I was spending some time on a forum today. On this forum I belong to two groups, an LDS group and another group where most of the members are not LDS. The majority of the people in both of these groups are women.
While perusing the LDS group, one woman started a thread to post some photos of prom dresses she and her daughter were considering, and wanted input in regards to whether they are “modest” by LDS standards. Most of them were not, for various reasons. Some of the responses she got were things like: “No! Wide shoulder-covering straps are not enough! You need sleeves!” At the same time, the same women were also saying things like “The neckline is a little low, but it’s workable on the right-shaped woman.”
Excuse me? Do we really as a group put so much emphasis on things like sleeves that other things like necklines go by the wayside? Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m all for wearing what you want to wear. Sleeveless, low-cut, whatever. I’ll freely admit that I’m no Molly Mormon. In the end it’s your decision and it’s what you feel comfortable with.
However, I feel like placing so much emphasis on shoulders/sleeves and then neglecting to talk about chests and things that seem more “obviously” immodest is affecting how we view “modesty” in an LDS community.
So I started a spin-off thread, including a poll. I posted these two pictures.
Option A
Option B
And then I asked, which one do you think is more modest?
These are the results from the LDS group:
These are the results from the non-LDS group:
No matter which camp you belong to, you have to admit that those are interesting results.
I, personally, am of the opinion that option A is more modest. Shoulders, to me, are more appropriate than chesticles any day of the week. Is it bad that I think there is something wrong with the way we are teaching modesty in the church if approximately half of the voters in the LDS group responded this way? What do you think? LDS or not, which one do you think is more modest?
(Keep in mind that the question is NOT “which one would you wear?” I am well aware that option A is butt-ugly and I wouldn’t be caught dead in it in a million years.)
tonihansen 
I totally agree with you. Option A is definitely more modest.
Thank you!
I think either option (A or B) are modest. And I’ll tell you why, neither are flamboyant in showing off thier bust, and are not very tight. They are both covered and aren’t showing anything that would make them appear sleezy. Which I think is the point of “modesty”. As for Prom dresses, if it stays up and keeps a young lady covered “up top” and isn’t one of those mini-skirt prom dresses, then it’s pretty modest. I have heard of this argument before, about sleeves to no sleeves… I am LDS but I’m also a convert, and I was told when I became a memember that a young women is able to wear sleeve-less until they got through the Temple. As long as a young lady doesn’t show her bra (which I think is tacky) with any top on then she shouldn’t be pestered about the sleeve issue.
Christina – Some young ladies might be able to all of a sudden give up their ENTIRE WARDROBE the day they go through the temple but seriously I don’t think that’s the case. They will justify — “it was sooo expensive”, “but I look sooo cute in that”, “it would be perfect for this occasion” — so that they can continue to wear those clothes to conform to societies standards — NOT the churches. I know of members — my family included — that will take off their garments to wear something “super cute” or “so trendy” but if you listen to the council of our leaders you are to wear your garments always — when it’s hot, at night and not make any modifications to them (ie tucking and rolling them to fit the clothing). It’s always more difficult to make the right decision then it is to give in to peer pressure. But the lovely thing about being a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints is that we ALL have freedom of choice 🙂
As children (at about age 8) we were taught that if you could not wear garments with the clothing (ie they couldn’t be seen & were covered without tucking and rolling) then you were modest. PERIOD. End of topic. So, to me both would be inappropriate. And in today’s standards too many people try and justify their clothing to conform to societies standards, not what has been directed by our church leaders. So ugly or cute doesn’t matter.
There is a flaw in your poll. The way I see it your comparing apple to oranges or more aptly stated, apples to coconuts. You see, option A has huge jugs so no matter what she wears my eyes are drawn to her two evolutionary advantages. Maybe chicks should just wear what they want with the understanding that modesty is dependent on the dude whose staring at her breasts.
I realized that this was skewing some peoples’ responses as the comments were coming in on the forum, but I wanted to use the same photos here that I used there so that the data I had was consistent. I should have chosen better photos to begin with.
Option A is wayyyyy more modest. Im LDS and my rule is ‘no boobies & no buttcheeks’ All of my 10 non-LDS sisters and their friends know better than to break that rule in my house… Or if they want me to take them somewhere (Im the oldest of 11 girls) There is no reason for your bits & pieces to be hanging out. Option B leaves NOTHING to the imagination and is not at all flattering.
Picture A is much more modest. The way I see it, we are encouraged to be modest because our bodies are temples and, quite frankly, to keep those boys from thinking bad things. I don’t know too many guys that will gawk at a pair of nicely rounded shoulders…