Quantcast
Family

Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: Bikinis and restaurants? Degrading for both women and men

Comments

Return To Article
  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 23, 2013 2:20 p.m.

    Carmen,

    You had to go in thinking that you would either 1) defy your contract or 2) wear a bikini

    Why on earth would you sign a contract requiring you to do something that you were so strongly against? Wouldn't the prudent thing be to politely decline?

  • Brahmabull sandy, ut
    April 23, 2013 2:46 p.m.

    If you have ever been outside Utah, you would know that many women now days dress with less and less clothes. Beaches in Florida are full of women in skimpy bikinis. It is not that big of a deal. Men like to look, women like to be looked at. It is human nature. If they don't like their line of work, I am sure another restaurant would hire them...

  • From Ted's Head Orem, UT
    April 23, 2013 3:01 p.m.

    Funny Utah article. Sitting at the beach in Santa Monica or any beach town and you're surrounded by bikinis. Halter tops to college classes in Hawaii. And then there's the gym! Come on Carmen...get real. Would I pay more to go to Bikini Cuts? Nope. What about Hooters? The food wasn't that great and the shorts and nylons uniform was uninteresting. Back in the day the Playboy Club was a good place for a business lunch and I found myself inside one (Century City, following the client's lead) and it turned out to be a good lunch. The bunnies were covering more skin than the girls at the beach 6 miles to the west and it was a complete non-issue. Guys who are going to leer are going to leer in church and everywhere else. I doubt many women say to themselves "I've got to take this job as a __________" (waitress, stripper, ring girl, fitness model, etc) with a concern about being leered at. If it bothers you, don't do it.

  • Larry Chandler CEDAR CITY, UT
    April 23, 2013 3:15 p.m.

    Wow, hope your ankles are covered when you go outside. Wouldn't want you to be degraded. And what, exactly, is degrading for men about women wearing bikinis? As far as male customers OK with being treated like animals who can't control their cravings, um, works for me.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    April 23, 2013 3:37 p.m.

    Challenging these sorts of things is great. Thank you.

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    April 23, 2013 5:47 p.m.

    Carmen, I'm not surprised that you are getting some mocking comments but you are right. I'd rather respect a woman for her brains than for her partially clad body. But, I guess some women are so insecure or have so little brain, that the only thing they have to attract attention is a body. How unfortunate.

  • ekute Layton, UT
    April 23, 2013 6:46 p.m.

    Free enterprise. Customers don't have to patronize, employees don't have to work there.

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    April 23, 2013 7:07 p.m.

    One of the best things about football season?

    Crowd shots @ UCLA, Fla St, Auburn, Az St, etc... home football games.

  • Lyle Springville, UT
    April 23, 2013 7:07 p.m.

    Rather than speculate and guess, you might have interviewed some of the employees and customers. You might have been surprised, or you might have found exactly what you were expecting.

  • aceroinox Farmington, UT
    April 23, 2013 7:27 p.m.

    @JoeBlow--guess you didn't read the sentence where Carmen noted they made an exception for her.

    I'm not a woman, so I have no idea why some dress scantily or how they feel about men gawking at them. There is a real incongruence in our society. Women want to be respected for their minds and real contributions to society, yet they submit to a culture that increasingly exploits them as sex objects. Stars compete for the deepest decolletage on the red carpet.

    I admire women such as Carmen and others in the entertainment business who fight the "requirement" to exploit their bodies for the sake of ratings. Society has become increasingly accepting of more and more bare flesh, a continuum that results in a thriving porn industry. I get that for those who don't believe in moral absolutes that is no big deal, and that for them exploiting women's bodies for porn is OK, and a "victimless" crime. If you really believe that, search for some of the chilling documentaries recounting the human cost of women trapped in that industry. And to the men who "hire" those women to perform for them: for shame!

  • zabivka Orem, UT
    April 23, 2013 7:49 p.m.

    It's really just a byproduct of capitalism. There's no perfect system, but capitalism seems to have a pretty good net result, so we're left with some seedy operations here and there.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 23, 2013 7:49 p.m.

    "guess you didn't read the sentence where Carmen noted they made an exception for her. "

    People don't (or shouldn't) sign a contract and then hope for an exception. The way it is written, the contract was signed and later the exception was granted.

  • Arizona1 Tucson, AZ
    April 23, 2013 7:54 p.m.

    Well written, Carmen. I'm always surprised to see some of the comments that pop up on Deseret News in response to an article. In this case, I think some of the comments that cheapen a woman's worth to how much skin she can show prove Carmen's point. What will it take for men to respect a woman for who she is rather than for how much skin she can show?

  • roberto Moses Lake, WA
    April 23, 2013 7:56 p.m.

    Ahhhh, that was refreshing! I'm a little surprised at some of the posts. I wouldn't want my daughter working in a place like these businesses, and would be embarrassed if she or my mom knew if I went to one. I really don' think I'm a prude. Even though its accepted now days, it still doesn't make it right and you can never convince me that your a better person for going. My sons might want to go but they or their Dad has no business going

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    April 23, 2013 8:17 p.m.

    Hooters has good wings.

  • aceroinox Farmington, UT
    April 23, 2013 8:36 p.m.

    @JoeBlow--maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see what you're seeing in the article. For all we know, the exception was granted after she told the producers she couldn't agree to the contract. The producers clearly accepted her innovation on the two-piece swimming suit, so what are you grousing about? Much ado about nothing.

  • John Charity Spring Back Home in Davis County, UT
    April 23, 2013 9:08 p.m.

    Shame on the left-wing extremists who have attacked Rasmussen for her stand against immorality. Study after study has confirmed that these types of businesses which exploit scantily-clad women increase the overall crime rate in the surrounding area. Sexual assaults, prostitution, and drug use all increase exponentially. No community which cares about the welfare of its citizens would ever allow any such business into its midst.

  • Wastintime Los Angeles, CA
    April 23, 2013 10:36 p.m.

    "And I believe every woman is worth more than a plate of hot wings."

    Me too... although I've known some who weren't worth two plates!

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 23, 2013 11:40 p.m.

    @JSB
    "I'd rather respect a woman for her brains than for her partially clad body. But, I guess some women are so insecure or have so little brain, that the only thing they have to attract attention is a body."

    Here's the problem... you're putting blame on a woman for an issue that involves the men. In fact, you're the one making a judgment about a woman's brain based on what she is wearing.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 23, 2013 11:48 p.m.

    @Arizona1
    "What will it take for men to respect a woman for who she is rather than for how much skin she can show?"

    There's also the reverse issue of that too. Is a woman being disrespected for who they are because they aren't conforming with what someone believes is acceptable amounts of skin being covered? An extreme form of this is of course Saudi Arabia.

    Now I'm not saying that women should definitely wear clothes that cover less skin. I'm saying that a woman deserves respect regardless of her choice in swimsuit.

  • mountain man Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 1:52 a.m.

    Carmen. We are so proud of you for who you are and what you represent.
    I guess you can't take all the credit--- it surely I always want to write Shirley must be directed to your parents, teachers.
    Those who who there to guide you along life's treacherous highway.

  • ontheotherhand Highland, UT
    April 24, 2013 5:29 a.m.

    "Only in Utah" do you get the endless flow of anti-Mormon/morality/values comments about how prudish we are "here." I moved here from L.A. A few years ago, and while, yes, bikinis and immodest clothing were everywhere, there were also many people of all faiths who felt the same as the "prudish" Mormons and were oh, so glad when we had the guts to actually say and do something about it. (Like the other woman on Fear Factor with Carmen.) To all the men out there essentially telling Carmen to "get real", I would suggest you do the same. Trying to justify your desire to view women as sex objects with the "jeez, everybody's doing it but you prudes" line is so third grade.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 24, 2013 6:02 a.m.

    Wearing long dresses and hair in a bun or burkas doesn't degrade a woman (tells her she's nothing but the property of a man)?

    Women, like men, should be able to have the freedom to do and wear what they desire.

  • Hawkeye79 Iowa City, IA
    April 24, 2013 6:12 a.m.

    @Joe Blow

    Welcome to the world of legalese, my friend. Nowhere in the contract did it say that the contestant agreed to wear a bikini. The contract verbiage stated "two-piece bathing suit - NO EXCEPTIONS" and Carmen wore (1) a thick, zip up swim shirt that covered her entire torso and (2) long shorts that reached her knees. Traditional counting methods would suggest that her bathing suit consisted of two pieces.

    For the next stunt, she wore (1) a one-piece bathing suit and (2) shorts. Again, her bathing suit consisted of two pieces.

    My guess is that she worked out the details of her two-piece bathing suit prior to signing the contract, but it wouldn't have mattered anyway as she was clearly not in breach of the contract's terms.

  • flatlander Omaha, NE
    April 24, 2013 6:13 a.m.

    At work it is easy to spot which women are married and which ones are not by how they dress and I work in an office building. Women dress on how they want to be viewed by men and other women and once married they don't care as much.

  • Silent Lurker Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 24, 2013 6:19 a.m.

    I agree with Carmen completely, but having known the Rasmussen's for many years I think Carmen should be reminded that very few if any of the women in the places she refereed to grew up with all the advantages she has had.

  • Allyson Reynolds Highland, UT
    April 24, 2013 7:22 a.m.

    @Ranch: I hardly think Carmen is suggesting women should be forced to wear burkas. This post is not about individual freedom, but about how both women and men should have more respect for women as human beings and not as sex objects--especially in a free society, I might add. There are endless clothing options between a bikini and a burka. Don't use hyperbole to confuse the point she is making.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    April 24, 2013 8:14 a.m.

    I'm glad there is still moral outrage over non-issues.

  • Whos Life RU Living? Ogden, UT
    April 24, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    I always feel bad for men when they have their shirts off. Women are always googling at their bodies. I feel bad for these men that want their shirts off. It is sad of the degrading that they are doing for men as a whole. This is how this article sounds to me.

    This is just silly. Women should be able to wear what they want to wear with no judgment. (this includes burqas, Gs, and all the way to the skimpy bikini)

  • Hurteau Auburn, MA
    April 24, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    Funny how there is never any mention on how women ONLY look at man's wallet,, Where is the feminist outrage there??

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    April 24, 2013 9:12 a.m.

    what's wrong with letting the free market determine our fashion and jobs? If people don't want to wear bikinis they don't have to buy them. If enough people don't buy them then the fashion industry will have to adjust. If you don't want to work in or serve in a place which requires certain types of clothing then those companies will be forced to adjust.

    Let the free market work! What repubs seem to want is government intervention! More nanny government? No thanks!

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    April 24, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    I'm confused....

    Conservatives are for Free Enterprise, Free Markets and less restrictions.
    If there is a market for this, then let the market decide.
    If you don't like it, leave.

    Now it's something else?

    I've worked many jobs that I didn't agree with how things were being handled.
    I left one job once because management was forcing me do something I knew to be completely Un-ethical.
    But business was business in their minds.
    Rather than compromise my morals and ethics, I quit.

    Too bad Utah doesn't have Unions to stick up for workers rights.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 9:20 a.m.

    What? Someone just figured out sex sells?

    Other then that, I'm wondering who gave anyone the right to tell women what they can wear, or to judge them for that choice. It is none of your business if a woman wears a bikini, or for that matter if she chooses not to wear a bikini. The lady who wrote this article decided not to wear a bikini, and good for her. But other women choose to wear bikinis, for whatever reason, and good for them.

    Ain't freedom grand?

    John, can you provide any proof for your claim that, "Sexual assaults, prostitution, and drug use all increase exponentially" in the vicinity of a Hooters?

    Let me tell you what I think is exploitation of woman: woman working minimum wage jobs with no health insurance, no paid vacation, no pension plans, no sick leave. That's exploitation.

    By the way, most people don't see wearing a bikini an immoral act. Sorry if some of you don't understand yet, but your idea of morals doesn't get to dictate to me what my idea of morals is.

    Ain't freedom wonderful!

  • ksampow Farr West, Utah
    April 24, 2013 9:32 a.m.

    Brahmabull: - It's not that big a deal.

    Only if you have become desensitized. When modesty and decorum become rare, society suffers. Casual attitudes about modesty are a step in the direction of pornography and debauchery, which destroy families and weaken society.

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    April 24, 2013 9:42 a.m.

    My wife and I stopped at a Hooters for lunch while on vacation. (She suggested it, figuring I might enjoy it.) The waitresses were attractive, friendly without being inappropriately flirty, and the outfits they wore were more modest than much of what we see on the streets on a summer day in just about any major city in the US.

  • Bifftacular Spanish Fork, Ut
    April 24, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    Well done Carmen. You're right on. Don't listen to the criticisms from those who on one hand try to make it appear as if this is a non issue but then fall all over themselves defending it. If it truly makes no difference either way, then cover up! It's pretty simple. No one is saying people don't have a legal right to wear a bikini as a work outfit - it's just a bad idea on many levels. The comedian Ron White said it best, "I had the right to remain silent, I just didn't have the ability".

  • Hawkeye79 Iowa City, IA
    April 24, 2013 9:57 a.m.

    @airnaut

    Yes, you are confused. Are people suggesting that the government outlaw these types of restaurants? Or are they voicing their opinion that they are a bad idea? Therein lies a great distinction.

    In a free market system, people are still free to voice their opinions. In fact, it is a great driver of what makes a free market system successful. The time when you left a job when you disagreed with a practice is a great example of how it can work.

  • flatlander Omaha, NE
    April 24, 2013 9:56 a.m.

    Just returned from the gym and since I read this article first I checked out the outfits. Some women dressed head to toe, some in modest work outfits but plenty were in sports bras and short shorts and they weren't paid to be there. Point is people dress how they want to be seen

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 24, 2013 10:34 a.m.

    These comments show much about the commenters. It tells us what status they give women. It tells us how much they disrespect women. It tells us that they consider women to be objects for their viewing pleasure.

    I have nothing but disdain for any man who disrespect women, who leers at them, who uses them for his personal gratification.

    I have nothing but disdain for any person, man or woman, who exploits women to gain financially.

    I have nothing but disdain for men to frequent those places of business.

    When society loses respect for women, it becomes a society full of diseased people who see nothing wrong with using others for pleasure.

  • Tandrews Petersburg, VA
    April 24, 2013 10:36 a.m.

    Mainstream ideas about our bodies have changed. The message taught is that our bodies are meant to be flaunted, we want to look & feel sexy, wearing immodest clothing says & shows we love ourselves, our bodies, & are confident.

    No longer is immodesty shunned as a sign of sinful person, but it is celebrated & encouraged as a sign of self-worth, confidence, & beauty.

    Satan has done his job well. He has taken the teachings of Jesus Christ & made them seem "bad, irrelevant, old-fashion, restricting."

    If you believe in God & Jesus Christ, keep their commandments. Jesus taught that our bodies are sacred; are created by God for the purpose of procreation & expression love between a husband & wife; aren't to be adorned in apparel to attract attention. He also taught that the ways of the world are not his ways; don't look for your worth from the world, but from God.

    Immodesty can lead to sins of pride, jealousy, coveting, and adultery.

    Keep the commandments of God and you will be blessed

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 11:42 a.m.

    "should have more respect for women as human beings and not as sex objects--especially in a free society"

    Allyson, it is precisely because we live in a free society that people get to determine, on their own, how they should dress. I don't imagine you see any bikinis in North Korea, or in fundamentalist Islamic countries. It is precisely because if our freedoms that we can choose. Also, I have total respect for women, in fact, I have so much respect for them that I believe I have no business, whatsoever, telling them what they can or can't do. They are not my play things, I don't get to dress them. And burkahs are very pertinent to the conversation, not the clothing itself, particularly, but the mindset behind them. The idea that someone has the right to tell a woman what she HAS to do is the issue.

    Tandrews, thank goodness I don't share your religious believes, and as such your argument carries absolutely no weight with me.

    Richards, thanks for sharing who you have disdain for. But guess what? I don't care.

  • Go Utes Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 11:49 a.m.

    Thank you for the article. I agree. It is sad to see what society accepts as OK. Funny that with all of the progress in the women's rights area, women and men (generally) both seem to continue to treat women as objects. We see this time and time again in the movie industry, which fancies itself as a progressive industry. How many times do we hear about some new actress who had her career jumpstarted by appearing nude in some magazine, thus getting "noticed" and now perceived as a legitimate actress. So sad. Others are bullied by a director that if they do not do whatever inappropriate scene, she would "never work again in this town," etc. Others make some good movies and then feel compelled to take off their clothes to shed the "good girl" image that could hurt their career.

    This is not an industry problem, however. It is a problem with individual choices. If each actress and director refused to lower their standards, and if the movie-going (and restaraunt-going) public refused to partake of the trash that is out there, then there would be no pressure and no market for this sort or thing.

  • Hurteau Auburn, MA
    April 24, 2013 11:53 a.m.

    Tandrews,,, Believing in fairy tales is not a good thing,,,

  • Well.ok Lehi, UT
    April 24, 2013 11:58 a.m.

    I've always wondered why it's immodest for a woman to show her stomach when swimming/at the beach, but not immodest when a man does the same thing. Can anybody answer this for me?

  • Clovis Fan Clovis, CA
    April 24, 2013 12:09 p.m.

    Carmen,

    Thank you for standing up for good women everywhere. As a married man who wants to be virtuous, it is very annoying to be exposed to immodestly dressed women. I greatly respect women who respect their bodies and dress appropriately, and wonder why some women want to send the message to the world that they don't respect their own bodies. I agree that modesty in dress is more beautiful and appealing than a woman who disrespects herself and dresses immodestly. A woman will always attract the kind of man she is advertizing for by the way she dresses. Thanks agasin for your courage to write the truth.

    Larry from Clovis

  • Wastintime Los Angeles, CA
    April 24, 2013 1:42 p.m.

    The irony for me here is that, all things being equal, I (and I believe most men) find fully clad women way more desirable than scantily clad women. Take the same group of young waitresses that work at Hooters, dress them up (in nice Sunday dresses) and send them to a church, and the men at that church will be happier than they would be at a Hooters. This is because the imagination is way better than reality.

  • Go Utes Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 3:33 p.m.

    I have never liked the "modest is hottest" thing. I know what it is trying to convey, and if that helps a girl want to be modest, great. What I don't like about it, however, is that it still makes women an object. It is implying that the main reason to dress modestly is to please men. In reality, being modest should bring internal joy from knowing that you are growing closer to God because of righteous choices. It should not serve as just another way to attract guys (albeit a more classy variety than those attracted to immodesty). Anyway, rant over. Thanks for the relevant article.

  • Allyson Reynolds Highland, UT
    April 24, 2013 4:14 p.m.

    Mark,

    As another commentor remarked, no one (including myself) is asking for government action to mandate what women can and cannot wear. We are simply voicing our opinion that this world would be a much better place if people used their freedoms to show respect for each other. And for some of us, that means not treating a woman's body as a sex object.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 24, 2013 6:07 p.m.

    Allyson, I reread my post. I don't believe I said that you were saying that the government should do something about bikinis. But, see, that's not my issue with what people are saying. My issue is that people think they themselves have a right to tell women what to do. They think they have a right to judge a woman based solely on the clothes she wears. Or to shame them. And you have seen that in this thread. Someone called them insecure or not having a brain. Imagine that, based only on her clothing choice. Talk about objectifying women.

    That's what I have an issue with. You have many here saying how a woman should dress. That's what I have an issue with. Really, its none if your business, or anyone else's what a woman chooses to do.

    Somehow we have it in our heads that we get to tell women what to do. We don't. It's not right when Islamic countries do it. It's not right when we do it. Even if it has no weight of law. It is none of your business.

  • billster36 Nies, MI
    April 24, 2013 9:56 p.m.

    Well, for what it's worth I'm a guy. Just thought I'd get that part up front. As to the women who work in these places feeling good about what they do, I don't know if they do or not. I do know that they are able to make good money, and for some of them this is one of the few jobs they can get. They might be college students trying not to graduate with student loans that look like the national debt of a third world country. Or they might be single mom's trying desperately to take care of a family. I'm glad your parents raised you the way they did, but I'm also glad that we live in a society that does not force women to cover head to toe like in some countries I could name. As to the men who "can't control their cravings" I'm sure these restaurants have a few males on the staff also. Likely some very large, intimidating males. In my day we called them bouncers, because when they threw your sorry butt out on the sidewalk, you bounced. Sometimes twice.

  • Wastintime Los Angeles, CA
    April 25, 2013 12:50 a.m.

    "Well behaved women seldom make history." - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich

  • Hurteau Auburn, MA
    April 25, 2013 5:56 a.m.

    Stripper lays out $3,345 in cash to justify her job

    Google it for the story! There is NOTHING wrong with being a stripper or a Hooters girl.

  • SLC gal Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    Go Carmen!!!! I agree "Modest is Hottest!!!" I, for one, as a women, feel much more comfortable when I'm in clothes that offer decent coverage (I don't wear burquas btw), and I don't have to worry about a slip here, or a wrong move there exposing too much.

  • windsor City, Ut
    April 25, 2013 7:51 a.m.

    Carmen--you had to know going into this that your opinions would be hammered.

    But you did it anyway.

    Good for you.

    All the negative posters who find flaunting women, and men who are suckers, all so praiseworthy apparently don't mind 'telling on themselves'......

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    April 25, 2013 9:01 a.m.

    Is there still a bikini cuts? If so, please let me know. My hair is a little long.

  • Allyson Reynolds Highland, UT
    April 25, 2013 1:04 p.m.

    Marc, I'm going to give this one last shot. We are arguing for two completely different things . You're arguing for personal freedom and zero judgment, I'm arguing for a society that values and respects women such that neither women or men would want women (or men!) to use their bodies for money or entertainment. You don't want anyone to judge anyone else, but you judge people like me as prudes because we believe this behavior objectifies women. Why else require a waitress to wear a bikini or female FF contestant to wear a 2 piece suits? Carmen had to fight to wear something she was comfortable in. Why not argue against THAT breach of personal freedom? It is very telling that the vast majority of supporters for women as entertainment in this comment thread are men. Not surprising, actually, but still sad. It's an opinion, Marc. And opinions may sound judgmental to you, but I still have the freedom to express mine: This world would be a better place if women didn't feel they had to use their bodies to get money.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 25, 2013 3:10 p.m.

    ". . . you judge people like me as prudes. . ."

    Wow, that's interesting. Going back over my comments I couldn't find a single one aimed at you personally. You really are missing the point. I don't think anyone has a right to tell others what to do. Yet people somehow think they should be able to tell woman what to do. You see a clear example of this in Islamic countries, and when others try to shame women into acting as they want you see an example of it here.

    No, I never said anything about you, or anyone else, choosing to dress, or act, as they want. If you are a "prude", whatever that is, then truly good for you. If you choose to wear less reveling clothing, then indeed, it is none of my business, and enjoy your life in peace. I have no right to tell you what you should do, or even judge you.

    Carmen did not HAVE to fight to wear what she wanted to. She chose to be on Fear Factor.

    I'm not arguing in support of "women as entertainment", rather that no one owns them. Do you really disagree?

  • Milt South Jordan, UT
    April 25, 2013 5:21 p.m.

    Interview the women who work in these jobs... in nearly every case you will find, it is an attitude of taking full advantage of the 'gawkers' --- the men are absolutely objectified too, they are nothing but walking wallets ... money dispensing pieces of flesh to be used until the cash is gone... and that's the extent of it -- objectification on both sides 100%.

    Of course, the women are the only ones who are worth worrying about as victims of objectification! ;-) wink wink

  • Patrick Henry West Jordan, UT
    April 25, 2013 7:29 p.m.

    "I don't believe for a second that these women are proud of what they do... How can they, when the whole point of their job is to encourage people to look anywhere but their eyes?"

    Some women actually like dressing in clothing deemed inappropriate by the LDS church because they want attention. It does not mean they are inviting men to physically abuse them or worse. It simply means they want attention. Is that type of attention right for you? Well that's up for you to decide. But seriously Carmen, just because you don't want men to look at you like that does not mean that there are not women who do. Some of the women may in fact feel proud of what they are doing.

    Perhaps you would be wise to not reflect your values on the actions of others. This is especially true, when it comes to interpreting how other people feel about their own actions.

    Personally I won't teach my kids to dress like that, because I personally feel it attracts the wrong type of attention, but what I call wrong attention some non lds women might call right attention.

  • Thefullnancy SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    April 26, 2013 2:45 p.m.

    Wow, if only every woman on earth was as wonderful as the author the world would be darn near perfect. Having standards is a wise and prudent thing to do. However, passing judgement on others and surmising absolutes without any concrete objectivity is just the opposite and in addition does not adhere to those sttandards. Besides your standards are not mine and vice versa.

  • Thefullnancy SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    April 26, 2013 2:49 p.m.

    Some of the scantiliest clad women you will see are women volleyball players and women track athletes (including BYU). Just saying.....

  • From Ted's Head Orem, UT
    April 27, 2013 8:33 p.m.

    How much skin one shows and it's modesty rating is determined by the circumstances. Female VB players (indoor and outdoor) wear very tiny shorts and yet the men do just the opposite and wear longer shorts, so the argument can't be about function only. BYU VB player walks to class in her VB shorts and is reported for an Honor Code violation...not appropriately dressed. At what point can we determine modesty? It's a moving target. Switch channels to younger girl dance squads with their mimicking of adult exotic dance moves and yet everyone smiles and says how cute they are with their hip thrusts and swivels. And the protests from women about being sex objects! Yeah I get it...you're wearing those 6" stilettos and that barely there LBD because it's comfortable? At a club with similarly dressed women you wouldn't stand out too much...but wear it to church and the RS presidency will tackle you. Modest? Sex symbol? Too many of us are programmed to associate nudity with eroticism and that's where the trouble starts.