Yoga pants not immodest at the gym


This article created a discussion on modesty and standards that was greatly appreciated. However, there seems to have been some confusion as to the Scroll’s stance in regards to the Honor Code, which we wish to clarify. The current standard for BYU-Idaho in regards to form fitting pants at the John W. Hart Fitness Center states, “Types of form fitting exercise or fitness pants (leggings, yoga pants, running tights or similar) should be solid black in color (no patterns, designs or writing).” This can be found on the BYU-I Student Activities Web page, which we have included below.

We at the Scroll desire to support the current standards of the university and simply disagreed with the petition seeking to ban yoga pants, as well as some of the arguments associated with this topic.

Scroll Editorial: Approved by a 28-0 vote from the Scroll editorial board.

 

The BYU-Idaho gym is in the process of changing the color of tight, form-fitting exercise pants to solid black.

A group of BYU-I students have started a petition protesting the wearing of specific articles of clothing in the gym.

“We respectfully petition that the use of spandex, skin-tight yoga pants, compression pants or other uncovered, skin-tight apparel does not conform to the standard of modesty of the Lord or his Church based upon the teachings of the scriptures or modern-day church leaders and prophets,” according to the petition.

We submit that form-fitting exercise pants are not immodest in the BYU-I gym and that all individuals are responsible for their own thoughts.

Let’s talk about yoga pants. Citing them as immodest and immoral because they are tight is incorrect. If one were to apply this thinking to any sport, the athletic world would be full of a lot of terrible people.

When a professional swimmer changes into his or her swimsuit, is that immoral? When a baseball player squeezes into his form-fitting pants, is that immoral? When a professional distance runner dons her running shorts, is that immoral?

Certain activities require a certain uniform. To ask an Olympic swimmer to wear a loose-fitting outfit is impractical for the activity at hand.

At a gym where people are moving, stretching and lifting, a certain uniform is required. Those who are gym junkies would never wear jeans or a dress no matter how loose or modest. Exercise clothes are more form fitting to move along with the body and to not restrict movement as much as possible.

For women, wearing basketball shorts can be very awkward and revealing when the shorts ride up or move out of place. So which is more immoral? Seeing a woman’s whole thigh as she is doing crunches or just seeing the shape of it in her form-fitting exercise pants?

The issue of modesty has been talked about in many circles and among many people. In countless Young Women’s classes, our rising generation of women has been taught, “Cover up to help the boys not have bad thoughts.”

Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are counseled to dress modestly. It is our responsibility to do so. But when a woman is dressed appropriately, it is not their fault when men have impure thoughts. To say such an idea is to assume that men have no agency or control of themselves.

 

You may also be interested in “New gym dress policy causes debate”

 

“Agency is the ability and privilege God gives us to choose and to act for ourselves,” according to lds.org. So why is it that women everywhere are being blamed for men using their own agency?

It’s the same principle if a woman were to walk through a chocolate aisle, eat everything in it and for a store associate to accept the excuse, “It was right in front of me. I couldn’t help it.”

Part of this life’s challenge is to become the master of our natural instincts and carnal desires. We can blame no one for our thoughts and actions. We each carry the divine right of agency to act and think for ourselves.

No one is forced to use the gym. Just as Joseph fled from Potiphar’s wife, if a young man feels he simply cannot control his thoughts during his workout when a girl is pumping iron in form fitting exercise pants, perhaps he should move to a different part of the gym.

The principle applies to women. If you go to the gym and can’t stop wanting to touch every bicep around you, go work out somewhere else. But if thoughts can’t be controlled in the BYU-I exercise facilities where people are far more modest than any other gym in the country, the issue is no longer yoga pants, but self control or a lack thereof.

“If we are unsure about whether our dress or grooming is modest, we should ask ourselves, ‘Would I feel comfortable with my appearance if I were in the Lord’s presence?’” according to lds.org.

Although we may feel a bit underdressed to be in the Lord’s presence in our workout clothes, we would be comfortable in our yoga pants if we had just come from the gym upon his arrival.

 



'Yoga pants not immodest at the gym' have 93 comments

  1. January 26, 2016 @ 11:12 pm Jared Morton

    That this column was unanimously approved by an editorial board speaks very poorly of BYU-I. The grammar is poor, the reasoning is thin, and the argument is sloppy. Revise and resubmit.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 8:07 am The clapper

      Okay teacher.

      Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 6:02 pm Matt Seivert

      Thank you Jared! My thoughts exactly.

      Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 11:23 pm James Eisert

      Jared, I think it speaks highly of BYU-Idaho since it allows their students not only to have an opinion, but allow them to voice it. If we were the “cult” so many of our detractors say we are, we would not allow for any such opinion.

      Also, targeting a persons grammar does nothing to refute an argument. This also speaks highly of BYU-Idaho as I learned this in BYU-I’s Persuasion class when talking about fallacies.

      This being said, although I think they make some good points here, I do not see what the problem is about sticking to the standard athletic outfit. Guys are stuck wearing them too.

      Reply

      • January 28, 2016 @ 12:06 am Jared Morton

        Mr. Eisert, it appears that you did not grasp the full point I was making. I was criticizing not only the piece’s poor grammar, but also its poor reasoning and lazy arguments. As to what you learned in your Persuasion class,

        Mr. Eisert, I agree that poor grammar alone cannot refute an argument that is otherwise solid. However, that is not a problem that this article has. In addition to dismal grammar, this piece suffers from poor reasoning and sophomoric arguments. If one wants to be taken seriously, one must speak and write like a serious person.

        Reply

        • January 28, 2016 @ 12:18 am Jared Morton

          Disregard the first paragraph of the above comment – I inadvertently posted two versions of the same sentence.

          Reply

          • January 28, 2016 @ 10:29 am Scott

            douché
            touché

            Sorry everyone, please disregard the first line of my post. I only meant to submit one of them. You see I take myself super seriously and hold others to standards even I’m incapable of achieving (The UX division of Apple need to revise and resubmit the code for their enter button, it doesn’t work right yet). My go to methods include ad-hominem attacks and accusing writers of poorly constructing arguments, while not citing specific problems. What people don’t understand is that I am in charge here. Any thought that drifts through my head is inspiration mingled with brilliance. I also don’t need to explain or defend myself, I just encourage others to be better at life like me. No overt hints, just “revise and resubmit”

        • January 28, 2016 @ 8:08 am Joseph

          Jared has a stick up his butt because the women who feel good wearing spandex won’t talk to him.

          Reply

        • January 28, 2016 @ 8:10 am James

          Hey Jared… You wrote two versions of the same sentence in your comment. Probably a good idea to be less critical of other people’s writing until you learn to proofread your own. Have a nice day!

          Reply

          • January 28, 2016 @ 8:35 am Jared Morton

            Touché.

            However, in my defense, writing a column (which can be edited) for a newspaper (which can be edited) and having it published by editors (who can edit) is quite different from writing in a miniature box on my phone and bumping a button that posts a comment without the possibility of changing it.

        • January 28, 2016 @ 1:11 pm James Eisert

          Ok Jared. I’d be interested in what you consider a sophomoric statement. Also, which points do you they made that would be poor reasoning?

          Reply

          • January 29, 2016 @ 4:02 pm Jared Morton

            The chocolate aisle analogy is sophomoric. Although it has superficial similarities to the modesty concern, the comparison is weak at best. The author clearly did not think it through.

            The statement “the athletic world would be full of terrible people” is sophomoric. The athletic world is full of terrible people (as are any other number of “worlds”). It is not so full of them as to impugn the group as a whole, but it has enough of them that appealing to the virtue of athletes is silly.

            As for poor reasoning, I would say that the entire piece is reasoned poorly. This is primarily because the author does not argue against the portion of the petition that is quoted. A few sentences after quoting the petition, the author addresses “citing [yoga pants] as immodest and immoral.” But the quote from the petition does not contain the word immoral, or any variation of it.

            The author’s poor reasoning is also evident in the logical fallacies she employs (e.g., argumentum ad numeram).

      • January 28, 2016 @ 4:55 am Johhny

        You just think your opinion matters. You may voice it, but does it matter? How many people would it take to actually “un-sustain” a living prophet?
        I actually thought this was an Onion article.

        Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 8:01 am Stephani

      An editorial board approved it. Meaning it was an editorial. A student submitted it. Editorials do not get sent back for revisions. The staff liked the opinion presented and voted to print it.

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 1:41 pm Nikki

      Dear Jared:

      You claim that the grammar in the column is poor, but I could find little evidence to substantiate that claim. What did you find that you think is wrong?

      Reply

      • January 29, 2016 @ 3:35 pm Jared Morton

        A few examples:

        The author sometimes hyphenates form-fitting (correct), but sometimes fails to do so (incorrect).
        “A group of BYU-I students have” should be “A group of BYU-I students has”
        “Certain activities require a certain uniform” should read “Certain activities require certain uniforms”
        “moving, stretching and lifting, a certain…” should read “moving, stretching, and lifting, a certain…”
        “to not restrict movement as much as possible” should read “to not restrict movement more than necessary”
        “Young Women’s classes” should be “Young Women classes” (see the lds.org websites if you disagree)
        “when a woman is dressed…it is not their fault” should read “when a woman is dressed…it is not her fault”
        Referring to the Lord, “gym upon his arrival” should read “gym upon His arrival”

        For what it’s worth, the petition also has poor grammar. For example, it states: “We petition that…apparel does not conform…” The sentence can’t decide if it’s making a statement or petitioning for something.

        Reply

        • January 30, 2016 @ 2:40 am Miranda

          Jared, you are both petty and careless. You failed to correct the split infinitive, “to not restrict movement”. Tsk. That’s the trouble with being a persnickety grammar Nazi. The feeling of superiority is so gratifying, you miss the bigger picture: that you are, in fact, a wanker.

          Reply

  2. January 27, 2016 @ 12:21 pm Bryce Harper

    “When a baseball player squeezes into his form-fitting pants, is that immoral?” Have you watched baseball? They wear pajamas out there. Perhaps the most “modest sport” there is out there!

    I petition that every athlete of any sport should sport a baseball uniform so as to appease my eyeballs and assuage my brain. Hat included, your naked, hairy top-head is both deeply enticing and extremely offensive.

    Reply

  3. January 27, 2016 @ 12:44 pm JJohnson

    Amen, to sense and applying principles for oneself.

    Reply

  4. January 27, 2016 @ 3:30 pm Richard Van Wagenen

    Clearly if BYU-I students have time enough to draft and circulate the petition I just read, then they I have too soft a curriculum. Get a life!!

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 6:48 pm Aaron

      Richard, you’re just saying that because you’re a servant of the Adversary!!!

      Reply

  5. January 27, 2016 @ 3:34 pm Melissa

    I don’t think yoga pants are immodest, but making this a feminism issue is just ridiculous. The petition says absolutely nothing about men having immoral thoughts because of yoga pants. That had nothing to do with their argument. Absolutely nothing. Their argument was that yoga pants don’t fit the standard for modesty that the Church has established. YOU brought the whole “immoral thoughts” thing into the debate because it’s a catchy, popular argument that will make the petitioners look like chauvinistic idiots. Like a previous commenter stated, it’s a sloppy, fallacious argument. And yeah, bad grammar.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 10:35 pm Neil

      Interesting that loose fitting clothing works equally as well in the gym as tight fitting clothing (barring hyperbole). In other words tight fitting clothing is not comparable to swimsuits. And swimsuits usually contain form changing foam layers which mask the shape of the body. As for whether shorts are more revealing than yoga pants, I would say that the skin of the leg is less pertinent (on the themes of modesty/distraction/digustingness) than seeing the exact outline of someone’s bits, and butt. Finally, rather than comparong it to baseball it would be better compared to body paint (in other words “not clothing”) and I don’t know any slorts where body paint is an acceptable uniform. As for grammar, I thought it was fine.

      Reply

      • January 27, 2016 @ 10:40 pm Ko

        Sports*

        Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 12:31 pm K'Loni

      The schools entire arguement against yoga pants stems from they show the shape of the leg wilco just entices thoughts. So it is an issue directly about mens’ thoughts and their ‘inability’ to control them. So it isn’t ridiculous that this became a feminist issue

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 1:45 pm Nikki

      Dear Melissa:

      You are the second to comment on the “bad grammar” of this post, but I have yet to see any support of this claim. Where are you seeing the grammatical problems?

      Reply

      • January 28, 2016 @ 2:43 pm Aaron Brown

        There are two “grammatical” problems in the post that I noticed immediately:

        1. The very first sentence lacks verbiage that would provide needed specificity, provide context for what it’s claiming. Even just a possessive pronoun — “its” — would’ve made things better. As is, the sentence reads as if it’s talking about ALL pants on earth, rather than pants worn in an on-campus gym.

        This wouldn’t be that big of a deal, except it’s the VERY FIRST SENTENCE of the piece that we’re talking about, so the error is really egregious. It makes the reader think the whole thing’s going to be inept.

        2. The second grammatical error is located in the quotation from the petition, so it’s not fair to hold it against the editorial staff. (Though maybe they should’ve provided a [sic] to show that they were smart enough to catch the error).

        “We respectfully petition that …does not conform” makes no sense. You petition for some action to be taken, for the university to DECLARE that X “does not conform”, for example. You don’t petition “that it does not conform”. This makes no grammatical sense at all. Makes the petitioners look silly.

        But given what they want, we already knew they were silly anyway. :)

        Aaron B

        Reply

  6. January 27, 2016 @ 4:23 pm Emily

    Ultimately we are all responsible for our own thoughts and actions. But here at BYU-Idaho we operate under a higher standard. The student living moto is “Love, Shared Responsibility, and Mutual Respect”. You cannot claim to follow this, which we all do because we signed the Honor Code and say “I can where what I want because the thoughts of others are not my responsibility”. Here, at BYU-Idaho they are. And if we love each other and we respect each other, we will not dress in a way that might make it difficult for anyone to keep their thoughts clean. That being said, I don’t really have a problem with yoga pants, and I do wear them often. But you cannot say that we don’t have a responsibility to do all we can to make it easier for each other to live a pure and clean life because as children of God and brothers and sisters we do.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 10:41 pm Neil

      Well said.

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 5:32 am Danny

      What does this have to do with cleanliness of thoughts? And what defines cleanliness of thoughts? I see a beautiful face (not prohibited by the Honor Code, IIRC), and I have happy endorphins hit my brain that letting me know, “That’s a nice face.” The same thing is true of the rest of the human body. Just because you do squats and have an aesthetically pleasing shape that I appreciate does not translate into “I want to have sex with you.” Especially because I recognize that many men have aesthetically pleasing shapes too. I myself am pretty decent. What is the origin of this paranoia that the human form is inherently impure or leads to “impure” thoughts? By extension, how does dressing in an activity-appropriate fashion equate to disrespecting others? Showing up to class in a grungy, loose t-shirt, denim short jeans, and basketball shoes seems to be far more disrespectful than a woman wearing a form-fitting (i.e. NOT FRUMPY) dress to class.

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 2:54 pm Kristine

      I have exercised in both types of shorts, and I have to say that I am by far more modest in tighter yoga shorts than I ever have been in loose ones, no matter the length. As the author said, when you do crunches or any other exercise on your back, the legs of the shorts fall all the way up your thighs. I always spent more time pulling the shorts back up to my knee in an attempt to stay modest than I spent doing the actual exercise. I wear tight shorts so I can stay modest and still get the job done.

      Reply

    • January 29, 2016 @ 11:20 pm Ty

      Women should just wear burkas if the idea of showing any sort of form of your body is not being your “brothers keeper”

      Reply

  7. January 27, 2016 @ 4:58 pm Jay

    If only there was a higher power we could consult about this issue. If only a higher power had a spokesperson. If only a spokesperson of the higher power had any influence over this decision. oh wait, isn’t that what students of byui commit to believe? huh.
    Kudos to the chocolate analogy, but there was just a few very giant flaws in that analogy. Have the ladies walk through the chocolate isle after opening up all of the boxes so they could smell it, and then tell them to not look at or think about the chocolate. Come on, control your thoughts and don’t even think about the chocolate. Don’t you have control? Don’t you dare feel the natural urge to eat the chocolate!!!! Makes a little more sense then doesn’t it?
    One last thought: who was it that asked “am I my brother’s keeper?” oh ya, that was Cain. Didn’t end too well for him if i remember right.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 10:47 pm Neil

      Smell it. That’s some powerful imagery. I want chocolate now. Also I really like the connections you made in my brain. Well written.

      Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 11:40 pm Fanny Alger

      But, we want to see boobs!

      Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 11:43 pm Helen Mar Kimball

      Yes, because it’s the girls’ responsibility for you not to get a boner. Grow up

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 5:44 am Danny

      Yes, this is what I want to teach my daughters! They have to walk a very narrow path to both be beautiful (Elder Oaks telling them to wear some make-up) but not too beautiful or attractive (or young men might have awful thoughts!). I also want to start saving up tens of thousands of dollars for their therapy when they’re completely neurotic and co-dependent because they grew up being told they’re the equivalent of chocolate, responsible for the behavior of others. Heh. And we wonder why so many Mormon women are hopped up on anti-depressants.

      I have a better idea: I’m going to teach my daughters to dress well, for their own sakes, so they like what they see in the mirror. It’s not to dress to get somebody’s attention. It’s not to dress to avoid somebody’s attention. Both of those are manipulative, insecure, and rooted in pride. Because whoever somebody is, yes, he will have responses, but they’re his own business.

      By the way, the myth that men are simply visually stimulated is a horrendous oversimplification. A woman’s brain and personality make her far more physically attractive or unattractive than straight physical appearance could ever accomplish. So if you really want a man to not have “dirty” thoughts, you women had best keep your humor, wit, cleverness, and confidence to yourself. Otherwise his thoughts are your fault!

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 4:07 pm Cat

      If I give in and start snarfing down chocolate, it’s my responsibility and not the open box’s fault. This concept basically accuses men of being complete immoral idiots who are too weak to control themselves at the sight of a covered up buttock. And then it proceeds to place the blame for the actions of these weak, idiotic men on women. It damages both sides of the equation.
      I like a nice bicep, so I will request that all basketball players from now on wear baggy sweatshirt and sweatpants that cover them completely. Because hey, I am not responsible for my thoughts, right?

      Reply

  8. January 27, 2016 @ 6:21 pm Ken

    Great article. I agree. I worked at the gym, some of the rules I had to enforce made no sense and were ridiculous, like why does the color matter of somebody’s pants? Lol, and back in my day the black yoga pants had to “flare at the bottom” so as to not show the contour of the ankles hahaha because guys are totally turned on by ankles, as we all saw in the movie “singles ward.” Seriously, to all the negative nancy commenters, remember devo yesterday…. be more thankful. In gyms outside of BYUI some girls pretty much wear sports bras and spanx. Be thankful yoga pants are all you have to worry about lol, and it’s really not that big of a deal.

    Reply

  9. January 27, 2016 @ 6:38 pm Alita

    I think the whole point of modesty is being missed, or at least twisted. We are NOT responsible for another’s thoughts and we have never been asked to be so by church leaders. Modesty is about respecting our bodies. Part of that respect includes not using them as an attention-grabber. Modesty in dress and appearance is not all that different from the character trait. The shorts were uncomfortable, rode up, and revealed more that I wanted doing certain exercises. I certainly prefer to wear form-fitting pants when I exercise. That has nothing to do with a desire for attention, though and that is not what this argument should even be about.

    Reply

  10. January 27, 2016 @ 6:49 pm CK

    But you can wear yoga pants at the gym…

    Reply

  11. January 27, 2016 @ 6:51 pm CK

    Never mind, I read the petition wrong. Oops!!

    Reply

  12. January 27, 2016 @ 6:57 pm Aaron Brown

    It makes me sad that everyone involved in this discussion is less righteous than I am.

    I’ve found that whenever I enter a gym, I am immediately overcome by a desire to hump anyone and anything within view. Men, women, service dogs, it makes no difference. My Bishop and my therapist both think I have a problem, but I know it’s my tendency to be amazingly “in tune” spiritually that leads to my sensitivities. It’s very inconvenient to almost never leave the house, for fear that the walking pornography encircling me will tempt me into vile debauchery. But I know I will be blessed for my valiance as I continue to keep the commandments.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 7:09 pm Hat Tipper

      *tips hat*

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 8:21 am James

      I have the same problem. Haven’t been to class in 2 weeks because of it. Too bad all women can’t be wiped off the face of the earth…oh wait… then we’d turn gay… oh wait… then our kids wouldn’t be allowed to get baptized… oh wait… we wouldn’t have kids…
      I guess the better solution would be to learn self control and understand that unless we live in Rexburg for the rest of our lives, we’re going to be exposed to much more extreme styles. It’s time to accept responsibility for our thoughts and live life.

      Reply

  13. January 27, 2016 @ 7:03 pm Alicia Bingham

    For the Strength of Youth says, “Immodest clothing is any clothing that is tight, sheer, or revealing in any other manner. Young women should avoid short shorts and short skirts, shirts that do not cover the stomach, and clothing that does not cover the shoulders or is low-cut in the front or the back.” President Clark also said, “Tights are not pants.” Yoga pants are tight. Go to the For the Strength of Youth to remind yourself why we’re counseled to dress modestly.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 7:22 pm Hannah

      If we want to judge all athletic wear based on those exact standards, then we cannot wear swimsuits, dance uniforms, cheerleading outfits, volleyball shorts, football pants, rugby or soccer shorts, tennis skirts, tracks uniforms, and so on. If you want to wear loose clothing that restricts your movement, you are free to do so. However, do not expect everyone else to do the same.

      Additionally, the word “tights” when used in the statement “Tights are not pants,” refers to an article of clothing that is often sheer. It is a noun. The word “tight” when used in the statement “Yoga pants are tight,” is an adjective used to describe something that is not loose. The two words are not synonymous. Please do not confuse them.

      Reply

      • January 28, 2016 @ 3:42 pm Kurt

        I find it incredibly odd to see the words “loose clothing” followed by “restrict your movement.” By definition, the two terms should be mutually exclusive. As a matter of fact, my Marine Corps dress blue uniform is form-fitting and INCREDIBLY restrictive. I cannot properly bend at the waist or lift my arms above my shoulders while wearing it.

        Reply

  14. January 27, 2016 @ 7:34 pm Karen Humiston

    Really? Is this really an issue you find important at an american university in 2016? Unbelievable.
    TO ADMINISTRATORS: How did this ever become an issue? These are the kind of discussions that
    isolate your campus and the minds of your students.

    Reply

    • January 27, 2016 @ 7:53 pm Joe

      That is what BYUI’s strict adherence to a strict honor code seems to be about sometimes. I went to a conference once in DC and met some BYUI students there. They were seniors networking with future employers. They were not allowed to be without their adult chaperone. Now, these are 22-23 year old men and women – adults – some of whom have served missions and wandered foreign countries. They did not need a chaperone. I was disappointed in BYUI.

      This is just more of the same.

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 12:13 pm Gary Bernard

      It’s actually interesting that things like this are some of the MOST controversial we have here (there are exceptions of course), but the fact that we avoid much (not all) of the drama and controversy faced by other young people on other campuses actually speaks well of the quality of education and spirit of community we have here. We know that BYU-Idaho is set apart from much of the worldly traditions and philosophies and we use this time here to prepare to make a difference in the world beyond what some call “the Rexburg bubble.”
      TO ADMINISTRATORS: Thank you for keeping this campus on a steady upward course and helping us be dedicated to our education in such a way that makes things like “dress and grooming” one of the “major issues” we have here.

      Reply

    • January 29, 2016 @ 12:17 am Kyle

      It’s an issue because it’s ridiculous that an adult female cannot choose to wear clothing that allows her to feel comfortable. It’s amazing that people follow the word of a sexist “prophet.” Beautiful… Needless to say, I stand with the editorial board because any “immoral thoughts” due to tight clothing should not – and cannot – be placed on the female. LDS, please advance to the 21st Century.

      Reply

      • January 29, 2016 @ 1:03 pm Mike Price

        Allowing yoga pants in the gym is the school’s policy. The editorial board is simply agreeing with the policy already in place.

        Reply

  15. January 28, 2016 @ 12:04 am Jihad Joe

    I believe all women should wear burqas. That would solve this modesty problem once and for all. Heck, let’s remove all women from campus for good!

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 12:15 pm Gary Bernard

      The standard applies equally to men. This article just happens to be written from a woman’s perspective. I don’t know any men who are upset by the dress standards, but the standards are the same for both genders.

      Reply

  16. January 28, 2016 @ 12:35 am Steve-O

    We are witnessing the rise of the LDS version of ISIS in that petition. Gotta cover up those girls to protect the men from themselves. Come on guys. Be men and accept a little personal responsibility.

    The thing that really bugs me about the petition is that instead of appealing to the wearers better judgment for wearing said clothing, they prefer for the state (school) to force these girls actions. Classic Progessivism boys! Welcome to team Bernie!

    Reply

    • January 29, 2016 @ 3:04 am Krissy

      If only guys were the only ones complaining. Then comments like this would makes sense.

      Reply

  17. January 28, 2016 @ 1:02 am Nick

    Baseball players wear form fitting uniforms? The suit that I wear to church each Sunday is tighter than my baseball uniform ever was. And I’m really sorry that my football jersey was tight. I really am. But I had shoulder pads on during the games. If I removed the protective gear it probably would have been more loose and modest.

    Reply

  18. January 28, 2016 @ 6:49 am James Nelson

    Sounds like Sharia law to me.

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 2:16 pm Braden

      I know right!? And Mormon conservatives (myself included) complain about U.S. Government overreach. *scoff* What the POTUS has in mind isn’t half as bad as the Honor Code. Can you imagine Barack calling for an expansion on indecent exposure to include yoga pants and shorts?

      Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 9:10 pm PST

      The brethren of the church run the school and make the rules, right? If one doesn’t like the rules an easy solution would be to seek education elsewhere.

      Reply

  19. January 28, 2016 @ 7:10 am Truthteller

    Did Bednar write this?

    I think Bednar wrote this.

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 12:20 pm Lauren

      I am an AVID believer that this whole debacle about what pants should be allowed into the gym is ridiculous!!! But… having thought it over and struggling with it, and hating it, and talking MUCH crap about it has brought me to my knees in humility. Because, after all, we did sign an agreement to follow the rules at this private university. That being said girls and boys, is the rule targeted to the females? Yes. Why? Because we are held to a standard of modesty and as millions above have stated the church’s stance on modesty includes not wearing tight/formfitting clothing. Also girls humble yourselves to the stance that there are many males and yes even females struggling with the addiction of pornography and controlling their thoughts. Can you handle this? if so continue reading without rolling your eyes. Are we a gospel centered on service? YES. do we want to go to the gym and help young men feel comfortable and righteous? Or do we want them to be distracted and thinking unholy thoughts? NO so humble yourselves to that fact we want to help not harm. Also I am not out to make men seem like dogs and women pieces of meat but this is the conclusion that has helped me have a POSITIVE outlook on this situation and not a NEGATIVE outlook as I had for a very long time. Yes it is ridiculous but be more Christlike and suck up what you wear for and 1 a day. This is not Nazi Germany its a private institution in which you agreed to follow the standards.
      Over all, if you still think this is a bunch of crap then pay to go to a different gym!!!!

      Reply

      • January 29, 2016 @ 2:49 am Susan

        This is true. People are struggling.

        Think about the Word of Wisdom, there’s a line which says, “Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints…”

        Ever thought about what that means? That means that lots of us can drink alcohol and coffee and be fine, but for some it starts an addiction that burdens their life and the lives of those around them. We sacrifice all that is in the WofW for those who are weak. (I have a pretty high inclination for getting addicted to things…so it’s probably me. Thanks!)

        I really liked your post because it reflects unselfish thinking. Thinking about those who are suffering from temptations that not everybody understands or relates to. (Even though with the case of pornography, it’s statistically the majority…..yeah think about that too.)

        Also I liked that you brought it back to the basics. We have been raised to know better. “Modesty includes not wearing tight/formfitting clothing.” When did this become forgotten?! I feel like this should be posted on EVERY girl’s fridge on campus. If I was going to give a devo, that’s something I would ask the girls to do.

        I would also tell the guys they are awesome and to keep up the good work……..and tell the girls to step it up…….Oh wait maybe that’s why the want girls going on missions now………haha! But seriously, every girl is a politically correct feminist these days, it’s like taboo to believe in motherhood as a first priority.

        Talking to people now it’s like I didn’t even grow up in the church and I have higher standards than you. I know I should be more humble, but yoga pants are straight up gross. I don’t need to see your camel toe and I completely understand if guys don’t want to either!

        Reply

      • January 29, 2016 @ 2:50 am Susan

        This is true. People are struggling.

        Think about the Word of Wisdom, there’s a line which says, “Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints…”

        Ever thought about what that means? That means that lots of us can drink alcohol and coffee and be fine, but for some it starts an addiction that burdens their life and the lives of those around them. We sacrifice all that is in the WofW for those who are weak. (I have a pretty high inclination for getting addicted to things…so it’s probably me. Thanks!)

        I really liked your post because it reflects unselfish thinking. Thinking about those who are suffering from temptations that not everybody understands or relates to. (Even though with the case of pornography, it’s statistically the majority…..yeah think about that too.)

        Also I liked that you brought it back to the basics. We have been raised to know better. “Modesty includes not wearing tight/formfitting clothing.” When did this become forgotten?! I feel like this should be posted on EVERY girl’s fridge on campus. If I was going to give a devo, that’s something I would ask the girls to do.

        I would also tell the guys they are awesome and to keep up the good work……..and tell the girls to step it up…….Oh wait maybe that’s why the want girls going on missions now………haha! But seriously, every girl is a politically correct feminist these days, it’s like taboo to believe in motherhood as a first priority.

        Talking to people now it’s like I didn’t even grow up in the church and I have higher standards than you. I know I should be more humble, but yoga pants are straight up gross. I don’t need to see your camel toe and I completely understand if guys don’t want to either! lol,

        Reply

      • January 29, 2016 @ 11:31 pm ty

        have you ever struggled that bad with pornography?
        If someone is that deep in a porn addiction, they don’t need yoga pants to harm them. or even having to look at a girl. …. believe me.

        Reply

  20. January 28, 2016 @ 12:21 pm Lauren

    I am an AVID believer that this whole debacle about what pants should be allowed into the gym is ridiculous!!! But… having thought it over and struggling with it, and hating it, and talking MUCH crap about it has brought me to my knees in humility. Because, after all, we did sign an agreement to follow the rules at this private university. That being said girls and boys, is the rule targeted to the females? Yes. Why? Because we are held to a standard of modesty and as millions above have stated the church’s stance on modesty includes not wearing tight/formfitting clothing. Also girls humble yourselves to the stance that there are many males and yes even females struggling with the addiction of pornography and controlling their thoughts. Can you handle this? if so continue reading without rolling your eyes. Are we a gospel centered on service? YES. do we want to go to the gym and help young men feel comfortable and righteous? Or do we want them to be distracted and thinking unholy thoughts? NO so humble yourselves to that fact we want to help not harm. Also I am not out to make men seem like dogs and women pieces of meat but this is the conclusion that has helped me have a POSITIVE outlook on this situation and not a NEGATIVE outlook as I had for a very long time. Yes it is ridiculous but be more Christlike and suck up what you wear for and 1 a day. This is not Nazi Germany its a private institution in which you agreed to follow the standards.
    Over all, if you still think this is a bunch of crap then pay to go to a different gym!!!!

    Reply

  21. January 28, 2016 @ 12:51 pm Aaron Brown

    Why is everyone so less righteous than me? No really, I wanna know WHY. I’m completely serious.

    Everywhere I go I meet other Mormons who just don’t understand the importance of dress and grooming to the Gospel plan. Is it that they made less valiant choices in the Pre-Existence, and now their spiritual intuitions are clouded as a result? That’s honestly the only explanation that makes any sense to me!

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 1:11 pm Lauren

      It seems that on the topic of modesty and following the teachings of the leaders you are doing great. But… on the topic of being judgmental and self righteous, that could use some work

      Reply

      • January 28, 2016 @ 2:31 pm Aaron Brown

        But can my comments really be deemed inappropriate self-righteousness if I really am, truly and objectively, more righteous than everybody else? I don’t think so.

        I call it “truth-telling”, Lauren. I’m sorry that you’re opposed to truth.

        Reply

        • January 28, 2016 @ 7:09 pm Lauren

          If you feel youre being christ like in your words than thats all that matters

          Reply

        • January 29, 2016 @ 1:38 pm John Wood

          This has to one of the more enjoyable troll comments I’ve seen in a while. Thanks for the laugh.

          Reply

  22. January 28, 2016 @ 2:05 pm Braden

    As an alumnus, I’m tired of this debate. People have been butting their heads against a brick wall for decades. The honor code is controlling, out of sync with the doctrines of agency, and, in certain provisions, completely unnecessary. But the University really doesn’t care what the student’s think, as much as you really want to believe they do. By being so generous as to allow you to post an article, the illusion appears that all have a voice and are heard. Since I’ve been aware of the school’s rules, regardless of countless complaints from innumerable students, the status quo remains. The policy is the same. I’ve become quite cynical about the whole matter: Just grit your teeth and bear it. Focus on all of the good that will come from BYU-I, and weigh that against the closest thing to a dictatorship you’ll ever experience. Finding my wife, and saving money were worth being subjected to unceasing oversight. It likely will be for you too. So take off your Yoga pants, dawn your burkas, and go break a sweat.

    Reply

  23. January 28, 2016 @ 4:59 pm Jacob

    There is a big difference between the “skin-tight” yoga pants mentioned in the actual petition and “form-fitting” yoga pants used in the authors argument.

    Reply

  24. January 28, 2016 @ 5:27 pm George

    The issue is not so much being form fitting, as it is revealing. While doing the “abs that rock” class, my wife and I BOTH noticed that the skin of a young lady’s butt was shining through the material, crack and all. The fact that my wife noticed too shows that it’s not just guys being immoral. Maybe they should include a rule that says the material has to be a certain thickness or type. There are cheap spandex that are see through, and good high quality yoga pants that are not. And on another note, these type of pants should definitely not be worn as a substitute for jeans. They’re called yoga pants for a reason. Nor should you wear jeans to do yoga. Just saying.

    Reply

  25. January 28, 2016 @ 6:30 pm Nolan

    I’m afraid my remarks may start an argument as I have seen several in the comments already. I intend to do my best to remain unbiased toward either side in this argument. If I fail, please be patient with me.

    I have seen many criticisms of this article’s logic in the comments. I would agree that some of the examples and comparisons are exaggerated and/or unrealistic. Some may even be poorly cited. My intent here is to simply get people thinking.

    I would like to point out that there is a difference between a sound argument and a valid argument. By that I mean, just because I think the reasoning in the article is bogus doesn’t make the point wrong. Were it approached from a different angle, I may very well be inclined to believe it. (That is a hypocritical. Not an admission of my beliefs)

    That being said, no sound argument can be made for an invalid position. My question now is, if the arguments in this article are invalid, does that discredit the point being made? Is there a sound argument that could be made or is the article just grasping at straws?(Again, hypothetical)

    Some people may think the arguments are sound because they agree with the point being made, but does that actually make the arguments sound? (Also hypothetical) I believe the views expressed in the article, and the point being made are a matter of morality for many people. By that I mean they see this from their perspective and believe everyone in the world should feel the same way they do. If I do not feel that way about something, it is a matter of opinion to me. That feeling of religious zeal is powerful. It can be a very good thing in moving many people to do great things. I have also seen times when my friends were closed minded because of their personal beliefs. I myself have been in that boat many times only to find I was wrong. I have also been the only one in the boat and everyone else later found I was right.

    So in the end, what is the truth? Is this a moral point? Or a matter of opinion? Are the arguments sound? If not, is this still a valid argument? If you took the time to read my comment, I’d like you to think it over.

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 9:06 pm PST

      I don’t see the need for any argument at all. The brethren of the church run the school and make the rules, right? If one doesn’t like the rules an easy solution would be to seek education elsewhere.

      Reply

    • January 29, 2016 @ 3:11 am Jeff G.

      hypocritical? really? I’m fairly certain you mean hypoTHEtical. There’s a small difference.

      Reply

      • January 29, 2016 @ 9:16 am Nolan

        Thank you Jeff. Hypothetical is what I meant. Sometimes I have trouble with autocorrect.

        Reply

  26. January 28, 2016 @ 7:10 pm Lauren

    How about we all shut our mouths and realize EVERY standard we follow is inspired by GOD

    Reply

  27. January 28, 2016 @ 7:45 pm Trefoils

    In ancient Rome they exercised naked.

    Reply

  28. January 28, 2016 @ 7:55 pm Trefoils

    Probably so their clothes wouldn’t get stuck in the machines.

    Reply

  29. January 28, 2016 @ 7:56 pm Trefoils

    You know, cause they wore togas, quite lengthy.

    Reply

  30. January 28, 2016 @ 9:03 pm PST

    The brethren of the LDS church make the rules at BYU-i, don’t they? If you don’t like the rules, an easy solution for you would be to seek education elsewhere.

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 9:07 pm Trefoils

      Yeah! right on. don’t try and spend time understanding the rules. just leave. like me an PST wanted you here in the first place. psh

      Reply

  31. January 28, 2016 @ 9:41 pm Bill

    I am a guy and I don’t like my shorts falling when I am doing crunches…could I maybe wear yoga pants? Otherwise that would be a sexist double standard right?

    Reply

    • January 28, 2016 @ 10:47 pm Trefoils

      I agree with bill. That would be a good determiner. If everyone can’t wear yoga pants, no one should wear pants. of any kind. it would just erase the whole problem

      Reply

  32. January 29, 2016 @ 6:16 am Don

    Why not wear yoga pants under the gym shorts and make everyone happy and eliminate concerns of seeing up gym shorts or falling pant issues?

    Reply

  33. January 29, 2016 @ 1:21 pm John Wood

    I think this article points out a really prevelant attitude in some students at BYUI and members of the church.

    I know someone that in his ward had a women stand up during Relief Society and she explained how she was so proud of her son because he asked a girl to put on something more modest at school. Because he didn’t want to have bad thoughts he essentially told her that it was her fault for tempting him. Although I’m sure his intentions were to keep chaste thoughts but I think that this attitude that men cannot control their thoughts or that we have to ask people “politely” to not use their agency how they wish is completely absurd and false. Just because someone doesn’t have the standards as you doesn’t mean that you can oblige them to follow those same ideas.

    As to the issue of yoga-pants at the gym I think the same general idea applies. Not that BYUI is sexist but the attitude suggests that yoga-pants and practical workout clothes are somehow promoting promiscuity on campus or that male students are not responsible for their thoughts.

    Interesting article and a good read.

    Reply

    • January 29, 2016 @ 1:26 pm John Wood

      *Although I’m sure his intentions were to keep chaste thoughts I think that this attitude…

      Reply

  34. January 29, 2016 @ 3:28 pm Dallin Boardman

    The problem isn’t wearing the yoga pants at the gym, to me it’s when it goes beyond exercising. Woman need to wear this for exercise, just like a swimmer would wear his trunks or Speedo just for swimming. Too often I went to the grocery stores and other parts of campus and would see woman wearing these as they would any other pants, that’s where I would draw the line. To me, those situations can be deemed immodest dress since it is very tight and form fitting.

    Reply


Would you like to share your thoughts?

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright 2015 BYU-I Scroll