Wear Pants To Church Day; And Other Cultural Dress Standards

[Scott Lloyd]

Here it is, from 1978:

This was followed up in the Daily Universe with a cartoon of Santa writing

"Yes, Virginia, there is a standards clause. How about a long overcoat instead?"

I hadn't seen this follow-up post from you when I posted my previous message to you.

Yes, this is indeed the letter we published. In fact, I'm fairly certain I had charge of the editorial page that day, so I am responsible for printing this letter that led to the brouhaha.

The cartoon you speak of was drawn by Pat Bagley, who went on to become editorial cartoonist at the Salt Lake Tribune, where, last I checked, he still works.

This indeed happend in 1978, the last year I worked for the Universe.

What I said before still stands, though. I have since heard this sort of thing identified as an urban legend, so I still wonder whether our letter writer was telling the truth.

Edited December 12, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[DavidB]

I think Trotter's statement in response to this effectively neutralized this issue. In other words, this group is going to have to really go out on a limb and cause their members to put themselves into positions of direct apostasy in order to get more notice.

I think Trotters statement is a bit misleading, the Hand Book does contain a section about wearing white shirts - though the Handbook leaves room for non-white shirts.

To the culture of the members in America has created a very much Pharisitical approach to Church attendance and such.

[Saints Alive]

To the culture of the members in America has created a very much Pharisitical approach to Church attendance and such.

I would love to wear a polo and slacks to church... I'm too much of a status quo kinda person to actually do it though.

[Wiki Wonka]

I hadn't seen this follow-up post from you when I posted my previous message to you.

Yes, this is indeed the letter we published. In fact, I'm fairly certain I had charge of the editorial page that day, so I am responsible for printing this letter that led to the brouhaha.

The cartoon you speak of was drawn by Pat Bagley, who went on to become editorial cartoonist at the Salt Lake Tribune, where, last I checked, he still works.

This indeed happend in 1978, the last year I worked for the Universe.

What I said before still stands, though. I have since heard this sort of thing identified as an urban legend, so I still wonder whether our letter writer was telling the truth.

I have a scan of the actual letter to the editor (and cartoon) from the Daily Universe. It includes her name (which I deleted here, but maybe it's not a big deal 34 years later). It seems like BYU would have quickly identified her at the time, but I don't remember what happened after that.

WW

[Wiki Wonka]

Now I want to organize a "men in skirts" day where guys wear kilts, lava lavas, hakamas, etc. just to be a smart donkey.

Uh...this already happens in the wards that meet in our building - one of them is a Tongan Ward.

[Wiki Wonka]

I cannot participate meaningfully in Pants Wearing Day. Instead, I'm gonna grow a beard and show up on Sunday in a loose robe with no other clothing so people can see into my bosom.

All those who are thankful that they are not in JeremyOrbe-Smith's ward on "Pants Wearing Day" please signify by the usual sign.

WW

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

[Nominee]

All those who are thankful that they are not in JeremyOrbe-Smith's ward on "Pants Wearing Day" please signify by the usual sign.

WW

Oops, the rep point that I just gave you was an accident. I am on my iphone. I have to tell so that it will not be misunderstood as "the usual sign." I cannot be glad I am NOT in Jeremy's ward - because I AM in Jeremy's ward. :/

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

[Stargazer]

Well, I don't know about this pants thing, but last night I dreamt I had to walk all the way across town dressed in nothing but my underwear (specifically garments). As bad as this sounds, this was better than my occasional "being naked" dream, where I find myself walking around town wearing nothing.

I do not understand why these dreams pop up occasionally. Is there some Freudian explanation for this?

I don't know why they think wearing pants is so outre; I wear pants to church every time.

[Stargazer]

These women need to get out of Utah. We have sisters in my ward who routinely wear pants and it's never a big deal-it's never any kind of deal.

And besides that, there are cultural dress standards in the church for men just as their are for women. Men probably have more, in fact.

This petition seems, in my opinion, to be the epitome of being in the 'thick of thin things.'

Yeah, just try being a guy and wear a non-white shirt to church.

Although I wore a black shirt and tie to church a couple of weeks ago and nobody commented upon it.

[wenglund]

I do enjoy listening to a strong woman's voice so to speak...

Me, too. I just don't see strong women as the kind to publicly fuss about something so petty as wearing pants to church. To me, that is the type of thing a "small" and "weak-minded" woman would do.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Stargazer]

In UK, wear pants to church day would have a whole different meaning. I'd go

Yes, that would be a LOT more interesting.

[Duncan]

Whatever happened to that Psalms 16:7 that says the Lord looks on the Heart? I am not in favour of wearing clothes you'd normally wear to the beach, bar or wrestling night at the Arena or anything but I mean really

[Nominee]

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only thing in this world worth dressing up for if you ask me!

[juliann]

I wish they wouldn't associate clothing with their activism. I've thought about wearing pants to church because the dress thing is so silly, especially when it is cold, but I don't want it to have anything to do with some agenda. To be blunt, now that hosiery has been discarded even by older women, some of us would look more polished in pants. Now that I'm seeing so many say pants are being worn in their wards, I'm going to do it when this blows over. It will be a shock in my ward.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

I hadn't seen this follow-up post from you when I posted my previous message to you.

Yes, this is indeed the letter we published. In fact, I'm fairly certain I had charge of the editorial page that day, so I am responsible for printing this letter that led to the brouhaha.

The cartoon you speak of was drawn by Pat Bagley, who went on to become editorial cartoonist at the Salt Lake Tribune, where, last I checked, he still works.

This indeed happend in 1978, the last year I worked for the Universe.

What I said before still stands, though. I have since heard this sort of thing identified as an urban legend, so I still wonder whether our letter writer was telling the truth.

I got the following off of signature books website (not sure if I'm allowed a direct link):

The Lord’s University

Bryan Waterman and Brian Kagel

Chapter 4

The incident immediately received national attention. “There’s something strangely perverse and incongruous about a dress code which demands that a girl dressed in nice denim pants is rejected from a campus facility while a girl in underpants and an overcoat is acceptable,” Bryan wrote in her letter to the editor: “Is it vital that we expose the lower half of our legs?” She also called attention to the gender discrimination implicit in the code’s permission for men to wear denim.¹⁵⁰ Gerald Dye told reporters the student sounded “like an extremist.” To one irate church member’s let-[p.155]ter, which called for disciplinary action against Bryan for holding “the university and the Church up to national ridicule,” Oaks responded by “agree[ing] wholeheartedly” but said he feared any action against the student would make “this matter much worse.”¹⁵¹ “We feel very distressed about this event,” Oaks wrote another angry BYU alumnus. “We will take the appropriate action, you can be sure.”¹⁵² Bryan, who received dozens of crank telephone calls over the next few weeks, was verbally chastised by Dean Cameron and Gerald Dye, but no formal action was taken against her.¹⁵³ In a weekly meeting with administrators a month later, Oaks determined that “no further statements on the jeans issue [would be made] at this time.”

[AddamS]

I'm gonna grow a beard and show up on Sunday in a loose robe with no other clothing so people can see into my bosom.

I suppose it would be easier this way to tell if it was burning.

[DavidB]

I wish they wouldn't associate clothing with their activism. I've thought about wearing pants to church because the dress thing is so silly, especially when it is cold, but I don't want it to have anything to do with some agenda. To be blunt, now that hosiery has been discarded even by older women, some of us would look more polished in pants. Now that I'm seeing so many say pants are being worn in their wards, I'm going to do it when this blows over. It will be a shock in my ward.

You should wear pants on the 6th, just because you want to wear pants.

[Bart Burk]

I would favor Amish dress standards myself. Keep it simple, modest and feminine all at the same time. I favor the way their men dress as well and am slowly changing my wardrobe to match it. No more striped dress shirts.

Edited December 12, 2012 by Bart Burk

[canard78]

Not if a man is in a leadership position or wants to serve in the temple.

It shouldn't, but if there's one thing that gets me disproportionately riled, it's beard prejudice. It stems from nothing more than cultural views and attitudes of the 60s still affecting those in senior leadership.

Sigh... It shouldn't bother me, but it does. The idea that a veil worker can't be bearded is slightly illogical and ironic given what their role is in the temple.

I'm afraid I often grow a winter beard as a mild show of independence. I find it gets a slightly more surprised reaction than when I take a bottle of Bud to PEC.

[Scott Lloyd]

I got the following off of signature books website (not sure if I'm allowed a direct link):

Thanks for the cite. Interesting stuff I hadn't heard before.

I clicked on one of the footnote links, which took me to the website, where I found this interesting footnote:

153. Bryan Waterman, telephone conversation with Anita Lavon Bryan Welch, 30 July 1996, notes in Waterman’s possession. Apparently Bryan was only the most publicized of perhaps dozens of women who pulled similar stunts before women’s jeans were allowed on campus. Utah attorney general Jan Graham told an audience at Utah Valley State College in 1996 that she had done the same thing as a BYU student. Graham was subsequently confused with Bryan in press reports of her speech. See Robert Kirby and Lisa Johnson, ‘Jan Graham: Utah State Attorney General,” Salt Lake City, May/June 1996, which mistakenly attributes the publicity generated by Bryan to Graham. Thanks to Terry Ann Harward and Merle Tanner-White for help sorting out the confusion surrounding this story.

If "perhaps dozens of women ... had pulled similar stunts," that's what makes me wonder whether Bryan actually did the thing or only heard about it being done previously then wrote the letter claiming personal experience to draw attention to what she regarded as an unjust policy.

Apparently, though, she was questioned about it later (see the above footnote) and stuck to her story.

[Judd]

Whatever happened to that Psalms 16:7 that says the Lord looks on the Heart? I am not in favour of wearing clothes you'd normally wear to the beach, bar or wrestling night at the Arena or anything but I mean really

He does look on the heart, which can often be a problem. People make a big fuss about how people 'look' at them or treat them or whatever for their colored shirt, attention-grabbing beard, lack of tie, or whatever it is. I look at church as a somewhat less-intense purpose of the temple. What I mean by that is that in the temple we all wear the same clothes. We're there for the purpose of worship and not for our own purposes of image or comfort. I look like an idiot in temple clothing. That's ok as I'm not really there to be seen or for other purposes. The same with church, I have numerous other things I could wear that I'd be more comfortable in or that I would look more appealing in, but the underlying purpose of me being there has nothing to do with that.

In the same regard, I don't really care if someone has a beard, a green shirt, or a woman with pants, etc. as again my purposes for being there are completely separate from that. What gets annoying, however, is when someone either wears/does something or makes a big fuss about whether they can/can't do something and indirectly makes it explicitly clear that their intentions are primarily selfish and secondarily worship.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Thanks for the cite. Interesting stuff I hadn't heard before.

I clicked on one of the footnote links, which took me to the website, where I found this interesting footnote:

If "perhaps dozens of women ... had pulled similar stunts," that's what makes me wonder whether Bryan actually did the thing or only heard about it being done previously then wrote the letter claiming personal experience to draw attention to what she regarded as an unjust policy.

Apparently, though, she was questioned about it later (see the above footnote) and stuck to her story.

I'd have to agree that these things should be met with a healthy amount of skepticism.

[Duncan]

He does look on the heart, which can often be a problem. People make a big fuss about how people 'look' at them or treat them or whatever for their colored shirt, attention-grabbing beard, lack of tie, or whatever it is. I look at church as a somewhat less-intense purpose of the temple. What I mean by that is that in the temple we all wear the same clothes. We're there for the purpose of worship and not for our own purposes of image or comfort. I look like an idiot in temple clothing. That's ok as I'm not really there to be seen or for other purposes. The same with church, I have numerous other things I could wear that I'd be more comfortable in or that I would look more appealing in, but the underlying purpose of me being there has nothing to do with that.

In the same regard, I don't really care if someone has a beard, a green shirt, or a woman with pants, etc. as again my purposes for being there are completely separate from that. What gets annoying, however, is when someone either wears/does something or makes a big fuss about whether they can/can't do something and indirectly makes it explicitly clear that their intentions are primarily selfish and secondarily worship.

I recall a seinfeld clip where says that people from the future or aliens or whatevr are all dressed the same! the just say the hck with does this look good with this or does that fit with this and all go with the same outfit! I thought it was hilarious!!