Garment changes

[Jeanne]

15 hours ago, Rain said:

The only time I have heard from a quasi-official source was when my friend went through about 5 years ago and I was allowed to go through the instruction with her, but I've heard it through many, like those here who have heard it through the instruction as well.

 

There were 6 other women with all our moms/guides etc going through the temple when I first got the instruction. There was nothing personal about it for me. In fact, the matron kept calling us brides etc and it made me feel uncomfortable because I looked across the row and was the only one without an engagement ring and I was going on a mission.

 

Bleach is not good for most garments - it actually will take out some of the white. Like calm said it is best to look up specific fabrics, but here are some general things. 

Living in Logan some of your problem may be hard water. Do you have a water softener? That should help with keeping them a little more white. (I love how much whiter they keep here in Mesa verses Riverton!)

Using vinegar in place of fabric softener can also help with the Grey with the added bonus that it is cheap and also works as a softener. 

LIke others have said, sunlight does wonders for white. 

If you search for "garment white" there are a number of solutions to mix up which I haven' tried, but keep meaning too.

Another idea is to through a color catcher in with the clothes. Don't know if it will work,  but worth a try.

I love that you are respectful of keeping them white!

 

Thanks for all this info here...I was going to try bleach but his skin is just super sensitive.  The water is probably a problem too...my own clothes down come out like they used to  Thanks so much!!

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

I consider it a sacred privilege to wear the temple garment.  As with anything that has any connection to the divine it should be treated with reverence and respect.  I'm sure that there are things that I could do, inwardly as well as outwardly, that would improve my experience in wearing the garment.

I just wish people would quit wearing them to the gym...come dressed to work out..and just go...

[Bernard Gui]

I’m being somewhat facetious, but I think it would nice if the Church contracted a company such as Under Armor to design garments that are appropriate, comfortable, durable, supportive, and functional. 

Edited December 5, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[ksfisher]

9 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I just wish people would quit wearing them to the gym...come dressed to work out..and just go...

Good advice.

[Tacenda]

49 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Thanks,,,I thought it was just me.I know that when Mom washed them they looked a whole lot better!!  Thank you again.

It definitely might be my front loader washer though, haha.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Instructions are advice. They are not commands. If I read an instruction manual it may be wise to follow those instructions but it doesn't mean I'm commanded to follow every jot and tittle. It would be pretty silly to have those instructions changed after I had already followed the original instructions and my item was assembled correctly.

I think it is an effort to add correlation into a system of inconsistent instructions. I can understand that. What I can't understand is the gaslighting of people to make them think that's what they've always been told and that's the instruction they received in the temple, and that they've even covenanted based on the correlated instructions in the TR interview.

Like i said, i agree that they aren't commandments, but I don't see how instructions can reasonably be defined as advice.  When your kids ask for help with their homework, or are taking a test, do you teach them that instructions are directions on how to succeed at what they are trying to do, or just advice that may be wise to follow?

I think it's also unreasonable to call this gaslighting.  Do you sincerely believe the church created this TR interview question to try and manipulate members to feel like they are going crazy?  

[Jeanne]

10 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It definitely might be my front loader washer though, haha.

I blame my washer/dryer for so many things...but yeah.  I guess the thing is...I know they are clean!!

[Hestia]

HappyJackWagon has been banned from the thread for Godwin's Law violation.

[stemelbow]

What a fun and somewhat disturbing discussion about my under-britches.  I do admit in reading this I'm surprised anyone knows anything about underpant types and all that.  I've been trhough the process of getting new under-shorts twice in my life.  Once when I went through the big T when I was 19ish (or possibly 18 and 9/10s) and once when a few of them wore out--a decade or so later.  Now more than 20 years later, I'm still sitting in under-wears as pristine as I bought them.  Yep, I still sport originals, as they cycle through my warsh.  They're white enough for me.  I mean if someone spotted me in them they might be quite surprised to learn they are so old, and contrasted against my skin they'll appear as white as Jesus' hair was in Joseph's acclaimed vision.  I ain't tipping anyone off though.  I just wear 'em, wash 'em then wear 'em again.  I've never really noticed the issues that are discussed here.  

On another note, back some years ago, I got into a long and tired discussion with a counselor on the question of always wearing my underpants.  I always did wear them, but I asked him what I promised in the endowment that said I had to wear them day and night.  He got upset and said I didn't know what I was saying, that he can't talk about it because we needed to go to the celestial room before he feels comfortable.  I told him well if I can't get my recommend signed then I suppose he'd never be able to address this quite pressing concern.   He left to talk to the bishop about it as it appeared he wasn't willing to sign me off.  The bishop returned with him, signed me off with a bit of a chuckle and sent me and my way.  All these years later I wondered if people just didn't take what they were promising in the temple seriously or not when confronted with that question.  I am continually surprised to see most people don't realize the quick bait and switch that was pulled on them.  "Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?"

What instruction again?  Come again?  

 

 

[Calm]

10 hours ago, rongo said:

My wife has an *amazing* recipe for whitening white clothing. It has laundry detergent, borax, dishwasher detergent, bleach, and 5 gallons of boiling water. You heat the water, pour it in your large container, add the ingredients, add the white clothing, and push it all under with t broom handle. Leave overnight, and then wash clothing as normal. H.O.L.Y C.O.W! Brilliant white, and the water looks like paint water in the morning. It does remove all wrinkle-proofing, and probably ScotchGuard, but we treat our white shirts and garments monthly. It keeps gray garments brilliant white. 

It will possibly remoove the quick drying ability as well.  Bleach isn't supposed to be used with those fabrics and may damage the fabric's ability to wick.  Probably not as fast as fabric softener which coats the fabric though,

Edited December 6, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Jeanne said:

I just wish people would quit wearing them to the gym...come dressed to work out..and just go...

Some people have to go to work afterwards or come from work.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I’m being somewhat facetious, but I think it would nice if the Church contracted a company such as Under Armor to design garments that are appropriate, comfortable, durable, supportive, and functional. 

It wouldn't be unintelligent, all they would need to do is let them know the basic structure and where a seam can't be placed.  They don't have to discuss marks at all.

The second, iirc, designer of garments was an award winning bathing suit designer.  There was a chapter about it in Mormonism in Transition by Thomas Alexander (excellent book for history buffs).

Edited December 6, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Thanks for all this info here...I was going to try bleach but his skin is just super sensitive.  The water is probably a problem too...my own clothes down come out like they used to  Thanks so much!!

I sometimes put baking soda in the washer and bath.  Get the huge bag from Costco.  Cheap that way.

[Calm]

11 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

On the other hand I have never heard any recommendations about wearing other underwear over or under the garments. Women may think they have unique problems in this area but they don't.

The ones I am aware of specifically for men outside of one sports accessory involve health issues, which from what I have been told by a number of leaders and specialist helpers from church clothing fall into a different category...and btw for those not aware but may need to be, there may be specialized garments to help such as the one piece 'night gown' for invalids or those with continence problems you can get which makes the hygiene work much easier for caregivers and is how I got into deep learning about special circumstances (answering a question for a nonmember nurse who was sweetly respectful of her client, who had some dementia, as the nurse wanted to do things right and not just force her patient to dispense with her garments).  These open up at the shoulder and are Velcro strapped for those who are limited in motion.  My mom loves them for sleeping in.  She finds them very, very comfortable and easier to take on and off on her painful days.

That doesn't mean there aren't other every day stuff that creates a debate wear over or wear under for men, I just don't know of any.  If guys want to discuss options they have been taught in order to both properly and comfortly wear their garments, I certainly don't have a problem with it.

I do know of several every day activities or physical states that require even healthy women to think about how they need to adjust how they wear garments though.  And women generally are given specific instructions in the temple on what to do about these, sometimes incorrectly by women wanting to be helpful.

If guys don't have to go through this, I think it's great.

Edited December 6, 2017 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I think it would nice if the Church contracted a company such as Under Armor to design garments that are appropriate, comfortable, durable, supportive, and functional. 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'appropriate' here.

The garments that I wear are comfortable, durable and functional. I actually just got a shipment of new ones last week and started wearing them this week. My last lot was bought in 2010; I would say lasting seven years is acceptably durable. With the possible exception of the tag in the waistband, I have zero complaints about comfort. What functions do you find that garments don't perform? Mine perform all the functions that I can think of. As far as supportive, no thank you! I am not and never have been a fan of restrictive clothing. Give me room to breathe and move, please! (Which is why I wear the 'boxers'.)

Edited December 6, 2017 by Hamba Tuhan

[strappinglad]

I understand that those endowed members in the military have special rules about the wearing of garments. I've heard that it was possible for them to just carry the marks with them. True?

  Nothing like wearing a white shirt in camp in Vietnam to instill a relaxed state of mind.

[Calm]

26 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

I understand that those endowed members in the military have special rules about the wearing of garments. I've heard that it was possible for them to just carry the marks with them. True?

  Nothing like wearing a white shirt in camp in Vietnam to instill a relaxed state of mind.

Military garments can be other than white and are special ordered, but one has to get special permission and be in a military unit to get it.  

This may be out of date info, over 15 years.  (When they had a hard copy catalog) Will see if I can find something more up to date. 

Add-on:  looks still in force, desert sand is only color available premade, others t-shirts need to be sent in for marking apparently

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/callings/military/military-garment-special-orders.pdf

Edited December 6, 2017 by Calm

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, strappinglad said:

I understand that those endowed members in the military have special rules about the wearing of garments. I've heard that it was possible for them to just carry the marks with them. True?

  Nothing like wearing a white shirt in camp in Vietnam to instill a relaxed state of mind.

One of my mission companions, who was Swedish, had a pair of khaki brown colored garments he’d received on entering the military.

[Jeanne]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

Some people have to go to work afterwards or come from work.

I know...and they have to do what they have to do...me, too..but I wish that they could change someplace more private..

[Jeanne]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

I sometimes put baking soda in the washer and bath.  Get the huge bag from Costco.  Cheap that way.

Thanks Calm...I will try this too!!!

[Bernard Gui]

19 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm not sure what you mean by 'appropriate' here.

The garments that I wear are comfortable, durable and functional. I actually just got a shipment of new ones last week and started wearing them this week. My last lot was bought in 2010; I would say lasting seven years is acceptably durable. With the possible exception of the tag in the waistband, I have zero complaints about comfort. What functions do you find that garments don't perform? Mine perform all the functions that I can think of. As far as supportive, no thank you! I am not and never have been a fan of restrictive clothing. Give me room to breathe and move, please! (Which is why I wear the 'boxers'.)

Appropriate meaning completely compliant with all LDS temple standards. Durable means continuing and improving on current construction and material integrity. For example, the elastic bands in the waistbands are the first parts to deteriorate, the bands are too thin, so they sometimes cut into the stomach. Functional means updating materials, form, fit, and features with those of more modern undergarments. For example, improved breathable fabrics, horizontal access for lefties and righties, and the sleeves and legs that don’t “ride up” the limbs or necessitate “the Mormon clutch.” Perhaps place the marks on all garments like they are on military issue so they cannot be seen through a white shirt or in a gym situation. Functional....well, at least provide support options for those who don’t find boxer style to their liking, or even create a sport model with modern materials and features that can be used for physical activity without having to remove or supplement the regular garment.

Edited December 7, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Hamba Tuhan]

'Appropriate meaning completely compliant with all LDS temple standards'.

Oh, that makes sense now.

'Durable means continuing and improving on current construction and material integrity. For example, the elastic bands in the waistbands are the first parts to deteriorate, the bands are too thin, so they sometimes cut into the stomach'.

Interesting. As I wrote above, I just bought my first new garments in seven years. I was getting multiple holes in the fabric, but the elastic in the waistbands was perfectly fine. I also don't have any issues with waistbands cutting into my stomach. That sounds like it may be more a wearer-related issue to me, no?

'Functional means updating materials ...'

I wear Dri-Lux. The Church sources this fabric from the DriRelease company. It's used in many sporting applications. I find it very up-to-date.

'... form, fit, and features with those of more modern undergarments'.

I had a look at the underwear brand you mentioned earlier. They all look like girdles for men to me. I don't mind if the Church makes something like that an option, of course, but I certainly won't be buying any.

'For example, improved breathable fabrics ...'

See above. Have you tried the Dri-Lux garments. I can help with a service project on a 40C day, and my T-shirt will be wet with sweat, but my garments will be dry. It's great stuff!

'... horizontal access for lefties and righties ...'

I have to admit this has never crossed my mind before.

' ... and the sleeves and legs that don’t “ride up” the limbs ...'

I have never experienced this. Ever.

'... or necessitate “the Mormon clutch.”'

I have no idea what this means...

'Perhaps place the marks on all garments like they are on military issue so they cannot be seen through a white shirt or in a gym situation'.

I really like having marks that I can feel! I also don't worry about changing in front of others. I've literally never once had anyone make a comment. And we tend not to wear thin shirts.

'Functional....well, at least provide support options for those who don’t find boxer style to their liking ...'

I'm happy if the Church wants to cater to this demographic.

'... or even create a sport model with modern materials and features that can be used for physical activity without having to remove or supplement the regular garment'.

I've never understood the need to have underclothing specifically for sports. We don't do that here or anywhere else I've lived except in America. But again, I'm happy for there to be more options if that's feasible.

Thanks for your clarifications. It helps me to understand better what some people are talking about.

[Bernard Gui]

15 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

'Appropriate meaning completely compliant with all LDS temple standards'.

Oh, that makes sense now.

'Durable means continuing and improving on current construction and material integrity. For example, the elastic bands in the waistbands are the first parts to deteriorate, the bands are too thin, so they sometimes cut into the stomach'.

Interesting. As I wrote above, I just bought my first new garments in seven years. I was getting multiple holes in the fabric, but the elastic in the waistbands was perfectly fine. I also don't have any issues with waistbands cutting into my stomach. That sounds like it may be more a wearer-related issue to me, no?

'Functional means updating materials ...'

I wear Dri-Lux. The Church sources this fabric from the DriRelease company. It's used in many sporting applications. I find it very up-to-date.

'... form, fit, and features with those of more modern undergarments'.

I had a look at the underwear brand you mentioned earlier. They all look like girdles for men to me. I don't mind if the Church makes something like that an option, of course, but I certainly won't be buying any.

'For example, improved breathable fabrics ...'

See above. Have you tried the Dri-Lux garments. I can help with a service project on a 40C day, and my T-shirt will be wet with sweat, but my garments will be dry. It's great stuff!

'... horizontal access for lefties and righties ...'

I have to admit this has never crossed my mind before.

' ... and the sleeves and legs that don’t “ride up” the limbs ...'

I have never experienced this. Ever.

'... or necessitate “the Mormon clutch.”'

I have no idea what this means...

'Perhaps place the marks on all garments like they are on military issue so they cannot be seen through a white shirt or in a gym situation'.

I really like having marks that I can feel! I also don't worry about changing in front of others. I've literally never once had anyone make a comment. And we tend not to wear thin shirts.

'Functional....well, at least provide support options for those who don’t find boxer style to their liking ...'

I'm happy if the Church wants to cater to this demographic.

'... or even create a sport model with modern materials and features that can be used for physical activity without having to remove or supplement the regular garment'.

I've never understood the need to have underclothing specifically for sports. We don't do that here or anywhere else I've lived except in America. But again, I'm happy for there to be more options if that's feasible.

Thanks for your clarifications. It helps me to understand better what some people are talking about.

I wear dri-luxe also, and nylon mesh in the summer, and thermals at times in the winter, but I think there are better materials available. I find some Under Armor and similar makers’ materials, for example, far better. I wore one-piece cotton and cotton/polyester for 3 years in Central America and Australia back in the days. I never could dry out and the fungal problems were awful. The “Mormon clutch” is what one does when the legs and crotch ride up necessitating periodic downward adjustment. For me and others I know, it’s a constant battle. It was far worse with one-pieces but still a problem now. My white shirts are not thin. They are standard issue Costco, Penney’s, and VanHeusen. When the shirt material touches the garment the marks are visible. I understand what’s behind being able to feel the marks and agree with the sentiment; however, I am uncomfortable having them visible to others and hence for a long time have avoided gyms and pools with open dressing areas. Guys don’t wear athletic cups or supporters over there? You guys are tough!  But when I think of my grandfather’s woolen union-suit style with the buttons or ties and trapdoors, I think we don’t have it so bad. Now they were men. BTW, Sister Gui, my lovely daughter Bellelindissima, and several daughters-in-law like the new women’s styles and materials.

 

Edited December 7, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

On 7/6/2017 at 12:35 PM, cinepro said:

My thought on reading that was how sad that almost everyone who was alive (and stuck in their garment-wearing habits) at the time of the switch to 2-piece must now be dead.

 The rumors of our demise are a bit exaggerated. Kinda liked them, except in the heat and humidity when only cotton or cotton/polyester were available.

Edited December 7, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I wear dri-luxe also, and nylon mesh in the summer, and thermals at times in the winter, but I think there are better materials available. I find some Under Armor and similar makers’ materials, for example, far better. I wore one-piece cotton and cotton/polyester for 3 years in Central America and Australia back in the days. I never could dry out and the fungal problems were awful. The “Mormon clutch” is what one does when the legs and crotch ride up necessitating periodic downward adjustment. For me and others I know, it’s a constant battle. It was far worse with one-pieces but still a problem now. My white shirts are not thin. They are standard issue Costco, Penney’s, and VanHeusen. When the shirt material touches the garment the marks are visible. I understand what’s behind being able to feel the marks and agree with the sentiment; however, I am uncomfortable having them visible to others and hence for a long time have avoided gyms and pools with open dressing areas. Guys don’t wear athletic cups or supporters over there? You guys are tough!  But when I think of my grandfather’s woolen union-suit style with the buttons or ties and trapdoors, I think we don’t have it so bad. Now they were men. BTW, Sister Gui, my lovely daughter Bellelindisima, and several daughters-in-law like the new women’s styles and materials.

 

I am looking forward to the cotton and spandex to keep its shape, that is one combination that doesn't make my skin itch,