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