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


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have seen people post that they support this group and like that they are trying to show solidarity. The point is..this was just a testing of the waters I do believe or a stepping stone to more of their agenda. It was NEVER about pants for this group and they can claim that to the end of time as we know it. I will never believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know nursery leaders who wear pants as a matter of habit.

There is no rule against pants.

So solidarity for what? To me it's going to church in a spirit of defiance, which doesn't scream solidarity to me. It's not about pants. I just wish y'all would say what you actually want, because you're protesting against something that doesn't exist.

But mostly I'm just so, so sad for the feeling of discord and division between RS sisters online that I've felt so acutely this week. That does not come from a good place. Yes, I recognize that by posting that last night I participated in it, and for that I'm sorry. But I'm not sorry that I would rather go to church wearing MY best- which by society's standards, not just LDS standards, is one of my dresses- and do the regular Sunday stuff, than to go to a meeting meant to renew sacred covenants in the spirit of opposition.

Eowyn, do you remember posting this thread?

Ladies, I need an attitude adjustment lately. I really try to find the joy in life and be thankful for my womanhood, but right now, I'm kind of hating it.

I am not a feminist. I am pretty traditional, and I've had good men around me all my life so I don't really have a problem with the patriarchal order of things.

Maybe it's that I'm in a place in life where I have young kids and a husband that's always working and not a lot of freedom. But tonight as I did yet more dishes and laundry, I just started feeling like it's not fair. I get all of the grunt work, and none of the authority and freedom that my good husband seems to get. Don't get me wrong; I love and appreciate him and I know he works hard at a job he doesn't always like. He presides over our home righteously and defers to me in many things. I guess my issue is that he has had somewhat of a choice in what his daily work will be. He works in a field he finds interesting and enjoyable at least some of the time.

But no matter what, as a SAHM, my work will always be dishes and laundry and cleaning and changing many diapers a day and running the errands and seeing to the stuff that the breadwinner can't, which right now is everything. . . the errands, including his, the yard work, the parent-teacher conferences, the car maintenance, etc. He's great about taking over so I can get out, if he's not working and I have the energy to go anywhere, but that doesn't happen a lot.

Let's not even touch the fact that if I die before him, I could get saddled with another wife of his choosing, and he never has to worry about that.

It's strange to feel this way, because I've almost always found delight in being a woman. I don't know, maybe I'm just tired. Do you ever feel this way?

At the moment you wrote that, the feelings you were feeling in your situation did exist. So why do you think that other women in your church do not have similar feelings about their church position, about how they see culture and policy in their church, not equal between men and women? If pants are allowed, then why make such a big deal about women wanting to wear them to express their feelings? If dresses are really viewed by you and the LDS church as "best" then why be disingenuous about saying that pants are fine? The way I'm reading you is that you're trying to have your cake and eat it too.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're talking about fighting for more worship of Heavenly Mother,

I wouldn't object.

the "right" to stand in on baby blessings and father's blessings,

This has my full support

and sending their tithing to feminist organizations, for starters. That sounds pretty apostate to me.

I can vocalize my support for more equality in the Church while disagreeing with this one.

All Enlisted makes me embarassed that they're members of my gender and using my gender for such un-Christlike behavior.

That's alright. Mormons often leave me embarrassed to be mormon. Thanks to groups like All Enlisted, it's been happening less often, but it still happens far more than I would like it to.

Edited by MarginOfError
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.

Last night I read such a list, I'll agree with you and Pam 100%...it is bigger than pants, and very close to leading toward apostasy. That said, the list I read was not compiled by the leaders/organizers of All Enlisted, but rather random people posting ideas on Facebook.

How so?

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.

From what I understood, the standing in on baby blessings was mostly sitting in a chair holding the baby, getting to be part of the experience, not actually assisting in performing the blessing itself. That's an idea I don't object to.

Eowyn, do you remember posting this thread?

At the moment you wrote that, the feelings you were feeling in your situation did exist. So why do you think that other women in your church do not have similar feelings about their church position, about how they see culture and policy in their church, not equal between men and women? If pants are allowed, then why make such a big deal about women wanting to wear them to express their feelings? If dresses are really viewed by you and the LDS church as "best" then why be disingenuous about saying that pants are fine? The way I'm reading you is that you're trying to have your cake and eat it too.

M.

Excellent comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't find the two posts incongruous. I get exhausted in my roles, as does my husband in his. I get burned out. That doesn't mean I'm fighting Church leadership to change things. It means I get tired. I'm not going to picket the temple over it or pray to Heavenly Mother for help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...the "right" to stand in on baby blessings...

I remember watching a baby blessing once and did think it was odd that no women were taking part in the actual blessing. In other churches, when there is a baby baptism or baby dedication, both women and men take part. Both women and men are part of that baby's life that it only seems natural that they would be involved in such a ceremony.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need to say more.

Maureen, I think it was really rotten of you to dig through the board and find a post I made during a really hard week for the purpose of attacking me with it. Other boards have rules against doing that. It was low and uncharitable. Life has been hard for me the last couple of years, and I reached out here for some encouragement. Now I don't feel safe doing that here, lest someone use it against me down the road.

Here's the difference: I was discouraged and I sought help with my feelings. I prayed about them. I talked to my companion and read the scriptures and words of the prophets about my role as a woman. I saw that I was lacking perspective and not looking at where my husband was struggling, too. I felt the love of my Heavenly Father for me as His daughter. I remembered some sweet experiences I've had that solidified my role as a woman and helpmeet. I humbled myself and saw that equality doesn't mean sameness. I didn't rally the troops and march into Sacrament meeting with a disgruntled heart because I was tired of dishes and diapers. I found truth and comfort in the teachings of the Gospel instead of attacking it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate Wingnut's perspective, though I personally feel closer to Eowyn's views.

Yesterday, getting dressed, I couldn't recall if it were pants day or not. As I have one pair of nice dress slacks that fit and really have a thing for skirts and didn't think too much about it, I wore a skirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, I will say this in regards to the pants issue itself:

While I mentioned that I have worn pants to church before, it's something I don't spend a lot of time thinking about. Now that I've been forced to think more about it, perhaps I will try to include more pants in my Sunday wardrobe just for pure fashion's sake.

While I understand the symbolism of the pants these women are using, I just can't think that way. It's clothing that looks nice. As I said in the other thread, I really don't care what others wear.

I do not appreciate having to wonder just what loaded image my modest, respectful, and nice outfit is sending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember watching a baby blessing once and did think it was odd that no women were taking part in the actual blessing. In other churches, when there is a baby baptism or baby dedication, both women and men take part. Both women and men are part of that baby's life that it only seems natural that they would be involved in such a ceremony.

M.

Quite often father's blessings have mother's holding their children. I have blessed many babies while the mother is holding their child, because the child is calmer in the mother's arms.

However, this is not the argument. This is a ruse. The argument is the priesthood.

A baby blessing is different because hands are placed underneath the baby, and if the mother's hands are beneath the child, then she is actively participating as a priesthood holder.

A biological father isn't even able to stand in the blessing anymore, if he doesn't hold the priesthood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not about pants being evil, any more than a blue shirt or an orange tie is evil. This is about rebellion and apostasy. Period.

Next Sunday, let's all wear an orange tie to Church to signal that we want the Church to embrace homosexual "marriage" and seal such in our temples.

What's that, you say? You're upset about this? You silly fool. It's just an orange tie. It's idiots like you who object to orange ties that hold our Church back. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH AN ORANGE TIE! So let's all wear our orange ties. Solidarity, brothers and sisters!

Same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not about pants being evil, any more than a blue shirt or an orange tie is evil. This is about rebellion and apostasy. Period.

Next Sunday, let's all wear an orange tie to Church to signal that we want the Church to embrace homosexual "marriage" and seal such in our temples.

What's that, you say? You're upset about this? You silly fool. It's just an orange tie. It's idiots like you who object to orange ties that hold our Church back. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH AN ORANGE TIE! So let's all wear our orange ties. Solidarity, brothers and sisters!

Same thing.

Just one correction Vort, "let's all wear [a rainbow] tie..." ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wear pants day was extremely successful yesterday. There were several women who wore pants yesterday in my Ward.

Another group was suggesting a wear a dress day for all gay and transgender men who are members of the Church on 1-13-13. I have heard about it from several people but am unable to find a website yet that promotes it. Maybe they are still working on it. I know that a large percentage of openly gay members don't attend church, and in light of the church's new website, I think this would actually be a good way to get them and their freinds to at least attend church on that one day. So that members can show transgender and gays that they are welcome in church and can even now hold church callings, and enter the temple if they prepare to do so.

I look forward to the day when there will be an openly gay high councilman, mission president, temple president, or even general authority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look forward to the day when there will be an openly gay high councilman, mission president, temple president, or even general authority.

Need I say more?

This is not about wearing pants. This is about rebellion and apostasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wear pants day was extremely successful yesterday. There were several women who wore pants yesterday in my Ward.

Another group was suggesting a wear a dress day for all gay and transgender men who are members of the Church on 1-13-13. I have heard about it from several people but am unable to find a website yet that promotes it. Maybe they are still working on it. I know that a large percentage of openly gay members don't attend church, and in light of the church's new website, I think this would actually be a good way to get them and their freinds to at least attend church on that one day. So that members can show transgender and gays that they are welcome in church and can even now hold church callings, and enter the temple if they prepare to do so.

I look forward to the day when there will be an openly gay high councilman, mission president, temple president, or even general authority.

Said very tongue in cheek...

Then let's have a day where everyone leaves their children at home so those that can't have children won't feel excluded because it's a family oriented church.

Let's have a day where everyone wears the letter "A" on their lapel so those that have committed adultery but feel unworthy to come to church won't feel left out.

Seriously is that what this church is all about? Having "days?"

Seriously this thread is really upsetting me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Who said I don't love them? Do I have to do what they're doing to love them? Can't I love them in a dress?

I wasn't targeting you with my comment, I am sorry if you took it that way. Remember I said earlier in the thread that I understood your point of view, and that I wore a dress to church.

I was speaking generally as I mentioned previously in the thread about my concern about how hateful the Facebook discussion became.

TO ALL

I don't support the goals of the feminists, as reported here (I haven't actually read their site), but I am also uncomfortable with the jump to name calling and judgment. I think the difference is some of you are talking about a faceless group, and some of us are talking about individuals.

Though I haven't read the site mentioned up thread, I have read blog posts from sisters who call themselves feminists, and while I don't share their concerns, none of them seem apostate to me. They seem like sisters that are struggling with their faith, trying to make it work. If someone is on the fence, struggling with their testimony perhaps, name calling may likely push them the wrong way.

Finally...if it is not already clear, I am trying not to take a side here, but to petition for a little more understanding, patience and tolerance. What if it were your daughter that was struggling, would you want people to call her an apostate and tell her to "get out of the church already" or would you want people to lovingly fellowship her? That is all I am saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if it were your daughter that was struggling, would you want people to call her an apostate and tell her to "get out of the church already" or would you want people to lovingly fellowship her? That is all I am saying.

I have brought up apostasy a few times because that is what trying to go against the church can lead to. But never ever have I said nor will I tell someone to "get out of the church already." That is never my place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I need to say more.

Maureen, I think it was really rotten of you to dig through the board and find a post I made during a really hard week for the purpose of attacking me with it. Other boards have rules against doing that. It was low and uncharitable. Life has been hard for me the last couple of years, and I reached out here for some encouragement. Now I don't feel safe doing that here, lest someone use it against me down the road.

Here's the difference: I was discouraged and I sought help with my feelings. I prayed about them. I talked to my companion and read the scriptures and words of the prophets about my role as a woman. I saw that I was lacking perspective and not looking at where my husband was struggling, too. I felt the love of my Heavenly Father for me as His daughter. I remembered some sweet experiences I've had that solidified my role as a woman and helpmeet. I humbled myself and saw that equality doesn't mean sameness. I didn't rally the troops and march into Sacrament meeting with a disgruntled heart because I was tired of dishes and diapers. I found truth and comfort in the teachings of the Gospel instead of attacking it.

Eowyn, I was not attacking you. But if you felt attacked I apologize for that. You chose to make that post and it is retrievable by anyone who posts on this forum. I was trying to point out your inconsistencies in thought. Your previous heart felt post is exactly what other LDS women go through. To say that other women haven't felt like you in either their private home life or church life is not real or fair. To ask for support from women on this forum and then to not be able to understand why other women also look for support is confusing. To say on one hand that pants are allowed in church and then on the other hand to say that the church's standard is that a dress is best, is contradictory.

M.

Edited by Maureen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the difference is some of you are talking about a faceless group, and some of us are talking about individuals.

Maybe this is the problem.

I have brought up apostasy a few times because that is what trying to go against the church can lead to. But never ever have I said nor will I tell someone to "get out of the church already." That is never my place.

You haven't (thank you!), but others here have. Not in this thread, but in the original thread on this topic, using almost those exact words, in fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

I have brought up apostasy a few times because that is what trying to go against the church can lead to. But never ever have I said nor will I tell someone to "get out of the church already." That is never my place.

I wasn't directing my comments at any one individual, both IDEAS have been raised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share