Public Showers
Men shower together in public
When I was in high school, our shower room was a three walled enclosure with two rows of showers along the opposite walls. I have no idea how the girls’ shower room was set up. Obviously, I had never been inside and I had never asked any of my female friends.
In the MTC, the showers for the elders consisted of a room with two poles running from the floor to the ceiling. At the top of each pole were six showerheads. The elders would choose one of the twelve showerheads to use. It is my understanding that the showers for the sisters consisted of individual stalls.
At the gym at the University of Lethbridge, the set up is similar to the MTC. Again, I haven’t asked any of the women I know at the U of L how it set up. At Mary’s gym, however, the showers for the women are separate stalls.
Why is this? Why are men’s showers communal while women’s showers are separate? I could understand why women’s showers would be separate if they were co-ed showers. Have women always demanded separate showers, or was this something that has always been?
Sure, it would be nice to have my own separate stall, but I have no qualms about sharing a communal shower either. I am comfortable sitting in the steam room or in the shower or even towelling off with other guys around. Mary tells me that women never talk to each other in the shower. I talk to guys all the time while showering, drying off or even getting dressed.
What is the difference?
Popularity: 39% [?]
[More Help]
I’ve actually wondered the same thing. And yes, women’s showers are always in seperate stalls, even in school. At my women’s college locker room we had a choice of shower stalls or the communal pole. The conclusion I came to was that this is because women are culturized to be modest and ashamed of our bodies. The message is that women’s bodies visually are powerful sexual stimulants. It doesn’t matter if we are only with other women, it’s a lifetime of shame making us want to hide. And I think part of that comes from the seperate shower and bathroom stalls. It’s institutionalized modesty. The other aspect to it is that 99% of women are ashamed of their bodies because we don’t look like models, we’re lumpy and out of proportion unlike everyone on tv. Most of us are embarassed to show our bodies to other women because of that. Just my two cents. None of this is scientific.
31 Aug 2005 @ 06:06 | Permalink
in my highschool and when I went to Nursing school the showers were communal with one long wall or a room with shower heads placed every so many feet. The gym we go to here also has a woman’s communal shower as well as the rec centre where we go to aqua classes or just to swim. I don’t think I have ever been to a place where the women’s shower were seperate stalls.
31 Aug 2005 @ 06:06 | Permalink
The MTC is open to prevent self defilement
31 Aug 2005 @ 06:07 | Permalink
Its not just showering, I know girls in college who will not even change in front of anyone, not even their roommate. I walk around freely in my bra and underwear and cause a stir in my own apartment (member of the opposite sex are never around, this is BYU after all). I think too a point girls are taught to be ashamed of their own bodies and it is something that they never get over.
31 Aug 2005 @ 06:08 | Permalink
JL,
You make a very valid, powerful point. Women—or more precisely, their bodies—have been sexualised in our modern culture. Your assumption intrigues me. If what you say is true than the sexualisation of the female body has not only affected men, it has affected women.
Which brings up another question. If woman does not shower communally because she is afraid others will ridicule her imperfect body, does this mean she compares others’ bodies to the imaginary ideal herself?
Also, in recent years the sexualisation of the male body has been on the rise. Should we assume that the same phenomenon will become present among men? My wife was saying the other day that on one of her mailing list, men have said they are uncomfortable showering in public. Could this be why?
Mum,
Your experience brings up further questions. Why do you suppose some female shower rooms are communal, yet some are not? I could see why showers in your high school were communal because it was quite a few years ago. But what of the others? Why are they communal while so many female shower rooms today are not?
a,
That thought makes some sense, but there are some problems with that.
First, does this mean sister missionaries are free to masturbate? Does it mean that elders are more prone to masturbate than sister missionaries; that elders are less trustworthy than sisters? I am not sure I can answer these questions in the affirmative.
Second, if prevention of masturbation was the cause of communal showers, then why are showers not communal in missionary apartments in the field?
Third, this still does not address why male shower rooms are communal elsewhere.
31 Aug 2005 @ 06:08 | Permalink
Jenna hits it on the head for the most part, though there are other issues.
23 Feb 2006 @ 19:50 | Permalink
I would hate to be a boy in the 8th grade. What those kids must go through.
We had to shower together in gym when I was a sophomore and I just would never get naked in front of anybody, so I rode home on the bus probably smelling it up.
When I was in New york and we went to the Victoria’s Secret store (Sarah’s favorite), women were changing and trying on bras all over the place.
I got some strange looks for my garments, but I didn’t really take it in till after. It just never occurred to me that it might seem odd.
Although I looked up once and saw a young guy staring at me with horror as I tried on a bra. That didn’t bother me much, either, I’ve had three babies. I just moved over a bit. He’d wandered in by mistake.
24 Feb 2006 @ 06:00 | Permalink
LOL, that’s too funny :)Maybe next time he’ll read the sign on the door.
24 Feb 2006 @ 08:45 | Permalink
At the VS store, there isn’t a door per se, there’s a long hallway with stalls. It’s sort of like what you would expect.
I feel worse as I think of it that I totally didn’t think about my garments. The more I think about it, the worse I feel. Although no one was rude.
24 Feb 2006 @ 19:13 | Permalink
What MTC did you go to again? My husband wholeheartedly does NOT recall that there were group showers. Just wondering.
K.
14 Mar 2006 @ 13:19 | Permalink
Provo. 1992.
14 Mar 2006 @ 13:26 | Permalink
Funny, that is the same year that my husband went to the MTC in Provo.
K.
20 Mar 2006 @ 22:47 | Permalink
Here’s what they look like. I have no idea if all the buildings had them, but mine did.
20 Mar 2006 @ 22:51 | Permalink
Well, great. My husband would like to know where the shower stalls went that he frequented every day. Perhaps those are not included in the pictures. Interesting.
K.
21 Mar 2006 @ 10:07 | Permalink
I know the sister misisonaries in our district had stalls (not communal showers), so maybe some of the elder dorms did as well.
21 Mar 2006 @ 11:12 | Permalink
Most likely.
K.
21 Mar 2006 @ 11:51 | Permalink
When I was in the MTC The showers were communal, This was 1980 though. Most public pools are communal,for men at least.
10 Apr 2006 @ 12:47 | Permalink
I graduated from High School in 1991, and all of us girls had a communal shower room, and showers were still mandatory.
Like someone else above already mentioned at their school there were polls that had 4 shower heads each which meant that you were always facing another girl directly accros from you.
And the shower room in the women’s locker room at my gym is communal.
16 Apr 2006 @ 22:04 | Permalink
In the fall of 1992, the MTC went through an organizational change in preparation for upcomming renovations to accomodate growth.
I may have this backwards… it’s been a while, but before the change, our floors and buildings were organized according to the language being learned. Most dorm buildings were designed for male occupants. I believe there was one building for the female missionaries.
After the change, we were all moved into different buildings and were mixed in with elders learning other languages. I remember that for my district, our new residence was the building that was previously occupied by the female missionaries. In the place of the public showers, there were 4 shower stalls that really didn’t provide any privacy at all, but were more private than the other showers in the other buildings. I have no idea what the showers are like in the newly constructed dorms.
14 Jun 2006 @ 05:22 | Permalink
On my floor in 1992, there were English-, Mandarin- and Italian- speaking missionaries.
14 Jun 2006 @ 07:25 | Permalink
Then that must have been after the change. I can’t remember exactly when the change happened. It may have been the spring of 1991. I was actually in the MTC on 2 different occasions and I don’t remember during which stint the change was made…. I may have to dust off my journals to jog my memory.
14 Jun 2006 @ 07:35 | Permalink
Ummmm …
I was in the MTC in 1998 and my building still had the communal, tree-of-life-style, showers.
… I’m so embarassed.
14 Jun 2006 @ 09:25 | Permalink
I just had to see why this thread was the most popular one to be viewed. I was amazed that it is 2 years old and has so few post on it. So I have to ask – Is this one viewed so often because the people looking at it are closet perverts hoping to read something juicy that happened in a Public Shower?
So how does it feel to be LDS and realize you are a CLOSET PERVERT?
15 Jun 2006 @ 20:30 | Permalink
It’s popular because of how well it ranks in Google. Most of the visitors to this thread are likely not LDS.
16 Jun 2006 @ 07:25 | Permalink
Closet pervert?
If I saw this headline in the paper, you can be damn sure (sorry Mary ;) ) I’d read the article and look for the associated pictures.
It’s salacious so it draws attention.
I hope you don’t get any catalogues in the mail, Bill. I hear there’s ladies in their underwear in them.
Darn those closet pervert home shoppers…
16 Jun 2006 @ 08:26 | Permalink
Looking information for naked men in showers is one thing, women on the other hand is different. Better jump over to the garment thread.
16 Jun 2006 @ 14:15 | Permalink
How is one any different than the other?
16 Jun 2006 @ 14:23 | Permalink
You need to ask the difference between men and women?
16 Jun 2006 @ 16:24 | Permalink
He means looking for information on naked men in the shower and naked women in the shower. How are those different? Not how are men and women different.
16 Jun 2006 @ 16:28 | Permalink
I was in the MTC in 1981. In my building our showers were in separate stalls. My district found out another building had communal showers and one night we all went over to the other building and used the communal shower and showered together. I can’t remember why we decided to do it, I guess it was a male bonding thing. I remember we were all singing to the top of lungs top 10 tunes. It was a lot of fun.
13 Jul 2006 @ 10:22 | Permalink
Male bonding while showering together?
Hmmm, strange. lol
13 Jul 2006 @ 10:38 | Permalink
I’m not sure whats more disturbing… the fact that you all had a group shower, or that you felt the need to post about it twice!!! (Just kidding) ;-)
13 Jul 2006 @ 10:39 | Permalink
He originally posted his comment on a different post. He must have not realised I moved it over for him.
13 Jul 2006 @ 10:42 | Permalink
I figured it was something like that (thus the just kidding and the winky smiley)
13 Jul 2006 @ 12:13 | Permalink
It seems strange to me that men would shower together at the MTC and sing top ten songs?
Are we talking about Priest or Elders?
Its just a pun.
13 Jul 2006 @ 19:59 | Permalink
lol- i just felt like I had to share that wonderful story. Yeah, maybe Top 10 songs were not appropriate in the MTC but we were just newly ordained Elders, still green behind the ears. Looking back, it was strange we all decided to go shower together for the fun of it, I think it was one of the Utah boys that came up with the idea…..
14 Jul 2006 @ 08:52 | Permalink
Was the Utah Elder Gay? Hum – Doesn’t Gay mean Happy?
Did he also want to help everyone wash thier backs?
I bet he thought he had already reached heaven. All those naked wet men and him.
Are you sure he was really an Elder?
Can any Utah people confirm if naked men showering together is a normal activity in Utah?
If so, get ready for a flood of real happy men. See above.
14 Jul 2006 @ 12:42 | Permalink
I am not comfortable walking around nude in the women’s locker room but I admire those women who are able to do so in comfort and I wish I had the confidence to do so.
I remember reading an article once where they said that Jennifer Aniston is perfectly fine with being nude in public locker rooms, and that if she’s naked and some women ask her for an autograph she will just stand there nude while she signs it for them. But I guess when you look like her you do have that naked confidence?
19 Jul 2006 @ 21:36 | Permalink
What do you mean by “when you look like her”? Does she have the ideal naked body?
20 Jul 2006 @ 05:51 | Permalink
Well, I’ve never seen Jennifer Aniston completely naked, but I would say that she has a great body. It’s a lot better than mine for sure!
If I did look like her I think I would probably have the confidence to be nude in a locker room like she is?
20 Jul 2006 @ 18:09 | Permalink
For me, it wouldn’t matter how “good” my body looked, I wouldn’t want to be nude in a locker room. Just me though. Naked is naked is naked.
20 Jul 2006 @ 18:14 | Permalink
My body doesn’t look anything like hers and I have no problem walking around nude in a public shower or locker room.
20 Jul 2006 @ 18:26 | Permalink
not long ago i played tennis at a public tennis court that had a locker room with a communal shower area. i went inside to use the restroom i was shocked to see almost all the people nude in the showers.next time i went back it didn`t seem so bad maybe i had gotten used to it. next time i go back i would like to take a shower.
27 Nov 2006 @ 22:52 | Permalink
iwould my comment to appear with just kim b
27 Nov 2006 @ 23:04 | Permalink
I’m not an LDS, but recently this conversation came up between my wife and our friends. I think there are four situations:
So, why? I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that the ladies more often than us men have to care for the kids. So, they would bring their daughters and sons into the locker room and with the sons there, would need more privacy. Personally I have no problem with the open showers and have carried on conversations with other men while showering.
13 Dec 2006 @ 06:10 | Permalink
Hi there,
I’m from the UK. To me showering naked isn’t really a big deal. I went to a state secondary school in 1983 and it was mandatory to take a communal shower naked after P.E. lessons. I’ll admit that I was a little shy the first time doing this but after that I was fine. I was really skinny as a kid and also I started puberty late-ish at around 13 or so. t.b.h. I just wanted to get clean and I had no problems even at 13 of the other boys seeing my ribs or my penis/lack of pubic hair etc. No one made any comments and they just got on with showering too.
A few years ago there was an outcry in Britain as to why school pupils should shower communually (same sex) due to reactions from parents of Muslim children who said it was against their religion to be nude in company or something like that. Since then state schools have had to refurbish their shower areas and put in separate shower stalls/cubicles which I think is going a bit overboard when most children would probably be ok with nude showering. Why don’t they have a rule that states children may shower either naked or with swimming trunks/costume on or something like that?
I feel that kids need to be naked in front of same sex kids for showering activities as it must surely help with gaining confidence with their bodies.
18 Dec 2006 @ 07:03 | Permalink
While communal showering may not be a big deal for some people it is for others, myself included. I don’t understand why some people aren’t more understanding of this? Modesty should be respected as a personal preference not as a hang-up for schools to cure through same-sex group nudity. It’s one thing to argue for showering in schools for the hygenic value of showering, but it’s quite another thing when it becomes an argument for same sex group nudity because it supposedly builds charecter. School bureaucrats making kids be naked together in order to psychologically condition them sounds like something right out of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.
21 Dec 2006 @ 10:59 | Permalink
Just to set the record straight. The Bill that wrote on this thread is not me. Please do not confuse us.
22 Dec 2006 @ 10:26 | Permalink
It’s pretty obvious it’s not you.
22 Dec 2006 @ 10:41 | Permalink
George
We are well aware of that, believe me.
22 Dec 2006 @ 12:59 | Permalink
As with Bill, I’ve never been comfortable with communal showering. But as a Brit, this is something to do with our culture — we are constantly taught about how we shouldn’t expose ourselves, and so to communally shower, to me, would not feel right.
Regarding Kim’s original thought. I would purely go along with the fact that women are constantly portrayed as a sexual object — and so it is better to keep them away from one another.
Something to notice is that men don’t only shower together quite often — they also pee together. Urinals are often no more than 12
"apart from each other! There must be something in our culture that makes men pack together, and women feel more individual.Also, I liked comment 3, about how men shower communally in the MTC to stop them self-defiling.
28 Dec 2006 @ 04:56 | Permalink
Back in the 1970s, my (UK) school had communal showers, at least for the boys. Never asked the girls, just assumed their showers were communal too. Showering was compulsory after swimming and I didn’t notice anyone having a problem with that. Indeed, the swimming teacher often had to come and switch the showers from hot to cold to make us leave the showers and get changed for the next lesson, so I suppose we enjoyed showering!
In the Netherlands, the showers at my sports centre were communal (and my wife tells me that was true of the womens’ showers there).
From what I’ve heard, the main reason for communal showers is not so much to help people over their inhibitions but simply that it’s easier and quicker to clean communal showers than a series of cubicles. And there’s less to vandalize (no doors or partitions, probably fewer shower heads and taps).
Unimaginably to most people in the US, saunas in the Netherlands and Germany are generally mixed and nude (though they often have one “women-only day” a week), and the showers at the sauna are mixed, communal, and used nude. And no-one perceives that as erotic.
3 Jan 2007 @ 04:35 | Permalink
Personnally I love showering communally. It gives a great sense of confidence, almost camraderie in being a adult male. Its no big surprise that I have a penis and pubic hair so why should I be ashamed when people see it? I shake it around for them, haha.
22 Feb 2007 @ 14:16 | Permalink
Well seeing as how this is the most popular, I guess I will just have to wade into the fray with my thoughts on public showering.
What’s the big deal? In some countries men and women and children bathe and shower together (communally). In reading every single post on this article I conclude (however right or wrongly) you all are just proving your worthiness as products of your social conditioning.
Now let us not forget that social constructs are man-made and therefore false. Not unlike the moral chimeras we accept ourselves (as social members) in order to remain group inclusive.
Alas though these beliefs, founded within our social constructs, are not the truth (innocence) God intended for His people.
21 Mar 2007 @ 16:01 | Permalink
It’s true that schools and other institutions installed communal showers for utilitarian reasons; easier to clean and cheaper to build. But the use of communal showers presupposes that all people are comfortable with them and that any inhibitions must be abnormal. When you begin justifying communal showers as “character building” it becomes group nudity for the sake of group nudity. This happens by default, not by design.
You wouldn’t say this about all social practices and mores? If personal preferences are just matter of social conditioning there wouldn’t be any value to them. I agree that cultural attitudes toward modesty tend to be more superfluous than cultural attitudes toward wife-beating. The difference between American and European beaches may be the difference between forks and chopsticks. But how a society imposes itself on people isn’t superfluous. Just because nudists are comfortable doesn’t mean that communal showers aren’t humiliating to other people.
My attitude toward people who voluntarily take group showers at the YMCA, as well as nudists, artist models, and even porn stars is live and let live. But if modesty isn’t a valid personal preference then the concept of personal preference has no meaning.
28 Mar 2007 @ 19:21 | Permalink
Very good, yet modesty is a moral value inherent in degrees to the disparate societies in which it is practiced. If we weren’t at first taught to be ashamed of our nudity, than uncomfortable with our nudity we would not feel.
28 Mar 2007 @ 19:34 | Permalink
lol
I’m sorry but that’s funny because it’s how Yoda talks…
Amused, I am. Funny, that is.
29 Mar 2007 @ 08:43 | Permalink
So I wasn’t conditioned by taking communal baths with my extended family. I’m not “ashamed” of my nudity, just uncomfortable displaying it in public. Shame implies moral guilt as if something is wrong with personal privacy.
My problem with your argument isn’t about nudity. It’s with your line of reasoning. Dismissing people’s attitudes as conditioning and social constructs implies relativism when taken to the logical conclusion. What you’re saying about modesty could just as easily be said about wife beating and dog fighting.
29 Mar 2007 @ 08:45 | Permalink
Ah ha . . .Rick you are indeed intuitive. Yoda was my inspiration for that particular turn of phrase. You see I can’t seem to get my mind around the whole God living on a distant planet revolving around the star Kolub. It makes me think of George Lucas and from there Star Wars and then to. . .Yoda. Do you think God knows Yoda?
29 Mar 2007 @ 09:01 | Permalink
You make an interesting argument Bill, yet your conclusion is not taken to it’s logical extreme. There are still societies where wife beating & dog fighting are quite acceptable – because of the social conditioning of the people. However, in our society we have been taught to recognize these as abhorrent.
There is nothing negative about it when I state a particular element of society is responsible for certain practices. Or do you suppose our individual objectivity, in all our various consciences, might have somehow found some middle ground upon which we (as mere people) formed an organic set of moral values, beliefs, and normatives , universal to us all.
Of course you are not, because you probably would agree we were taught how to behave appropriately . . .not to mention dress for the occasion (smirk). Don’t make me strip naked, and slap my wife while on the way to take my Staffordshire Terrier out to the pit to kick some American Bull Terrier arse – just to make a point. (listen for the distant laughter . . . wait it’s coming . . . I promise . . . well maybe not with this crowd).
You are quite correct when you say it is Relativism theory which I place my personal experience upon. Which social theory do you hold as possibly more responsible for our/your reaction to nudity.
29 Mar 2007 @ 09:26 | Permalink
What information leads you to draw this fallacious conclusion?
To come to this conclusion, you would have to assume that everything man-made is false. Casual observation contradicts this line of thinking. Your argument, and line of thinking, has limited depth.
29 Mar 2007 @ 12:16 | Permalink
Not everything man made is false, because I am not referring to the tangible. Social constructs are developed in the mind, they are not tangible. Rather, they are ideas.
We either embrace the ideas or reject them. It should also be understood that social constructs are not static, rather they are in flux. However, changing mores, values, and norms still restrict the behaviours of people (as free agents), to the extent that these same mores, values, and norms permit certain behaviours.
They are what they are because we have developed a society which accepts them as that. However, both society and mores, values, and norms are not irrefutable (natural/organic) laws (such as, oh lets see I’ll give you an easy one – GRAVITY), they are merely ideas we have foisted upon us by the group/society in order to remain inclusive within society or the group (such as a particular faith). So either you adhere to the mores, values, and norms or you become a fringe element. But they are not real things – just ideas!
C’mon JM don’t make me give you the whole school of philosophy lecture. Dive into the deep end and experience the depth. Put some of the dots together for yourself.
Mi Dios
29 Mar 2007 @ 14:49 | Permalink
I never asked for it. You were applying boolean logic to something that is clearly anything but.
29 Mar 2007 @ 20:09 | Permalink
What set, contained within my logic, are you referring to, as Boolean?
30 Mar 2007 @ 06:50 | Permalink
Your Booleans are what everybody can see when you shower naked.
30 Mar 2007 @ 07:34 | Permalink
Thats good, Thanks man (rofling)
30 Mar 2007 @ 18:30 | Permalink
John said:
It’s negative when it becomes a rationale for moral relativism or a rationale for not respecting the rights and preferences of others. I’m not denying that a society influences behaviors, only that all the differences aren’t relative. If the abhorrence or acceptance of wife-beating is only a matter of social conditioning then where is right and wrong?
I suppose I’m modest for the same reasons I tend to be introverted and private. I’m obfuscating, but I don’t feel that I have to justify myself with a theory found in a textbook. For me, the big issue is personal preference and authority. Since modesty is a personal preference I take issue with society’s expectation that I or anyone else should have to take same-sex group showers. My point isn’t about refuting nudists. It’s about not having to practice it myself.
For you, the big issue is cultural determination of values. By arguing that modesty is only a social construct, it follows that it isn’t a real value. Therefore you can dismiss my position by contrasting it with another culture’s mixed sex communal bathing. My problem with your paradigm is that you are dismissing disagreements by psychologizing them. Psychologizing disagreements is often a way to dismiss disagreements more than it is means of explaining them. If a person’s actions or words are nothing more than some socially conditioned or psychodynamic response you don’t have to take them seriously.
1 Apr 2007 @ 11:07 | Permalink
Right and wrong is again conceived within the minds of the people living within a particular society’s rules of norms, values and mores. All the differences are relative to particular society’s rules of norms, values and mores.
Modesty is a real value, but only insofar as a particular society is willing to accept and uphold it. I am not dismissing your (personal) preferences / beliefs / values / morals by contrast & comparison. Just pointing out that because you (personally) have them does not make them right!
You state, “If a person’s actions or words are nothing more than some socially conditioned or psychodynamic response you don’t have to take them seriously.” You are right – I think you’re finally getting the hang of this Bill.
However, the context of that person’s actions or words have to be taken in consideration of ones own relation to the same. In other words, unless a person’s actions /
words are taken out of their social context then these should be taken seriously as they relate to the person. In another social context, they may be construed superfluous and non-specific as relating to the culture.
Beez Kneez, you can have the last word if you want to, but let’s not dance this around too much more, because I am quite certain I am not permitted to post entire studies and research I have completed on similar topics.
1 Apr 2007 @ 11:49 | Permalink
John said:
>Right and wrong is again conceived within the minds of the people living within a particular society’s rules of norms, values and mores. All the differences are relative to particular society’s rules of norms, values and mores.
Sounds like you’re saying there is no right or wrong, that social constructs are arbitrary. Your statement, taken by itself, would mean that institutionalized racism, like they had in South Africa and the American South, were not moral outrages – only a particular society’s rules relative to its norms and values.
Describing people as “products of their environment” can explain the bigots who lived in those societies, but it doesn’t resolve the moral question of racism.
>I am not dismissing your (personal) preferences / beliefs / values / morals by contrast & comparison. Just pointing out that because you (personally) have them does not make them right!
I just hope you don’t say the same about my abhorrence of wife beating, dog fighting, and Jim Crow laws.
>You state, “If a person’s actions or words are nothing more than some socially conditioned or psychodynamic response you don’t have to take them seriously.” You are right – I think you’re finally getting the hang of this Bill.
Hardly! That statement does to human beings what Descartes’s philosophy did to dogs. It reduces them to organic automatons. The implications are potentially Orwellian. Don’t get me wrong, social sciences can be well and good, but reductionism takes away our humanity. Psychologizing nonconformity is often a political tool for marginalizing and controlling people.
If our ideas, beliefs, and deeper feelings are nothing more than conditioning and psychodynamics then there would not be any real substance to them. Why draw distinctions between Rosa Parks and the Klan if they are only the puppets of social sciences not people making choices?
4 Apr 2007 @ 10:38 | Permalink
On your first point, statemants like yours are alarmist and representative of a person who gleans their personal world news info fom the major media players. I will not waste my time explaining about how the attitudes which affected the dutch occcupation of white South Africa were founded in an external culture enforcing it’s wil upon another via imperialism (ask G. Bush for the rules on that game).
On your second point, rather simplistic moral value you represent . . .I expected deeper.
On your third point, do you think dogs have emotions similar to that of humans???? For your basic elucidation, firstly you take my quote out of it’s context and represent it as a whole, when that you have is a part of the sum. This enables you to attempt to strategically make me appear foolish. Sorry for you, because this was another’s quote I was re-representing for reference to my comment. However you completely miss the point It is neither reductionism, nor is it psychologizing (which isn’t a word) non-conformity. It is Sociology 101, and a tool for freeing us from the hegemonic control of society (and those institutions which further influence it).
Point four, well there you go again, “our ideas, beliefs, and deeper feelings are nothing more than conditioning”, which allows us to conform as agents acting within a given society.
I think you are getting it now, too
Cheers . . .
John W. Wickstrom
4 Apr 2007 @ 18:38 | Permalink
I was in the MTC in 2001 and had communal showers. I had no problem with it after the first couple times. There were never any problems for me personally. I do remember that one kid we all thought was gay got an erection in the shower. We all kind of just looked at each other and thought…okay… I think we just shrugged it off and never thought of it again. It wasn’t that different from anything else I had experienced. I showered in high school, public pools, sports, etc. All the time in the nude! It’s not big deal. Some have small penises, some have large, some are circumcised (like me), and some are not! We don’t wear hats around to cover our varying hair colors, textures, etc.!
19 Apr 2007 @ 19:24 | Permalink
Everybody doesn’t have your maturity. The MTC isn’t a high school, where an erection in a public shower could lead to abuse. Assuming, for argument’s sake, that this kid was gay, it was like a heterosexaul guy being aroused while showering women.
As for your hat analogy, there are people who believe in keeping their heads covered in public. Their reasons may be religious, cultural, or even personal. Being forced to remove their head coverings can be humiliating. There was a controversy in France over Islamic head scarves and 17th century Quakers were persecuted were refusing to remove their hats. Isn’t this another personal preference to be respected?
29 Apr 2007 @ 10:13 | Permalink
John W. Wickstrom, if you’re going to respond to Bill, you really should respond to what he wrote instead of just giving a pathetically weak attempt to wave off his arguments.
9 May 2007 @ 19:02 | Permalink
The women’s showers are always separate. The country club I belong to has communal showers that both men and women use together. Some are outdoors.
18 May 2007 @ 14:18 | Permalink
Oh, my….
23 Jun 2007 @ 10:56 | Permalink
I remember reading somewhere that the gang/communal shower for men grew out of World War I lessons learned. The poor health of those drafted into military service lead to things like the Flour Enrichment Act, and physical education being required in public schools. Since soldiers need to survive in conditions which usually don’t include much privacy, someone thought it would be a good idea to desensitize men to being naked around each other, thus the communal/gang shower room became part of men’s locker rooms.
11 Jul 2007 @ 17:30 | Permalink
‘Surviving’ a lack of privacy?
I had no idea that it was a hardship.
12 Jul 2007 @ 08:27 | Permalink
In my middle and high school gym classes, we were never required to take showers–and no one did. We just changed clothes before and after class and went on our way.
In college, our gym has open showers, but almost no students use them. Occasionally adults go in, but seeing students there is basically unheard of.
I’m a graduate student, and I use the open showers every time after exercising in the gym. I find using them right after working out to be refreshing … not to mention liberating.
Why are people so insistent on not showing themselves, even in locker rooms? The reason is that we were all taught that showing the body is wrong. Open showers were normal years ago (from what I’ve heard), but now they’re all but extinct.
I wish more people would realize that showering in public doesn’t have to be embarrassing or awkward. Instead, it often provides a sense of freedom and liberation by not having to worry so much about covering up.
23 Dec 2007 @ 19:59 | Permalink
I still remember my first experience in a communal shower at the age of six. It was on a Gulf Coast beach in a primitive cinder block building, with separate sides for males and females. There were four other people there, all nude and it seemed like fun. Then there were the years in P.E. when it was required to dress out (i.e. shower with your classmates) This was in the 60’s; again no big deal. I became a nudist later and recently the issue came up while chatting with a couple on their front porch about how schools no longer require showers in phys ed. Those of us at this resort think nothing of using the communal shower there (four shower heads in a row) and many are the times I showered with members of the opposite sex there, sometimes with their spouses present. We sometimes would chat while stark naked in each others presence. It seems such much healthier to be blessed with this attitude toward nudity in public.
12 Jan 2008 @ 12:39 | Permalink
If God had meant us to be nude, we would have been born that way. Everything else is cultural window-dressing. Modesty is culturally and time specific in its expression, until there are universalized norms about the human body. When the body becomes accepted, and we can disasociate sexuality from sensuality, we can move on to things that really matter. And nudist/naturist communities and resorts have MUCH MUCH FEWER sexual issues than clothed counterparts. Makes you think.
23 Feb 2008 @ 12:30 | Permalink
In post #80, Terry said, “If God had meant us to be nude, we would have been born that way.”
The last time I checked, we WERE born “that way”! Yet for some reason, we’re taught to cover up (and generally be ashamed of showing our bodies) from that point on.
An interesting observation …
23 Feb 2008 @ 13:43 | Permalink
Many interesting points raised. I am pleased that international views were brought up. So often American and Canadian views seem to be the only views in the world to some people. Just because a shower in an American school wasn’t communal, certainly doesn’t speak for the world. I live in Brazil right now and my girlfriend tell me it’s fine for her and her friends to be naked with each other, just the other day she and her friend showered in the same shower.
Additionally, though it may stray a little bit from the main topic, they are also fine with touching each other in any place and she often grabs her mother in private places as somewhat of a game I suppose. Playfully. Of course I realize that this will be different for different people and perhaps different regions within this country and of course other country. But I think it must be realized that the North American continent is such a small part of the world.
Points raised about conditioning certainly have some merit. I personally have showered with other men and it doesn’t bother me a bit. I recently did with a friend in Russia and enjoyed a gym there that didn’t require the use of shirts (actually I don’t think there was a dress code at all but I’m sure nudity in the lower half would be frowned upon). But at the same time there were a few American girls there and they were so afraid to be seen naked. They even thought themselves so adventurous when they decided to try showering together… but, in the dark, with 3 shower heads for the three girls and I’m sure they were very careful not to even brush up against each other.
My personal opinion is that being comfortable with nudity is a sign of maturity, but acknowledge that’s debatable.
5 Mar 2008 @ 09:43 | Permalink
Simple actually: Historically, showers were a guy thing from sports and prisons, and communal stalls were just easier. When women showers came along, space wasn’t such a concern since they needed much less. The trend stuck. My opinion.
1 Jun 2008 @ 00:09 | Permalink
It’s actually quite hard to figure out why the difference, because there are also contradicting situations. Such as at hot springs in Japan or Korea for example, where the women have no qualms about being naked in the pools, all the while chatting and yakking away. For the men, status quo as what you have described above for communal showers.
2 Jul 2008 @ 07:22 | Permalink
well heres a way to look at it…
fitness clubs or gyms, schools and whatnot built communal showers because their cheaper and faster for people to get in and out, and less space.
as far as nudity goes in communal showers for me. i was skeptical at first when i went to the Y with my dad because i joined swim team and he used to. i was a bit nervous but when everyone else is doing it, its not so bad to become used to it.
and i belong to the Y and a private gym, me and my girlfriend go and she says theres communal showers for the girls too and they have no problem showering together.
i guess what all this means…. who wants to go home or go out with friend or go to work after being completely soaked in sweat or chlorine.
2 Aug 2008 @ 22:52 | Permalink
It seems that men are more comfortable with each other being naked than women, although women will shower together they would rather be seperate. Where i go to the gym all the individual stalls are always full, so i use the communal ones.
Also, the steam room is unisex, and most are naked, so thats okay, if not a bit strange..
19 Sep 2008 @ 09:12 | Permalink
Maybe I am totally missing the point on this one, but I would have thought the need for separate showers for women was obvious. Every month to be exact. Surly the separate showers are to give privacy for the times in the month that you need to be alone.
Sorry but perhaps I am missing something.
24 Sep 2008 @ 14:05 | Permalink
During the two months I was in the MTC I always showered after the 10 o’clock curfew. Every night. In the morning I would go in and use the sink and mirror but wouldn’t even look at the shower area. I wonder how many other Elders thought I NEVER showered. Yeah, I hated the shower setup there.
15 Apr 2009 @ 11:54 | Permalink
We had communal showers in High School I worked after school with janitorial and the women had individual stalls.
13 Jan 2010 @ 03:58 | Permalink