Words to a General Authority on Elder Callister's article "The Lord's Standard of Morality"

Dear General Authority:

My name is Sarah Culp. I have been a member of the Mormon faith my entire life and currently hold a temple recommend and am an active member of my ward in Columbia, Missouri. I attended Brigham Young University and received a degree in Elementary Education. I have two beautiful children and feel very blessed. I just wanted to give you some background to who I am and perhaps give you a small picture of who is writing this letter to you.

 As I read the March 2014 issue of the Ensign I was particularly troubled by Elder Tad R. Callister’s article on “The Lord’s Standard of Morality”. I feel very strongly about sharing my feelings with you. I hope my concerns and comments will be received with an open mind and open heart.

First I want to say, I certainly agree with adhering to the Lord’s morality and think it is important to encourage men and women to dress modestly and guard themselves from temptations and sin. However, Elder Callister’s words on “immodest dress” on pages 47-48 of the March 2014 Ensign were particularly troubling. Elder Callister focuses on the modest dress of women. He only quotes one scripture about modest dress (which includes more than just covering our body, but also about humility) which is from 1 Timothy 2:29 “women [to] adorn themselves in modest apparel”. This verse comes from a section of scripture that also admonishes women to “learn in silence with all subjection”, so I wonder if this really captures the essence of empowering individuals, mainly women, with modest dress. (In fact, I would ask if this chapter of scripture is in contradiction to modern revelation on how men and women should interact within the church all together.)

In addition Elder Callister stated multiple times the main reason for women to dress modestly is that  “the dress of a woman has a powerful impact upon the minds and passions of men”. To further quote Elder Callister, “If it is too low, too high or too tight, it may prompt improper thoughts, even in the mind of a young man who is striving to be pure.”

This is very concerning to me for several reasons:

1. It takes away the empowerment of modesty from women. A woman should choose to dress modestly for herself: to help her keep the Spirit with her, to help her feel comfortable, to encourage her to value her inside worth more than her outward appearance. But instead, Elder Callister seems to state that women should be modest to help men control themselves. This can imply that she is somehow dirty or unclean if a man has improper thoughts about her. She needs to be morally clean and modest for a man, rather than for herself first.

2. It may be true that a woman dressing modestly is helpful to a man who is striving to keep his thoughts clean. But isn’t it also true that all sorts of things can excite both men and women. What is “too high" or “too low” for one particular man may do nothing for another man. This implies that it is a woman’s job to keep a man’s thoughts clean, and should anticipate what might “prompt improper thoughts.”

3. This also takes away the ultimate responsibility of men and women to keep their own thoughts clean. We will encounter many, many different types of people in our lifetime. It is not others’ responsibility to keep our own thoughts clean, and further more, it is perfectly natural to have thoughts that we are attracted, even sexually, to another person, for any number of reasons. But ultimately, we each must be responsible for our own thoughts and learn to steer our thoughts in an appropriate and Godly manner.

Elder Callister continues his comments on modesty to say: “Men and women can look sharp and fashionable, yet they can also be modest”. This is his one comment to men on their modest dress, but then his focus comes back to women: “Women particularly can dress modestly and in the process contribute to their own self-respect and to the moral purity of men…” (the MOST important reason to dress modestly should be for "their own self-respect", but it is only a side note, here) “… In the end, most women get the type of man they dress for.”

I am honestly very surprised this last line was allowed to appear in the Ensign magazine. This last line implies that if a woman is not dressed correctly she will not find a kind, good man… or even worse this could imply that she deserves whatever unkind treatment she may get if she is not dressed modestly.

A few more items of concern:

4. Again, as I just stated, this easily implies that if women are dressed immodestly, they do not earn the respect and kind treatment of others, especially men. Although this may sometimes happen, it is certainly not right. Many women are assaulted or raped who are wearing all sorts of modest clothing. Many women who dress modestly marry or date men who are abusive or cruel. What message does this send to our young women and young men? Does this encourage kind and respectful treatment of all people? Or does this perhaps blame women for being too beautiful or too sexy?

5. This also gives a mixed message within a church that focuses so much on marriage. It almost says to young women, ‘Be sure to dress beautiful enough to attract a nice young man, but not too beautiful or sexy. Then you will only be causing trouble or making someone have an impure thought.’ I recently read a reprint of a talk given at a November 2013 YSA conference by Larry L. Eastland that counseled young women in the following way: “I have been told that my remarks today should be like your dress: long enough to cover the subject, but short enough to be interesting.” This is a very hard and truly unfair line to ask women to walk and is exploitive. Women are so much more than how they dress, and we should be encouraging them to see themselves as the Lord see’s them.

6. This also over sexualizes women, over emphasizing their outward dress when finding and meeting a partner. We all know the phrase ‘dress for the job you want.’ When one dresses modestly and is thoughtful about their appearance it can often attract other professional and spiritually minded people. But having a discussion on modesty end with the phrase “most women get the type of man they dress for” puts undue focus on women’s outward appearance. This phrase reduces women to sexual objects, judged by their clothing. Even in the best of circumstances, a woman who dresses modestly may attract a righteous, spiritual partner. But is her outward appearance truly the main reason for the attraction? Shouldn’t we remind women of how they are more than how they look or dress? Especially in a society which often only focuses on how women look and constantly exploits women based on their appearance.

7. This also discredits men. Although it may be true that an immodestly dressed woman can easily activate men, men still have self-control, as well. Women should not be treated as the gatekeepers for sexual activity and impure thoughts. Men are 100% responsible for their own actions. Just as David was responsible for his lust for Bathsheba, men are also in control of their own thoughts and actions. Was it Bathsheba’s fault she was bathing on the roof (or wherever she was bathing)? My point is not to get caught up in placing blame when a sin takes place, but to state that men (and women) are responsible for their own thoughts and actions, regardless of how tempting the situation may be.

Elder Holland stated beautifully in a 1988 BYU devotional:

"I have heard all my life that it is the young woman who has to assume the responsibility for controlling the limits of intimacy in courtship because a young man cannot. What an unacceptable response to such a serious issue. What kind of man is he, what priesthood or power or strength or self-control does this man have that lets him develop in society, grow to the age of mature accountability, perhaps even pursue a university education and prepare to affect the future of colleagues and kingdoms and the course of the world, but yet does not have the mental capacity or the moral will to say, ‘I will not do that thing’?"

           

Elder Callister’s sentiments on women’s modest dress in the March 2014 Ensign seems to directly conflict with Elder Holldand’s message.

8. Lastly, this also takes away from women’s role as sexual beings. Women also have sexual desire and can experience lust. Although sexual expression is not considered moral outside of marriage, it is still important for women to recognize their own sexuality. Only addressing men’s sexuality can make it hard for women to fully identify themselves as sexual beings and make them feel weird or unclean for having sexual thoughts, if we only talk of men having impure thoughts. Every person, both males and females, are sexual beings and are thus equally susceptible to impure thoughts and sexual temptation.

I don’t believe that Elder Callister had malicious intent when he gave this devotional and it was later printed in the Ensign. However, that does not lessen the damaging effects of the subtext and the implications it can communicate to both men and women, in particular, in the church. Elder Callister does go onto address being in control of one’s own thoughts in the next paragraph, but this seems understated compared to how strong his words were toward immodesty in women in the previous paragraphs.

I recently heard a speaker at a stake youth event refer to young women who are dressed immodestly “becoming pornography for young men”. Unfortunately, this is not first time I have heard this phrase repeated. I believe they were referencing Elder Oaks talk from April 2005 General Conference where he also stated that “And young women, please understand that if you dress immodestly, you are magnifying this problem by becoming pornography to some of the men who see you.”

What an extreme, damaging and unsettling remark.  Not only is this not true, but it takes away from the beauty and empowerment that comes from dressing modestly. A woman in a tank top is a far cry from a pornographic film, and to compare her to such devalues her, over sexualizes her and creates a gap between treating women as human beings and seeing them as objects, exploiting them. 

The type of language Elder Callister used in addressing women’s dress is comparable to language used to blame victims of rape and abuse (otherwise known as ‘rape culture’/rape myths). His language around women’s modesty also puts more pressure on women to be gatekeepers of morality, which undermines their own sexuality. His language also places women in a subservient role, in which they base their actions on what they will mean for men. Again, I do not think that offending or belittling women was Elder Callister's intent at all. I do not doubt that he is a Godly and good man, with good intentions, but perhaps that is all the more reason to closely consider how we treat the subject of chastity and morality concerning men and women within the culture of the Mormon church. 

It is of the utmost importance to help our youth, and all our members, make good moral choices that empower us. And it is SO important not to let the topic of modesty unwittingly disconnect women from their bodies and focus on their outward appearance rather than their own self worth. Furthermore, I DO think it is important to dress modestly, but these comments, in my opinion, do more harm than good.

Thank you for reading my remarks. I truly hope you will pass this onto someone who may not have considered these issues before. I would be happy to hear your response to any of my comments.

I love so many things about our church. I have been blessed by my membership in countless ways. But I pray and hope for change in the way we address modesty and chastity, specifically to our young women.

Sincerely,

Sarah Culp