Wear Pants To Church Day; And Other Cultural Dress Standards

[bluebell]

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?

Please try not to make arguments idiotic just because you disagree with them. It's obvious that that's not what's being said and for you to try to 'make' that what's being said just so it's easier to make fun of it comes off badly.

I'm sure Erin will be back to explain herself further, but i'll be the first to admit that she is not the first i've heard to 'go there' when commenting on the women who are directly involved in starting and spreading this petition. To many people (men and women, myself included) it seems crazy to spend time, energy and effort (especially during this time of the year) on a campaign trying to get women to wear pants to church.

With so many needs in the world today-especially during this season-i don't really get how 'start a pants wearing campaign at church' makes the cut. Especially when it will have absolutely no affect on anything. A woman wearing a dress to church isn't a sign that women are being treated less than men anymore than a man wearing a tie to church is a sign that men are less than women.

I don't think it's that over the top to suggest that if a person really wants to make the world a better place and to make a difference, then a pants wearing day at church is the least effective and worthy way to do it and that resources are being squandered, if making a difference for the better is the actual goal.

[wenglund]

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?

It would take a rather narrow and superficial view of things to think that the mental and emotional effort consists solely in putting on a tie. And, the narrowness and superficiality may be compounded by mocking laughter as if you have a clue.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[DavidB]

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.

And corners need people trumpeting their own righteousness. And faces need sullen looks on fast Sundays so we know who is fasting.

As alreayd said, you do not know what these women do. You do not know where they spend their efforts...if they are women, and likely mothers, I wager they are very adept at multi-tasking.

It is simply ridiculous to suggest that the pants campaing is some all consuming event that these woman are fixated upon 100% of the time.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

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? (All Enlisted)

http://www.sltrib.co...-pants.html.csp

My first thought is I really don't care if women wear dress pants to church or not. But, what other inequalities are they talking about? Is wearing pants really going to encourage the 1st Presidency to change its mind about the priesthood or who can hold what calling?

What about other cultural dress standards that could be changed?

I will wear pants Sunday.

[Nathair/|\]

I will wear pants Sunday.

I won't.

[Stargazer]

And corners need people trumpeting their own righteousness. And faces need sullen looks on fast Sundays so we know who is fasting.

As alreayd said, you do not know what these women do. You do not know where they spend their efforts...if they are women, and likely mothers, I wager they are very adept at multi-tasking.

It is simply ridiculous to suggest that the pants campaing is some all consuming event that these woman are fixated upon 100% of the time.

Your point is that we don't know that besides making this completely pointless protest over something that quite literally does not matter except to people who strain at gnats and swallow camels, that these women might possibly by some small chance ALSO be volunteering at soup kitchens? And that therefore we shouldn't dinigrate their pointless protest? You know what? If they are volunteering at soup kitchens and such like, then good on them. But so what? That still doesn't make their protest any less pointless and full of "Look at me! I'm trendy!"

Who besides those who judge on the basis of surface appearances give a flying fig about whether women wear dresses or trousers to Church? It's a cultural convention, for crying out loud, just like saying "please" and "thankyou", closing your mouth when you chew, and listening politely when another person is speaking. Or do you support conducting loud conversations during a High Councilman's talk as a way of protesting boredom?

I suppose you would applaud wildly if you went to the Middle East and saw that certain individuals were bucking the cultural conventions by refusing to belch after a good meal? As long as the non-belchers were, possibly, volunteering at the local soup kitchen.

Give me a break.

[Saints Alive]

I will wear pants Sunday.

They addressed that; men that want to show solidarity for the "cause" should wear a purple shirt, tie, or ribbon. Purple being the color of the suferage movement.

[Tacenda]

In my lifetime I've only seen one woman wear a pantsuit to church. I'm a follower, and would have to have several go for it in my ward, before I'd feel comfortable doing it. Plus I'm old school and think Sunday best is a dress.

[halconero]

I care not for whether they wear pants or a dress to church so long as they wear a much more important clothing item underneath them, and that my friends, is something I don't care to really investigate.

[Calm]

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.

I assume that what Erin essentially means is that if these women are spending say 5% of their current time, energy and resources on promoting the ultimately pointless "pants at church day", that is 5% of their time not available for more meaningful activities...however they have chosen to spend the rest of the 95% of their time. And considering the much more immediate needs out there, it seems to her a tragic waste of crucial resources.

The choice of "pants at church" IMO is actually a good choice for someone wanting to cause a 'scene'...not at church, but publicly. It is actually so trivial that members in general will be dismissive, thus providing those agitating for change another opportunity to claim that the Church is dismissive of women as they create a fictitious link for the media and others between oppression of women and the wearing of pants.

And those members who choose to overreact to any attempt to put the Church in a bad light will only make it much worse by appearing to react to such a trivial act as a woman wearing pants while the reality is they see it as an attack on the Church. This in no way is justifying any hostile reaction to the promotion, I am just pointing out the effectiveness of choosing a pointless action as the banner to march under.

Edited December 14, 2012 by calmoriah

[DavidB]

I do not think that not making a issue of women wearing pants to Church can be regarded by anyone a "Church is dismissive of women".

I think all women should wear pants to Church this Sunday just to prove the point, that women can wear pants to Church and that the Church has no dress against it. By all women wearing pants, it makes the issue of FMH moot.

It is railing against these women that provides the justification for this event.

[Stargazer]

I actually went to read the comments under the article, and some commenter wrote:

It would appear to this reader that the Mormon church is more interested in what people wear to church than the fact that they came to church at all. It would seem to me that people who are interested enough and want to learn about God in this manner,should be allowed to dress as they see fit and are comfortable as long as they are clean and properly covered. Just another way of dictating to their followers the whats and hows of their lives. A reminder to myself as to why I don't attend.

To which I responded:

Do you think this is some "rule" that the church has or something? Did you not read the church spokesperson's statement: "Generally church members are encouraged to wear their best clothing as a sign of respect for the Savior, but we don’t counsel people beyond that." Does this sound to you like there is some kind of "rule"? As a reminder to yourself why you don't attend, this comes across as a straw man. Attend or don't attend, it's your choice. But what's the real reason? Try addressing that and you'd be better off.

No, what is happening here is that a group of women are envious that only men in the LDS church may hold the Priesthood, and they have chosen to protest this supposed inequity by defying a non-existent rule. It's slightly pathetic -- rather like Don Quixote tilting at windmills. At least IMHO.

If you don't believe that President Monson is a prophet, seer and revelator with authority from God to lead the Church, then fine. But why would you then support a protest whose goal is to ultimately to allow women to hold the Priesthood, if the Priesthood is a fiction? It would be better if those who are so worked up about it would do something useful to the community, like volunteering regularly at a local soup kitchen.

As you may notice, I carried over the soup-kitchen-volunteering thing to the Trib's comment page. I am eagerly awaiting someone to take me task there for my troglodyte attitude, but so far I am reaping disappointment. Although I've gotten 3 "Likes" so far. That's nice.

I've never commented on the Trib's page before. This is a real red-letter day! I might never comment again.

[pogi]

Who besides those who judge on the basis of surface appearances give a flying fig about whether women wear dresses or trousers to Church?

The question is, how many in relief society don't judge the surface appearance? No offense women, but I have known lots of women and I hear lots of stories from the society. I can't tell you how many women I know are fed-up with Utah Valley for that reason, where they feel that they have to dress a certain way and speak a certain way to be accepted by other women in the ward. Many women complain of an extreme pressure to look and act perfectly, and when they fail to live up to those cultural standards they feel unaccepted and unappreciated.

If this issue helps in any way to open the minds of "traditional" women in relief society to be accepting and tolerating of diversity, and to quit being so darned stuffy, than I send my blessings with this effort. I honestly feel that most women are open to other women wearing pants, but most are afraid to challenge the tradition and norm out of fear of judgment. Getting lots of women to wear pants on the same day, I am sure helps these women to feel safe to do so. It's kind of silly that it has to come down to this, but the fact that such silly measures are taken speaks of the real concerns and fears of judgment. To dismiss the feelings and concerns of these women is simply rude.

I don't think that this is really an issue of pants, it is an issue of judgment and acceptance. It is not women standing up against the intolerance of the church, it is women standing up against intolerance of other women. They simply want to feel comfortable with their imperfect and untraditional selves at Church without being glared at and stared up and down.

Edited December 14, 2012 by pogi

[bluebell]

I do not think that not making a issue of women wearing pants to Church can be regarded by anyone a "Church is dismissive of women".

I think all women should wear pants to Church this Sunday just to prove the point, that women can wear pants to Church and that the Church has no dress against it. By all women wearing pants, it makes the issue of FMH moot.

It is railing against these women that provides the justification for this event.

I don't believe the women care a hoot about what other women wear to church. I won't be wearing pants to church on sunday, not because i have anything against wearing pants, but because i don't want to be at all attached to the crusade of these women, and that's what wearing pants will signify on this sunday.

It won't speak at all on the dress code-it'll be seen as an agreement that the church is sexist and THAT, in my opinion, is what these women are looking for. They are taking a worthless gesture and turning it into something completely different. When some sister shows up in pants thinking "yeah, i want to support the idea that women can come to church in pants in they want to", what these women will be hoping is that everyone else sees her and thinks "yeah, that woman also thinks the church is sexist and things need to change".

[juliann]

I assume that what Erin essentially means is that if these women are spending say 5% of their current time, energy and resources on promoting the ultimately pointless "pants at church day", that is 5% of their time not available for more meaningful activities...however they have chosen to spend the rest of the 95% of their time. And considering the much more immediate needs out there, it seems to her a tragic waste of crucial resources.

I don't think we want to go there because anybody who wastes time here is subject to the same judgment. So before that kind of criteria is set the one doing it better be spending every minute of her day productively.

I think all women should wear pants to Church this Sunday just to prove the point, that women can wear pants to Church and that the Church has no dress against it. By all women wearing pants, it makes the issue of FMH moot.

It is railing against these women that provides the justification for this event.

That is why this is such an effective activity, there are always those who will rise to the bait but when it comes to pants of all things, the usual remarks against activist women make the church look so petty and silly. I was just thinking that the best reaction would be to wear pants and just quietly remove this as a bone of contention....just not this Sunday.

[bluebell]

.

I don't think that this is really an issue of pants, it is an issue of judgment and acceptance. It is not women standing up against the intolerance of the church, it is women standing up against intolerance of other women. They simply want to feel comfortable with their imperfect and untraditional selves at Church without being glared at and stared up and down.

You think wrong.

The women behind this petition have said themselves that it's specifically meant to highlight gender inequality in the church.

[Stargazer]

The question is, how many in relief society don't actual judge on the surface appearance? No offense women, but I have known lots of women and I hear lots of stories from the society. I can't tell you how many women I know are fed-up with Utah Valley for that reason, where they feel that they have to dress a certain way and speak a certain way to be accepted by other women in the ward. Many women complain of an extreme pressure to look and act perfectly, and when they fail to live up to those standards they feel unaccepted and unappreciated.

I think this is a human and not just a Mormon characteristic, so if those who are fed up with Utah Valley move elsewhere, they will likely find it the same there. And find it in the Catholic Church, too.

One time, I started to post family videos on my YouTube channel in order to let other family members see what we were doing. Next thing I know my sister-in-law commented about how my wife's facial expression wasn't sufficiently happy. I then got strict orders to never post anything ever again. My SIL is definitely not LDS.

I don't think that this is really an issue of pants, it is an issue of judgment and acceptance. It is not women standing up against the intolerance of the church, it is women standing up against intolerance of other women. They simply want to feel comfortable with their imperfect and untraditional selves at Church without being glared at and stared up and down.

Agreed. But as I said, it's a general and not particularly a Mormon problem. It's too bad that it occurs there, too, though. It just shows that we are all in need of personal progress.

And as to progress, to Epictetus is attributed:

The signs of a man making progress are these: He censures no man; he accuses no man; he says nothing about himself as if he were somebody or knew something. When he is impelled at all or hindered, he blames himself; if he is censured by another, he offers no defense.

And reading this I realize that I am in definite need of progress.

[Tacenda]

The question is, how many in relief society don't judge the surface appearance? No offense women, but I have known lots of women and I hear lots of stories from the society. I can't tell you how many women I know are fed-up with Utah Valley for that reason, where they feel that they have to dress a certain way and speak a certain way to be accepted by other women in the ward. Many women complain of an extreme pressure to look and act perfectly, and when they fail to live up to those cultural standards they feel unaccepted and unappreciated.

If this issue helps in any way to open the minds of "traditional" women in relief society to be accepting and tolerating of diversity, and to quit being so darned stuffy, than I send my blessings with this effort. I honestly feel that most women are open to other women wearing pants, but most are afraid to challenge the tradition and norm out of fear of judgment. Getting lots of women to wear pants on the same day, I am sure helps these women to feel safe to do so. It's kind of silly that it has to come down to this, but the fact that such silly measures are taken speaks of the real concerns and fears of judgment. To dismiss the feelings and concerns of these women is simply rude.

I don't think that this is really an issue of pants, it is an issue of judgment and acceptance. It is not women standing up against the intolerance of the church, it is women standing up against intolerance of other women. They simply want to feel comfortable with their imperfect and untraditional selves at Church without being glared at and stared up and down.

I have to say ... women dress for other women, have you ever heard this expression? It's true, I believe. We just want to be accepted. There are a few women that break with that tradition and do whatever the heck they want. Mostly the younger crowd, don't cowtow to what others expect, love that! There is a gal in my ward that I just love that wears ankle socks with shoes and a levi skirt. She wants to be warm:) Edited December 14, 2012 by Tacenda

[Calm]

I don't think we want to go there because anybody who wastes time here is subject to the same judgment. So before that kind of criteria is set the one doing it better be spending every minute of her day productively.

I was thinking the same thing myself, there are so many things we do that we don't need to do in life that drawing lines like this responsibly is too difficult. Better to simply encourage spending time on worthwhile things...for one thing when people feel defensive they tend to put more effort into justifying what they are doing and are less likely to change.

That is why this is such an effective activity, there are always those who will rise to the bait but when it comes to pants of all things, the usual remarks against activist women make the church look so petty and silly. I was just thinking that the best reaction would be to wear pants and just quietly remove this as a bone of contention....just not this Sunday.

I wonder if enough would do this to be significant enough. I like wearing my skirts (I wear them long so I don't have to worry about hose for my vampire white legs) to church, they are much more comfortable for me than any of my dress pants and I need to be reminded not to slouch over the pews and chairs as I do when I am in pants generally.

[Calm]

I think this is a human and not just a Mormon characteristic, so if those who are fed up with Utah Valley move elsewhere, they will likely find it the same there. And find it in the Catholic Church, too.

One only needs to move to a different part of Utah Valley, my ward doesn't get into this kind of stuff. I suspect it is more of a neighbourhood characteristic than county or state wide.

[Erin15]

That is why this is such an effective activity, there are always those who will rise to the bait but when it comes to pants of all things

When you say it that way it sounds like these women are doing nothing more then trolling.

Edited December 14, 2012 by Erin15

[Jude2]

Helped today at a funeral and we were laughing at this, thought we would hold a counter protest and wear long skirts with lots of lacy and ruffles.

[Cobalt-70]

I don't believe the women care a hoot about what other women wear to church. I won't be wearing pants to church on sunday, not because i have anything against wearing pants, but because i don't want to be at all attached to the crusade of these women, and that's what wearing pants will signify on this sunday.

It won't speak at all on the dress code-it'll be seen as an agreement that the church is sexist and THAT, in my opinion, is what these women are looking for. They are taking a worthless gesture and turning it into something completely different. When some sister shows up in pants thinking "yeah, i want to support the idea that women can come to church in pants in they want to", what these women will be hoping is that everyone else sees her and thinks "yeah, that woman also thinks the church is sexist and things need to change".

If you don't wear a dress to church next Sunday, it will be just as likely that some uninformed person will interpret your actions as an outward expression of positive sexism. Why would you make such a statement that could be misconstrued? It's safer to just go with the flow and wear pants, right, so you don't offend anybody?

You see my point? You can't be held hostage by how ignorant people might interpret your actions. Anyone who knows anything about this event on Sunday knows this has nothing to do with sexism. Conservatives think that everything that feminists do is about sexism, because they have not yet bothered to educate themselves about what feminism is. It's about patriarchy (or pantriarchy, in this case), not sexism.

[Erin15]

Conservatives think that everything that feminists do is about sexism, because they have not yet bothered to educate themselves about what feminism is. It's about patriarchy (or pantriarchy, in this case), not sexism.

Let's set aside for a moment the fact that the way feminist theory uses patriarchy is much closer to a propoganda mythos intentionally designed to create a culture of victimization and fear then it is to a dispassionate historical analysis. (Cue incoming standard deflection responses of "you just don't understand" and "you are insulting women.")

Instead, I'll just point out that it's kind of hard to believe they even have a message, much less take it seriously, when they are using tactics from the internet troll's playbook.

I'll make a prediction: Come sunday morning the participants will go to church and no one will either notice or care. Come sunday night the participants, unable to relate any true stories about how people got on their case, will fabricate some. Keep an eye out for undisprovable phrases like "I could feel people staring at me," and "I felt uncomfortable and unwelcomed."

Edited December 15, 2012 by Erin15

[DavidB]

My experience with trolls is part their MO is mind read, sit in judgment of others and a the while proclaiming to the world their own piety....or was that the pharisees.

While the Church does not have a "no pants allowed policy", some members do have a policy that they think others must abide by. Yes, these ladies have missed the mark a bit by blaming the Church instead of the smog nosed members who impose standards on others and otherwise make church a unpleasant experience.....there is hope though, I am witnessing a rainbow, so one more year to improve ourselves

Edited December 15, 2012 by DavidB