've seen in previous ones. The behavior I'm referring to is nitpicking the rules of the challenge.

The point of a challenge like this is to spend a 2-3 months following more healthy practices with the hope that you'll stay in the habit after the challenge is over. So it's strange when a challenge barely starts and everyone starts immediately looking for ways to bend the rules.

The rules are things like eating fruits and vegetables, exercising, not eating late at night, drinking lots of water, and laying off the sweets. It's pretty simple.

One good brother justified his willingness to bend the rules and eat things he shouldn't, because he claims that cutting out certain foods simply isn't sustainable. I'll give him that. Making a change for a few months and then picking the habit back up after it's over is probably less than useful. On the other hand, going cold turkey and dropping something that you never thought you could forgo can actually show you it's possible and reduce your cravings for that particular food or drink.

I know, because I've done it myself, going a year without carbonated drinks just to see if I could. I drink them occasionally now, but not near as much as I used to. If you're so hooked on a food or drink that you don't think you could ever give it up, that's probably a signal that you do need to give it up.

I'm okay with him cheating, though, because it's less competition for me as I go for the big prize.

Yoga

I had a strange conversation with my boss about a month ago that made more sense today.

It was just the two of us in his office, and somehow the conversation turned to Yoga. I really don't remember how, and it doesn't matter. He mentioned he had started doing it at home. Fine. He had some DVDs he was using to learn it. Okay. You feel like you're standing or sitting there doing nothing, breathing deeply, and you end up way sore the next day; it's a great workout. Sounds interesting.

Then it gets weird. He starts saying something and then pauses for a second and says, "I know you're Mormon, and I really don't want you to take this the wrong way, but what I really like about Yoga is how it's all about the individual. It's about what you do to benefit yourself personally. You can introspect and modify things however best suits your needs."

Okay, so what does that have to do with being Mormon? I could kind of guess where he was going with it, that he obviously has some issue where he thinks the LDS Church is too controlling or something. It was just hard to say. Last I remember we teach about the importance of agency, self-reliance, and similar doctrines, but I understand the confusion caused by being cautioned against detrimental behaviors which often serve to remove agency.

So turn off the wayback machine, and we're at a conference that has some early morning Yoga for attendees. Not having ever done Yoga before, I'm interested and go. I knew he was interested, having told me previously he likes it, so I tell him he should come tomorrow. Then the connection is made. He says that he's not into organized religion or organized exercise.

So he apparently has this little schpiel he gives, and apparently the first time he only gave me the half about not liking organized exercise, forgetting to mention organized religion other than to ensure me he wasn't trying to demean my choice in subscribing to organized religion.

It makes me wonder if I sometimes tell a story so many times it becomes old and memorized to the point where I go on auto-pilot and don't pay attention to whether I told all the important parts. Maybe it's kind of like when you copy and paste a sentence, and it doesn't quite fit in its new location. So you delete a word or two and fix the capitalization and punctuation to make it fit without realizing that it still doesn't make sense.

I'm not totally sure how he knows I'm LDS, since we've never talked about it, although I have some guesses. I don't take offense to his choice to reject organized religion. I'm assuming his contempt is general to all organized religions. While I understand it better now, so it's less strange, it's still a bit off that two discussions on exercise have brought in at least a mention of religion. Granted, Yoga has religious roots, but the way it's practiced here in the states is pretty nonreligious in nature.

Choices

I mentioned that we would be going on a backpacking trip, and the weather actually cooperated on this one. The most annoying weather-related incident was finding out as I filled out the tour permit that I needed to have some new hazardous weather training. Other than that, the weather was just about perfect. It was warm but overcast. We hiked four miles in, our destination a high mountain lake. I hadn't been backpacking with this group of Scouts, and I was pleasantly surprised at how prepared they were. Several of them learned important things about what to bring or not when backpacking but it wasn't too painful.

We actually had all our boys but three attend. We're an average size LDS troop, with nine boys. It's just enough that we could probably split into two patrols but that we don't have to. Three of the six boys who chose to come skipped baseball games to be there. One of the boys who chose not to come chose to play in his game. His dad is the coach and called me to tell me how broken up his son was that he couldn't come camp with us. I don't know if he really was sad or not, but life is all about choices, and I'll never get on anyone for choosing something good, given two good things to choose from.

The problem I do have is with the other two boys who didn't come. They claimed they had to do something for lacrosse, even though the lacrosse season ended several months ago. They actually wanted to stay for a neighborhood ping pong tournament. You know what, that's cool, too. The ping pong tournament is a big tradition run by one of their families. So go to the tournament. It's not like I don't know it's happening. But no, they lied, thinking that I would understand their missing the backpack trip for lacrosse but that I wouldn't understand if it was ping pong.

I've already told both of them multiple times that coming to activities or not is their choice. I don't get upset if they're not there. Yes, we miss them, but we can also get along without them. One of them keeps trying to fire me up, telling me he's not going to our week-long camp. I already have his deposit and physical, so I know he's going. But even if he wasn't, it doesn't rip me apart if he chooses to go to football practice instead.

They missed out on a great backpacking trip, not me. I was there, lying in my one man tent, miles from civilization, sipping ice cold water from a glacier-fed spring, staring up through the mesh roof at the stars above, wondering when the boys who were there would stop reading 'yo mama' slams off their iPod Touches and go to sleep already.