Third Hour

Why Women Don’t Wear Pants to Church

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Vort said:

Says the woman who is not even a member of the Church.

Are you now going to claim that, despite not being a Latter-day Saint, you have extensive, decades-long intimate experience with Latter-day Saints at Church on which you base your judgment? Or are you going to look to weasel-word your way out, a la "I didn't say all members or most members, just members, so as long as there exist at least two Latter-day Saints who have judged their own and others' worthiness by Church wear for at least two decades, then my statement is justified"? I'm kind of thinking yes to that latter thing.

By the way, where is all the outrage against Maureen's hateful, judgmental attitudes? Heaven knows Maureen has voiced her loud and long opinion on this forum against judgmentalism, and more than a few have come to her defense. I suppose judgmentalism, whether real or merely perceived, is objectionable only when exercised against the wrong people, such as homosexuals or Democrats, and not when exercised against the appropriate whipping boys, such as conservatives or Latter-day Saints.

I don't need to be a member of your Church to notice cultural views. All I have to do is read this thread to know that many of the men here see the author of this article as being rebellious for just writing the article.

If you think I have hateful attitudes on this forum, then quote one of my posts that reveal these hateful attitudes.

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/27/2019 at 5:52 PM, Anddenex said:

What you are describing and what this OP is addressing are to different topics. Pants have the same meaning as an English member as they do as an American. The principle is Sunday Best, Sunday Best for whatever country a member lives in (or according to laws).

There is a difference with what you are describing, "Dang, I am late because of work." Obviously the Lord and anyone else understands, just as we understand a potential convert (yes, even a woman) who shows up in shorts and a t-shirt to our sacrament because that is all they have or what they have been used to attending their other religious meeting. Or the homeless lady who walks in -- without having bathed for a long time -- dirty clothes, torn, and ripped. Ya, I love the Church members for this also. Nothing special about the ward in the UK.

This is where it is usually good to read what is being represented, which is talking about members who are making "light" of our sacrament meetings and are light-hearted in their approach toward God and his servants. These are those who are seeking to make a statement, to become a light unto themselves, who would rather say "Look at me! What are you going to do about it!" during sacrament rather then coming to Church with a broken heart and contrite spirit.

 

 

Summarized trollfully: Anddenex thinks English women should wear skirts and no pants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Suzie said:

@MarginOfError this comment of yours: "I'd love for you to point out any one instance where I've advocated for someone else to wear pants to church, or to wear a colored shirt, or to not shave. I've advocated for people to wear whatever they're comfortable wearing, and against using a dress code as a litmus test for faithfulness. "

Reminded me of this quote by Nibley:

"The worst sinners, according to Jesus, are not the harlots and publicans, but the religious leaders with their insistence on proper dress and grooming, their careful observance of all the rules, their precious concern for status symbols, their strict legality, their pious patriotism... the haircut becomes the test of virtue in a world where Satan deceives and rules by appearances."

This is more a double edged sword, would you agree? Was it not God that established the dress and grooming standards within the Law of Moses, by which the religious leaders added to (during yeas of apostasy) the dress and grooming standards given (which is the error), not the standard that was given.

If the Lord has made a standard, or even a principled invitation (whether by my voice or the voice of my servants -- it is the same), yes indeed, those who are honoring the Lord's standard (or the principled invitation) are in fact showing more faithfulness -- in that thing -- than others who would seek to change, mock, or advocate otherwise.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

This is your chance to invoke the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

No true English woman wears "pants"!

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 5:00 PM, Third Hour said:

Dear Reader, I have a confession: I wear pants to church. Sorry, I should clarify why this is a confession: I'm a woman and I wear pants to church. If we're just talking about style choices, I also like horizontal stripes, dangling earrings, and natural, wavy, hair. But this particular style choice is much more important than that. Sure, you may be thinking what you wear to church is not important. We go to church to  renew covenants. I agree! However, if what we wear is so insignificant, why does the sight of women wearing pants cause such a fuss in the first place? Believe me, it does. In December of 2012, some Latter-day Saints staged "Wear Pants to Church Day". One participant, Jamie Baydd, remarked in this article that it was designed to tell church members that "If you think you're different...or if you feel there isn't a place for you here, there is." Saints within and beyond the continental U.S. and Europe participated to raise cultural awareness. Women and men wore pants...

View the full article

It's funny how the passage of time reveals the true nature of people.  Remember the fuss caused by Sonja Johnson?  She, the pioneer of equal rights for women both within and outside of the Church.  She chained herself to the fence at the temple to make her point.  Fast forward 40 years and where is Sonja and what is she doing?  She lives in a tiny house in Arizona with her wife.  A nut all along as it turns out.  Whenever I see people wanting to upset the natural order of things I tend to let them blow their hot air and watch what they do when the air is depleted.  They generally turn out to be nuts.  Julie Rowe - you reading this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TheRedHen said:

It's funny how the passage of time reveals the true nature of people.  Remember the fuss caused by Sonja Johnson?  She, the pioneer of equal rights for women both within and outside of the Church.  She chained herself to the fence at the temple to make her point.  Fast forward 40 years and where is Sonja and what is she doing?  She lives in a tiny house in Arizona with her wife.  A nut all along as it turns out.  Whenever I see people wanting to upset the natural order of things I tend to let them blow their hot air and watch what they do when the air is depleted.  They generally turn out to be nuts.  Julie Rowe - you reading this?

You think that if a person's life slows down as they get older that means they are a nut job. She is after all 83 years old.

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The selective reading is strong with this one . . .

Who's gonna tell her?

I'm not gonna.  I bet she's gonna come back with... ohhhh... so LGBTQ+ are nuts now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2019 at 3:26 PM, MarginOfError said:

I find this one of the greatest fallacies we teach.  I really do.  It's tantamount to surrendering our agency. And when it takes its natural extension (which I've heard multiple times) that if we follow the prophet and the prophet is wrong (or whatever priesthood leader), then the fault lies on the prophet, it's outright heretical. 

I will not surrender my agency like that, nor will I displace the accountability for my decisions. 

And to be clear, I don't have a problem doing things that I don't understand. I'm just not prone to doing something that the Lord, as far as I can tell in my dialog with Him, just doesn't care about.

I agree with the general principle.  I disagree with the application.  Naaman's story should advise us here.

The bar I'd set is when I believe there is something very wrong with a directive I've received, or if it will take unusual resources of time, money, effort, etc. to obey, then I need a firm confirmation to obey.  But if it doesn't take much, why not?

I find it odd that you set the bar for what might be termed "loyal opposition" or possibly "civil disobedience" at "I don't really care (possibly "I believe the Lord doesn't really care") and there's no difference in effort, so I'm going to disobey it."  Very odd indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a young woman (between 12 and 14), I received a phone call asking me if I could offer the opening prayer in a stake activity (I don't recall if it was a YW activity, seminary or something else). However, I was beyond excited... it was such a big deal to me. I was young, insecure and I remember my innocent self even "planning" for days what I would say in my prayer, I didn't want to mess up. I decided to wear dress pants for this activity (no jeans), I loved those pants because they made me look all grown up so when the day arrived, I remember reaching early because I couldn't contain the excitement. I was asked to sit down near the front, I took a program and my sister and I sat together... you could have seen my smile from miles away!

Life at home was difficult and Church was for me an oasis where I found solace and acceptance so the fact that the "Church" chose ME (insignificant me in my view at that time) to offer a prayer during a stake activity meant the world to me...  I remember opening the program and seeing my name printed on it and I couldn't believe it. When the meeting started, I heard my name being called to offer the prayer. I remember that it took me forever to reach the podium because I was so nervous... and when I reached and I'm about to offer the prayer, the Stake YW president stopped me and said: "Suzie, you cannot offer the prayer. You are wearing pants."  and then signed for me to leave the podium and choose someone else to offer the prayer. I remember going back to my seat completely embarrassed by the "looks" I was getting from everyone there and deeply sad knowing that God doesn't accept prayers from people like me. I wondered what I did so wrong... because I always did something wrong. I remember the prayer being said but... my eyes were not closed. I was quietly crying and my eyes were looking at my name in that program and wondering about pants...

I type this and I have to be honest... I have to stop because I'm overcome with the same emotion I felt many years ago. It wasn't just a simple prayer for me... this experience CHANGED everything. Over the years, it became a VERY powerful lesson in my life about acceptance, about looking beyond the exterior...being less preoccupied about shirt colors, beards or tattoos and more concerned about cultivating a kind heart that can make people feel truly loved and accepted in Christ's Church...  I am just HAPPY to see people coming to Church with whatever they have.... partaking of the sacrament and doing the best they can.

I don't want anyone coming to Church and feel like I did that day...

I want everyone to feel accepted, knowing that no matter what they are wearing God listens to their prayers. "for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart."

Even when they are wearing pants...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Suzie said:

I don't want anyone coming to Church and feel like I did that day...

I want everyone to feel accepted, knowing that no matter what they are wearing God listens to their prayers. "for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart."

Thank you for sharing this experience. I wholeheartedly agree. When I was 14, my family was planning to move from Fremont, CA to Kent, WA in November. My dad had already been transferred and was living in a small travel trailer and flying home on the weekends or whenever he could. Then, on a Friday night in late August just before High School was to start on Monday my parents made the decision to have me return with my dad and start school in WA instead. I was told to pack and get ready to leave around 6:00AM in the morning (flying standby meant getting to SFO early).

Just like that, and without any goodbyes to friends, my world turned upside down and I was gone from the place I was born and raised. Saturday was a blur of being introduced to living in the trailer in a small trailer park in a run down industrial area, and of course in the rain. My dad worked nights so I had to stay out of the trailer until he woke up and left for work. On Sunday morning I realized that I hadn't packed any Sunday clothes - and for the first and only time of my life I went alone to church in jeans, a t-shirt, and tennis shoes with holes in them. 

Embarrassed, unkempt, and unknown I quietly sat down in the back and tried to be as invisible as possible. But to the credit of the Kent 1st Ward, adults and youth approached me after the meeting, introduced themselves, and welcomed me openly. I'll be forever grateful for the kindness and love they showed me when inside I was an angry and emotional mess that compounded the embarrassment that I felt. What a difference from the YW President in your story.

The lesson?  To paraphrase Paul - though you wear Sunday clothes regularly and obediently and have not charity, you are nothing. I wear Sunday dress, even when I have to work on Sundays, but I don't care what anybody else wears - I only care that they are there.

_______________________________________

PS: I'll be forever grateful that my wife never wore panty hose! Good riddance to those horrible things. But there was a day not so long ago when people put guilt trips on women for not wearing them.

"A collective high-pitched hallelujah likely went up recently among Mormon women when the LDS Church changed its policy to allow female employees in the church's Salt Lake City headquarters to forsake their pantyhose and go barelegged." SL Tribune May 12, 2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fether said:

I'm actually very hesitant to click on that link...

Lol! Just a fully dressed perfectly respectable kilt wearer. In my town, we have the Men in Kilts company in which employees wear kilts over pants while doing yard work. Apparently it is very popular. 

 

Edited by Sunday21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 9/4/2019 at 9:38 PM, Suzie said:

When I was a young woman (between 12 and 14), I received a phone call asking me if I could offer the opening prayer in a stake activity (I don't recall if it was a YW activity, seminary or something else). However, I was beyond excited... it was such a big deal to me. I was young, insecure and I remember my innocent self even "planning" for days what I would say in my prayer, I didn't want to mess up. I decided to wear dress pants for this activity (no jeans), I loved those pants because they made me look all grown up so when the day arrived, I remember reaching early because I couldn't contain the excitement. I was asked to sit down near the front, I took a program and my sister and I sat together... you could have seen my smile from miles away!

Life at home was difficult and Church was for me an oasis where I found solace and acceptance so the fact that the "Church" chose ME (insignificant me in my view at that time) to offer a prayer during a stake activity meant the world to me...  I remember opening the program and seeing my name printed on it and I couldn't believe it. When the meeting started, I heard my name being called to offer the prayer. I remember that it took me forever to reach the podium because I was so nervous... and when I reached and I'm about to offer the prayer, the Stake YW president stopped me and said: "Suzie, you cannot offer the prayer. You are wearing pants."  and then signed for me to leave the podium and choose someone else to offer the prayer. I remember going back to my seat completely embarrassed by the "looks" I was getting from everyone there and deeply sad knowing that God doesn't accept prayers from people like me. I wondered what I did so wrong... because I always did something wrong. I remember the prayer being said but... my eyes were not closed. I was quietly crying and my eyes were looking at my name in that program and wondering about pants...

I type this and I have to be honest... I have to stop because I'm overcome with the same emotion I felt many years ago. It wasn't just a simple prayer for me... this experience CHANGED everything. Over the years, it became a VERY powerful lesson in my life about acceptance, about looking beyond the exterior...being less preoccupied about shirt colors, beards or tattoos and more concerned about cultivating a kind heart that can make people feel truly loved and accepted in Christ's Church...  I am just HAPPY to see people coming to Church with whatever they have.... partaking of the sacrament and doing the best they can.

I don't want anyone coming to Church and feel like I did that day...

I want everyone to feel accepted, knowing that no matter what they are wearing God listens to their prayers. "for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart."

Even when they are wearing pants...

Your Stake YW President needed a talking to by my Dad.

Okay, here's my story - when I was growing up, jeans became the rage in the Philippines.  But my dad did not allow me to wear pants.  I can wear culottes, not pants.  I begged and begged and begged my dad to buy me jeans.  He refused.  He told me I am a girl and need to learn how to be a girl.  I've resented that growing up until my sister became of an age that she wanted to be trendy and asked my dad for jeans... and my dad bought her jeans immediately.  That's when I realized... this was not about the pants. 

What it was - I was the first daughter after 2 sons.  Growing up, I've been butting heads with my parents demanding I get to be treated just like my brothers - I resented not being able to pee standing up, I wanted to be able to run around on the street in just my underwear, I wanted to wrestle with boys, etc.  Today, Canada would have forced my dad to give me hormone blockers and start transitioning me into a boy.  Instead, my dad decided I needed to be taught how to be a girl.  Hence, no jeans.  My sister, on the other hand, was so girl she wanted to be just like my mom and do everything that my mom does.  She already knows boys and girls are different so wearing jeans is not a "I want to be just like a boy" thing.

That Stake YW President is so caught up in thinking it is about the pants that she completely failed you in her blindness.  She needed to be taught a lesson by my dad.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I have found to be extremely ironic in our Church (particularly with religion and secularism) and how we treat lightly counsel regarding what we wear. The principle, which even an apostle of our Lord once again specified, Elder Holland, "We are to remember in as personal a way as possible that Christ died from a heart broken by shouldering entirely alone the sins and sorrows of the whole human family.

Inasmuch as we contributed to that fatal burden, such a moment demands our respect. Thus, we are encouraged to come to our services early and reverently, dressed appropriately for participation in a sacred ordinance. “Sunday best” has lost a little of its meaning in our time, and out of esteem for Him into whose presence we come, we ought to restore that tradition of Sabbath dress and grooming when and where we can." (emphasis mine).

Sunday best has been the principle taught for a long time now. I am honestly unsure why this principle seems hard, fuliginous, for some. I believe for the many here (who are saying wear whatever you want - despite the principle given by our Lord), if there sons or daughters were to be in a play, a sport game, a dance recital, or any other event they would properly dress their child in the attire recommended. If they brought their son to a basketball game in jeans and a t-shirt would their coach allow the child to play? Would they get mad or upset or offended if the coach said, "Sorry son, you don't have the proper attire, so you will need to sit this out"? My guess, they would completely understand, and there wouldn't be any day established by any group to "wear pants and tank-tops" to play the game.

We have parents who will attend a scouting flag ceremony and make sure their children are in the proper attire. But, when given a principle of Sunday best, with an invitation of what that means, we have parents who don't care about their child's attire at church, but will make sure they have the proper attire for a scouting event.

Personally, once again, this is another sad item that makes me all the more realize why the Lord still calls us his "little children." Then, do we need to wonder why we are loosing so many youth to the world? Parents will make sure they are at every game -- on time (or close to it) -- they will make sure they have the proper attire (clothing) -- if the coach disciplines them through proper means (whether by voice or by extra laps) the parents (more than not) tell their children to buck up. But, heaven's no, tell my child to wear his/her Sunday best -- forget you!

Oh the irony in those who profess to belong to the Church.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

This is something I have found to be extremely ironic in our Church (particularly with religion and secularism) and how we treat lightly counsel regarding what we wear. The principle, which even an apostle of our Lord once again specified, Elder Holland, "We are to remember in as personal a way as possible that Christ died from a heart broken by shouldering entirely alone the sins and sorrows of the whole human family.

Inasmuch as we contributed to that fatal burden, such a moment demands our respect. Thus, we are encouraged to come to our services early and reverently, dressed appropriately for participation in a sacred ordinance. “Sunday best” has lost a little of its meaning in our time, and out of esteem for Him into whose presence we come, we ought to restore that tradition of Sabbath dress and grooming when and where we can." (emphasis mine).

Sunday best has been the principle taught for a long time now. I am honestly unsure why this principle seems hard, fuliginous, for some. I believe for the many here (who are saying wear whatever you want - despite the principle given by our Lord), if there sons or daughters were to be in a play, a sport game, a dance recital, or any other event they would properly dress their child in the attire recommended. If they brought their son to a basketball game in jeans and a t-shirt would their coach allow the child to play? Would they get mad or upset or offended if the coach said, "Sorry son, you don't have the proper attire, so you will need to sit this out"? My guess, they would completely understand, and there wouldn't be any day established by any group to "wear pants and tank-tops" to play the game.

We have parents who will attend a scouting flag ceremony and make sure their children are in the proper attire. But, when given a principle of Sunday best, with an invitation of what that means, we have parents who don't care about their child's attire at church, but will make sure they have the proper attire for a scouting event.

Personally, once again, this is another sad item that makes me all the more realize why the Lord still calls us his "little children." Then, do we need to wonder why we are loosing so many youth to the world? Parents will make sure they are at every game -- on time (or close to it) -- they will make sure they have the proper attire (clothing) -- if the coach disciplines them through proper means (whether by voice or by extra laps) the parents (more than not) tell their children to buck up. But, heaven's no, tell my child to wear his/her Sunday best -- forget you!

Oh the irony in those who profess to belong to the Church.

 

I agree with everything in your post, except that it seems to insinuate that women in pants are not in their Sunday best.  Is that what you are trying to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, dprh said:

I agree with everything in your post, except that it seems to insinuate that women in pants are not in their Sunday best.  Is that what you are trying to say?

Yes and no. If jeans are truly Sunday best for "anyone" than come as you are. A young man whose shoes have holes or only has sneakers (due to a lower social economic status -- i.e. the Church video in the Self-Reliance curriculum) come with your shoes that have holes. If all a young man has is torn shorts and a black t-shirt then come as you are and worship, as that is his Sunday best. The principle is Sunday best. I find the principle very simple, clear, and plain.

The easiest explanation, as an adult/young man, I know the principle and I know what is taught in the Handbook and by prophets. I have the money, or my parents have the money, to afford a white shirt and tie. I purposefully choose not to wear such, am I in my Sunday best?

If I were in Japan, what is considered Sunday best, again a principle that is simple, clear, and plain. What are my motivations? Am I coming to worship Christ in my Sunday best, or am I coming to church to implicitly say, "Stick it"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dprh said:

I agree with everything in your post, except that it seems to insinuate that women in pants are not in their Sunday best.  Is that what you are trying to say?

I think the point is that you need to desire to wear your Sunday best. If I am more worried about what others will think of my favorite tie, or if I am excited for the world to see my sweet new suit, or if I want attention and to make a statement about wearing pants to church... then there is a problem.

I haven't been too active in this thread because I found it to be a bit of a joke, but I think everyone here is ok with a woman wearing slacks/dress pants to church. But what we find absolutely rediculous and appalling is when they do it to make a statement, or write an entire article about it and post it to a Latter-day Saint forum site. If someone is making any deal about it, they are making too much of a deal about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fether said:

...I haven't been too active in this thread because I found it to be a bit of a joke, but I think everyone here is ok with a woman wearing slacks/dress pants to church. But what we find absolutely rediculous and appalling is when they do it to make a statement, or write an entire article about it and post it to a Latter-day Saint forum site. If someone is making any deal about it, they are making too much of a deal about it.

But the whole point in writing the article is to show that even in the 21st century a lot of Latter-day Saints are still skeptical about a woman's intentions when they see her wearing pants/slacks to Church. They say they don't care but as soon as they see a woman wearing pants they automatically think she's being rebellious.

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Maureen said:

But the whole point in writing the article is to show that even in the 21st century a lot of Latter-day Saints are still skeptical about a woman's intentions when they see her wearing pants/slacks to Church. They say they don't care but as soon as they see a woman wearing pants they automatically think she's being rebellious.

M.

She speaks specifically of the bishop whose whole role in the situation she describes was to make sure she is worthy of the temple. If a man walked in for an interview and he wreaked of alcohol, I would specifically ask he he drinks alcohol. She came in wearing pants, he asked her if she was trying to make a statement... based on the fact that this article exists suggests that the bishop was at least partly right.

What we have here is a classic Men in Black 3 situation minus the racism/sexism (start at 0:25)

 

Edited by Fether

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now