Wear Pants To Church Day; And Other Cultural Dress Standards

[Avatar4321]

Maybe we should invite non-member women to come to Church dressed in pants. They could end up feeling the Spirit and being baptized because no one will care what they wear.

[Saints Alive]

So I think we have established that women can wear pants (or trousers for our non-American friends) to sacrament. What about wearing them to the temple?

[pogi]

So I think we have established that women can wear pants (or trousers for our non-American friends) to sacrament. What about wearing them to the temple?

My wife wore them to a temple marriage. Nobody kicked her out, but I did see a couple uncomfortable looks. The temple workers were all very welcoming though.

Edited December 14, 2012 by pogi

[mercyngrace]

Like most have said already, it makes me no nevermind whether women wear pants or not. Wear your best and come clothed in humility.

I only ask one thing of all feminist women who plan to "attend" this "event". Please wear your pants responsibly, unlike my LDS daughter who insists on being "the pants ninja".

Thanks in advance!

[pogi]

Wear your best and come clothed in humility.

Well said!

[Nathair/|\]

Like most have said already, it makes me no nevermind whether women wear pants or not. Wear your best and come clothed in humility.

I only ask one thing of all feminist women who plan to "attend" this "event". Please wear your pants responsibly, unlike my LDS daughter who insists on being "the pants ninja".

Thanks in advance!

She's awesome! She should visit my ward with her mom.

[Hamba Tuhan]

So I think we have established that women can wear pants (or trousers for our non-American friends) to sacrament. What about wearing them to the temple?

I used to work in a temple. The policy as stated in the handbook is that temple workers are not to question or turn away anyone who arrives with a valid recommend regardless of dress. Bishops are to teach members to wear their best of the House of the Lord; consequently, one has to assume that those attending are doing so.

Edited December 14, 2012 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

Maybe we should invite non-member women to come to Church dressed in pants. They could end up feeling the Spirit and being baptized because no one will care what they wear.

In my first ward on my mission, the other elders met a woman on the street and invited her to church. Unknown to anyone else, she accepted their invitation because she thought it would be funny to create a scene amongst some uptight, judgemental Mormons. She showed up on Sunday wearing a leather miniskirt, a 'tube top', crazy heels, and huge earrings, with hair and makeup to match. I was in the foyer when she walked in, and I watched the members of the ward welcome and embrace her. Before she knew what was happening, a lovely older couple had escorted her to a pew to sit with them. At the end of the service, she was invited home to eat lunch with another family. We saw her again the following Sunday and the Sunday after that and eventually at her baptism. It must be something of a shock to discover that one's target is a complete straw man.

[Hamba Tuhan]

3) Since women already do wear pants in Church, wouldn't the real push for "equality" between the genders come from men wanting to wear dresses to Church?

A fair few men in my ward wear skirts to church already. Problem solved.

[mercyngrace]

She's awesome! She should visit my ward with her mom.

Maybe she will if she's ever out your way.

[Saints Alive]

My wife wore them to a temple marriage. Nobody kicked her out, but I did see a couple uncomfortable looks. The temple workers were all very welcoming though.

I meant white ones... Like for an endowment session.

[The Nehor]

I wish people would just stop caring or if they want to be charitable and help others those uptight about acceptable dress would dress more casually so as not to alienate their siblings in the church and those who do not care should dress very "nicely" so as to avoid distracting the uptight ones. Everyone gets blessed for thinking of others and everyone is nicer. Woo-hoo!!!!

I will just keep wearing my chainmail tie.

[canard78]

So I think we have established that women can wear pants (or trousers for our non-American friends) to sacrament. What about wearing them to the temple?

Thanks Saints Alive. I can't help but snigger as I read them.

[wenglund]

I agree, why can't people just come to church for the sole purpose of growing closer to God?

Let's not forget that the gospel is also a hospital for the spiritual sick. As such, we should expect periodic manifestations of at least some symptoms of spiritual sickness among the general membership, including people arrogantly steadying the ark on such relatively insignificant matters like women wearing pants to church, rather than focusing on meaningful things like growing closer to God. It will take some time to heal certain people of the disease of cloth-worship and ark-steadying.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[elect_lady]

Women wearing pants to church is a manifestation of a disease? It's arrogant? Wow. I would have thought that a few hundred women wearing pants to church would be more like a few hundred women wearing pants to church, than an arrogant display of sickness. That's just me, though.

[wenglund]

Women wearing pants to church is a manifestation of a disease? It's arrogant? Wow. I would have thought that a few hundred women wearing pants to church would be more like a few hundred women wearing pants to church, than an arrogant display of sickness. That's just me, though.

No. Public and publicized acts of defiance intended to pressure the church to change it's policies and practice on matter of such little importance as women wearing pants, is a manifestation of arrogance and spiritual sickness. Obviously. How you interpreted it otherwise is baffling to me.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[DH]

No. Public and publicized acts of defiance intended to pressure the church to change it's policies and practice on matter of such little importance as women wearing pants, is a manifestation of arrogance and spiritual sickness. Obviously. How you interpreted it otherwise is baffling to me.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

They're not trying to change the Church's policy on something "of such little importance as women wearing pants," because the Church does not have a policy against women wearing pants. It's a symbolic gesture protesting how Church culture often demeans women. That many women feel "less than" men at church is not a thing of little importance.

Edited December 14, 2012 by DH

[DavidB]

Since there is no church policy against woman wearing pants, then there is no defiance against the church.

The arrogance spiritual sickness lies in the members who ridicule a woman for wearing pants or a young man for not wearing a white shirt.

To me the membership culture on this issue is not much different than those who ridiculed the widow for tithing meer mytes.

Edited December 14, 2012 by DavidB

[Erin15]

Apparently there is a Feminist group planing a "wear pants to church" day in protest of "gender inequality" in the church. Has anyone heard of this group?

Ugh.

The soup kitchen I volunteer at is close to shutting down from lack of support, the foster care system I am a part of is desperately in need of more foster parents...

An THIS is how some women in the church are spending their time during the days of their probation?

Seriously, when I read this article, all I could think about was Isiah 3 and 4, where The Lord talks about how the Daughters of Zion will have to be humbled and purged in the last days because of their worldliness and haughtiness. We're not there yet, but I can see the road signs, and the miles are counting down.

[DH]

How do you know those women don't also volunteer at soup kitchens and raise foster children?

Wearing pants to church is not exactly diverting vital resources from charitable projects.

Edited December 14, 2012 by DH

[bluebell]

How do you know those women don't also volunteer at soup kitchens and raise foster children?

Wearing pants to church is not exactly diverting vital resources from charitable projects.

It's likely the mental and emotional "costs" of such a campaign that Erin is suggesting is being squandered here. It seems like these women have taken this issue on as a 'cause' (otherwise, they would just wear pants to church and do nothing more) and if so, then it's not unreasonable to assume they are expending resources to support it.

Perhaps she meant something else though.

[Cobalt-70]

No. Public and publicized acts of defiance intended to pressure the church to change it's policies and practice on matter of such little importance as women wearing pants, is a manifestation of arrogance and spiritual sickness. Obviously. How you interpreted it otherwise is baffling to me.

Wade, my friend:

Nobody who is going to wear pants to church on Sunday is doing so because they want to "pressure the church to change its policies" on the matter of whether you can wear pants to church. Church policy is already on their side. For those who are protesting anything (which is a minority), they are protesting those Mormon "enforcers" who--for cultural reasons having nothing to do with church policy or doctrine--either want to keep women in their "proper place" as manifested by things like dresses and other modern Western indicia of subordination, or (2) are working, often unconsciously, to marginalize women's voices and women's perspectives within the church.

But most participants aren't even protesting anything. They just want to raise awareness of women's issues among the church laity, and promote solidarity between women outside the cookie-cutter mold.

Edited December 14, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[DH]

It's likely the mental and emotional "costs" of such a campaign that Erin is suggesting is being squandered here. It seems like these women have taken this issue on as a 'cause' (otherwise, they would just wear pants to church and do nothing more) and if so, then it's not unreasonable to assume they are expending resources to support it.

Perhaps she meant something else though.

Really? You expect me to take that argument seriously? If I wear a purple tie to church on Sunday to support the women, are you going to assume I don't help the poor, pay tithing, or whatever, because I "squandered" mental and emotional effort putting on that tie?

[wenglund]

They're not trying to change the Church's policy on something "of such little importance as women wearing pants," because the Church does not have a policy against women wearing pants. It's a symbolic gesture protesting how Church culture often demeans women. That many women feel "less than" men at church is not a thing of little importance.

In a way you may be right. If people think that "pants" somehow makes the cultural difference in value (intrinsic or otherwise) between men and women, then there is something seriously wrong with their thinking and their spirituality, and depending upon the prevalence of such inane thinking, it may be of some important.

However, to the rationally minded, "pants" aren't relevant to people's value, and in the eternal scheme of things, the issue of women not wearing pants in church (be it a policy or cultural norm) is of relatively little or no importance, particularly when compared with our seeking to do things that bring us closer to God.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited December 14, 2012 by wenglund

[wenglund]

Wade, my friend:

Nobody who is going to wear pants to church on Sunday is doing so because they want to "pressure the church to change its policies" on the matter of whether you can wear pants to church. Church policy is already on their side. For those who are protesting anything (which is a minority), they are protesting those Mormon "enforcers" who--for cultural reasons having nothing to do with church policy or doctrine--either want to keep women in their "proper place" as manifested by things like dresses and other modern Western indicia of subordination, or (2) are working, often unconsciously, to marginalize women's voices and women's perspectives within the church.

But most participants aren't even protesting anything. They just want to raise awareness of women's issues among the church laity, and promote solidarity between women outside the cookie-cutter mold.

Please read Bluebell's post above. She actually gets it.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-