In case anyone's wondering, No, Jacob doesn't show any skin in this episode. I know. I know. I was disappointed too.

Alrighty, I’m gonna dissent a little here. First I want to make clear that I LARGELY agree with Jacob here. Everything said about the principle of modesty is 100% true and accurate. I mostly agree with all said. My dissent comes in to fold. 1. He mentioned that modesty can be on two extremes. He gave an example of a girl wearing a pioneer dress to a dance and a girl wearing something more revealing and concluded that both extremes are equally immodest. I STRONGLY disagree. If the pioneer dressed girl is doing it solely with the direct thought that she is better than everyone there because of her clothing choice, then yes-but just objectively looking at the two, they are not equally immodest. The pioneer dressed girl if done in a non prideful way is 100% more modest. 2. I totally understand what Jacob is saying when he talks about the standards of modesty, depending on the context and society norm. However, society currently has a norm where we promote lust. The modern standard has shifted drastically and is considered “normal.” I think this results in a lot of problems. Just because the norm becomes more extreme does not mean that it then can be classified as modest. If the norm in society is that people can walk around wearing nothing, that wouldn’t make it modest. For people to suggest that modesty Depends on cultural norms and context, I would ask, at what point is the line drawn? There has to be a point at which something is objectively immodest to wear. Although context and culture does have some influence, it is not the soul factor in what is considered modest. Modern society has normalized lust and sexual degeneracy in our clothing choices. It is now the “norm” but that does not make it OK. Overall, great video and thoughts!

As a father it is difficult to watch my daughters dress the way of the world. They are old enough to do as they please now, but we live in such a sexualized world that all their peers and those they see in media are dressed in ways that 20 years ago would be considered inappropriate. Do we just follow the declining norms, but 2 steps behind? I always appreciated when the church came out with guidelines because at least then (hopefully) my kids’ peers would be dressed in a similar way and at least the pressure to dress immodestly wouldn’t be as great.

As the world goes more and more insane, having absolutes in addition to principles becomes critical. That is sorely missing from this episode.

Modesty protects the heart from those who only want the body.

OK Jacob, you've got to address the rampant cosmetic surgeries and body modifications within the church and women church leaders. Lip fillers, face lifts, botox, etc.... how do those things fit in with your theory on modesty? I personally think nearly every body modification that is purely cosmetic is immodest and has damaging effects on the youth who see respected or popular women setting an unnatural standard for beauty. I recognize there are outliers like fixing deformities or extreme abnormalities. But why is everyone getting lip-fillers rn?! Hot take: I think women with attractive attributes are much more beautiful than women with augmented body parts. Modesty is an attractive attribute

Make modesty great again!

If you're using your body as an object, it's immodest. Be agents, not objects to be acted upon.

I have a family member that was run out of the church in part to the extremes of "modest" dress especially when it came to swim wear. The young women's president could not divorce the term "two-piece" and "bikini" even going so far to say that swim team one pieces were not acceptable at a youth activity. This family member was the only girl on a high school swim team. This woman was immodest in her claims that she lived the "higher law".

What does our appearance say about who we are? Our chosen appearance is a representation of whom we worship, an outward manifestation of whom we aspire to be like and represent. Garments are mentioned in the Book of Mormon at least 26 times mostly in connection to purity. Costly/fine/precious apparel or clothing is mentioned at least 14 times in connection with wickedness and pride. When Christ clothed Adam and Eve in the garments of the holy priesthood they were clothed in a representation of the covering He would provide through His atoning sacrifice and thus a physical mark of His name upon them. appearance isn't just about protection from the elements or a shield for privacy, it is a billboard of information. People judge one another almost instinctually and often unfairly based on one another appearance. Part of developing Christ-like attributes is to overcome biases and to see one another as children of God and our brothers and sisters. We should seek to align ourselves in all ways including appearance to reflect that we worship Christ. This is one way that we are engraved with the image of Christ. we should seek to be like Him who was the greatest representative of modesty. Christ never was self-aggrandizing but was meek and lowly in heart always giving glory to His Father. One of the best examples of this is in the act of baptism. Christ was spotless and without sin yet chose to submit to the will of the Father in all things and didn't make an exception for Himself.

I'm glad you addressed this topic. I also wish that this was the focus of all those modesty topics discussed by church leaders for decades. Having said that, in defense of church leadership, the broader Christian community in the West also focuses on the same thing when it comes to modesty - females wearing clothing that is physically revealing. I learned a year or so ago that modesty was really about drawing attention to oneself and not about dressing suggestively. I learned it from reading about early Christian living (those who JSJr called the early-day Saints) and that they emphasized not drawing attention to yourself. In the more righteous phases of Nephite living, they did not wear costly apparel (i.e. draw attention to themselves). I wonder how much different the Church culture would be if the need to draw attention to yourself was discussed as much or more than the need to dress "modestly".

I definitely appreciate this. I think back to my days as a single man and how a woman dressed attractively would inspire me to actually want to ask her out and pursue her, while someone technically more “modest” but frumpy and uninteresting would just fall by the wayside. It’s okay to be attractive!

This is well thought out. A few points Jacob didn't address. The women's volleyball team isn't wearing spandex shorts because they need to. They are doing it to draw attention to themselves. If spandex shorts were somehow necessary to ensure the best athletic performance, the men would wear them. It's about drawing attention to themselves to increase viewers. Also, the church has talked about using the garment as a guide for modesty, that means it's not just about cultural norms. Also, as a visual artist, I can tell you that your brain is wired to respond to visual imagery, in spite of culture. So yes, there are some things that will always cause a sexual response in your brain, regardless of culture. I appreciate the intention of this video and the time spent making it. We do have a major problem with modesty in the church. We need to have more clear standards, because just leaving it up to everyone to interpret, just gives an easy excuse to those who want to dress immodestly. When you have a standard (like what the temple garment covers for example) at least there is a minimum standard, without spelling everything out.

Great episode. I think some people use others revealing dress to indulge feelings of spiritual superiority. But people also use their tolerance of almost any dress as a to indulge feelings of moral superiority. An extreme on one end does not justify participating in the extreme on the other end.

I usually agree with Jacob. Can’t say that I do on this one. If the goal becomes “just be moderate compared to what everyone else is doing” all that leads to is members sinking to the depths…albeit at a slower pace than the rest of the world. (Aka moral relativism.)

Excellent video Jacob! I think we do need to focus more on the PRINCIPLES modesty teaches us and not on the specifics of what we can and can not wear. I think the focus on the “why” instead of the “what” is the only way we should be teaching and talking about modesty. This is coming from a woman who grew up struggling with how modesty was taught to me growing up and the years spent trying to find the TRUE principles and reasons why we practice modesty through study and prayer. The same could be taught about piercings and tattoos.

I think a good place to start would be asking if you would be ok with your parents wearing the outfits 😂

Midriff and belly shirts are really popular right now. I grew up a few years after the Britney Spears era so It doesn’t bother me much as it would older people. It’s a bit strange though when I went to target, Marshall’s and Costco and was surprised when all three of my cashiers were wearing shirts that showed several inches of skin to the belly button. I’m surprised that work places don’t have dress policies of don’t enforce them. It just seemed like a strange thing seeing this one right after the other three times in the span of a few hours. Obviously It’s just the style right now and it’s popular. One of the girls in our ward kept wear a shirt that went above her belly button to church activities. We didn’t say anything but it is kinda weird when people don’t understand dressing appropriately for the time and place too. I guess what I’m saying is the styles are a bit revealing right now and we need to be careful not to judge people by these styles because it’s kinda just the norm. It can be hard for women who grew up with modesty rules to see younger members getting to wear whatever they want when we tried extra hard and put in so much effort to get clothes that covered well and fought against culture. But I can also see the benefit of people having less judgement around the body, less policing each other and their clothes and focus more on the person.

Brother Jacob, I'm all grown up now, but wish I would have understood the meaning of modest better when I was younger. I do appreciate your research and insights!

Modesty comes from within. If we are humble before the Lord, and truly love God, all we want is to do His will. Pride is the source of vanity. A proud person usually does not have a strong concept of self and self worth.

This is exactly what I’ve come to on my own! Thank you for using your talents in figuring this out.

I think a lot of the comments are totally missing the point, getting hung up on the moderation example. No, it's not about just being moderate to your cultural norms. It's about understanding the principle and using that as the foundation for personal revelation through the Spirit to understand what's appropriate for you. Because once you really understand the principle, no rules are really needed anymore. As parents, yes we can sets rules and standards to help us teach the principle, but like Joseph Smith said, "teach them correct principles and they will govern themselves" If you know the principle there is no circumstance that will throw you off, and no insecurity of what to do if the "rules" are removed. You will always know the right way to act or dress with guidance from the Spirit. Which is why he also gave the example at the end of the girl who feels she does need to stand out because the norms around her are too far gone. If she does so via the Spirit and not pride or vanity, she is modest.

"General ideas are no proof of the strength, but rather of the insufficiency of the human intellect." Alexis Tocqueville, Democracy in America, vol 2, book 1, chapter 3

Jacob, I mostly agree with you but I have a couple of questions that will illustrate the point. Why do women volleyball players dress like this (insert sexualized revealing photo that you used) while men’s volleyball uniforms are like this? Compare cheerleader uniforms between men and women, workout clothes that men vs women wear at the local gym and on and on and on. Just because women have chosen to be highly sexualized in our society and that we are accepting it does not make it modest or not modest. Garments were made to cover our nakedness. That is the standard from a loving Father. Anything that does not do this in any situation is immodest regardless of event, culture, or time period. We should be better than the world and have a far higher standard instead of capitulating, blending in, and in many cases surpassing the world. On a side note. Why the heck do we even have cheerleaders at any sporting event except for the sexualization of women? If you can’t perceive that, I can’t help you.

"Modest is hottest." -Plato. Shame bad, modesty good. 😊

The relativistic nature (to culture) of modesty can be a problematic view and i think there's a lot more to hash out on that. The discussion of how moderation and middle-of-the-road is correct made it seem like being peculiar was a bad thing. So is the point of modesty to fit in? If anything, i think anyone's personal standard for dress should yield a quality of peculiarity though obviously not to an extreme. Most of the time the point of standards is to be set apart, though (to Jacob's point) not in a vain way.

The culture right now is to rebel against any and all rules about anything so it seems letting these principles guide us is better because otherwise people will rebel on purpose just to “break a rule” which I feel is what we see in the ex-Mormon community. They get obsessed with breaking all the “rules” and act like it was the rules holding them back. When there were always principles behind the rules but they couldn’t get over the seeing just rules they felt were overbearing. I won’t lie though if I felt at times culture in the church was getting strange. When everything is guided by the heart we’ve got so many people breaking “rules” it can be hard as a member to keep following the commandments. Like it makes it look more appealing to not follow typical standards or commandments. It’s almost difficult to tell if you’re doing the right thing anymore. When so many people take off their garments to wear cute clothes or to model clothes but in the 90s you might even have forgone a successful modeling career to stay modest in the past. Many same sex attracted members have chosen to stay celibate or marry a opposite sex spouse but now in sacrament meeting we see same sex couples together and that person who is celibate or chose to marry a oppose sex spouse has to watch them every week as they proclaim they are pioneers on social media. Even motherhood in the church is different, many of our mothers sacrificed everything to be with their children like popular clothing, big vacations, getting hair or nails done ect. but now it’s almost opposite and you are shamed for not working and staying home with your children. And I know it’s almost impossible to make it on one income so it’s necessary at times but the culture about it is so different. Another example is a girl with same sex attraction in are ward had a girlfriend and was making out with her and another girl with SSA chose not to act on her temptations and they both get to go do baptisms for the dead and kissing a person of the same sex isn’t really addressed or disciplined so they both were rewarded the same. Just very different than it use to be and can be hard to know what the right thing to do is… sometime for members trying to do the right thing it can feel like why try, they get the same or close to the same reward and didn’t have to give up anything.

The problem I have with the analogy of lying to the gestapo to protect the Jews you're hiding, is that by agreeing to hide Jews, you have implicitly said you would protect them. To then admit to the gestapo that you're hiding Jews, just to avoid lying, then makes you a liar to the people you promised to protect. You're lying either way, but one lie sends the gestapo to their next target, and the other lie leads to harm for all the people you're hiding. I know which lie I can live with.

What we did correctly in raising my children: We started early speaking about modesty AND, especially since we lived overseas, we were also able to teach about judging others. What we did wrong: only focused at first on the outward expression of modesty. A little later on we added the meaning of modesty starting from the inside. BUT, I really wished we would have taught it this way!!!

Many excellent points both in the video and in the comments. I find it instructive that there is no variance (to the best of my knowledge) in temple attire throughout the world. I've never seen a man wearing a short sleeved shirt, or a woman in a dress that didn't come down well below the knees. Cultural norms and sliding standards didn't enter the picture (the street clothes members wear as they enter the temple is another matter). Those things aren't left to our best judgement.

Modesty as moderation in signaling. That makes a ton of biological sense and also explains why immodesty is a spiritual problems. It is both a manifestation of what you are trying to signal (perhaps even unconsciously) and also reinforces the intent of the signal. A man wearing overly expensive and flashy cloths both shows his spiritual pride and reinforces the pride in his heart

As a man, I have struggled so much in the modesty department. I promise that ive never intentionally shown my plumber's crack! I'm aware that I've flashed many poor victims over the years. In all seriousness, I'm left with a new appreciation for the women who have to make these decisions about what they are wearing, clothes they want but aren't buying, and fashion trends they find appealing but aren't engaging in.

Commenters, question for you: Is there a standard of dress God wants for us regardless of how others perceive us? Being immodest/vain is about how other people perceive us, thus making it impossible to be immodest in a world when you are the only human, for example. Is there a separate divine principle relating to dress specifically? Is it okay for the person living in a world all by themselves to show their stomach, or to not even wear clothes at all? Is a society of only straight men ok to not wear shirts or even pants? Why or why not? Anyways that's the questions that I have after reading the comment section. I'm leaning to no, there's not a dress code like that, but I'm not 100% certain of this opinion yet

It’s a lovely message, it telling that it is directed only at the one exercising personal agency in deciding how to dress. IMHO the problem is overwhelmingly on the side of trying to police others. Certain leaders in our ward were very reluctant to accept the new FSY pamphlet, and continued teaching our girls that the specific standards of the past still applied.

Great points here, especially in highlighting principles rather than rules. Where I would push back is with reducing clothing choice to sexual signaling in an evolutionary psychology view. Our choice of clothing can represent much more than what we want others (especially the opposite sex) to see in us sexually. We can choose to wear certain clothing for respect, dignity, honor, ritual, etc. (also, I’m not saying this is an either/or dilemma, just not the whole part of the story). Another issue, imagine telling a 13 year old girl that her clothing choice is about optimal sexual signaling. I don’t think that message would go well.

I need to marry a women from a modest conservative background. Because I love the idea of moderation 💯. I’m inspired…

I agree with Jacob ,but The shorts that the volleyball women when playing volleyball. They are way to short. The girls are always pulling the shorts out of the crack. BYU needs to look at the standards they have for players also.

Appreciated you highlighting the inherent hypocrisy in modesty rules, it opened my understanding. Thought your take on modesty was interesting and thought provoking.

@thoughtfulfaith2020 have you done a video on President Russell M Nelson autobiography called Heart to Heart? What are your thoughts on page 48 when he discusses joining Skull and Bones?

I agree. That's the reason "Loud Laughter" is a sin. It's not that God doesn't want us to have fun, it's that God is asking us to not draw attention to ourselves, or to lift ourselves above others. It's also not modest to scream down the road with your extra loud turbo car or truck, or Harley Davidson. But it's totally cool at a street party burnout competition.

[Please note, I am not capable of making short comments, and I accept that. Anytime I make an attempt to be more succinct, it leads to misinterpretations which take just as much time to address as it would have taken to elaborate more in a lengthier comment. But to sum it up (TL;DR): I liked the video.] Let me start with some context: This is the first video I've watched from this channel. It popped up in my suggested videos after I watched another video on modesty that focused on a different aspect; namely, discrediting and speaking out against those who engage in victim-blaming in cases of s*xual assault, and suggest that girls/women need to make sure boys/men aren't distracted in the classroom or office, and to make sure they do not 'invite' unsolicited attention and 'provoke' an attack. It doesn't occur to them to do a better job of teaching boys to not be r*pists (of course, women can be predators and men can be victims). The video demonstrates how this mindset is dangerous and degrading to men and women - it frames men as weak-willed, lacking agency and unable to control their carnal desires, and insinuates that a woman is at least partially responsible and was "asking for it" if her attire was immodest. Only a terrible person would say that to a victim who is already deeply traumatized. The video includes reference to a travelling exhibition titled "What were you wearing?" consisting of mannequins dressed in the actual clothing worn by victims at the time of their assault. It is a haunting and visceral statement. The victims' age, gender, culture, and occasion varies: T-shirt and jeans, calf-length dresses and skirts, hoodie and loose-fitting pants, a bikini, a boy's shorts and T-shirt, a wedding gown, a burka, cocktail dresses, a work uniform, a man's short-sleeved button down shirt with baggy shorts, and worst of all are the children's clothes, including a diaper😢. You can google the images - nothing graphic, it looks like a display in a clothing store. The message being that predators are not deterred by modest attire. I was prepared for the possibility that this video contained an element of victim-blaming and was relieved to see there is not. So thank you, Jacob. I clicked on this video not knowing what to expect. Sadly, religious extremists who make rage-bait content can poison the well against religious channels and content in general, speaking from experience, so seeing "Faith" in the channel name put my guard up a bit (for context, I am a 48 yr. old pans*exual gender-abolitionist neurodivergent atheist, which I am happy to elaborate on if asked). Although I was a little wary, I watched with an open mind, and got more out of it than I anticipated, and with no rise in my blood pressure! Some things that stood out to me in the video: (1) Instilling principles rather than making rules - this concept applies to almost every situation encouraging or teaching certain behaviors and/or values - telling a child "Because I said so" instead of explaining why a rule exists (if they are old enough to comprehend it) is less likely to result in a child following that rule; similarly, training an employee on a task without telling them how it relates to the business as a whole stifles their ability to troubleshoot, to suggest a more efficient process, to feel more invested in their job, etc. (2) The correlation b/w modesty and moderation. (3) Immodesty isn't always characterized by attempting to seek validation from strangers by trying to look sexy. Modesty is a complex concept, and this "thoughtful" video addresses it very well, in my opinion.

You make some good points. By their fruits ye shall know them. If there was a society where being naked did not trigger sexual LUST, and it wasn’t done to get attention, then is it immodest? Animals for example. Are they immodest within their species? I think what Jacob is saying is that you don’t follow the “norms” of society. But you follow the righteous result and intent. Yes society is always trying to push a heavy sexual and lustful message. If the message you send in your dress is one of beauty, and maybe that includes wearing a sun dress that doesn’t fully cover the shoulders, as a man, I would not look twice at a woman like that and instantly feel lustful. I would think she is cute, and pretty, and want to talk with her. Not take her to bed. So the answer is that you can judge modesty by the honest intent of the message you want to send, and the reception of that message by others. If you are not trying to sexually excite others, but rather present your best and most beautiful self, and that is the message that other people are getting from you, then I think the argument could be made that that is the heart of true modesty.

Well said.

Great ideas on principle. But I will add that I think principles fall flat on their face without a correct understanding of the truth driving them. A principle is a compass that can get you to where you're going, whether it is a good place or a bad place. Sometimes one's compass can be damaged through a number of different voluntary and involuntary actions, which is why it is imperative to teach people to follow the incentives of spiritual truths--doctrines (which are also taught by the natural world)--so they have the desire to recalibrate their compass, hop in the vehicle, and get to the best destination. Principle, by itself, rarely drives people to do good. When paired with true doctrinal incentives, it is a force the Adversary must reckon with.

⚠️ Jacob….This was awesome. Thank you. Going to share this w/ my wife + kids.

Brian Holdsworth had a few excellent videos about modesty

Modesty isn't how much you wear. It's moderation between extremes. It does fit in to social environments and circles. Because it's not all about clothing! It's all about love! There are minimum requirements that we must at least cover, for example our privates so as to not be naked. Most people follow this biblical standard. The moderate middle of the road is good. He mentioned sexual signals. The thing is, no matter what you wear, you are signaling something. Making sexuality a bad thing gets way too legalistic and prudish. He's right. We are sexual beings. A healthy medium of appropriate sexuality is what makes people beautiful. Too much is not beautiful, and too little is not beautiful. God bless. That's my two cents. Be beautiful for each occasion for the glory of God and your husband! Love you all! ❤

I was talking to a Sister and the conversation of dress came up. She said growing up her mom would tell her, your a girl getting ready for the temple. That kept her goal focused on dressing with, not in the popular of the day but, eyes set on christ, and understanding she cant wear G’s which represents Christ, in certain outfits. It was an “aha moment “ for me. If we help our kids understand our eyes set on christ, understand the temple and what the G’s actually signify, i feel (i maybe wrong) the clothes aspect will fall into place. My husband didnt like the feeling of the top G’s because he says he always runs warm. He would say well im modest i dont walk around with no shirt on in public or showing off my pecks in thin tank tops 😂. But i explained why i love my Gs and the symbolism they hold, and we wear christ, he then realized he didnt understand them in that way or maybe lost focus. He wears them now although somedays difficult the goal in mind helps bring perspective to him. 🤟🏽

Modesty is 100% culturally dependent.

There are some fearful absolutists among your viewers. Fearful of others, fearful of themselves. I totally agree with what you've said. You articulated well-reasoned principles. It's a model for how we should approach living the gospel.

I have a renewed appreciation for your content. Thanks.

I don't mean to insult nor do I claim to have all the answers, but I don't really think anyone knows what they're talking about on this issue.

This was excellent Jacob! I gonna have my daughters watch it. It was so well explained

Idk ion this one my wife wears swim suits she’s in shape I’m in shape it’s part of the WOD some may say it’s immodest but isn’t being obese immodest? People should bridal their passions things are sexualized because we as people make it that way if I’m at a beach and I see bikinis I think nothing of it I don’t care as well as the leggings woopty woop were is your head should be the question and to say dressing this way or that way is because they want attention is laughable can it be the case with some yes I can hear women saying this out of jealousy because they let themselves go and wear pajamas all day

I don’t know what Julie hanks will be mad about in this, but she will be mad!

[Edit: Sorry if this comment is offensive to anyone] I hope I'm not the only person who feels this way, but I rather disagree, and If you'll bear with me, I'll tell you why: 1. I'm rather confused as to why Brother Hansen here made the argument that there is such thing as TOO MUCH modesty. We learn from scripture, in 1 Corinthians 6, that, "19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s. I don't really see any scriptural data to back up your claim(Sorry, I've been chatting maybe a bit too much with antis. Hope it doesn't show too much in this comment.) How can we be TOO caring of our bodies that God has so graciously given us? How can we be too Modest? 2. Why are you grateful that our church doesn't discourage "You know what" behaviour? In ALL HONESTY, the ONLY part of me that wants *** to be acceptable is the mortal man, natural-manish part of me. I am going to dive deep into speculative theology for just a minute here, but... deal with it. I believe that there are THREE different types of choices that have always existed, inherently wrong choices, inherently right choices, and choices that can go either way, which, for identification purposes, I will call variable choices. 1. Inherently wrong choices are the choices that, under NO circumstances, can be used for Good. E.g. Worshipping Satan. 2. Inherently right choices are the choices that, under NO circumstances can be used for Evil. E.g. Worshipping God. 3. Variable choices are choices that don't inherently exist in this world, but did in the Pre-Earth life, before we were introduced to Good and Evil. These are the choices that can go either way, DEPENDING on your PERSPECTIVE. They are CONDITIONAL to your purpose and intentions. E.g. Saying the name, "God." This choice isn't inherently good or bad. If you say it in the act of praising God, it is good. If you say it in a profane and vain manner, in an act of expressing your emotions or condemning God, it is bad. These choices are the choices that can become confusing at times. We must also define what Good and Bad ACTUALLY is, and the Laws that God himself must abide by. If one reads The King Follett Discourse, they would find that most of everything, i.e living beings, have ALWAYS existed. If we had a definite beginning, then we must surely prove to have a definite end. We can also conclued that the Laws of Nature have ALSO ALWAYS EXISTED. We, as a species, lowercase g gods, are a type of being that has ALSO always existed. There are an unnumerable concourse of universes and since eternity past and forwards to eternity future, there have ALWAYS been mortalities and plans of salvation by each fine-tuned universes' supreme creator. Our bodies, just as the nature of our species, have always been constant/the same. With every single mortality we as a species have experienced, we can speculate that there has ALWAYS been a fall. All of us have to experience Good and Evil, which themselves are also constant. God is who he is now because of his choice to follow the Good, and Lucifer became the Devil via his choice to choose Evil. Because of the introduction of Evil to our bodies, corruption and "The Natural Man" infiltrated our bodies. I PERSONALLY, believe that our hormones and mortal desires of the flesh came with our blood via the fall and the corruption of man through The Fall of Adam and casting of the Devil to Earth. Going back to you know what, we can conclude that the action ITSELF is variable. We as a species are the way we are because of the very nature of our being. The act of procreation itself is a part of our duty as Sons and Daughers of God. We are commanded to multiply and replenish the Earth. The act itself is NOT evil, and one might argue that it is not necessarily good. It is simply a part of our nature as a "god." And this is where we get to mortality. Before we had a knowledgeable understanding of the concept of Good and Evil, before we were exposed to these eternal, opposite continuums, variable choices could exist. Choices, that weren't necessarily good or evil(To US,) as neither side could take its chance at using the choice for its own purposes. With this action mentioned in the video, being a variable choice, it can be used for Good and for Evil, and THIS is where I disagree with Brother Jacob here. The GOOD perspective of this particular action is to raise up righteous seed unto the Lord, Glorify God, BECOME LIKE GOD, and, to a lesser extent, develop a relationship with your spouse. I believe that the BAD perspective of this particular choice is to do so to satisfy our mortal hunger for hormonal action. EVEN when when in the bonds of marriage, is this action REALLY justified for the purpose of self-indulgence? I don't think so. We learn from the nature of Good and Evil, that God CANNOT JUSTIFY ACTIONS. No amount of good byproducts will EVER justify a wrong choice. We learn that EVEN WHAT APPEAR TO BE GOOD CHOICES, if done for the WRONG REASON, can turn the choice from good to bad. God ONLY pardons. HE cannot justify... or else he would be denied his Godliness, be stripped of his divinity, and cease to be God. The only seemingly bad choices that God can justify or take away are the ones that HE HIMSELF PUT IN PLACE. God did NOT create Good. People, especially outside of our church seem to misunderstand this often. When God commanded Nephi to slay Laban, there was the outcome of one of either two situations that took place. Either God created the law to ban the shedding of blood, thereby allowing him to abolish his own laws HE HIMSELF put into place... OR, he PARDONED the action. God will NEVER have the capacity to make a wrong choice right. It just isn't possible. There is opposition in all things. No matter how much money you give all of the old ladies and homeless people in the area, it will NEVER justify robbing a bank. It just can't. That money doesn't rightfully belong to you, no matter what good you can do with it. Going back to this whole situation: I've been told that engaging in the action itself is justified after marriage in part because it brings a couple closer together. I've got a few problems with this. For one, as mentioned, NO AMOUNT OF GOOD will EVER make a wrong choice right. You could do a LOT of good with all of the money you stole. But the choice is still wrong. Second of all, the action is only mortal. I do not believe that God the Father has addictive hormones running through his veins up in heaven right now. I believe that our urges came by way of the fall, with the blood that now runs through our veins, and with the ressurection and eschatological renewal, we will be granted a body of flesh and bone, free from ANY manner of temptation or urge. We learn from scripture that the things of this world are NOT OF GOD. Everything mortal in this world is ONLY TEMPORAL. Yes, the hormones may help build a stronger relationship with your spouse, but that doesn't justify ANYTHING, and second of all, it isn't eternal. It will pass away before we recieve our judgement and glorified bodies. Thirdly, as Brother Hansen mentioned in a recent Stick of Joseph YT vid., Getting the people right will get the systems right automatically. If you and your spouse both follow the number one great commandment, and truly LOVED GOD MORE THAN ANYTHING, you wouldn't need to retort, resort, and rely to/on these natural, worldy, corrupted hormonal indulgences to keep a healthy, SPIRITUAL relationship going. Justification was coined by the devil through man via Wickedness. If we take God commanding Nephi to slay Laban, for example, God NEVER made killing someone right. He simply PARDONED the action. The interesting thing about the nature of God is the fact that he is perfectly just and perfectly merciful. It is a perfect balance. If God witholds punishments when they are due, he will cease to be God. If God witholds grace when it is due, he will cease to be God. EVERY choice God makes it the BEST choice that could have been made in that moment, or God would lose his Omnipotence, and cease to be God. Now, God can not strip us of our Agency, so he can WITHOLD action, but he cannot make faulty descisions. When Laban recieved the punishment of death, he obviously deserved it. His punishment was the perfect punishment that could have been made, perfectly merciful and perfectly just, or God would cease to be God. Therefore, God did NOT justify the action. God PARDONED IT. Nephi needed the plates, and Laban needed punishment, and Lehi's family needed a swift and clean escape. God FORGAVE Nephi for shedding the blood of a man; He didn't JUSTIFY IT, he PARDONED IT. Now this is how it relates to the other thing: Why did Nephi slay Laban? Nephi slew laban BECAUSE GOD TOLD HIM TO. Why should we choose to have a family on Earth? BECAUSE GOD TOLD US TO. When Nephi was commanded to slay Laban, he didn't go, "Oh, sweet! I've always wanted to kill someone. Now it is justified! I've always wondered what it felt like to delight in the shedding of the blood of one of my brethren. I'm going to enjoy this." NO. Just because God wants us to do you know what, doesn't mean we are allowed to ENJOY IT. Commandments do NOT allow INDULGENCE. By that point, you will have left the path of Godliness, and entered the strange roads of the spacious field, surrounded by the cloud of darkness, and forever weighed down by Natural-Manish desires. THE ONLY PART OF ME THAT WANTS THE LUST TO BE GODLY, IS THE NATURAL MAN-ISH PART OF ME. MY SPIRIT COULD FREAKING CARE LESS. WHY ARE WE SO WORLDLY AS A MODERN SOCIETY?

The beach, any sporting activities, and proms are separate and distinct. It is comparing apples to oranges. Most things in life are the 80/20 rule. It is modest to wear a bathing suit - even a 2 piece - and shorts to exercise. Period.

The man I marry shall love me for my heart :)

Very nicely done! The trouble is, as with most rules or principles, Agency is not mentioned. Latter day Saints are commanded to teach children about faith and Jesus Christ by the time they reach the age of accountability, but the fact that at that age individuals have their agency, is usually ignored. Parents' responsibility becomes to protect the neighbors and the world from their children, not dictate to them. Rules are appropriate at church affairs, but those rules aren't necessarily appropriate for public school gatherings. Youth, and all persons, have the Right and responsibility to choose their own path, thus principles properly taught, not rules, regulations, and laws, are appropriate within the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Agree w/ about 70%-80% Must decisions on appearance be based primarily on "the other's" mortal perceptions? If for example it was a cultural norm to pierce and tattoo one's face, not doing so is perceived by others as vain/immodest, yet I know it is unhealthy disfigurement and in that revealed truth decide not to tattoo or pierce my face, am I in the wrong?

Are you saying a married man or woman is ok to sexually signal? And particularly when you say you don't know where the boundaries are. You try to make "playing with fire" to possibly be a good thing. The term has always suggested someone doing something dangerous that may result in great harm or cause serious problems. By saying you don't know where those boundaries are says you shouldn't be playing with fire in the first place. Playing with fire is different than having knowledge of how to safely and properly prepare, light, and maintain a fire. The middle is very arbitrary, considering how less modest the clothing trend has gone in the last 50 years. There has been zero movement to the modest direction, but all movement to the immodest direction. Why don't we find a "middle ground" from the 1500''s? A middle ground today is still immodest IMO. I just went to a carnival with my young kids last weekend. The majority of girls were literally wearing bras for tops...Should we find a middle ground to this? I don't think Isiah would push for a "middle ground" in our day as he saw it. Here are his views on "sexual signaling". Isiah 3:18 In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls, and their round tires like the moon, 19 The chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers, 20 The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings, 21 The rings, and nose jewels, 22 The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, 23 The glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the veils. 24 And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle a rent; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of a stomacher a girding of sackcloth; and burning instead of beauty.

Cheerleaders could wear leggings underneath the skirt, volleyball shorts could be lengthened to go down to the knee and Polynesian dancers could put a shirt on. We must be a witness of Christ at all times, in all places and in all things. Modesty needs to start with teaching our young people about wearing the garment and making temple covenants. Clothing is a sign of covenants and the Atonement. The Lord was the first fashion designer after the Fall. You can tell how modest someone is by how much revelation they receive. President Oaks gave an excellent talk on gospel culture in the March 2012 Liahona. He said, ""We plead with youth elsewhere to be as modest as most of the young people we see in Africa". They are completely covered. He specifically called out Western nations who are disintegrating when it comes to our values. Modesty can become an excuse for people to exercise moral relativism in one area just so then it can bleed off into other gospel principles. I'm in the minority now and current cultural trends are taking us farther and farther away from the standards. I know the standards have changed but I think we need to focus modesty around the temple. That is the ultimate goal.

Seems like a mistake to call modesty avoiding extremes in dress although I think both can be good things.

Do all Seventies receive the Second Anointing?

❤. A big fan of your thoughts on the subject. Great job. Lots to process. Definitely a re-watch. Sharing.

So good I really like how you explained modesty. Thank you

Very well Explained, thanks so Jacob, love your channel.

when males shake hands too hard or stand too close or stares too much its like immodesty -- using physical means for undue effect... PLUS have the same reply of "how can I be responsible for what YOU think?"

Very interesting take. It's given me a lot to think about. Doesn't this put us in the position of the world dictating how we act and what we wear, though? If they just go further and further in depravity, do we also? What DOESN'T it apply to?

I can’t wait for the next life where we all wear robes to our wrists and ankles. Let’s just start that now.

Sexual signaling is quite a loaded phrase. It puts an unfair blame on people, especially young people. Most often Mormons (Christians for that matter) turn off and or suppress their sexual intelligence as a way to achieve a false understanding of modesty, and or chastity. For me I can completely say that I have been totally turned on by a person wearing what the context of this discussion would consider modest. For each of us this can be totally different. Sometimes that turn on has happened in very sacred places. What I find disingenuous and vile are the patterns of suppressing our sexuality regardless of what is being worn, and the scorn of judgement by false perceptions of what is or is not appropriate. Sometimes the most powerful thing that another human being can do is to deeply breath that another human being can stir a responses inside another human being. What is wrong with feeling that exchange of information and to teach our children how to healthily process that information with out resorting to turning off that intelligence. What is un-natural is the suppression of those feelings and then the funky way that it causes a human being to conduct them selves in this world. When I feel the radiance of the things that turn me on as prompted by the way another human is interacting in a space that I am in, I revel in that feeling and the reminder of the fact I am a physical, logical, emotional, spiritual, sexual being. I want all of my intelligences to be robust and true. It deeply affects the way that I go about doing good in this world. No more do I consent to the ideas of being afraid of my sexuality. To do so I believe, and in my experience of navigating the garbage dogma of false modesty and chastity at the expense of turning off one of our intelligences that makes us human, that makes us like our Devine Parents. Though your video essay says a "Different Approach" I find it still reeks of an foul odor that serves to dim our sexuality and a wholeness of what makes us human.

"Context" seems to have a lot to do with the fashion of the day, and the church seems to be about 20 years behind fashion. For example, I once saw a Relief Society magazine from the 20's that said women should not show their ankles. Speaking of fashion, what about men's beards? If principles that give us the "why" behind our obedience (and I agree), what's the principle governing why men attending BYU cannot wear beards? And, what's the principle behind why drinking coffee (caffeinated of decaffeinated) is breaking the Word of Wisdom, but drinking Coca-Cola isn't. And, speaking of chastity, why the double-standard of hetero relationships vs same-sex relationships? What is the operative principle here, and where is the scriptural support?

Part rational and part rationalization.

Moderation, per se, is in the mind of the beholder. Your description of appropriate public displays of human sexuality (holding hands or showing bare shoulders or legs or hair) may be too obscene for me. Or my description of appropriate public displays (men wearing cod pieces or speedos or women frolicking nude at the beach) may be too obscene for you. Moderation, as a principle, goes from zero to 60 depending on who defines 'moderation'.

I don't buy into the proposed idea that being fully modest is immodest.

🤙

Trying to say that the principle applies the same to men as it does to women is a gross disregard for the reality we live in and it couldn’t be further from the truth. Have you ever seen a packing list for young women going in a youth conference trip? They are filled with long lists of things they cannot wear with very specific guidelines. The young men’s packing list instructs them to bring shirts, pants, shorts, shoes, etc… with NO additional guidelines on length, shoulder exposure, or anything if the like. The standards are very different and have always been. The women of the church have always been expected to keep a very specific standard and are micromanaged about it constantly. Please don’t gaslight the women into thinking they are held to the same standard as men are in the church because they are NOT

Great articulation of a subject that too many people over-complicate.

Don't cast your pearls before swine. Modest dress is holding back the intimate for a special person. If a person wants to be intimate with everyone then that is their choice, but it has consequences that can't be controlled. I recommend saving the best views for only the one you love & want to be intimate with. Much of today's dress standards, in public & even at church leaves very little to the imagination. It seems many want to be intimate with many.

Withdrawing hard rules in favor of guidelines is something you do when your children mature. Can we honestly say we've gotten more mature?

This was great - helpful and well reasoned. Thank you ❤

im a very sweaty person. So I get it

This video smells like rationalization and a desire to get away from the "collective witness" of church leaders' past teachings on modesty. Modesty as used by the prophets has NOT been about being in the middle (the broad road). He should rethink the principles here.

I wish that in the Church there was as much concern with the boys showing modesty as the girls. They make such a huge deal about everything the girlswear to camp. The boys go shirtless while swimming at Scout Camp. Such a double standard.

Matthew 23:24 !!!!!!

Sending this to family

I am very happy about the changes that were made to the FSY materials. It was always unfair how girls got a whole laundry list of dress rules, and boys only got a couple things. It made it seem as if modest dressing standards and behaviour was just something women had to worry about. Boys taking off their shirts, or dressing in thuggish and masculinizing attire is just as much of an issue. Not to mention clothes that show off musculature or is very tight fitting. I do realize that men are more visually stimulated, so modest dress in women does perhaps need some more attention in certain environments, but us guys have had way too much lee-way as youth, and it gave the impression that boys just couldn't control their thoughts so girls needed to make up the difference, which is utter rubbish. Some equanimity in how these things are treated is necessary, and I'm glad we're moving into having a much more comprehensive message regarding modesty with our youth today. Great video, and I'm excited for the Church is applying these principles in the many cultures where the Church now resides.

What a great video. Thank you! ❤

I seems strange to be lecturing women on the evils of seeking attention. You do the same thing by attracting attention to yourself to gratify some need inside yourself. You do this by proclaiming some moral high ground publicly on your KZfaq channel and in whatever debate or opportunity to show off your morality or superiority or great knowledge, each time you justify your tearing down of others who say or act differently. Women can make clothing choices that can say a lot about them and how they see themselves. But, by making those choices they are not tearing you or anybody else down by doing it. Why can’t you live your principles and find your inner peace without tearing down other who are not limited by you narrow mindset?

I agree that propely understood principles is the only way to inspire others to keep covenants, but i dont agree with your "Keeping Jews" illustration. In such event, youre better off risking your life so that germany does not escalate to such state than lying at the door. I see this example the way i see sin, Its the tip of the Iceberg. I'll risk my life in absolute joy, love and peace 1000 times over running for office to redress iniquities of the nation than i would ever be ok with acquiescing in silence and lying thereafter. I think seeing the superficial output of a lie is the wrong approach to examine the condition of our state. Reverse engineer it instead. Theres a principle in modesty, there's no principle in neoliberal volleyball.

There's some twisted version of a fallacy of equivocation going on here. The BYU volleyball shorts are not a standard for modesty. Neither is anything from BYU a standard for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Stop using their compromises as an excuse to muddy the water. Some Church bureaucrat somewhere can't dictate modesty (Polynesian Cultural Center? REALLY?). Even the GA's have no authority to dictate doctrine on God's standard for modesty. The Especially for Youth pamphlet is not the standard, it's from the arm of flesh. Jacob, your reasoning is based on worldly rationizations. I have less respect for you. You continue to grease the wheels of apostasy.

This was great❤

Well done and well said.

Swing and a miss Jacob. "Dress in the middle of whatever your culture does" is not how it is done.

So, do all of you prudes think the church should ditch the Polynesian Culture Center? Their show is risque!

How come our current leaders don't understand any of this?

Wow I’m really disappointed in reading this comment section. Y’all need to get over the culture and start focusing on the actual gospel. Again, great job Jacob ❤

Thanks Jacob. Because 15 prophets and apostles, countless stake presidents and bishops not to mention young women leaders need you to to give women the proper perspective on modesty. Jacob Hansen, keeping mansplaining manly!

What's up with Andrew tate pics now😂😂

I thought this video would be a promotion of the Seventh-Day Adventist book, not a criticism of LDS modesty standards. Boring clickbait. I'm out of here.