What I will be focusing on today, in my favorite Sunday dress


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

Funny, you didn't vote for Romney, and he was threatened with assassination for wanting to be an honest president.

Maybe disgruntled Romney voters can wear blue jeans to Church next Sunday as a sign of solidarity with - I dunno - the embassy staff and CIA personnel sold out to Libyan thugs by the Obama administration, or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OKay, so I have no idea why men were wearing purple of all things. If they really wanted to show solidarity, why didn't they wear dresses? If they really want 'equality' and for some reason this means that women are equal all along and it is not acknowledged, why not wear a dress?

Is it considered demeaning to wear a dress? Jesus wears a dress in every picture I see of Him.

In fact when shortly after my hubby got his endowments I mentioned to him that really I thought men would wear robes in the temple. I mean, you see the pictures of angels, men and women angels, and they are all in robes/dresses. So I suggested to him that he might find himself under those clothing guidelines in the hereafter. At first he was opposed to the change, but then said that if everyone else was then maybe it wouldn't be so bad.

There are a lot of members of a certain religion in my area that expects the women to not cut their hair and to wear dresses every day. I can understand that they are trying to be Biblical, but I don't understand why their men wear pants. I mean, they are a relatively new invention, and if you are truly trying to live Biblically, they should be in robes.

To be perfectly honest, if there were women in my ward today that wore pants, I didn't even notice. Actually there was at least one because she sat next to me and I helped her with her kids. At least I think she was in pants, but I'm not positive...you know why? I don't care. I really honestly don't care, as long as they are modest and relatively clean I don't even notice what someone else is wearing, truly.

If the police came to me and said, "What were they wearing?" sorry, I got nothing. The number one thing I notice is their gender. Second, what language they are speaking. Third, hmmm if they were kind to me or not or if I felt I had filled their expectations from one bearing the Lord's name. Fourth, did they have kids with them. Fifth would be race I think. Age after that. I don't always notice facial hair or glasses either. Odd I know, but there it is.

You truly believe in equality? Show me the dresses. I love wearing a dress. Pants if I'm in the nursery on the floor probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OKay, so I have no idea why men were wearing purple of all things. If they really wanted to show solidarity, why didn't they wear dresses? If they really want 'equality' and for some reason this means that women are equal all along and it is not acknowledged, why not wear a dress?

Purple is a color traditionally associate with women's suffrage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that is nice, but I think a dress would really make it hit home more than purple.

I don't think a dress is demeaning and I just don't get it. I also have longer hair and I get to wear earings and make up. He doesn't get to. Really, he should be the one complaining, I mean no nail polish even! And his shoe choices are between black and brown...no bows, no straps, no open toes.

Poor men. The snazziest thing he gets is his tie, and maybe a colored handkerchief in the pocket.

I LOVE being a woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man I am so confused about this thread. I had no idea there was even an LDS feminist movement. Why on earth for? I feel so empowered by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I think if we actually focused on the doctrines of the Gospel and not on being offended when someone is less than perfect then we would all be much better off.

Today's lesson in RS was all about forgivness. I was touched by several scriptures about how many times we are to forgive.

ok enough rambling.

Mags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I don't know how their wards work, but here if the sisters aren't behind an activity it ain't happenin'

Even the chili suppers the priesthood put on...who buys the ingredients? stirs it when they aren't looking? reminds them what time they need to be there, or that there is an activity at all?

The Priesthood is a tool to be used to accomplish the Lord's work. To be jealous of it is like being jealous of the guy who does the mopping while you are sweeping. You have to sweep, you have to mop. Just be glad you don't have to do both all by yourself. He can have his mop, I'm so good at this sweeping business that he hardly has to use it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a Mormon (obviously). I consider myself a mild feminist (which is quite radical to many members of the Church). I do not, however, consider myself a Feminist Mormon. I don't know what the end goals of groups such as All Enlisted are (sometimes I'm not sure they even know). I support changes in culture, and even some changes in policy. I do not support changes in doctrine that come about as a result of rebellion and protest. If the end goal is to have men and women be complete equals in the eyes of the Church, women holding the Priesthood, prayers offered to Heavenly Mother, etc., I do not support that.

Though many of you may think this is a bunch of rubbish, this blog post is the best description/explanation I've read for why women wore pants to church today: Ask a Feminist. Some of the items in the list I agree with. Some I don't. Some I don't care about. Some I had never even thought about before. But I think I can sympathize with just about all of them (and I think all of them are cultural and/or policy-based, but I might be wrong...I don't remember exactly).

I don't post this as a defense of why I wore pants today: I already explained why, and I won't do it again. I post this because there are many people out there, both on LDS.net and in my own personal circle of friends, who don't understand that today wasn't about pants. The pants are akin to wearing a black armband during wartime: it's representative of something greater. I hope this can help you understand.

Edited by Wingnut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, help me. Women are clearly not required to wear dresses in LDS wards. Yet, apparently, a good number of women feel pressured to do so. Is this so?

If so, then I surmize that some women believe this expectation is tied to other expectations to behave and conduct oneself as a modest, conservative lady. Perhaps, some even feel pressured not to seek outside work or professional work, or work in traditionally male-dominated fields?

So, there is this mild form of push back against cultural expectations. Others perceive this to be a protest against modesty, or a slam against the church, perhaps?

I repeat my earlier observation, for it fits most religious communities: the unwritten rules are often more difficult to navigate than those that are codified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of it has to do with perspective. I do not choose to feel less than equal, so I don't. Yes, my role in the temple is different, but I like it. I have had sisters who lead the ward mission, I have had sisters who teach the Sunday school for the adults, I have seen a sister in the Stake Sunday School presidency. I have had a lot of experience with sisters filling roles in the ward that, I guess in more LDS populated areas they do not do.

They have had to do more here because the brethren would not. It is a very sorry state to be in. My husband's place is not in the home. He is not suited for it, he can not accomplish the things in the home that I can. He is suited to administration. Our roles are different, not unequal. I do work outside the home, but believe me if I could I would be a stay at home mom. I find great joy in womanhood. What kind of man would he be if he were not asked to do any calling because women can do it better? How would his talents and self-confidence grow? How would he be more like the Savior? They need these callings. Sisters inherently are creators, self-motivated improvers, we beautify the world and people around us so naturally that we don't even have to be asked.

Men have to be asked, sorry but in general it is true. Not that they don't want to, or that they are incapable, but there is something in their nature. They want to stay in the garden, questioning if they really have the intelligence and wherewithal to accomplish anything more. They need to be asked. They need the title. Eve is the one who was ready to move forward, take on the beginning of mankind, the knowledge of good and evil. Adam drug his heels, only moving out of necessity. He had to be put in the lead, otherwise he would always be drug around like a puppy on a chain only going where he felt he had no other choice. A balance has to be made between Eve's enthusiasm and Adam's introspection.

The men who go out and work, the things they work on will pass away. The money, the status cars, possesions, etc. will all pass away. What the women stay home and do has eternal consequences. To nurture, raise and educate another who has the potential to become a god is nothing to sneeze at. We influence their hopes, likes, goals, and dreams. We show them problem solving skills, compassion, empathy. When they use that priesthood to bless that baby, it is a seedling compared to the amount of sacrifice that the child's mother has gone through to give that baby life. We feel it grow, we work for his/her birth, and feed that child so that it's continued existence is completely dependent upon us. What significance does that momentary blessing have compared to growing a body for an eternal spirit that has been waiting a millenia or more for the temple we prepare for it? Must the mother be the sole source of every moment of progression? They can never do what we do, but they need to have eternal significance too, so they have the priesthood and they give a blessing.

I learned my role in the temple standing before the veil. Of course we don't bandy about the significance of our Heavenly Mother, look what is done in our Heavenly Father's name. What horrible things He is given the credit for. She is much too sacred to be drug through such slime.

PEC is concerning priesthood matters. They do not make decisions of what the RS Pres will or will not do. The sisters are expected at ward council and have an equal say at that round table, yes because every person at that table including the sisters have an equal responsibility to listen to and recieve revelation concerning what is discussed there. If they do not speak up it is because of their own feelings.

We choose to feel what we feel. We are not made to feel anything. To say, "it makes me feel" is passing on responsibility. We choose to feel less when we place more importance on titles and momentary responsibilities than we do on the little ones we care for. What short-lived calling can compare to filling our children with a view of the eternities. Both areas have to be met. The brethren take care of the baptism and the water, the sisters are what get the children in the water and give the courage and encouragement to keep the covenants made there.

It is anti-feminist to tell me that I am not equal without a priesthood title, and tell me that what I do isn't as important because I don't do it in front of a bunch of people and get a load of glory for it. The reason my hubby is a great priest has a lot to do with me taking care of the things he doesn't have to worry about at home. He can focus on other things, less important things, true, but things HE needs to do to become more like the Savior, and this is how I sustain him. He sustains me by staying out of my way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a heavy laden topic to me.

In order not to be offensive or too controversial, I'm biting my tongue to all the different responses I could give to this.

What I can say appropriately, I will. First off, I don't believe church is the correct place to stage political protesting, no matter how well meaning, sincere or deserved it may be. So, I'm glad I wore a dress today.

However, I grew up in a home where my own dad was quite abusive. The priesthood was just one more arrow in his quiver of tools to use to justify his unrighteous dominion. So, it hurts a lot to hear others downplay how this can and has taken place in the past.

I'm really grateful for how our church leaders have come out so strongly against unrighteous dominion/abuse in the past years. To me, this is a beautiful thing. And still needs to be listened to.

There's not doubt in times past, in our society as a whole, that women have been portrayed as the weaker sex. I am soo grateful for the doctrine of agency in our church. Which basically means to me that, while I will never be able to hold the priesthood simply because of my gender, God will not force me to support the patriarchal order of our church. That is my choice. And, one I will gladly make in support of the church by virtue of the fact that I have had the witnessing of the Holy Spirit many a time as to the truthfulness of this gospel and the authenticity of the covenants I made through baptism and the temple ordinances. This divine witness from the Holy Ghost is what keeps me here. Along with a testimony of the divinity of the priesthood authority.

As far as what happens when a male chooses to abuse it, Doctrine and Covenants 121 gives a beautiful dialogue about it. Certainly has made me feel better to read it a few times.

Dove

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Yesterday I learned that the event page on Facebook had been taken down because of death threats. That sealed the deal for me, and I chose to support the women who were told they should be shot in the face for daring to be different. I chose to do it in a spirit of sympathy and bearing others' burdens.

This is the main issue for me as well.

I am not a feminist...in fact, forgive me but--the worst bosses I have had at work were all women. I would much rather have a male boss. Sorry Sisters!

But good grief...whatever happened to charity? I love how we talk about forgiveness and "let it go" when it is someone else that we think should be doing that (speaking generally and not to anyone specific in this thread). How about if us dress wearing/non-feminists, love and forgive our sisters who are feminists, even if we don't fully understand their reasoning? Why can't we just love them???

Giving someone a death threat (one of those doing the threatening was a BYU student. . .) for wearing pants to church/being feminist, is a far worse sin, than wearing pants.

I think we need to keep our priorities in order here....set high standards for yourself, live the gospel the best you can...and love don't judge....LOVE everyone else. That's what I think the Savior would have us do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving someone a death threat (one of those doing the threatening was a BYU student. . .) for wearing pants to church/being feminist, is a far worse sin, than wearing pants.

Well, the difference is that wearing pants isn't a sin at all. :P I know what you meant, I just wanted to say that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've read more about this issue I've come to dwell upon some events from the Book of Mormon more and more.

And it came to pass that after much labor among them, they began to have success among the poor class of people; for behold, they were cast out of the synagogues because of the coarseness of their apparel—(Alma 32:2)

If our culture has come to view wearing pants to church as that large of a threat to our worship, I think we've got some serious reflection to do. It's easy to look back at the Zoramites and say things like, "Well they did what they did because of pride. This isn't really about pants but about showing respect for the Lord and accepting his teachings." That's all nice in theory, but I am pretty sure that the Zoramites had some pretty clever justifications for how displeased God would be if they let the riff-raff into their synagogues.

While it's absolutely true that this weekends demonstration wasn't about just pants, if we as a culture can't learn to accept comers of all beliefs and feelings--instead of insisting that people who participate in the church accept our singular view of the world--then we're in a heap of trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've read more about this issue I've come to dwell upon some events from the Book of Mormon more and more.

If our culture has come to view wearing pants to church as that large of a threat to our worship, I think we've got some serious reflection to do. It's easy to look back at the Zoramites and say things like, "Well they did what they did because of pride. This isn't really about pants but about showing respect for the Lord and accepting his teachings." That's all nice in theory, but I am pretty sure that the Zoramites had some pretty clever justifications for how displeased God would be if they let the riff-raff into their synagogues.

While it's absolutely true that this weekends demonstration wasn't about just pants, if we as a culture can't learn to accept comers of all beliefs and feelings--instead of insisting that people who participate in the church accept our singular view of the world--then we're in a heap of trouble.

This reminds me of a saying I once heard a Catholic friend of mine say, when she was sharing all the different walks of life that have found their path of faith in the Catholic church.

She said: "Here comes all of us"

I loved the image that immediately popped into my mind when she said that. A whole mob of people, of all different races, cultures, languages, political view points, traditional attire, etc. etc. all with eyes turned towards the Lord, walking towards His outstretched arms. It can be a struggle for the Church to figure out how to best reach out and serve people who are all so different, and sometimes we have to struggle against our "natural man" who would shy away from dealing with anything "different", or judge that that difference is "wrong" and something to be set aside if someone wants to be counted among the "faithful". But the Gospel is for all of them, and we need to stretch out our arms to them just as the Savior is. Even if they're feminist. Even if they're Democrat. Even if it's a woman coming to church in pants, or a man coming to church in a polo. The Gospel is there for all of them, and rather than judging them for their attire, we should rejoice that they are here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If our culture has come to view wearing pants to church as that large of a threat to our worship,

This is what I am finding incomprehensible. Not that I am failing to understand MOE words because they are quite clear... but the idea that pants are some how a threat.

And having be made aware through this forum of the 'movement' and having gone to church yesterday... And having be made thus aware before hand and I still can not tell you who wore pants or had purple tie or whatever. (Ok... Confession time... I probably would have noticed a guy wearing a dress so I can be pretty sure that didn't happen and that all the guys wore pants but otherwise my statement stands) As far as I know maybe ever single sister wore pants yesterday and frankly if they did I don't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I am finding incomprehensible. Not that I am failing to understand MOE words because they are quite clear... but the idea that pants are some how a threat.

And having be made aware through this forum of the 'movement' and having gone to church yesterday... And having be made thus aware before hand and I still can not tell you who wore pants or had purple tie or whatever. (Ok... Confession time... I probably would have noticed a guy wearing a dress so I can be pretty sure that didn't happen and that all the guys wore pants but otherwise my statement stands) As far as I know maybe ever single sister wore pants yesterday and frankly if they did I don't care.

For this, I commend you. I commend all of the people who feel as you do. I honestly wish the collective response to this demonstration was "meh." But clearly, there is a large enough block of our membership that does care. I hope we can bring those members up to the same level you are at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If our culture has come to view wearing pants to church as that large of a threat to our worship, I think we've got some serious reflection to do. It's easy to look back at the Zoramites and say things like, "Well they did what they did because of pride. This isn't really about pants but about showing respect for the Lord and accepting his teachings." That's all nice in theory, but I am pretty sure that the Zoramites had some pretty clever justifications for how displeased God would be if they let the riff-raff into their synagogues.

I don't consider women wearing pants as a threat to our worship. I will say this once again. The whole thing about "Wear pants to church" was in protest to the perceived inequality of the genders in the LDS church.

To use church as a place of protest or to show protest is inappropriate to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If any of you have seen the list of other protests these women are thinking of, which I will not post here but include withholding tithing, physical protests at Church headquarters, and worse, you'll understand why I find it folly to back anything they do. Their agenda is much bigger than "inclusion". They are inciting rebellion on many hands and leading others from the Gospel. It's a very contentious focus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading this paragraph in their "about" section on the facebook page..I KNOW this is not stopping at just pants but a prelude to future things.

The creators of this event are feminists who recognize pants are a symbol of much larger issues that require addressing. This event is the first act of All Enlisted, a direct action group for Mormon women to advocate for equality within our faith. We do not seek to eradicate the differences between women and men, but we do want the LDS church and its members to acknowledge the similarities. We believe that much of the cultural, structural, and even doctrinal inequality that persists in the LDS church today stems from the church's reliance on – and enforcement of – rigid gender roles that bear no relationship to reality.

This is a step to apostasy and I'll have no part of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any effort, display, protest or idea that removes the focus of even a single person and especially a child during sacred worship of and covenants from our savior, regardless of how socially just or unjust is a threat to worships and covenants of the saints.

Any lady that wore paints at any time to a worship service for the one and only reason to demonstrate their love of Christ (and no other reason) then you have my support and admiration. But for those that alter focus from Christ to any other cause - my only concern is that you personally awake - not to the threat you impose for others but to your self and that you have centered you worship on something other than Christ.

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading this paragraph in their "about" section on the facebook page..I KNOW this is not stopping at just pants but a prelude to future things.

The creators of this event are feminists who recognize pants are a symbol of much larger issues that require addressing. This event is the first act of All Enlisted, a direct action group for Mormon women to advocate for equality within our faith. We do not seek to eradicate the differences between women and men, but we do want the LDS church and its members to acknowledge the similarities. We believe that much of the cultural, structural, and even doctrinal inequality that persists in the LDS church today stems from the church's reliance on – and enforcement of – rigid gender roles that bear no relationship to reality.

This is a step to apostasy and I'll have no part of it.

How so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How so?

When you start protesting against doctrines of the church that are set down by our church leaders through inspiration and revelation from Heavenly Father you are basically stating that you don't believe in those said revelations and doctrine.

You can't state you support and sustain and at the same time protest. The two just don't go hand in hand. That in most times leads to apostasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're talking about fighting for more worship of Heavenly Mother, the "right" to stand in on baby blessings and father's blessings, and sending their tithing to feminist organizations, for starters. That sounds pretty apostate to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

They're talking about fighting for more worship of Heavenly Mother, the "right" to stand in on baby blessings and father's blessings, and sending their tithing to feminist organizations, for starters. That sounds pretty apostate to me.

All the more reason to try to love them, and hope they will change their hearts before they make choices that will lead them farther away from God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share