We are visiting the TBM in laws and daughter was running around naked after having her clothes taken off from being dirty. Father in law kept making comments about her putting clothes on. Then when we finally did put some clothes on her, he said "there, now you are modest".
To me, this seems the most ridiculous thing ever. I don't think it's a big deal if a 3 year old runs around naked. I also think 'modesty' is only what we make it. It seems like that is just sexualizing a 3 year old.
Is it a big deal if a 3 year old runs around naked?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2013 10:04PM by dogeatdog.

Here is my guess...

It is a big deal if some weird pedo is in the room thinking the kid needs to be modest.

It tells more about what Father in Law thinks about. He is afraid of his own sexual thoughts.

Just saying!

I agree.

THIS IS A HUGE RED FLAG!!

My father in law was very much the perfect dad and grandpa- UNTIL he ended up being sent to PRISON for Sexual Abuse of Children.

He complained about cousin next door who let her toddlers run around in the back yard sprinklers naked. One of those children became a victim.

Since he has been in prison- several other victims have come forward.

Yes- he confessed. Yes he still had a temple recommend- and Yes- local preist(craft) hood tried the blame the victim game with us-

Please make yourself familiar with the signs of abuse and dont leave ANY child- boy or girl alone with this man,

Utah has an epidemic of "nasty grandpas" according to the people we spoke to from district attorneys office.

Prevention is the cure for this.

My four year old runs around naked frequently. He even requests to go outside for the express purpose of peeing in the grass or dirt. I don't care except for the fact that we don't fence around around our backyard and cars often drive by. Children don't feel shame being naked at that age. There's nothing wrong with it. The whole modesty thing has gotten completely out of control.

my take on this:

the WHOLE, ENTIRE LDS perspective on 'modesty' is Warped/Perverted; it's like trying to reason with a Monkey, a Babboon, etc.

OTOH, a 3 yr. old CAN'T be (what even the LDS call) 'immodest', That's for sure!

They used to tell me to put SHORT SLEEVES on my 3 year old. also shorts under her dresses for modesty. Mormons were very particular about this back in the day. Don't know if they are like that anymore, my kids grew up and I don't have anything to do with them [Mormons]anymore.

That is not only ridiculous, it is inappropriate, and I would call him on it. Loudly.

"FIL! What an inappropriate thing to say! We will not have you negatively affect our three year old's self image by telling her she should be ashamed of her body. Do not do it again."

Too true!

Wasn't there a post awhile back where they were talking about someone complaining on Facebook about how hard it was to find "modest" baby clothes?

Sick.

https://www.lds.org/friend/2011/06/hannahs-new-dress?lang=eng

Drivel from two years back about modesty for a four year old so yes it still is a big deal for some.

Below is a story from a few years ago the OP's post reminds me of. You can check out the shockingly immodest, horrifying photo of a five-year-old girl that was banned:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-400528/Passport-photo-girl-5-banned-case-offends-Muslims.html

Of course, she was five, not three, so I guess she was a little tramp who ought to have known better! ;-)

Holy hell! What is wrong with a naked 3 year old! My 3 year old girl lifts her dress up from time to time to show everyone that she doesn't wear diapers anymore, they're not aware fully of what their doing, to them it's fun. If that was my FIL I'd tell him straight up you're in my house therefore I will parent my child how I want, and why does it bother you so much? That behavior from you're FIL is very concerning, that right there is a red flag!

I disagree.

I object when my grandchildren run around naked and I have asked m daughter to please have them dressed when I visit.

I am not expressing my hidden pedophile desires. There are plenty of reasons for children to wear clothes. For starters, wearing panties keeps their anuses closed so they aren't wiped by my clothes when they sit on my lap.

The little boy likes to poke things up his butt and him wearing clothes distracts him from that desire into more constructive entertainment. The little girl wearing pants discourages the little boy from putting objects in her orifices, which he thinks is delightful fun.

The little girl likes to play in the dirt, which I heartily encourage, and we like to make mudpies. When she sits splay-legged, her privates get packed with dirt. She has had several UTIs and she is just turning four.

The family has a dog and the dog likes to lick the children's nether parts, which I find disgusting and not a good way to clear out the dirt. Getting the dog to lick them in the crotch is not as good play for them as coloring or playing with puzzles.

And that does not even touch the social consequences like having a child who is perfectly happy to pee in public no matter where they go. Why not, since he can just pee wherever he is in his own backyard- INCLUDING the sandpile where his sister is playing with her little vag planted on the dirt where the dog goes potty.

And that doesn't even go into the factor of attracting the attention of pedophiles which live in the neighborhood.

Anagrammy

I agree with this- I think the push for modesty is just because who knows when to flip the switch? I mean, to a TBM, a 25 year old wearing short shorts is not ok, same with a 16 year old. But a 10 year old? 5 year old? I think the mentality is just make the rules te same for everyone, or else you'll be out in the position where you'll have to explain why they're not allowed to wear immodest clothes as an adolescent, which COULD require the parent to acknowledge the existence of sex/desire. GOD FORBID!

With the utmost respect....

I think there are more issues in what you describe than simply whether or not they are wearing clothes!

I know you've talked about those kids before, Anagrammy, but those kids have issues. I've never known a kid who not only poked things up his own butt, but also into his sister's orifices. Creeps me out every time you mention it.

There's something else going on there.

When my son was little, he frequently took all his clothes off in warm weather. Of course it was at home, and we had a pretty private backyard with a wading pool. Yes I was always with him, and I didn't make a big deal out of it. I did not make him wear a bathing suit in the wading pool, and I thought his little body was beautiful. He wasn't a practising nudist, just occasional streaking.

Isn't it normal that little kids like running around naked a little after their baths? Why raise them with body shame issues? When they're old enough to understand, you explain about keeping your private area covered. That's pretty much all they need to know.

serena Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's something else going on there.
>
I agree. My twin boys are going through a phase of hating to wear clothes, especially pants or underwear. They can be quite disgusting little monsters (like most toddler boys, I guess), but not once have I seen them or heard them talking about sticking anything in their anuses. They see their sister naked at times and have never tried to stick anything in her anus or vagina, either. Nor has she ever done that to herself or them.

I could see any kid doing that once or twice because many kids will try anything and everything with their bodies, but I don't think a child doing this repeatedly is normal. Maybe your daughter should consult with her kids' pediatrician?

"wearing panties keeps their anuses closed so they aren't wiped by my clothes when they sit on my lap"

And this goes for people's "lap" dogs also. You like his bare but on your slacks, fine, but I might not. And cocker spaniels are not lap dogs (IMHO-u know who u r).

My Mormon mother loves to tell everybody what to do, and likes to end her lectures with, "But it's your choice." I have always found that strange and annoying. The more I look back over the years, the more I think she has as much of an obsession with sex as any male Mormon so-called leader.

To me, it's about control. "Grandma sure wishes you would..." followed by a lecture about modesty or whatever other topic she is obsessed with at the time.

On the other hand, my wife is a nevermo. Her parents are awesome. When we stayed with them, and our daughter came running out of the bathtub (3 at the time) my FIL and MIL giggled and said, "Oh, look who had a bath." The don't give a rip. They know there is nothing wrong with a naked toddler.

Running around the house naked at 3 or 4 does not make a child bad. But making the child feel awkward for being naked can have consequences.

Controlling people are not part of my life. I have the luxury of living out of town, away from controlling relatives, in a predominantly relaxed, secular community.

Most of my Asian friends have normal sex lives. They rarely talk, but when they do, they say that their parents never lectured them about sex. Same with my European friends. It's America that has the leftover Puritan, hysterical thinking.

T-Bone

T-Bone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My Mormon mother loves to tell everybody what to
> do, and likes to end her lectures with, "But it's
> your choice."

Heh. My mother's version of this is "I'm not telling you what to do, but ..." followed by telling people what to do.

No one is fooled.

My niece ran around naked all the time. Her mom couldn't keep clothes on her. We would be outside talking and she would come right out front with neighbors around and all. I'd just pretend she was wearing clothes and that it was normal. Once in my back yard by my pool she took some lantana flowers and sat and made a little bouquet in her girly crack while her mom and I chit chatted.
Well, after awhile she grew out of it and started wearing clothes. Now she is 12 and doesn't even know she ran around naked. She has moved on. And I would never tell her she made a bouquet. Now I think it's a little funny. At the time it wasn't so funny.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2013 08:17AM by snuckafoodberry.

One more time for the people that missed it:

Definition of MODESTY
1: freedom from conceit or vanity

You will note that does NOT have to do with clothing!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/14/2013 08:16AM by tig.

I agree with the posters warning about the F.I.L. Most adults would normally find a three year old either someone to ignore, find cute, or find annoying as in noisy or bothersome but immodest means that man has his brain in a bad place. WARNING-WARNING-WARNING. FIL may never act on his feelings but the fact that he is reacting to a three year old with sexual connotations is very disturbing.

It is brain washing from day one. Adam and Eve story is where it started and continues with the temple endowment. Oh don't run around naked god may see you naked... How embarrassing.

I don't think the guy is a perv but he was conditioned to feel nudity was a sin. So, wrap the little babies when they are born to hide that ugly sin.

Good grief....10 X to the 10th.

this is one reason for which the LDS church and churches like it may actually be promoting pedophilia rather than helping thwart it. When people see everything as sexual, then you got problems you wouldn't have had otherwise.

To answer the question, three year-olds can't be "modest" because they are innocent and have no understanding of it.

Assuming he's a pedophile just because he wants his prepubescent granddaughter to wear clothes is a logical fallacy called affirming the consequent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

If she were 10 years old (still prepubescent) would you think he was nasty for wanting her to wear clothes? I'm just saying, there are plenty of non-creepy reasons why he might want his grandchildren to wear clothes. Let's give the guy a break. He's probably a nice grandpa that loves his grandchildren.

/My $.02

I think it is matter of different standards and generally nothing to do with latent pedophilia. However, it is a bit rude for someone to tell other people's kids what go wear. Three is pretty young to worry about modesty but a child that age is olenough to begin learning what is acceptable.I wouldn't make a big deal about nudity in children, but that doesn't mean I would encourage them to run around naked especially when others are around. You can do it without making a big deal out of it.

Three year olds aren't being "immodest", but they can easily be socially inappropriate, depending how they were raised.
See, I can remember being in diapers and bath time when I was two, and I was already aware that I should never be nude anywhere but the bathroom and my bedroom. But then my parents were rather excessive with discipline, and trust me I did everything I could to stay "correct" and "appropriate" as far as I understood it. I first began imitating "modesty" by TSCC standards when I was five.

Nudists are raised to carry a towel for sitting on. The abusive story further back up thread is a tale of neglect and feral children, not a nude family, despite how they may self-label. Pretty obviously has nothing to do with a child momentarily escaping being clothed.

And I would consider it a red flag on the FIL's part, personally. A three year old doesn't understand modesty, but does understand escaping what she's "supposed" to be doing. It's a game all healthy three year olds play and it explores and defines for her which rules are more important, based on the parental units reactions to her escapes.

What grown man thinks a toddler knows "modesty"??? Seriously!

Can a three year old be immodest?

Modesty carries with it an assumption of sexuality which is a completely foreign concept to a three year old.

Modesty is also an outward expression of personal beliefs and what three year old has complex enough beliefs to understand the concept of modesty.

IMO, any kid should be somewhat dressed around anyone who is not immediate family (mom, dad, siblings). There are different levels of dress that are appropriate for their age and the situation. For example, its fine to let a toddler run around in just a diaper on a hot day, but I wouldn't let a 5 year old run around in just her panties.

Its ridiculous though when people start telling little kids that their shoulders need to be covered or their shorts are too short. I have a sister who used to put short sleeve white onesies on her baby girls to make sleeveless dresses "modest." She even helped my daughter (age 2 at the time) put a white t-shirt under a tank top she was wearing once. It was summer, it was hot and all the cousins were playing together at Grandma and Grandpa's house. She thought that my daughter was immodest so she "fixed" her outfit."

Does FIL have undiagnosed Obsessive Compulsive disorder? OCD in it's 'pure' form is just having unwanted thots pop up, ususally about violence to self or others or unwanted sexual thots.

I know when I was younger and I had my firstborn son I wanted him dressed too, and not in pants that showed the diaper out the side. I had undiagnosed ocd and would be afraid that when I changed his diaper I 'might' have molested him, if his penis liked being touched as I cleaned him. I used to put diaper cream on his diaper and hope it got onto his butt, so I didn't have to touch him.

I didn't know these kind of thots were part of ocd. Funny, when I had my daughter 14 yrs later, I didn't have any sexual thots- instead I got germophobia/ contamination thots big-time. Go figure.

I'm not saying FIL isn't a pervert, i'm just giving an alternate opinion. I used to call it 'modesty' too, that my kid didn't run around naked. I sure as hell wasn't going to tell anyone about this 'problem' as I was sure they'd think I wanted to molest my son.

'Some people with OCD experience sexual obsessions that may involve intrusive thoughts or images of "kissing, touching, fondling, oral sex, anal sex, intercourse, incest and rape" with "strangers, acquaintances, parents, children, family members, friends, coworkers, animals and religious figures", and can include "heterosexual or homosexual content" with persons of any age.[12] As with other intrusive, unpleasant thoughts or images, most "normal" people have some disquieting sexual thoughts at times, but people with OCD may attach extraordinary significance to the thoughts.'-Wikipedia

Ocd seems to come and go- or it did for me, showing up during stressful times and in different types- til finally I got an official diagnosis. I knew I had ocd tendencies- as i'd seen some of my weird behaviors (driving around the block to make sure I didn't hit someone, if I drove over a bump), but since I didn't have the germ one, or the constant checking of the stove, I didn't think it included me.

Ask your spouse if FIL has exhibited any strange ' quirks' during her childhood- checking, obsessing over something, counting.

Again, i'm not saying it's not a sexual problem. Just that it might not be. JK Rowling's new book Casual Vacancy has a character with ocd- the principal, if you want to see how sexual- thot-ocd can affect someone's life. There are meds and treatment for ocd. It doesn't have to be forever. It sure does produce a lot of guilt, as the person having it doesn't know WHY these thots keep showing up.

Just a thot to look into. Keeping your daughter safe is the first priority. It's just that if it is ocd, FIL will enjoy visits more with less guilt later if grand daughter is dressed. If it is sexual perversion, keeping daughter dressed is a good first step while you figure out whether to bring her there any longer.