Utah looking stupid in the news again.

[Fiannan]

http://fox13now.com/2014/05/28/students ... blication/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No wonder porn is so popular in Utah. Whenever people go to strange lengths in repression of the body the sub conscious will either go one extreme or the other to compensate.

[Lizzy60]

That's just flippin ridiculous.

[Rose Garden]

=))

I love Utah!

[Original_Intent]

I noticed one girl they even edited out a tattoo. :))

I didn't even see a modesty issue on the ones that they filled in. It looked like they were imposing a temple garment standard.

[ajax]

I think all the girls looked great, pre-edit, tattoo and all.

[Original_Intent]

I wonder if any girl wore two or more pairs of earrings if the "extras" got edited out... :)) =))

[marc]

Society of whited sepulchres.

[Fiannan]

Well, they sure know how to get publicity. This story is in east coast newspapers as well as the UK Daily Mail.

I hate getting questions about the Church concerning these sort of things. Do they fluoridate the water in that school district?

[Jake]

On a more positive note, the superintendent was a shining example of how to wear the corporate uniform.

[jbalm]

Dem Shoulders.jpg (7.61 KiB) Viewed 2251 times

[Fiannan]

Lots of mean comments against Mormons here where the article is printed in England: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -sexy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The comments aren't moderated so at least consider signing in with Facebook and replying or voting the nasty ones down.

[SAM]

We just decided to move to Utah so when my friend saw this article she tagged me on Facebook to warn me where I was going ;) It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

[Shay]

[quote="Fiannan"Do they fluoridate the water in that school district?[/quote]

:)) :))

[Fiannan]

By the way does anyone know people in that city? What is the opinion of people, especially parents, there? I would assume most if not all of these young women are LDS, as well as their parents.

Would be interesting to see if there are a lot of talks scheduled on the evils of female skin in the next few weeks. =))

[ithink]

What is happening at that school isn't about skin, it's about men pushing their agenda on garments. But the initiators of this very damaging nonsense, and the little "boots on the ground" men -- the purveyors (see pic of the Mormon Taliban below), are unwittingly arguing against themselves. This is because they don't know that years ago, the temple committee recommended garments with tank tops. And those necklines and shoulders that have been painted in are in part, an artifact not originating from Joseph Smith, but from Emma, who thought garments though they would look better with a collar. The rest is reticent of the Victorian era (1700's), but only in part, as that era commonly covered ankles and shoulders, while leaving [gasp] the breasts completely exposed.

mormon taliban.JPG (23.15 KiB) Viewed 1955 times

[Desert Roses]

What is happening at that school isn't about skin, it's about men pushing their agenda on garments. But the initiators of this very damaging nonsense, and the little "boots on the ground" men -- the purveyors (see pic of the Mormon Taliban below), are unwittingly arguing against themselves. This is because they don't know that years ago, the temple committee recommended garments with tank tops. And those necklines and shoulders that have been painted in are in part, an artifact not originating from Joseph Smith, but from Emma, who thought garments though they would look better with a collar. The rest is reticent of the Victorian era (1700's), but only in part, as that era commonly covered ankles and shoulders, while leaving [gasp] the breasts completely exposed.

mormon taliban.JPG

Because breasts are not sexual objects for men, they are for producing milk for infants. :-$

[A Random Phrase]

Because breasts are not sexual objects for men, they are for producing milk for infants. :-$

In the old days, society was aware of that. Our society has lost that paradigm. We are upside-down and sideways in far too many ways.

[SAM]

A Facebook friend of mine posted this photo yesterday of a BYU yearbook picture from the 40's. Seems modesty has really changed over the years in the church or maybe because they didn't have photoshop back then they couldn't do anything about the picture?

*Sorry, I don't know how to embed photos.

[A Random Phrase]

I don't know how to make that pdf into a photo, but here's what I found on a search:


BYU students in 1930.

[SAM]

Perfect, Toni. Thanks! These ladies surely wouldn't made it into the latest edition of this Wasatch country high school's yearbook

[Fiannan]

Perfect, Toni. Thanks! These ladies surely wouldn't made it into the latest edition of this Wasatch country high school's yearbook

The Church in the 1930s, from my understanding, was way into analysis of scripture and applying the teachings in daily life. To a degree the Church was far more esoteric than it is today. Also, members were told not to make a big deal if they caught a kid masturbating ... only an issue if it was excessive. Naturally there are those who will say we have progressed since the 1930s and are ready for stronger doctrine -- like covering a girl's shoulders.

Just noting that culture can have a huge impact on the way one interprets the Gospel.

[Fiannan]

Because breasts are not sexual objects for men, they are for producing milk for infants.

Well in a way yes and in a way no. They are considered one of the erogenous zones and while their ultimate function is production of milk they hold special significance as secondary sexual anatomical features. And I rather doubt that culture is the reason people get turned on by breasts. If one shows pictures of exposed female breasts in a setting that looks romantic it causes arousal in almost all males and most females. One of the objections I used to have regarding Freud was if the breast signifies an attachment to warmth and indirectly to sexuality in regards to the mother then women would have similar reactions to breasts as men do. Well, once I studied the research on female sexuality it just so happens they do...but again setting is quite important. I've also known quite a few heterosexual women comment on seeing a well-endowed woman and admitting they might like to play for the other team, so to speak, at least temporarily. Most bi-sexuals I know also find the breast the biggest turn on. So to say breasts are not sexual is to kinda ignore reality.

That said many men get turned on by exposed feet or a really nice smile. Many women like to look at firm upper legs on men. So these features too could be said to be sexual and make the case, if we want to go way extreme, to say men should wear robes and women burkas. One should be able to control impulses rather than say everyone should wear modified tents.

[ithink]

Because breasts are not sexual objects for men, they are for producing milk for infants. :-$

Oh boy, not sure if I want to touch that one. But I will, since it is so simple.

Roses, surely you have considered the form and function of the breast in one case, but have you considered the form and function of the human breast vs. that of other species -- while they are not lactating?

Certainly what is erogenous to one is nothing to another, and to even begin to delineate these in nearly any way is ridiculous. First the breast had to be covered, so be it. But then it was the shoulders, the neckline, the ankles, the knees, the belly button, and so on. I'd say what the heck, lets just cut to the chase and sexualize the whole woman at once: we will have all the women don a burqa, and yes, we will let the religious leaders be exclusively in charge of that, since they in their inspiration know what is best for us, and must rise and protect us from ourselves.

Get the buckets of Prozac ready, the up and comers are going to be needing it.

[ithink]

... members were told not to make a big deal if they caught a kid masturbating ...

Certainly, especially when they do it in the womb.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/20/the_sci ... g_fetuses/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Those naughty babies! :ymparty:

[jbalm]

Because breasts are not sexual objects for men... :-$

As a man...gotta disagree with this.

Me like the bewbs.