Modesty standards are too far entrenched. If you try to make a case for the changes not being revelation, you are likely to get the response that ongoing revelation is behind them. The church leaders talk about modesty in general conference. You aren't likely to convince anyone that it isn't important if they already believe it is.Fiannan wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2017, 8:06 am1964 BYU Homecoming Queen.Red wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2017, 8:00 amSeriously! That is fascinating! Do you have some sort of evidence of the dress at BYU in the 50s and 70s? Not that I don't believe you, I just am highly interested.Fiannan wrote: ↑September 22nd, 2017, 8:36 amOh come on, there is a difference between telling members that viewing porn is wrong (as I find it to be) and going all "Reefer Madness" in regards to the issue. I have seriously heard LDS people say that looking at porn is as addictive as heroin and any amount is addiction. Thankfully the Church is now saying that this is incorrect and that most people who look at porn are not addicted. As for modesty it may depend on when a person was raised in the Church. In the 1950s is was perfectly fine at BYU to wear gowns that exposed the shoulders and much of the back. In the 1970s one can remember most youth wearing those really short running shorts (both males and females) to youth activities. Then something happened around the turn of the century and suddenly little girls in sun dresses were seen as immodest and we saw sleaves added to classic art paintings depicting angels. That is going overboard, don't you think?I'm not sure the church is losing people because it suggests modest dress and a less generous view of pornography viewing than you would like to see. And if it is, what would that matter? Should standards be relative to what brings in good attendance?
My daughter has been ostracized because I let her wear sleeveless shirts and shorts anywhere she goes. She's only 11. I let her pick out her own clothes. We have limits on sheer clothing, but I don't have a problem with her wearing what she likes. Lately though, I've noticed she's started wearing tights under all of her dresses to church. Her dresses aren't mini skirts, by any stretch, but they're probably four inches above the knee. I asked her why and she shrugs and looks guilty. The funny thing is though, she won't wear tights with her dresses anywhere but church. I've witnessed the other girls and parents ostracize her. I know this is what's behind her behavior. It makes me sad. This is why I want to know your evidence of the attire at BYU in the 50s and 70s. It's evidence that the standard has changed, but not due to revelation.
The problem is not the dress standards but the ostracization. A culture that allows snubbing over infractions, even serious infractions, is not a healthy one. It leads people to do what's "right" based on other people's beliefs. Even when it leads people to do good things, it distorts your ability to make decisions based on truth rather than opinion and so you can never be entirely sure you are truly in the right.
If you fight the ostracization, you will likely find it only gets worse. Instead, I would focus on being as inclusive yourself as possible. Encourage your daughter to be loving and accepting of everyone, especially herself. You will find that eventually she gains a supportive, loving group of friends who don't make her feel bad for her choice of dress. It might seem like every other girl in the ward is snubbing her, but that isn't true. As she loves and accepts herself, she'll find those who also love and accept her.