Lines around the block and 3 hour waits for sleeveless "garments"

[bluebell]

57 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Do you mind sharing why she's upset, your wife? No worries if not.

It does say a lot about the modesty part, especially when a famous person's artwork was changed to show sleeves in the Ensign a few years ago. 

That debacle was so embarrassing. 

[MustardSeed]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

That debacle was so embarrassing. 

What’s funny is that I was looking at this picture, comparing the two, thinking uh oh she made a mistake posting both the same pictures because Jesus is showing his shoulder, and in fact his nipple in both pictures. 
 

I guess they didn’t need to change Jesus outfit.  Just the shoulders.🧐

[MustardSeed]

From the handbook : 

 

In our day the garment encourages modesty, but its significance is much deeper. For Church members who have received the endowment, the garment reminds them of their connection to God, their commitment to follow His will, and the blessings and protection God has promised the faithful. 

[Senator]

9 minutes ago, Rain said:

Yes, but even if there are other things that tell of a different pattern than robes which were revealed if God is all knowing he will have understood that not all fabrics and hygiene products will have been available then that we have now so it makes sense to me that a God who loves us would be ok with changes as things become available. Or rather changed things in the past because the resources/culture in the past were not available till the future/eternity. 

To be clear for those who do not know - I no longer believe in the church, but I do not see why the best and true things must be how they started when you have a God who knows the past and future. In the scriptures it talks about line upon line. Why can't garments be the same way with line upon line we learn what works, what materials are available, what cultures and weather we have around the world, what things are important etc? 

Yes, this all just feeds my growing cynicism towards religiosity in general and the trappings therein.

[bluebell]

31 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

From the handbook : 

 

In our day the garment encourages modesty, but its significance is much deeper. For Church members who have received the endowment, the garment reminds them of their connection to God, their commitment to follow His will, and the blessings and protection God has promised the faithful. 

I'm really thankful they have finally gone back to the real meaning of modesty and not just made it about covering body parts and sexual feelings anymore.  It was refreshing to see that link go to an article that talks about modesty in language and behavior, and how modesty is an attitude of decency and humility and not bringing attention to ourselves. 

There are a lot of affluent members of the church who are fully clothed but not dressed modestly, but that is never really brought up.

My biggest issue with the garment change and the teachings around modesty is the silence on it actually being a change.  I didn't come of age in an era where it was really a problem but it got crazy in the 2000s (and sounds like it was crazy before my era as well).  I don't see the purpose in pretending like those eras didn't exist.  I think so much healing could be accomplished if leadership could acknowledge that at times modesty was taught and enforced badly, that such a focus hurt women and girls (and boys and men too, just in different ways), and that the new 'correct' understanding needs to be shouted from the rooftops so everyone gets the new message.

I completely see why some women feel gaslit.

Edited October 29, 2025 by bluebell

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

The light fabric tanks are more useful for overheating. I ran into the limits of garment with this for the first time truly when visiting Sicily in August. It was literally too hot for me on the streets. Which meant to avoid overheating I didn't wear my garments while touring during the day and wore the loosest linen I could find in the markets to allow my body to properly sweat. My SIL lived in a very hot and humid area in peru and when they talked about getting endowed in relief society, the biggest barrier to the sisters wanting to was the heat and wearing garments in them. There's areas of the world and the US where just a little more adjustability can make a world of difference. And with the garments as is, to make an outfit work with g's with women's clothing means needing layers. So I can often be wearing 3 to 4 layers of fabrics in the summer, making  light summer friendly outfits suddenly very warm. When this happens, the garment layer often becomes a glorified sweat collector. 

Unless you can find just the right shirts that are already garment friendly. Which can become more of less available depending the style that year. 

 

As an aside, I'm also looking forward to getting my husband some to reduce pit stains. His garments would last longer if it were for that. I buy pretty expensive deodorant to help reduce them. No way will I get my husband to do that too. 

 

With luv,

BD 

 

Thank you for your reasonable response, addressing what I actually said.

Are men's tank-tops being made available? I thought it was just a design change for the women.

[bluebell]

14 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Thank you for your reasonable response, addressing what I actually said.

Are men's tank-tops being made available? I thought it was just a design change for the women.

To be clear, these changes aren't tank tops.  They are sleeveless.  Most tank tops will still not work over the new sleeveless garments because tank tops tend to be cut different than sleeveless shirts or dresses.  But yes, the sleeveless design is available for men as well.

[bluebell]

Women could wear spaghetti straps and strapless fashion at BYU until they were banned in 1967.  It seems like the idea that modest meant covering everything the garment covered is a relatively modern thing in the church.

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, Raingirl said:

I’ve never had any issues with finding garment friendly clothes, nor do I dress in layers. I didn’t need to change my wardrobe when I joined the church and received my endowment.  I wear the same clothes I’ve been wearing for years.  Skirts and t-shirts in warm weather.  Jeans/pants with sweaters or sweatshirts in cold weather. 

It may be most accurate  to say it limits choices and only caters to a couple of outfit options. Personally, I feel ugly in t-shirts. I have very wide shoulders on a slim frame and when I was younger I had a very very thin frame with long very thin arms. T-shirts made me look like I was anorexic and I don't actually feel cooler in cotton. I used to be able to wear the same clothes for years....until I got pregnant. I went from a 2-4 to a 6-8 down to a 0-2 then back up to a 6-8 to a 10-12 to heaven help me if I can find a size to fit my basketball they call pregnancy on my last baby (he was a big and long boy on a very short torso'd lady). This was all in a 7 year period and I'm 2 months postpartum now wondering what my new normal will be weight wise and trying my hardest to not buy or mend clothes until I'm sure I've stabilized. I've been doing heavy amounts of shedding clothes that I'm pretty sure I'll never be able to wear again due to permanent hip and breast changes, making some of my clothes as I really do not appreciate the current cosplaying my childhood trend going on right now in most stores, and saying goodbye to a few clothes that are just simply wearing out because the material they're made from is crap for long term use (I'm trying to replace them with sturdier material). 

For some people and climates, garments really aren't challenging. I like them in the winter personally, because they add another layer to the cold for example. But that's not everybody and it doesn't fix that other people experience them differently. Heck, i experienced them differently at different sizes and periods of me wearing them. I used to be less heat sensitive and didn't notice the extra layer. I used to be smaller and could wear different styles that suddenly didn't work when my size changed and the garments changed with it. I never got yeast infections until this pregnancy. I never had a hot flash or postpartum sweats when I first started wearing them in my 20's. I lived in northern parts of the US. etc.  

 I think part of the reason it took this long to change them is because people who were less likely to have problems with them were often the ones designing them. It worked for them so it should work for everyone. But that's just not a good measure for if the garments is meeting the people where they're truly at. 

I don't expect garments to be perfect all the time. I don't expect garments to always fit every fashion trends. I don't think they should, if I'm being honest. But I'm still happy that there's more space and recognition that we are not all the same and there needs to be more wiggle room for those differences. 

 

With luv,

BD 

Edited October 29, 2025 by BlueDreams

[ZealouslyStriving]

20 minutes ago, bluebell said:

To be clear, these changes aren't tank tops.  They are sleeveless.  Most tank tops will still not work over the new sleeveless garments because tank tops tend to be cut different than sleeveless shirts or dresses.  But yes, the sleeveless design is available for men as well.

My only real concern is that, with the new prohibition against making your own, that this new style will become the only option available- so those who want earlier design options will eventually be out of luck and forced to wear garments they are not personally comfortable with.

Edited October 29, 2025 by ZealouslyStriving

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

My only real concern is that, with the new prohibition against making your own, that this new style will become the only option available- so those who want earlier design options will eventually be out of luck and forced to wear garments they are not personally comfortable with.

That could happen.  I don't think they offer the one piece garments anymore, for example, even though those were pretty popular with older generations.  I think you can still buy long sleeved and pants garments, but for warmth and not really to placate the 'one true garment style' crowd.  

If capped sleeve garments eventually disappear, I think it will happen slowly enough that most people who wouldn't be comfortable without them will be dead by then.  For the upcoming generations, sleeveless won't be any more noteworthy to them than two piece garments are currently for us.  So they probably would care as much about the loss of that option as most of us do today about the loss of the one piece garment option.  Which is to say, they won't care at all.

(if that has in fact been discontinued.  I'm not sure it has.  If after all these years you can still buy one piece garments, then I think we can be secure in not worrying about losing the capped sleeve option ever either).

Edited October 29, 2025 by bluebell

[ZealouslyStriving]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That could happen.  I don't think they offer the one piece garments anymore, for example, even though those were pretty popular with older generations.  I think you can still buy long sleeved and pants garments, but for warmth and not really to placate the 'one true garment style' crowd.  

If capped sleeve garments eventually disappear, I think it will happen slowly enough that most people who wouldn't be comfortable without them will be dead by then.  For the upcoming generations, sleeveless won't be any more noteworthy to them than two piece garments are currently for us.  So they probably would care as much about the loss of that option as most of us do today about the loss of the one piece garment option.  Which is to say, they won't care at all.

(if that has in fact been discontinued.  I'm not sure it has.  If after all these years you can still buy one piece garments, then I think we can be secure in not worrying about losing the capped sleeve option even either).

There will always those that as they study church history will want something more 'traditional'. So while most of the people won't care, that shouldn't infringe on the sentiments/desires of those who do. Why should they be forced to be less modest (as they see it)?

Edited October 29, 2025 by ZealouslyStriving

[Senator]

3 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

There will always those that as they study church history will want something more 'traditional'. So while most of the people won't care, that shouldn't infringe on the sentiments/desires of those who do. Why should they be forced to be less modest (as they see it)?

Why would anyone be forced to be less modest while wearing the new cut?

 

[bluebell]

16 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

There will always those that as they study church history will want something more 'traditional'. So while most of the people won't care, that shouldn't infringe on the sentiments/desires of those who do. Why should they be forced to be less modest (as they see it)?

Can you explain what you mean by the idea that a type of underwear would make someone feel less modest, when their top clothing still goes up to the neck and down to the ankles and wrists?  That's a sentiment I hadn't heard expressed before.

[Rain]

51 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

It may be most accurate  to say it limits choices and only caters to a couple of outfit options. Personally, I feel ugly in t-shirts. I have very wide shoulders on a slim frame and when I was younger I had a very very thin frame with long very thin arms. T-shirts made me look like I was anorexic and I don't actually feel cooler in cotton. I used to be able to wear the same clothes for years....until I got pregnant. I went from a 2-4 to a 6-8 down to a 0-2 then back up to a 6-8 to a 10-12 to heaven help me if I can find a size to fit my basketball they call pregnancy on my last baby (he was a big and long boy on a very short torso'd lady). This was all in a 7 year period and I'm 2 months postpartum now wondering what my new normal will be weight wise and trying my hardest to not buy or mend clothes until I'm sure I've stabilized. I've been doing heavy amounts of shedding clothes that I'm pretty sure I'll never be able to wear again due to permanent hip and breast changes, making some of my clothes as I really do not appreciate the current cosplaying my childhood trend going on right now in most stores, and saying goodbye to a few clothes that are just simply wearing out because the material they're made from is crap for long term use (I'm trying to replace them with sturdier material). 

For some people and climates, garments really aren't challenging. I like them in the winter personally, because they add another layer to the cold for example. But that's not everybody and it doesn't fix that other people experience them differently. Heck, i experienced them differently at different sizes and periods of me wearing them. I used to be less heat sensitive and didn't notice the extra layer. I used to be smaller and could wear different styles that suddenly didn't work when my size changed and the garments changed with it. I never got yeast infections until this pregnancy. I never had a hot flash or postpartum sweats when I first started wearing them in my 20's. I lived in northern parts of the US. etc.  

 I think part of the reason it took this long to change them is because people who were less likely to have problems with them were often the ones designing them. It worked for them so it should work for everyone. But that's just not a good measure for if the garments is meeting the people where they're truly at. 

The other problem is that those who have sensitivities were treated as complainers or less spiritual rather than looked at with empathy.

51 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

I don't expect garments to be perfect all the time. I don't expect garments to always fit every fashion trends. I don't think they should, if I'm being honest. But I'm still happy that there's more space and recognition that we are not all the same and there needs to be more wiggle room for those differences. 

 

With luv,

BD 

 

[JVW]

2 hours ago, Calm said:

How old is she? (The decade is enough if you don’t mind, just trying to compare to my and my mother’s experiences.)

Born in mid to late 1980's

[Raingirl]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

It may be most accurate  to say it limits choices and only caters to a couple of outfit options. Personally, I feel ugly in t-shirts. I have very wide shoulders on a slim frame and when I was younger I had a very very thin frame with long very thin arms. T-shirts made me look like I was anorexic and I don't actually feel cooler in cotton. I used to be able to wear the same clothes for years....until I got pregnant. I went from a 2-4 to a 6-8 down to a 0-2 then back up to a 6-8 to a 10-12 to heaven help me if I can find a size to fit my basketball they call pregnancy on my last baby (he was a big and long boy on a very short torso'd lady). This was all in a 7 year period and I'm 2 months postpartum now wondering what my new normal will be weight wise and trying my hardest to not buy or mend clothes until I'm sure I've stabilized. I've been doing heavy amounts of shedding clothes that I'm pretty sure I'll never be able to wear again due to permanent hip and breast changes, making some of my clothes as I really do not appreciate the current cosplaying my childhood trend going on right now in most stores, and saying goodbye to a few clothes that are just simply wearing out because the material they're made from is crap for long term use (I'm trying to replace them with sturdier material). 

For some people and climates, garments really aren't challenging. I like them in the winter personally, because they add another layer to the cold for example. But that's not everybody and it doesn't fix that other people experience them differently. Heck, i experienced them differently at different sizes and periods of me wearing them. I used to be less heat sensitive and didn't notice the extra layer. I used to be smaller and could wear different styles that suddenly didn't work when my size changed and the garments changed with it. I never got yeast infections until this pregnancy. I never had a hot flash or postpartum sweats when I first started wearing them in my 20's. I lived in northern parts of the US. etc.  

 I think part of the reason it took this long to change them is because people who were less likely to have problems with them were often the ones designing them. It worked for them so it should work for everyone. But that's just not a good measure for if the garments is meeting the people where they're truly at. 

I don't expect garments to be perfect all the time. I don't expect garments to always fit every fashion trends. I don't think they should, if I'm being honest. But I'm still happy that there's more space and recognition that we are not all the same and there needs to be more wiggle room for those differences. 

 

With luv,

BD 

I have two medical conditions that cause serious issues with heat, so I am not unfamiliar with those challenges. 
 
I understand that everyone’s experiences are different, no matter the subject.  My experience was that I wear perfectly normal clothes, no different from the non-church members around me, yet I routinely get attitude from people who say they struggle with garment wearing, or just have downright disdain for me when I share my experience. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

What’s funny is that I was looking at this picture, comparing the two, thinking uh oh she made a mistake posting both the same pictures because Jesus is showing his shoulder, and in fact his nipple in both pictures. 
 

I guess they didn’t need to change Jesus outfit.  Just the shoulders.🧐

I wonder if they would have felt the need to do so if the angels had been more masculine in appearance.  There are quite a few paintings with topless or partially topless men in the Gospel Art Kit…though typically angels are men and have a white robe like Moroni or one with tighter sleeves.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/media/collection/book-of-mormon-all-gospel-art-images?lang=eng

Edited October 29, 2025 by Calm

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

I have two medical conditions that cause serious issues with heat, so I am not unfamiliar with those challenges. 
 
I understand that everyone’s experiences are different, no matter the subject.  My experience was that I wear perfectly normal clothes, no different from the non-church members around me, yet I routinely get attitude from people who say they struggle with garment wearing, or just have downright disdain for me when I share my experience. 

Like you said different people have different experiences. I think you are so lucky not having to make major adjustments.  I miss having options in fabric choice, I prefer a clean look, but even if I iron my cotton and linen clothing, it’s royally creased by the time I am out the door.  Even the rayon is hard to keep the clean look with.  

You probably get to compensate with having to put in extra effort in other areas so I am not too jealous, few get everything to go smoothly for them without significant work and health seems to make things instantly more complicated for people from what I have seen.   
 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JVW said:

Born in mid to late 1980's

That was when it started ramping up iirc, though at least BYU started to allow pants full time, even for employees.  As someone who never wore a skirt even one day to high school and mostly lived in jeans, I was typically not too comfortable in my clothing at BYU until I changed to all cotton, full maxi skirts and they started allowing dressier denim.  By the time we hit mid90s…ugh.

[Benjamin McGuire]

16 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

You know I do. I happen to believe the historical accounts that God revealed the pattern to Joseph.  They've been hacked to bits.  The marks aren't even in the right places.

Per Joseph F. Smith 

Improvement Era, Vol. IX, No. 10, p. 813; “The Lord has given unto us garments of the holy priesthood, and you know what that means. And yet there are those of us who mutilate them, in order that we may follow the foolish, vain and (permit me to say) indecent practices of the world. … They should hold these things that God has given unto them sacred, unchanged and unaltered from the very pattern in which God gave them. Let us have the moral courage to stand against the opinions of fashion, and especially where fashion compels us to break a covenant and so commit a grievous sin.” – Joseph Fielding Smith, August 1906

Messages of the First Presidency 5:110; “The Saints should know that the pattern of endowment garments was revealed from Heaven and that the blessings promised in connection with wearing them will not be realized if any unauthorized change is made in their form or in the manner of wearing them.” – President Joseph F. Smith; 28 June 1906.

The fascinating thing about all of this is that there was no 'pattern' given to Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith saw a garment. But even in the first ones made, there were changes. This comes from James Alred (July 10, 1844):

Quote

It was while they were living in Nauvoo that the Prophet came to my mother, who was a seamstress by trade, and told her that he had seen the Angel Moroni with the garments on, and asked her to assist him in cutting out the garments. They spread unbleached muslin out on the table and he told her how to cut it out. She had to cut the third pair, however, before he said it was satisfactory. She told the prophet that there would be sufficient cloth from the knee to the ankle to make a pair of sleeves, but he told her he wanted as few seams as possible and that there would be sufficient whole cloth to cut the sleeve without piecing. The first garments were made of unbleached muslin and bound with turkey red and were without collars. Later on the prophet decided he would rather have them bound with white. Sister Emma Smith, the Prophet's wife, proposed that they have a collar on as she thought they would look more finished, but at first the prophet did not have the collars on them. After Emma Smith had made the little collars which were not visible from the outside of the dress, Sister Eliza R. Snow made a large collar of fine white material which was worn on the outside of the dress. The garment was to reach to the ankle and the sleeves to the wrist. The marks were always the same.

Joseph adopted the collars into the design. This suggests, among other things, that there wasn't a sort of sewing pattern or garment patter, but a general look, with some instructions about what should be there. The one-piece garment was not original. It is pretty clear (at least from history) that President Joseph F. Smith's comments ought to be understood in the context of being "authorized", since it was only a few years later (1923) that President Heber J. Grant did in fact authorize significant changes to the garment. And at the time, the splinter groups (the polygamous off-shoots) argued that this was evidence of apostasy in the Utah Church. Without any first-hand statements to go by, I suspect that whatever Joseph received was more of a guideline. I think that - as with much that involves our temple worship - we tend to fixate on all of this, as if the material aspects are far more important than the symbolic or figurative nature the garments have. There is something else worth pointing out. When President Joseph F. Smith made his comment, most of the garments were hand-made at home instead of purchased. The process was nothing like it is today. There was a discussion published back in 1981 in a BYU student paper (as a follow up to the major changes made in the Garment in 1979), which noted the following:

Quote

 

Representatives from Beehive Clothing meet often with designers to consult about new fabrics and designs. The designers are shown examples of current garment fashions and asked for suggestions. Beehive Clothing also has a very professional research laboratory. “We are always looking for new and better ways to make the garment more comfortable,” says a Church executive.  

When a new fabric or design is invented, it is taken to the Presiding Bishop’s Office and then to the First Presidency for approval. Members of the Church hierarchy wear proposed garments before making a decision as to their acceptance. At one time, there was a committee that aided in making these decisions. The committee was made up of General Authorities, the Church Relief Society President, a representative from the Temple Committee, an executive from Beehive Clothing, a retail merchant, and educational advisors. The committee was disbanded in order to expedite the decision-making process. An occasional ad hoc committee is formed when special problems arise.  

Members of the Clothing and Textiles Department at BYU are helpful in providing Beehive Clothing with data. Renee Thackeray has been involved in measuring body sizes in Guatemala for garment patterns. “The people there tend to be high-busted and flat-fannied,” said Thackeray. 

Beehive Clothing is responsive to retail sales. They would reportedly like to phase out the Bemberg fabric, which is imported from Japan. But they won’t as long as it remains a popular fabric. The mill guarantees garments against shrinking, loose seams, and other flaws. The company is said to have an excellent quality control lab. The production hall itself exhibits the latest in clothing manufacturing equipment, including computerized pattern- makers and cutters. They will soon be making their own elastic. Pre-arranged group tours are given with no prohibition against non- members.  

A representative of Beehive Clothing says that periodically members will design and sew a prototype garment they consider an improvement on the design. The mill welcomes this and any other suggestions members may have.

 

I found that last sentence in my quote to be interesting. It wasn't long after this that the Church updated it's policies on making your own garments - requiring that members could no longer make garments from scratch, although they could still make garments from officially sourced materials using authorized patterns. In 2010, the CHI was updated to inform members that they could only make the apron. And even that has been discontinued now. So, I think that President Joseph F. Smith's remarks might have some context that reflect a different intent than the suggestion that the garment can never change. That intent, now that the Church manufactures everything, isn't necessarily meaningful.

 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

with the new prohibition against making your own,

That prohibition has been around at least since I started buying them unless my memory is messed up. I did some special orders in cotton (the style didn’t come in cotton) because of that.  So for 40+ years.

(should have finished reading the thread before posting, lol; thanks Ben from saving me the effort to research specifics to check my memory)

Edited October 29, 2025 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

There will always those that as they study church history will want something more 'traditional'. So while most of the people won't care, that shouldn't infringe on the sentiments/desires of those who do. Why should they be forced to be less modest (as they see it)?

They can wear long sleeved and high neck clothing with sleeveless garments.  Doesn’t that fill the need for those who see such as more modest?

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, Raingirl said:

I have two medical conditions that cause serious issues with heat, so I am not unfamiliar with those challenges. 
 
I understand that everyone’s experiences are different, no matter the subject.  My experience was that I wear perfectly normal clothes, no different from the non-church members around me, yet I routinely get attitude from people who say they struggle with garment wearing, or just have downright disdain for me when I share my experience. 

I think it's the sensitivity to the topic. I haven't had a moment to respond to others, but I can feel this topic hitting me more sensitively than is my normal. I think BB mentioned that the 2000's were when they went hard on modesty in how they taught it and that does fit my experience. My clothes were chronically monitored as a teen to young adult. Modesty as a topic bothered me. A lot of the talk and presumptions around it in didn't line up to my experiences. That's a soft way of putting it. 

I try not to bite people's heads off. But I can imagine others may have stronger reactions from experiences similar or worse than me. 

As an aside, I had another hot flash/sweats and decided to buy a few pairs to try today. The line was definitely there...but it wasn't crazy. More later. 

 

 

With luv, 

BD

Edited October 29, 2025 by BlueDreams

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

told her that he had seen the Angel Moroni with the garments on

I wonder if Moroni appeared in different clothing at times as garments are not similar to the description given above (quoted by JHLPROF).  Makes sense for him to make an exception to show Joseph as easier to teach by sight that words what something is supposed to look like.