One of the interesting things about Mormonism is how the Brethren adapt the religion to stay in power, retain and cultivate political and economic influence and maintain control.

What was Mormonism to be after polygamy was abandoned? What culturally defined Mormonism?

This gave rise to a new emphasis on the Word of Wisdom dietary rules, anti-feminism and the ERA, and now ever-changing dress standards to combat against the erogenous zone du jour:


http://www.weddinglds.com/modest-wedding-dresses/lds-wedding-dresses-which-neckline-fits-your-face-and-body-type


But it wasn't always like this:


http://janariess.religionnews.com/2014/06/05/mormon-shoulder-war-whats-stake/


Mormon females used to wear sleeveless tops and dresses, as this photo of the 1964 BYU Homecoming Queen demonstrates. The For the Strength of Youth manual didn’t have any restrictions about sleeveless clothing then (though backless and strapless were flat out).

What changed?

There are likely several factors at work. First, as the broader culture has become more permissive, even to the point of marketing sexy clothing for little girls, it makes perfect sense that the Church would strive to counteract it, even if that means going too far in the other direction. It’s wrong for children—of either gender—to be dressed in a sexual way. As the APA reports, a too-early focus on sex can have negative effects on kids’ self-esteem and mental health.

Second, this may be part of a broader trend for the Church to spell out in precise detail what its standards entail, especially for teens. For the Strength of Youth used to be sixteen pages. Now it is three times that length.

But neither of the above reasons addresses the question of why shoulders in particular have emerged as a litmus test of modesty.

Perhaps it’s because shoulders are a recognizable symbol of human power and strength.

When we work hard, we put our shoulders to the wheel.
When we build community, we shoulder one another’s burdens.
When we destroy community, we give others the cold shoulder.
When someone we love is in pain, we provide them with a shoulder to cry on.
When we feel superior, we are head and shoulders above everyone else.
When we are angry and lash out defensively, we have a chip on our shoulder.
When we carry out our duties successfully, we shoulder responsibility.
When we meet someone powerful, we rub shoulders with them.
When we oppose someone powerful, we stand shoulder to shoulder with others in the fight.
When we push someone aside, we shoulder past them.

In every one of these examples, the human shoulder is a locus of might.

As tense discussions continue to erupt about Mormon women’s power, it’s not an accident that the corporeal locus of that tension has become their shoulders.

We are acting out our discomfort with women’s power by covering their shoulders, the part of the body that most represents responsibility, capability, and authority.
- See more at: http://janariess.religionnews.com/2014/06/05/mormon-shoulder-war-whats-stake/#sthash.rPUJr8As.dpuf



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2015 08:30AM by anybody.

The graph is fascinating. It really looks like some guy made an executive decision in 2000. "Let's make modesty for girls a big rallying point. Yeah, who could object to that?"

I am the same age as that BYU queen, and I can confirm that those were the dresses we wore, and without guilt.

I had the sweetheart neckline. The neckline plunged a whole 2 inches from where a crew neck wedding dress (if they made something that ugly) would lie. The temple matrons found it terribly revealing and placed a dickey of yellowed double knit polyester in my neckline. They clucked "the groom might be distracted as you kneel over the alter" - as if he wasn't already obsessed with doing the deed as soon as the blessed event was over! All of these "modest" illustrations are waaaaay more racy than what I wore. The dickey really made me feel (and made my dress look) pretty damn ugly. Friggin' cult!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2015 11:48AM by goatsgotohell.

My favorite part of the neckline article is that, besides the hair and level of white and delightsomeness, it's the same girl!

So much for mormon diversity.



P.S. The clavicle is clearly shown in several of those neckline option drawings, and now I have to figure how to deal with my raging erection....

Of the illustrations they showed for necklines (all very conservative), probably only one of them-the crewneck-would have worked with the garment. The rest were too wide, and the bride would have had to tuck the garments to the side, or have some lace inserts. That's what I did for my wedding dress.

The last thing a bride should have to worry about when they are looking for a dress is concealing an restrictive undergarment.

I know in the early 70s I wore sleeveless shirts at BYU. Seems to me the rules were no spaghetti straps or shirts that bared your shoulders. But the upper humerus was not pornographic back then.

Thank God because it was bad enough that I had to argue with my mother about skirt lengths in high school (before girls could wear pants to school). And in middle school (late 60s) we swam during phis ed two months of the year and the only people who wore one-piece swimsuits back then were old ladies. The two-piece (Annette Funicello styles) were tons less provocative than one-piecers are today. But I had to fight about those too. Luckily I finally had money to buy a 2-piece to leave at school and would sneak it home to rinse it out occasionally. Glad I didn't have to fight about showing my upper arms.

When my daughters were in middle/high school I had one conversation with them about clothes: "I don't care what you wear, I only care how you act." I knew if they were dressed inappropriately, they'd be sent home. Otherwise, I wanted them to feel comfortable and not feel like a freak.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/24/2015 02:52PM by NormaRae.

Only Mormons choose a wedding gown "to fit your face." Isn't it supposed to fit your body?

I didn't know about the shoulders thing until 2006 (teens to toddlers). The church was responsible for making shoulders taboo/sexy. Toddlers, young girls...? They really are perverted.

On YouTube there were some LDS teen boys being asked about what they looked for (dating). One kid said, "Some of them come so close, modesty wise... If only they had a different shirt on, covering their shoulders..." =[

Just wear the scuba suit, drapery, couch cover, hotpad mittens, green apron... in the temple, and a normal gown to the reception.

Why doesn't the church just sell garments in kids and teen sizes without the markings? Then they wouldn't have to have 1000 rules on what to wear.

or they could have 'junior markings'!!

Someone in the COB has already begun circulating a memo with the hope that an afossil will have a revelation that everyone will know was based on the memo.

Cult-ish, that's for sure.


statistics, historical information (Facts) ?


remember, to the saints, those are only 'flecks of history'; they truly Don't Care about the weightier matters.

Kindness - Empathy - even Honesty rarely concern them, because / so they can focus on trivia.

Yes, Virginia, Mormonism is a fabrication, a distraction from meaningful-significnt values, concepts, principles.