Raingirl

Why does “next to the skin, as much as possible” have to translate to forbidding wearing underwear beneath your garments? Even with wearing underwear beneath your garments, the majority of the garment is still directly touching skin. I’d say that’s as much as possible. It always amazes me how judgmental women are about how other women wear their garments. Do the same women zealously clinging to the garments-have-to-be-underwear trope go around policing non church members underwear? If garments are just underwear, why not? You would think women would appreciate this option, instead, some seem downright angry (and definitely judgemental) that other women are wearing their garments this way. Do these same women get upset about the six foot tall women who brag to me that they buy the petite garments so they can wear mini skirts and shorts, so they’re still “good”? Not only should men stop dictating and policing garment wearing, so should women. I can only imagine how many heads would explode if I talked about how women should actually go commando at night. Studies have shown that this reduces the number of yeast infections, and other issues. Gynecologists regularly make this recommendation. Nobody seems to bat an eye when a woman wants to skip her garments to wear short shorts or a strapless dress, but foregoing garments at night for health reasons, would probably induce a stroke in more than a few.

Wearing underwear and garments together has been going on for quite some time. Just because you haven’t experienced it, or are against it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Garments do not have to be substituted for underwear. That is a choice made by some individuals. It is perfectly acceptable to wear your garments over your underwear, thus allowing underwear to serve as underwear, and garments to serve as garments. I personally cannot imagine wearing my garments as underwear. Wearing my garment top over my bra is similar to wearing a chemise. A lot of women wear a thin pair of shorts overt their underwear, under a skirt, to prevent leg chafing. Different articles of clothing provide different functions. I have never understood using garments as underwear. Especially for women. Garments and underwear have completely different functions.

Stargazer has to defend polygamy. Without it, he wouldn’t have been able to marry as often as he has. I believe polygamy was man-made. With eternal marriage, they had to come up with a work-around for widowers to remarry. Wouldn’t want any man to forego sex, would we?

I think it’s entirely possible that both are in love with him. As far as only one of the twins marrying him, that’s all that is currently allowed. I’ve seen speculation that basically they are in a consensual polygamous marriage, but because of current laws, they have to promote the narrative that only one of them is married. Whatever the legalities or arrangements are, both twins are present for every moment of the relationship. It’s a situation that I don’t think any of us can understand.

Thank you for doing this, Ken! I stink at taking notes, so this is very helpful!

My understanding is that one of the apostles always sits out conference. I don’t recall how they’re chosen. President Nelso made a statement the other day, in light of the fact that he is approaching his 100th birthday, that due to the advancing ages of the participants, some speakers may give their talks from a seated position, or make a prerecorded talk. So, it seems that more than the “designated survivor” will be absent from the conference.

Studies show that a man’s financial situation improves dramatically a majority of the time after divorce. And divorce in and of itself does not estrange a father from his children. If a divorced father find himself estranged from his children, he needs to take an honest look at his own actions.

It’s not just the youth. I’ve seen plenty of middle aged women wearing outfits where it’s obvious they aren’t wearing their garments. Lots of strapless dresses, tube tops, etc.

If our leaders think women aren’t manipulative when it comes to dating, they’re living in a fantasy world. But they, like you and other long-married people, are generally clueless when it comes to the experiences of today’s single people in the church, especially ‘older’ single women. Have you ever considered that the church actually has reasons for its policies? You seem to have just assumed that it’s all arbitrary, and have proceeded from there. You haven’t addressed the actual reasons.

I wonder if this was because the church thinks women are not marriage material after a certain age, while thinking that the men are always marriage material?

Why do think that they are arbitrary?

I’ve heard the must never touch the ground mandate, as well. I think I’ve also read it somewhere, but couldn’t say where.

I think it’s a combination of timing and the personal beliefs of the person giving the instruction. There are still women who insist that the bra must be worn over the garment. I went through in 2011. Garments are a weird subject. I’m five feet tall, and I’ve had women who are much taller than me, brag to me that they buy petite bottoms so that they can wear the shortest skirts possible. I’ve never understood why they feel compelled to tell me that!

I have MS. With that, comes the inability to regulate my body temperature. It can make me extremely ill. Wearing garments has never caused an issue this way. If wearing that thin layer of garments over my underwear is enough to cause me issues due to heat, then actually whatever I am wearing at that point would be too much. While I think there are definitely some ‘wrong’ actions when it comes to the wearing of garments, I believe everyone should make their own decisions regarding how they wear their garments. However, while you may protest the wearing of garments in addition to regular underwear, your experience does not apply to everyone, just the same as mine does not.

Your wife is correct. You’ll never get a properly fitting and functioning bra this way. I go into more detail in another post, but when I was endowed, the instruction that I received was that the teaching that you had to wear the garment under the bra was incorrect.

When I received my endowment, I was specifically instructed that it was absolutely okay to wear my garments in addition to, not instead of, regular underwear. That the supposed instruction that the garment must be worn beneath the bra was not correct, and that it is perfectly acceptable to wear regular underwear beneath the garment bottom. This made sense to me, as I do not see the garment as underwear. Underwear and priesthood garments have entirely separate purposes, so it makes sense to not treat garments as underwear. Indeed, to me, it seems disrespectful. I cannot imagine expecting my garments to function as my underwear.

And people in their sixties don’t want to be in a group with people in their forties. Except for the usual guys looking to date someone half their age.

I can’t even remember the last time the Relief Society in my current ward held any kind of activity, much less one that would resemble a social opportunity for both sexes. It sounds like your ward operates differently from any of the ones I’ve been in. It sounds like it has a lot more going on. I like your wife’s ideas. She sounds like a great person. The church here supports and sponsors activities for the younger singles. If you’re past your thirties, you’re invisible. My former bishop and I tried to organize Family Home Evening (and other) activities, based on what I and other older singles had organized in my first ward, but we were unsuccessful. Most single women around my age group have given up on marriage. It’s just not going to happen in the church. I accept some years ago, that as long as I remain a member, I will be alone for the rest of my life. And I’ve already been alone for many years. I don’t think humans are meant to be alone, but for some of us, that’s our lot in life. I have a co-worker who complains about her husband every single time she talks about him. Drives me crazy. And, yes, I know we don’t know what anyone is really like, but still.

So many ways to get to know other singles? Maybe if you’re young and in a singles ward. If you’re a woman past child-bearing years, there are very few singles, much less social opportunities. Past a certain age, nothing is offered. In the first ward I was in, we took it upon ourselves to organize her-together. There was no support from the church. As far as dating goes, I knew of exactly three single men in my age range in the previous stake I was in. Of those, one was still pining for his ex wife after years of divorce, another had never been married, and the third re-married to a non-member. When I expressed a desire to have an eternal companion to my then-bishop, he chastised me for “wanting more”. And proceeded to expound upon why I wasn’t marriage material - I didn’t smile enough, etc. The single women I’ve known across the stakes I’ve resided in have had similar experiences.

But he has backup! Emily has also explained to us that using the word gay is offensive, and that SSA is much preferred. Certainly, these two experts can’t possibly be wrong? 🤦‍♀️

There didn’t seem to be any confusion regarding who you were addressing when you called me cheeky. Way to avoid a CFR. You don’t get to gatekeep anyone’s use of the word gay. As for same-sex attraction supposedly being the preferred terminology, that phrase has negative connotations for many. I’ve personally never seen it used outside of the church. Many people see it as a way for the church and its members to marginalize the gay members of the church. So, how about you just stop telling other people what words they can identify with and use?

She is criticizing people for using the word gay. It’s very clear in her posts. Sorry you can’t see it. You tend to over-analyze and project your way of thinking on to others. She wasn’t quoting anyone, so she wasn’t using quotation marks correctly.

She’s attempting to gatekeep a word that doesn’t even pertain to her personally. What business is it of her’s to tell someone they can’t identify as gay? Should I tell my brother he can no longer describe himself as gay because Emily forbids it?

Please show everyone exactly where I stated “everyone likes it”. I did no such thing. I simply asked why you put quote marks around a word. This is a CFR and board rules require that you respond to a CFR.