Who where's the pants?

[RubinHighlander]

https://www.ksl.com/article/46452842/si ... wear-pants

“As we adapt these standards, we always carefully consider the dignity of the missionary calling to represent Jesus Christ, the safety, security, and health of our beloved missionaries, and the cultural sensitivities of the places where they serve,” Elder Uchtdorf

So what about Marilyn Nomroe at the local unit? Will she still get publicly shamed for wearing pants to sac meeting?

[wtfluff]

For sister missionaries who entered a missionary training center before March 1, 2019, and have been working in a mission where they were not previously allowed to wear pants, the mission will provide funding for them to buy three or four pairs of dress slacks, according to a Thursday church memo released on Newsroom.

Hmmm... LDS-Inc. will fund pants eh? Don't they own clothing manufacturing facilities? I'm surprised they don't just send the sisters the pants they are "supposed" to wear.

Now, if they would just make ritualistic underpants only necessary during creepy ritualistic rituals, I might be impressed...

[Palerider]

This just makes it SO difficult to understand why the Lord takes so long to send these little tidbits of inspiration to his leaders....

This problem of protecting sister missionaries from bug bites and who knows what else wasn't apparent five, ten, twenty years ago???

The Brethren are making great strides, I tell you. Great strides!

The church is true!

[moksha]

Sisterhood of the traveling pants, eh?

It is a good thing that bits and flecks of knowledge along with the further light of wisdom are able to enter our world. We should embrace change and step boldly into the 1960s. Today Salt Lake and in about ten years, Provo.

[Thoughtful]

I think most people expect their children to choose their own outfits by age 4-6 years?

Not Mormons! 19 years old, you still need someone to tell you what is appropriate to wear!

[Palerider]

Sisterhood of the traveling pants, eh?

It is a good thing that bits and flecks of knowledge along with the further light of wisdom are able to enter our world. We should embrace change and step boldly into the 1960s. Today Salt Lake and in about ten years, Provo.

Who knows....dare we think of even Rexburg?

[Red Ryder]

Dare we say that the church is going through a period of Normalcy? Ministering, 2 Hour Church, a rebrand via name change, and now women can wear pants?

Oh wait, the rest of the world did all that back in 1988!

Mormons are always 30 years behind the times.

[Corsair]

So, women can now wear pants? Let me know when they are allowed to wear panties.

I suppose that it's nice how they have more freedom to choose their own pants, but that still leaves 50% of the LDS wardrobe that no temple worthy Mormon is allowed to choose no matter what environment they live in. Temple garments exist in a strange existence where they are strictly mandated, but have the poorest explanation for them. It's not unlike the Word of Wisdom ban on coffee and tea. The rhetoric is about the Lord's Law of Health, but forbidding coffee and tea make no sense from a health perspective.

The rules of garments are a series of myths and faith promoting rumors. They are are "shield and a protection" against nothing that can be relied upon. As a teenager first learning about them, I figured that they might prevent adultery since they were a reminder of temple covenants the moment you unbuttoned your pants. But I sincerely doubt that fidelity is caused by temple garments as much as there is simply loose correlation.

Another claim is that "Wearing the garment is an outward expression of an inward commitment to follow the Savior." The unfortunate implication is that anyone who takes them off is soundly rejecting Jesus and the LDS social group will treat the apostate accordingly.

I simply don't see revelation in this change. It's like the First Presidency has the list of trivial changes and they release one every few weeks to keep the faithful members excited about the church. This is a breathtaking move from the point of view of orthodox LDS believers. It looks like a minor HR ruling to either the Christian or secular world.

[Anon70]

I simply don't see revelation in this change. It's like the First Presidency has the list of trivial changes and they release one every few weeks to keep the faithful members excited about the church. This is a breathtaking move from the point of view of orthodox LDS believers. It looks like a minor HR ruling to either the Christian or secular world.

My TBM husband said this last night too....even some of the faithful are rolling their eyes. I was annoyed that they specifically called out the times they still have to wear a dress though. I told DH that I’d be wearing pants on Sunday in solidarity with the single young woman in our ward that started wearing them off and on a few weeks ago. He shrugged. Progress

[Red Ryder]

So, women can now wear pants? Let me know when they are allowed to wear panties.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

The best quote ever!

[deacon blues]

Sisterhood of the traveling pants, eh?

It is a good thing that bits and flecks of knowledge along with the further light of wisdom are able to enter our world. We should embrace change and step boldly into the 1960s. Today Salt Lake and in about ten years, Provo.

Who knows....dare we think of even Rexburg?

This reminds me about Rexburg, where I grew up. In 8th grade (1970) we had a student/parent survey about whether girls could be allowed to wear pants to school. It was considered quite radical by some. Before that dresses were required. Now remember, Rexburg often has sub-zero temperatures in the Winter.I don't remember what the results of the survey were, but I do remember that by 10th grade (1972) all the High School girls were wearing pants during the winter- even the Ricks College professor's daughters. I think Ricks College allowed girls to wear pants a year or two later. Now, 48 years later, we get prophetic confirmation.

[Palerider]

Sisterhood of the traveling pants, eh?

It is a good thing that bits and flecks of knowledge along with the further light of wisdom are able to enter our world. We should embrace change and step boldly into the 1960s. Today Salt Lake and in about ten years, Provo.

Who knows....dare we think of even Rexburg?

This reminds me about Rexburg, where I grew up. In 8th grade (1970) we had a student/parent survey about whether girls could be allowed to wear pants to school. It was considered quite radical by some. Before that dresses were required. Now remember, Rexburg often has sub-zero temperatures in the Winter.I don't remember what the results of the survey were, but I do remember that by 10th grade (1972) all the High School girls were wearing pants during the winter- even the Ricks College professor's daughters. I think Ricks College allowed girls to wear pants a year or two later. Now, 48 years later, we get prophetic confirmation.

Hey, in Shelley, Idaho it took a freaking lawsuit to get rid of the dress code in about 1972.

The school board lost.

It's hard for people to imagine how much power the church had in those little Idaho towns.

The only option those poor girls had were some pretty heavy nylons and sometimes long stockings.

I guess it made for some tough women. But I never saw that it helped keep everyone moral...

[Hagoth]

"Wearing the garment is an outward expression of an inward commitment to follow the Savior."

Which is doubly hilarious considering that they are UNDERwear.

[wtfluff]

"Wearing the garment is an outward expression of an inward commitment to follow the Savior."

Which is doubly hilarious considering that they are UNDERwear.

Which makes it EVEN MORE creepy that as a mormon, you are trained from a very early age to literally dress down every person you see who "could be" over the age of ~18, and determine if they are wearing the "correct" UNDERwear, just to check if they are part of your tribe, or if you should feel sorry for them because they're not wearing a sex-protection-suit. And of course it then also becomes your job to convert them to wearing polygamy-underpants. Virtue signaling, and us-vs-them at it's finest.

It's one of the things I truly hate about the way mormonism tangled up my brain, which I will NEVER be able to untangle.

[Palerider]

"Wearing the garment is an outward expression of an inward commitment to follow the Savior."

Which is doubly hilarious considering that they are UNDERwear.

The irony....

It's amazing what I never would have thought of on my own if I didn't come here.

[Palerider]

It's one of the things I truly hate about the way mormonism tangled up my brain, which I will NEVER be able to untangle.

You can do this wtfluff. Don't give up!

This also reminds me of a professor I once knew from BYU who was a convert to the church. He was apparently having some doctrinal difficulties and had been "warned" by his SP that he needed to get with the program.

He said something about the church that gave him real pause was that it was the first time he had encountered a "measurement of righteousness" (temple recommend interview) by and of men.

He had the audacity to think that righteousness was between oneself and God. What a child....

[Reuben]

It's one of the things I truly hate about the way mormonism tangled up my brain, which I will NEVER be able to untangle.

You can do this wtfluff. Don't give up!

This also reminds me of a professor I once knew from BYU who was a convert to the church. He was apparently having some doctrinal difficulties and had been "warned" by his SP that he needed to get with the program.

He said something about the church that gave him real pause was that it was the first time he had encountered a "measurement of righteousness" (temple recommend interview) by and of men.

He had the audacity to think that righteousness was between oneself and God. What a child....

What if your god is the church? Doesn't that make being judged by one of its representatives okay?

[Palerider]

What if your god is the church? Doesn't that make being judged by one of its representatives okay?

If God truly presided over the church there would be no need for interviews.

If you THINK God runs your church and you have interviews, you better think again.

If the church IS your god you desperately need an intervention team to help you de-program.