Third Hour

Why Women Don’t Wear Pants to Church

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dprh said:

Why would we draw the line at pants?  The church is supposed to be a hospital for sinners, not a country club of saints.

People don't get addicted to wearing pants, and it does not require an expensive procedure to replace pants with a dress.  We want to see people with tattoos and addictions in Church because it is indicative of their desire and willingness to change.  Wearing pants after knowing, believing, and committing to the standards of the Church is open rebellion.  We want homosexuals in Church too, but that doesn't mean we want them to embrace a homosexual lifestyle.

Share this post


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

How many Sunday School/Priesthood/Relief Society lessons have you been too where someone says they would like to see more people with tattoos, or smokers, or other types of people at church?  I've heard it more times than I can count in the last few years.  Why would we draw the line at pants?  The church is supposed to be a hospital for sinners, not a country club of saints.

That's not what the "pants thing is about".  The Church is supposed to be a hospital for sinners to get well, not a place for the righteous and sinful to catch the sinful plague.

Edited by anatess2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, person0 said:

 People don't get addicted to wearing pants, and it does not require an expensive procedure to replace pants with a dress.  We want to see people with tattoos and addictions in Church because it is indicative of their desire and willingness to change.  Wearing pants after knowing, believing, and committing to the standards of the Church is open rebellion.  We want homosexuals in Church too, but that doesn't mean we want them to embrace a homosexual lifestyle.

I think 90% of members truly don't care if a woman wears pants to church or not. I can't imagine it being a problem. Sure, if she wears booty shorts and a halter top, that's a problem. But pants? No one cares. 

No one cared about my tattoos, long hair, and facial hair either. I baptized two people-both times I put my hair in a braid and :: gasp :: didn't shave. 

Share this post


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

How many Sunday School/Priesthood/Relief Society lessons have you been too where someone says they would like to see more people with tattoos, or smokers, or other types of people at church?  I've heard it more times than I can count in the last few years.  Why would we draw the line at pants?  The church is supposed to be a hospital for sinners, not a country club of saints.

That's why there aren't rules forbidding pants, tattoos, and smokers.  HOWEVER, just because we welcome everyone, doesn't mean everything is acceptable in the eyes of Christ.  Do you think we should encourage people to smoke, or help them follow the Prophet?  

Share this post


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

Anyway, my point is, the statement "Church is not the platform for your social justice agenda.  You deserve what you get if you go down that path." comes off as pretty self-assured, implying that there's only one place that path leads to.  It would seem the truth is far more nuanced than that. 

And I'm also willing to make it personal.  If those who go down that path deserve what they get, please, explain to me what I should be getting.

Should be getting?  It's what you won't be getting.  Heck, look at your "Religion".  You still use Mormon, even though the Prophet has implored us not to.  Your mind, and heart, OBVIOUSLY isn't given to Him as much as it could be.  You're still trying to push the world into your life of Christ.  I'm trying to push it out of mine. None of that is ANY of my business, until you start advocating for others to do the same,  or setting an example.  

That's one of the things that bothered, and confused, me the most during my conversion.  Members who told me things were OK or explained things and I later found they probably weren't the best example to follow.   

Edited by Grunt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I think 90% of members truly don't care if a woman wears pants to church or not. I can't imagine it being a problem. Sure, if she wears booty shorts and a halter top, that's a problem. But pants? No one cares. 

No one cared about my tattoos, long hair, and facial hair either. I baptized two people-both times I put my hair in a braid and :: gasp :: didn't shave. 

I'd say you're right; I for one absolutely wouldn't care.  Not sure I even pay enough attention to other people at church to notice something like that.  However, I would definitely notice and care if someone started publicly and/or vocally advocating for it, as I suspect many other's would as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, person0 said:

Not sure I even pay enough attention to other people at church to notice something like that. 

Oh same here. I never noticed what a woman is wearing. In fact, as a guy, I think it's a terrible idea to talk to a woman about what she is wearing. Especially in the #MeToo environment that we live in. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, person0 said:

I'd say you're right; I for one absolutely wouldn't care.  Not sure I even pay enough attention to other people at church to notice something like that.  However, I would definitely notice and care if someone started publicly and/or vocally advocating for it, as I suspect many other's would as well.

And therein lies the problem - Sacrament Meeting is not the place for such distracting advocacy.  I like how @Grunt put it - pushing the world into our Life of Christ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, anatess2 said:

And therein lies the problem - Sacrament Meeting is not the place for such distracting advocacy.  I like how @Grunt put it - pushing the world into our Life of Christ.

For the record, I rarely know what I'm talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, person0 said:

I'd say you're right; I for one absolutely wouldn't care.  Not sure I even pay enough attention to other people at church to notice something like that.  However, I would definitely notice and care if someone started publicly and/or vocally advocating for it, as I suspect many other's would as well.

This is my point as well. I don't care, nor should I care, whether women wear pants, it's none of my business and it's trivial. I do care if someone brings a protest movement into church, and drags the spirit of contention in disrupting my worship to make a point. Church is for worship not protest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Midwest LDS said:

 Church is for worship not protest.

I agree completely, and in fairness I think the overwhelming majority of women who wear pants to church aren't doing so for political reasons-just practical ones. 

Edited by MormonGator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like I've missed something.  Where does it say that women shouldn't wear pants to church?  I found where sister missionaries are supposed to wear skirts or dresses to Sunday services, but not regular members.

My work has casual Fridays, like a lot of offices.  Jeans are only allowed then.  However, I don't think jeans are comfortable.  I opt to chose cargo pants when essentially everyone else wears jeans.  I don't feel like I'm rebelling or making a statement.  I think the author of this article has a similar view of dresses.

Edited by dprh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I think 90% of members truly don't care if a woman wears pants to church or not.
 

I agree...

Those that do make a big issue of it are being a bit selfish and short sighted...  Let me show why.  Take your sterotypical faithful lifetime member priesthood holder.  (I'll use me)  Per the arguments being made by the Wear Pants people... I have not have a choice in my Church wardrobe since I was 12 years old.  Its been White Shirt, Tie, and Slacks for a few decades now.

Any one that wants to complain about what they are expected to wear in church has nothing on your standard priesthood holder.  And in my decades of being a priesthood holder whenever I have heard anyone complain about white shirts and ties the answer is a variation of "Suck it up and get to work"  (Either that or nothing at all)

So equality would demand that they get responded to in the same manner...  Yet when we do the Wear Pants people melt down entirely.

So whoever whenever wants to complain to their leadership about a lack of support for different wardrobe options... Remember who you are talking to and the restrictions they are under.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

So whoever whenever wants to complain to their leadership about a lack of support for different wardrobe options..

Have people actually complained to leadership about that? Not a challenge, genuine question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Should be getting?  It's what you won't be getting.  Heck, look at your "Religion".  You still use Mormon, even though the Prophet has implored us not to.  Your mind, and heart, OBVIOUSLY isn't given to Him as much as it could be.  You're still trying to push the world into your life of Christ.  I'm trying to push it out of mine. None of that is ANY of my business, until you start advocating for others to do the same,  or setting an example.  

That's one of the things that bothered, and confused, me the most during my conversion.  Members who told me things were OK or explained things and I later found they probably weren't the best example to follow.   

1. Alrighty then.

2. 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.

3. I also type lds.org when going to Church websites.  I worry it might cost me my temple recommend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

1. Alrighty then.

2. 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.

3. I also type lds.org when going to Church websites.  I worry it might cost me my temple recommend.

I made my point and provided an example to support it.  You're absolutely free to disagree.

Edited by Grunt

Share this post


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

I feel like I've missed something.  Where does it say that women shouldn't wear pants to church? 

Indeed.  From the For the Strength of Youth pamphlet:

Quote

Show respect for the Lord and yourself by dressing appropriately for Church meetings and activities. This is especially important when attending sacrament services. Young men should dress with dignity when officiating in the ordinance of the sacrament.

If you are not sure what is appropriate to wear, study the words of the prophets, pray for guidance, and ask your parents or leaders for help. Your dress and appearance now will help you prepare for the time when you will go to the temple to make sacred covenants with God. Ask yourself, “Would I feel comfortable with my appearance if I were in the Lord’s presence?”

Genesis 1:27; Alma 1:27

The word "pants" doesn't appear in that pamphlet, nor are there any guidelines about dresses, other than this:

Quote

Immodest clothing is any clothing that is tight, sheer, or revealing in any other manner. Young women should avoid short shorts and short skirts, shirts that do not cover the stomach, and clothing that does not cover the shoulders or is low-cut in the front or the back.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MarginOfError said:

1. Alrighty then.

2. 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.

3. I also type lds.org when going to Church websites.  I worry it might cost me my temple recommend.

Image result for turn nose up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Have people actually complained to leadership about that? Not a challenge, genuine question. 

Did not the article in question complain about her bishop?  Do they not want to address the problem that they are experiencing? How can you really address the issue without discussing (aka complaining) to the leadership/people in question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Indeed.  From the For the Strength of Youth pamphlet:

The word "pants" doesn't appear in that pamphlet, nor are there any guidelines about dresses, other than this:

 

I did find this New Era article from 1974.  Even then they didn't come out with a straight answer.  The tldr summary is: Follow your local leadership.  Which in the author's case, her bishop was fine with her wearing pants if it wasn't an act of rebellion or protest.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/new-era/1974/12/q-and-a-questions-and-answers/when-and-where-is-it-acceptable-for-young-women-to-wear-pants-when-involved-in-church-related-activities?lang=eng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Did not the article in question complain about her bishop?  Do they not want to address the problem that they are experiencing? How can you really address the issue without discussing (aka complaining) to the leadership/people in question?

Did they? Oh well, I missed that part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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