Life Portrayed in Mormon Ads not Consistent with Reality

[maklelan]

Article here. The gist is this: Mormon ads try to make Mormons look unique, interesting, and engaging. This isn't consistent with actual Mormonism. My issue with this article: It's written by someone who lives in Utah and appeals to all the same canards about the stick all us Mormons have stuck up our hindparts. In other words, one woman who is annoyed by Utah Mormonism's idiosyncrasies appeals to personal anecdotes to make sweeping generalizations about Mormons everywhere outside of Utah. One example should suffice:

In a recent televised behind-the-scenes interview with one of the couples featured in the “I’m a Mormon” spots, the wife mentioned that one of the reasons she and her spouse were chosen to be in an ad was her husband’s penchant for growing unusual facial hair.

Well, that’s nifty; I’m all for hairstyle freedom of expression.

But imagine my confusion at hearing that this man’s facial hair was one reason he was chosen to be a global representative of my religion when the young men in my area are being told by local leadership that they must cut their hair to a short, conservative style or they can’t administer the sacrament or receive the Melchizedek priesthood. Why is funky hair being lauded in one arena and frowned upon in another?

The disparity between the image my church is trying so hard to convey to the world and the image local members are being told they must adhere to within their small ward boundaries is a bit unnerving.

I've never heard of a bishop telling priests they have to have a conservative haircut to officiate for the sacrament, and I've attended LDS congregations in five different states and five different countries. Has anyone else heard that young men can't get the Melchizedek priesthood unless they have a short, conservative haircut?

It seems to me that her perception of Mormonism is the aberrant one. Read the comments after the article and you'll see quite a few other Latter-day Saints conclude the same thing. Way to keep up the good work, Tribune.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Copycat

[mfbukowski]

Article here. The gist is this: Mormon ads try to make Mormons look unique, interesting, and engaging. This isn't consistent with actual Mormonism. My issue with this article: It's written by someone who lives in Utah and appeals to all the same canards about the stick all us Mormons have stuck up our hindparts. In other words, one woman who is annoyed by Utah Mormonism's idiosyncrasies appeals to personal anecdotes to make sweeping generalizations about Mormons everywhere outside of Utah. One example should suffice:

I've never heard of a bishop telling priests they have to have a conservative haircut to officiate for the sacrament, and I've attended LDS congregations in five different states and five different countries. Has anyone else heard that young men can't get the Melchizedek priesthood unless they have a short, conservative haircut?

It seems to me that her perception of Mormonism is the aberrant one. Read the comments after the article and you'll see quite a few other Latter-day Saints conclude the same thing. Way to keep up the good work, Tribune.

You're right- that's baloney.

It's determined by each Stake President individually, or each Bishop for his ward. Of course missionaries and temple workers have different standards.

We have High Councilmen in our Stake with full beards, and the Stake Executive Secretary used to have one, but shaved it off recently because it was grey and made him look older.

But we have a little "epistemological" problem here. Here in the hinterlands we don't get "Mormonads" anyway (except if we want them on the internet) so we wouldn't know if they are consistent with our experience or not!

That argument is the same one we hear all the time around here- "But your church doesn't teach that!". Yep, that's the point. If the church doesn't teach it, we are not violating a non-existent doctrine/standard by doing it or believing it.

It's the old Blake Ostler Orthopraxis instead of Orthodoxy thing.

[kitmarlow]

Article here. The gist is this: Mormon ads try to make Mormons look unique, interesting, and engaging. This isn't consistent with actual Mormonism. My issue with this article: It's written by someone who lives in Utah and appeals to all the same canards about the stick all us Mormons have stuck up our hindparts. In other words, one woman who is annoyed by Utah Mormonism's idiosyncrasies appeals to personal anecdotes to make sweeping generalizations about Mormons everywhere outside of Utah. One example should suffice:

I've never heard of a bishop telling priests they have to have a conservative haircut to officiate for the sacrament, and I've attended LDS congregations in five different states and five different countries. Has anyone else heard that young men can't get the Melchizedek priesthood unless they have a short, conservative haircut?

It seems to me that her perception of Mormonism is the aberrant one. Read the comments after the article and you'll see quite a few other Latter-day Saints conclude the same thing. Way to keep up the good work, Tribune.

This strikes me as odd also. Maybe I'm behind the times but last I heard or knew, faculty at BYU were not allowed to have beards or mustaches; and also you could not work in the temple if you a beard or mustache. And of course it's obvious to anybody who watches conference that the last GA to have a mustache (not to mention beard) was a certain...I think it was Elder Anderson. He wore a mustache for a long time, but was asked to shave it off--and of course he did. This was...I don't know...30 years ago?

[Mars]

I've never heard of a bishop telling priests they have to have a conservative haircut to officiate for the sacrament

That happened in my ward in Longview, Texas. The bishop was... erhm... hard nosed. He wasn't from Texas, but I don't recall where he was from originally. The only thing I do know is that he was a big BYU grad. Poor guy.

[bluebell]

I posted this on the same topic thread in the social hall, but i'll post it here as well:

The only thing she said that didn't make any sense to me was when she said "But really, is there much difference between people joining my religious ranks because of these well-crafted advertisements and those who join because they had a little crush on the cute and kind missionary who taught them."

It seems obvious to me that NO ONE thinks it would be a good idea for anyone to join the church because of an advertisement. These commercials are meant to get people to want to know more, they aren't meant to produce a testimony of the Gospel or to get people into the baptismal font.

I agree that the church is using typical marketing tools to get people interesting in learning about the LDS church, but I don't agree that the church is using smoke and mirrors to get people to gain a testimony. Her statement which i have quoted above makes it seem as if that's exactly what the church is doing but I don't think that's the case.

[WalkerW]

I always thought the "I'm a Mormon" ads were to show others that we are normal people with good morals, not that we are a bunch of hipsters.

Maybe I missed the memo.

[Macabus]

Perhaps in certain communities, there are standards practiced as a part of local tradition rather than Church wide policy. It is probably these traditions, some which have been practiced for decades, to which the author of the article is referring. In both of my wards as an Aaronic priesthood holding youth and in some units on my mission in California, white shirts and ties were a uniform for participating in the blessing and passing of the sacrament. Long hair was tolerated and, in my case, facial hair was also appropriate-before I was a missionary. Some congregations are more discriminating than others with certain traditions.

A few brave souls at BYU, both faculty and students, sport fine mustaches which are permissible under the Honor Code.

Though perhaps some Mormons may be considered bland, the same could probably be said for the same portion of the general populace. Accentuating and noticing particular individuals who are different is not inappropriate in and of itself. Using them to dispel the myth that Mormonism is a homogenous group I consider quite appropriate. I too don't think that missionaries will baptize investigators after seeing an advertisement, and they shouldn't.