Wear Pants To Church Day; And Other Cultural Dress Standards

[Nathair/|\]

I will wear them out of mercy for others who do not want to see my pasty white legs.

That's why we wear long socks with our kilts.

[Scott Lloyd]

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

See Post #42 from SeekingUnderstanding and my Post #47.

Apparently there were repercussions: She got a talking-to.

I still haven't concluded, though, whether she actually did the deed or simply made the whole thing up to draw attention to her disagreement with the dress-code policy. For one thing, to admit she lied in a letter to the editor might have compounded whatever penalty she may have received for having publicly embarrassed the university in the first place.

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?

This sort of dream is fairly common. I have noticed that when I have such dreams, I generally have left something undone that needs to be done fairly soon. I've yet to come to a conclusion about that association.

Edited December 16, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

See Post #42 from SeekingUnderstanding and my Post #47.

Apparently there were repercussions: She got a talking-to.

I still haven't concluded, though, whether she actually did the deed or simply made the whole thing up to draw attention to her disagreement with the dress-code policy. For one thing, to admit she lied in a letter to the editor might have compounded whatever penalty she may have received for having publicly embarrassed the university in the first place.

It seems unlikely that it would happen dozens of times with different women due to two things...the policy was well known, especially after the letter being published...and two I just don't think most BYU women of the time would feel comfortable walking around in their underwear even covered by a coat. Coats do tend to open up when sitting down, what if she lost her grip due to grabbing for a falling pencil or something? Sounds more like the alleged BYU riot/pillow fight of 87 where I've heard four different people claiming to be the one who started it. Would be interesting to take a survey now and see the percentage willing to take a such a risk.

This sort of dream is fairly common. I have noticed that when I have such dreams, I generally have left something undone that needs to be done fairly soon. I've yet to come to a conclusion about that association.

Might look for something in your life that leaves you feeling vulnerable or exposed. Edited December 16, 2012 by calmoriah

[yootaw]

Activities can be the same, Activity Day leaders get to design their own programs for the most part. I did some that were identical as when I was Akela (Canadian Cub Scout leader). So if activities are the same, leadership numbers are the same, number of days in attendance are the same (or are at least supposed to be as Maidservant pointed out), tell me what is different besides the uniforms and badges?

You seem to be saying that in cases where they are the same, then they are the same. I'm saying that they are not the same, at least here in the states.

[volgadon]

Do we do scouting internationally?

For the most part, no.

[Scott Lloyd]

It seems unlikely that it would happen dozens of times with different women due to two things...the policy was well known, especially after the letter being published...and two I just don't think most BYU women of the time would feel comfortable walking around in their underwear even covered by a coat. Coats do tend to open up when sitting down, what if she lost her grip due to grabbing for a falling pencil or something? Sounds more like the alleged BYU riot/pillow fight of 87 where I've heard four different people claiming to be the one who started it.

Well, I can personally attest that the 1978 letter was sent to the Universe and published, because I'm the one who published it. But beyond that -- and the resulting sensationalistic publicity -- I can't confirm anything.

Apparently Jan Graham, former Utah attorney general, did this sort of thing about a decade earlier. My theory is that the 1978 letter writer heard about Graham's antics -- or something similar -- and seized upon it as a way to publicly express her disapproval of the policy. As you say, it is questionable whether the 1978 student actually did it.

I do recall that a co-worker of mine at the Universe said something to this effect: "Haven't you guys heard about that? Women do it all the time. I've done it before."

[Regarding dreaming of being in your underwear in public] Might look for something in your life that leaves you feeling vulnerable or exposed.

In my case that would make sense. If I haven't discharged a responsibility, I do feel somewhat vulnerable and exposed.

Edited December 16, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

Interesting -- I didn't know that there were laws requiring coed troops in other countries.

Fancy uniforms, badges - yes, if that's how you would like to categorize it. I think that there is clear evidence of gender inequality. Most of the conversation around this topic seems to be centered around justifying the inequalities. I think that this makes it difficult to acknowledge that there may be a real problem to be dealt with.

Trust me, if there was a significant difference in what I see going on in Scouts and Activity Days, I'd speak up like I have a couple of decades ago about the gross inequality between YMand YW funding, something that has been directed to change by our leaders and is a local problem if it hasn't been fixed yet. The assumption that young women would be passive and just continue going to church whatever level/quality of attention they got is no longer a valid one, they are catching up with YM in the tendency to wander if you can't get them to the point of seeking their own testimonies and feeling connected with the faith community. I still make noises from time to time if I see an elaborate Scout trip while YW are confined to going to camp for their outings. Our boys went to Nauvoo from Calgary one year while the girls couldn't leave the province. Another year the boys went ocean kayaking. I spoke up again. This ward and my last one dont plan such elaborate trips, but they also dont have leaders who were...how do i saw it nicely...more Peter Pan than Peter Priesthood...which made them great leaders and really nice guys and wonderful people for keeping the boys involved because they really enjoying doing the fun stuff as much as the boys...which always helps with the relationships, not sure how well the testimony building went as ive only heard snippets about the old gang since we moved, but from what ive heard not a good percentage considering all the group of 15 boys went on missions save one. Hopefully it's just a temporary thing and may be more influenced by having to work at finding someone to marry.

However in observing the cub scouts now as they are in the room next door to activity days they seem quite parallel except for the dressup (granted, males in the animal kingdom do like to put on finery to attract females' attention so perhaps this extra is a good thing) and rituals, both of which I had a heck of a time getting my boys involved in when I volunteered to be Akela. And I've been told by the YW's leader that the budget is equitable...and she would complain to me if they weren't being my inlaw.

Edited December 16, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

You seem to be saying that in cases where they are the same, then they are the same. I'm saying that they are not the same, at least here in the states.

I am in Utah now, have been in two wards here plus have family in at least a dozen more with most of the women in YW or Primary. In the past I have heard extensive complaints about inequalities. The women are not shy in either my family or my husband's All when asked...and I have asked state it's much better now, I have not pushed for specifics though...it being a family reunion usually when I see them where we should probably be talking of other things. Two sisters in Colorado report the same thing.

If they aren't comparable, it is a leader issue most likely unless the bishop has been neglectful in paying attention to the handbook.

Edited December 16, 2012 by calmoriah

[Hestia]

Erin is taking a break from this thread.

[wenglund]

I still think that argument is stupid. If people are going to get all judgmental based on a set of unfounded assumptions (e.g. "I disagree with the "Pants" event. Those people must not be doing anything valuable with their lives."), then I reserve the right to call them on it.

For crying out loud, just let them wear their pants to church, and don't make all kinds of silly assumptions about their character because of it.

Seriously, by judging them like that, you are only proving that their point is valid.

To me, this post is emblematic of the backward thinking that has become more prevalent these day. Some of us here have reserved the right to call out the naysayers for their silly and petty "we are going to wear pants" protest and their unfounded judgements against the Church's alleged culture, and yet somehow you think we are the ones with the stupid argument. Amazing.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

I agree. However, I think that the proper perspective here would lead to a better understanding of what is motivating those led to protest. Blackstrap's comments seem designed specifically to avoid understanding their motivation. Which, in my opinion is discounting. And, as Juliann pointed out earlier, time spent on this forum could be just as easily seen as taking away from more important concerns.

You are clearly missing the point. It isn't so much about specific actions like wearing pants to church or writing a post on the Internet that is in question. Rather it is the CAUSES people have chosen to engage their time and energy. There are so many other CAUSES in the world than "women wearing pants to church" that are actually important and deserving of people's time and energy that it can't help but reflect poorly on people who choose to take up trite and relatively meaningless CAUSES. Indeed, one of the important CAUSES are pragmatic attempts to encourage people to redirect their time and energy from trite and meaningless CAUSES to significant and productive CAUSES.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[yootaw]

You are clearly missing the point. It isn't so much about specific actions like wearing pants to church or writing a post on the Internet that is in question. Rather it is the CAUSES people have chosen to engage their time and energy. There are so many other CAUSES in the world than "women wearing pants to church" that are actually important and deserving of people's time and energy that it can't help but reflect poorly on people who choose to take up trite and relatively meaningless CAUSES. Indeed, one of the important CAUSES are pragmatic attempts to encourage people to redirect their time and energy from trite and meaningless CAUSES to significant and productive CAUSES.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The point, in my opinion, is that what is trite and meaningless to you, is not trite and meaningless to someone else. Identifying it as trite and meaningless is a method of justifying not really engaging the issue with those having the concern.

[yootaw]

I am in Utah now, have been in two wards here plus have family in at least a dozen more with most of the women in YW or Primary. In the past I have heard extensive complaints about inequalities. The women are not shy in either my family or my husband's All when asked...and I have asked state it's much better now, I have not pushed for specifics though...it being a family reunion usually when I see them where we should probably be talking of other things. Two sisters in Colorado report the same thing.

If they aren't comparable, it is a leader issue most likely unless the bishop has been neglectful in paying attention to the handbook.

Again, I am encouraged by your experiences, and your optimism. Thank you. I agree that in general, men and women are becoming more equal in the church. Possibly some day they will in fact be equal.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

From comments she has made in the past in other threads, I'd say I was spot-on, but we will let her explain herself, hence the question mark in my post.

Of all the people to call a troll...Juliann does not fit the bill, by any means.

[Scott Lloyd]

It's one of the agenda items for our Priesthood Executive Committee meeting this morning: "5. Recruit snipers to pick off pants-wearing Relief Society sisters before they enter the building for Sacrament Meeting." (Sorry; couldn't resist! Carry on!)

Didn't see any pants-wearing rebels in sacrament meeting this morning.

But I did arrive to find the front door of the meetinghouse locked. Might have been heightened security. But it has happened several times before, so I tend to think it's just a case of bishopric neglect.

Edited December 16, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

Again, I am encouraged by your experiences, and your optimism. Thank you. I agree that in general, men and women are becoming more equal in the church. Possibly some day they will in fact be equal.

I hope not, at least not if that means they must be treated the same. As soon as that concept becomes the prime directive, attention to people's specific and very individual needs suffers greatly imo. I'd rather have a church structure built around supporting those in need with extra resources sacrificed by those that can manage without so that all will be able to work together toward the unity with God that the work for his Kingdom promises.

[Tacenda]

My son is wearing a purple tie with no idea that he is making a statement of support.

[yootaw]

I hope not, at least not if that means they must be treated the same. As soon as that concept becomes the prime directive, attention to people's specific and very individual needs suffers greatly imo. I'd rather have a church structure built around supporting those in need with extra resources sacrificed by those that can manage without so that all will be able to work together toward the unity with God that the work for his Kingdom promises.

Do you mind clarifying? I'm not clear how treating men and women the same would prevent the church structure that you've described.

[blackstrap]

"If you want to treat people differently,treat them the same. If you want to treat people the same,treat them differently "

[Vex]

I'm still waiting for an enumerated list of inequalities to come out of this debacle. I have an Aunt that is very gung-ho about this; but only decries 'inequality' but doesn't explicitly state what inequality they are referencing.

[changed]

Didn't see any pants-wearing rebels in sacrament meeting this morning.

I didn't either.

[wenglund]

The point, in my opinion, is that what is trite and meaningless to you, is not trite and meaningless to someone else. Identifying it as trite and meaningless is a method of justifying not really engaging the issue with those having the concern.

Are you suggesting that there is no reasonable and general way to determine triteness and meaninglessness, and that such determinations aren't relevant to the issue? If so, then that may explain your seemingly unwitting irony.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

Again, I am encouraged by your experiences, and your optimism. Thank you. I agree that in general, men and women are becoming more equal in the church. Possibly some day they will in fact be equal.

I doubt that men will be elevated to the level of high esteem as women any time soon.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Duncan]

certaintly against mysogyny and I have heard more mysogyny in my stake in the last 6 years coming from three certain men but I didn't see any women wearing pants.

[Calm]

Do you mind clarifying? I'm not clear how treating men and women the same would prevent the church structure that you've described.

If you set up a system that measures success by identical treatment and thus results, then what happens to the measures that are based on differences and meeting the needs that arise out of those?

An analogy: let's make the measure of most important for mission success the numbers of baptisms of performed. What happens when that fulfillment of that measure is placed as the most important achievement on the agenda? Other efforts that deal with the individuality of the investigators and their needs will suffer.

You want men and women to be treated the same. The only way this can be done is if all people are treated the same. Once that happens, people essentially becomes numbers on a checklist.

Edited December 16, 2012 by calmoriah