I’ve been wearing pants to church since the first of the year. My pants are not jeans or khaki’s, they’re nice dress pants*. I wear a blouse or a sweater and jewelry to make sure I’m in my “Sunday Best.” The first Sunday I felt a little weird about it, since women traditionally wear skirts or dresses to LDS services, but ever since that first week it’s felt normal. Perhaps ward members who know I’m a feminist think I’m rebellious. But I’m not, I assured my husband, making a political, social, or feminist statement (although I’m not afraid to make those). I’m simply being practical.
When I’m crawling around on the floor with the toddlers, jumping like a frog, or cleaning up play-dough, I don’t want to worry about keeping myself modest in a skirt.
Yes, I’m the nursery leader and I’m surprisingly happy about it. Although I have a two year-old in nursery with me, I’d much rather be singing and playing with him (and snacking) than sitting through Relief Society or Sunday School. I’d also reached the end of my rope teaching the 14 year-old Sunday School class. My lessons were very conflicted, like I was trying to resolve my own cognitive dissonance in front of them every other week. It was intellectually exhausting.
Thankfully, the nursery lessons are just my speed.
Oddly enough, only one person in my ward has commented on my wearing pants (although hardly anyone sees me when I’m back in nursery). A fellow mother of a nursery-goer said, “You’re so smart to wear pants! I bet that makes things easier in nursery.”
Why yes, it does.
Do you wear pants to church?
Do you consider it rebellious or a big deal at all?
* Footnote:
Since I’ve been wearing pants for several months now, I’ve discovered that pants, like skirts, have their benefits and drawbacks. Obviously, the benefits of pants are freedom to move, comfort, and modesty. The drawback is that my dress pants tend to be a higher quality than my skirts (more expensive to buy and clean) and must be worn with fancier tops to make them look suitable for church. So, instead of a cotton knit skirt and a shirt with a necklace that might cost a total of $15 and be machine washable, I’m wearing my fancy dress pants with a fancy blouse. This would be great if I weren’t getting smeared with fishy cracker goo, peanut butter, and unmentionable bodily fluids so that I have to take my clothes to the dry cleaner weekly.
Do you think I can submit my dry cleaning bill for reimbursement by the Primary? I’m starting to think that I haven’t really found the solution to the Nursery wardrobe question. Do you have one?
I wear pants to non-Sacrament meetings. This includes stake and general conference. Now that I think about it, I was wearing a pantsuit to stake conference yesterday. Nobody said anything about it, but I wonder if it subtly influenced how the question I asked the visiting general authority was answered.
I’ve worn pants to Sacrament meeting when I travel, and I’ve never gotten any flack for it, even in conservative areas of Utah. I’ve never had the guts to do it in my home ward, but maybe I will some day. I wish the thought had occurred to me when I was the nursery leader. It would have been so much easier.
As far as the dry cleaning goes, have you tried Dryel? You put the clothes in a cloth bag, drop a sheet in, and dry clean them in your dryer. I use it for my work clothes, and I love it!
“Do you wear pants to church?”
Yes.
“Do you consider it rebellious or a big deal at all?”
No, I don’t even notice. In fact, I bet those that do notice are in such a minority that if you are doing it to be rebellious you are wasting your time.
Just wear what you think is your Sunday best and be happy with it.
I’m also a nursery leader, and I often wear pants. I get some weird looks from other women (mostly just ones who don’t know me) but it’s well worth it to be comfortable and modest. Especially since one of my assistants is a man. He’s never told me so, but I’m sure he appreciates me not flashing my garments at him every time I get up and down from the floor with a 2 year old on my hip.
Forgot to add that I have never seen another woman wearing pants to my ward. And I notice those sorts of things as for me, it is a feminist issue.
I have never worn pants to church, but would love to, if only my husband weren’t such an old-fashioned prude about dress and grooming (he has redeeming qualities). It isn’t uncommon, however, here in Montana to see women in pants in the winter time. We were in Washington DC last month and attended the Capitol Hill Ward, where there were several women wearing pants (dress slacks).
Because of my sensitivity to toxic chemicals, several years ago I got rid of all of my clothes that had to be drycleaned. I have found dress slacks and skirts in fabrics that can be washed and hung to dry, such as rayon, cotton blends and linen. Eddie Bauer, Lands End and LLBean all make knit pants that are also very dressy when worn with a rayon or linen blouse. I wash these fabrics in my front-load washer in cold water on low spin and then hang them to dry on a plastic tube hanger. Most clothing manufacturers will tell you officially that rayon and linen should be drycleaned, but it really isn’t necessary.
I have not yet worn pants to church, but after this past Indiana winter I plan on it for next winter. Expecting women to wear dresses or skirts in -30 degree weather is just ridiculous. When in nursery I seriously considered it several times, especially since we had 3 nursery classes that all had to rotate. That’s a lot of climbing over gates, which is rather awkward in a skirt.
I have worn pants to church a handful of times. For me it’s both about the principle and the practical. The practical is that pants are warmer in the winter, and they are more modest when you’re bending over and picking up kids.
The principle is that there’s absolutely nothing disrespectful about women wearing nice pants to church. Nothing. In fact, I think nice pants can look very professional – certainly far more professional than a jean skirt, t-shirt, and flip flops that I see so many women wear to church with no recrimination or odd looks.
The idea that women should wear skirts or dresses to church is just pure ol’ Wasatch front Mormon culture, and I’m heartened to know there are women out there who are willing to go against this taboo.
I would have no problem with pants, except that skirts flatter my shape better. But I agree with Catherine, I have had some very nice slacks in the past that I was able to wash on my own. Not sure what they were made of, but I thought they looked fine with my cotton blouses that are easily washed at home (although I’m not a big fan of ironing).
On the issue in general, I’m just now remembering a young couple that has been coming to our ward off and on. She wears some odd style of “dress shorts” whenever I see her. I haven’t spoken to her, but I don’t get the impression that they are investigators. It makes me wonder why she is doing it. Could she be a feminist in hiding? Hmm….
I thought skirts and dresses at church were a way to keep Mormon women looking feminine. I assumed most Mormon men preferred this attire because it accentuates women’s shapes and curves. And it seems to me that Mormon men are no exception when it comes to finding women’s legs attractive. I figure the wearing of pants at church by women is a good way to push back against those masculine obsessions. I also agree they are quite comfortable at church. 😉
When we attend a Church meeting, our purpose is to worship our Father in Heaven and His Son, Jesus Christ. Our clothing should show our reverence for Them. – Robert D. Hales, “Modesty,” Ensign, Aug. 2008
I think we all need to look at how we dress and see if it is enhancing our personal worship. What do we want out of our experience at church?
I have served in nursery at least eight times in my adult life and will probably be called several more times before I am too old to lift a toddler. I have never had a problem finding modest dresses to wear to church/nursery. I have also worn a long skirt with long-johns underneath on cold days
To borrow from the 11th Article of Faith I claim the privilege of dressing according to the dictates of my own conscience, and allow all women the same privilege, let them wear what they may.
Thanks for your comments everyone. I will have to look into machine washable dress pants or using Dryell in my own washer and dryer.
As for it being about emphasizing women’s femininity, I think I can see that perspective. But as far as showing off legs, I’m not sure that’s true, as skirts were the dress code long before the hemline moved above the ankle.
Carol,
Of course you’re free to wear what you wish to church, as am I.
I wonder why you wear skirts? Do you have a testimony of them? Do you feel more worshipful or righteous in a skirt? Is it possible that a woman could feel more worshipful or righteous in dress pants? I’m noticed your quote mentions our clothing showing reverence for God. What does that mean to you? It’s mystifying to me. Aside from a t-shirt that shouts obscenities, I’m pretty sure God doesn’t really care about what I wear as long as I am pure in heart. If I recall, that’s one of the messages of the New Testament.
I understand the cultural argument, that’s what we’ve always done, but I don’t understand any doctrinal argument. I’m interested to hear one.
Thanks again, everyone!
In modern culture our everyday work attire and grooming is determined by a combination of practicality, dress code, fashion and self expression. The ratio of those four elements may differ depending on the kind of work we do.
For some venues, the element of expression of respect is included. (For example, when I was a child, my mother expected us to dress nicely when we went to visit my great aunt.)
For worship venues, the element of expression of worship is also included in choice of attire.
There is no one right way to express respect and worship in dress. Different women in different cultures (including different generational and regional cultures) will express it differently.
If I wear a particular pair of pants to church because they best reflect my respect and worship and enhance my ability to serve while I am there, then that’s fine. If I wear a particular pair of pants simply to make a personal statement or to follow a fashion, then I may be missing another way of expressing to God my devotion.
If I wear a particular type of skirt to church because that’s how I express my respect and worship and it works with my ability to serve while I am there. then that’s fine. If I wear a particular skirt to church simply because I think I look great in it or because that’s what everyone else is wearing, then, again, I may be missing another way of expressing to God my devotion.
For my grandmother, her way of expressing devotion was to include a hat and a pair of gloves. Going to the trouble of including those was one of her ways of showing great respect, which I respect.
The question isn’t whether or not it’s okay for you to wear pants. The question is, where is your heart? Ideally, that Sabbath morning decision about what to wear is a further opportunity to, with consideration, reflect the worship you are also planning on expressing in action and word that day.
That said, that question about your heart and your attire is one to ask yourself about you and to teach to your children. We have no call to ask that question about the sister sitting next to us in church. Instead, it is our duty to assume that she is already doing that, whether or not the result she comes up with is the same sort of one we might have.
At different times in my life, I’ve worn different things. I currently express my respect, worship and willingness to serve with a nice, clean skirt and blouse and sturdy walking shoes. If a sister expresses hers with some other form of attire, that’s her business; certainly not mine.
“I’m noticed your quote mentions our clothing showing reverence for God. What does that mean to you? It’s mystifying to me. ”
I checked out the article Carol referenced. In it Robert Hales writes about our hearts respecting and loving God and our brothers and sisters and the helpful nature of using our outward appearance as a further way (besides our words, action and attitudes) to express that reverence and love for all of them.
He certainly doesn’t discuss pants vs. skirts. He avoids discussing specific attire.
His essay is far from perfect, but if you can overlook the imperfections and just pay attention to the principles he discusses it may give you an insight into how that notion of dress as an expression of reverence might be applicable to a person considering further ways to express, enhance and enable further respect and love for fellow men and God.
The only thing I’ve ever seen mentioned about women wearig pants to church was in the November 1978 Ensign in the Report of the Seminar for Regional Representatives. All it states is that wives of church leaders should wear dresses, not pantsuits, while accompanying their husbands on official church business.
I can’t find anything else mentioned about it.
I should be wearing pants to church because 1) I am also the Nursery leader 2) I play the organ, and it’s impossible to see my feet wearing a skirt unless I hike it up to immodest heights (which I do, and hope the bishopric doesn’t turn around) and 3) I am pregnant, so I feel like I should get a free pass to wear whatever is comfortable.
But, I don’t wear pants, because I can’t really afford to invest in maternity pants/blouse outfits that I feel are nice enough for church. So I’m wearing my $30 knit maternity dresses a lot (including to work).
I think it’s great you’re wearing pants, I find nothing at all wrong with it.
I have known women to change into pants or put on some legging kind of things under their dress for nursery work. I think it is entirely practical. Although when I worked in nursery, I wore skirts–I did not and do not tend to wear skirts of a length that become immodest when seated on the floor–I am too grateful to anyone willing to serve happily in nursery to get too concerned about what they wear.
The reason I wear skirts and dresses to Church (and I actually DO look askance at people wearing denim skirts–my mama brainwashed me into that) is that it is different than what I wear the rest of the week. I like Sunday to be a day apart as much as possible, so I abstain from some everyday activities and wear a different set of clothes. It helps me remember to act differently and meditate more on the Sabbath.
An imperfect comparison, to be sure, but in my years as a missionary and later as a teacher at the MTC, I saw how much dress affected actions and even thoughts. Without exception that I know of (although such a exception probably exists) missionaries who did stupid things (ranging from stupid to disobedient to excommunicateable) did so in their P-day clothes, not their missionary dress. For me, dressing differently (and skirts/dresses are strictly Sabbath for me) helps me keep that Sabbath state of mind.
I think that pants as a symbol is highly dependent on context.
I started wearing them first when I was in a city ward in Philly. I biked to church, in the winter, and there was no way in hell that was happening in a dress. But the ward was mostly non-Wasatch front converts, so there were tons of women who probably didn’t even own a dress, people in African robes, boys serving the sacrament with bandanas, YW president with earrings, etc. Little old me in pants didn’t matter one tiny bit. There, it was purely for convenience sake. If I wanted to wear a dress, I did. If I wanted to wear pants, I did. No social ruckus necessary.
But now I live in a much more Utah-feeling ward, and I’m often one of the only women in pants. I’ve gotten a few glances because of it. And because of that, it has become a symbol for me. Now I am inclined to wear pants as a statement, because I am trying to go against the undertones of conformity that I feel here more than I did in Philly.
Make that YM Pres with earrings… a little more scandalous than a YW Pres having them (though I was the YW Pres in pants….. the horror!)
My kids love to “out” me. Occasionally, I wear pants to church and my kids will tease the bishop “Look! Mom is wearing pants!” The bishop, who is a friend of mine, always says “Your mom could wear pajamas for all I care. I’m glad she is here!”
As long as we are respectful (nix the pjs), I don’t think the Lord cares what we wear. He is the only one I have to please.
Again, great comments.
As an Arizona resident, I wear skirts several times a week, as they are cooler than pants or even some shorts.
Dress pants are about as far from my regular apparel as I could get. I actually hadn’t thought about that, but I think that it’s probably true, I’ve worn the skirt and blouse to the park or grocery store, but I only wear my dress pants for church, a funeral or a wedding (and any business events I may be invited to). So, for me, they really are the more respectful option. Thanks for helping me think of it in that light.
The fact that pants are less feminine than skirts really hasn’t been discussed much (aside from one comment). I’m interested that people don’t seem to think that it’s a relevant part of the discussion?
I didn’t read all the comments, but my first thought was, I have a great full, long denim skirt that would match with a lot of shirts/blouses and it gives me plenty of modesty as well as freedom to move. Just a thought!! I enjoy nursery too!
I think it can be a sign of feminist rebellion, but it most certainly doesn’t have to be. The woman who taught the RS lesson on Adam and Eve and used the lesson as an opportunity to tell us why feminism is so horrible and men are the “head honchos” (she really said this!) wore pants to church a few weeks later.
I think Sterling hit the nail on the head – the tradition of women wearing skirts to church is all about femininity. It’s a way of emphasizing our differences. We’re not supposed to look professional at church – we’re supposed to look submissive and sweet.
I recall in the early ’90s when a letter was read from the pulpit declaring trousers on women to be Verboten. I agree with the above comments that dresses are assigned to women as a gendered uniform. Suit and tie = masculine and authoritative. Dress = feminine and submissive.
For my own part, I find it unfair that women are expected to wear skirts, simply because most chapels are kept at the temperature of a meat locker. Funny how cold the aircon gets when a fat man in a wool suit gets to set the temperature.
I think that women wearing only dresses is clearly a demarcation of rigid gender roles, but then that’s the elephant in the room (or chapel), isn’t it?
There’s a woman in my ward who regularly wears dress pants to church. I think I probably didn’t even notice it for awhile because I just don’t particularly care what others are wearing. My guess is that no one in our fairly laid back beach town ward would even comment about the pants.
My friend who’s in nursery takes a pair of jeans and a shirt to change into after Sacrament Meeting so that she can get down on the floor and play. She’s in her mid-60’s, and I just think it’s great that she is still willing to get down on the floor and play with other people’s children.
I don’t get the feminist/pant issue. Why is wearing pants to church considered being a feminist or being rebellious? I think it’s a great idea, and way comfortable. I think it could and should become the norm, but the problem is too many women I think would wear pants that are either too tight, too baggy, or too worn, thus spoiling it for everyone. After being in the work force for 20 plus year, and wearing pants for that long, it was always difficult for me to wear a dress or skirt on Sunday. I hate wearing pantyhose, so wearing pants would alleviate that problem. Speaking of pantyhose – a Stake President that I had, told the women in a stake conference that they were to always wear pantyhose to church. Needless to say there were many that openly “rebelled”. Can you imagine your SP telling you that? Wearing dresses/skirts is considered part of the
“vain traditions of our forefathers”, and should be done away with. I wonder what the Brethren would say to that.
I wear pants to church on occasion. I wear them mostly when I bike but also when I might be going somewhere afterwards where a skirt wouldn’t be appropriate (like if I drop by the lab). At first, I felt a little self-conscious, but in my ward, it is not really a big deal. Wearing them didn’t stop the Bishop from sustaining me as Relief Society Secretary last month. Granted I am not the only woman in my ward who wears pants. In fact, I have gotten a few compliments on one particular pant suit (that fits me really well). I think most people are just glad to see me in church. I will admit though that beyond the practicality, I do realize wearing them goes against the norm, which I hope I’m influencing the betterment of.
I remember the first time I wore pants to church. I was on a business trip and unexpectedly had a break long enough to slip to church in my pant suit. I am embarrassed to say how self conscious I felt at the time when I should have just been grateful to make it to church.
I need an equivalent of a “lava lava” or some other nice outfit where I don’t have to wear pants or socks. I get way too hot, especially summers in San Antonio. I’m kind of jealous of my wife who gets to show some leg and thereby remain cool. Of course that brings up another dilemma. It’s usually the women who complain of being cold. Perhaps it should be the men who dress in skirts; women could use the pants.
YES, I wear pants to church and have for years. Sometimes I even wear pants to the temple.
I also wear skirts to church.
When I go to my office each morning, I sometimes where pants and sometimes wear skirts.
Each morning (Sundays included), I look in my closet and assess my mood. Whatever is clean and seems right for the day and the mood – I wear. That means, sometimes I wear pants to church. I conduct RS in pants, I give talks in pants, and I teach lessons in pants.
Because I’ve done it for so long, I don’t even notice it. It’s my Sunday best and I feel comfortable.
I do get lots of comments. Most of them are “I love you for wearing pants.” “I wish I had the courage to wear pants.” – and on rare occasion, “Did you know that The Brethern have asked women to wear dresses and skirts to church?”
Most people think I’m BOLD to wear pants, but I honestly don’t know why more women don’t. That is a question I’d like to ask women: why DON’T you wear pants to church.
I think it’s nice of members dress well for church, but honestly, I’d rather have them AT church than not there for wardrobe reasons. I think the church culture should say, “Just Come! In whatever you have. We want you here. Just Come.”
I’m not trying to make a statement with pants; but I do want to push the boundaries. I want people to think a little differently and expand their minds to what is acceptable – or even “right”.
Suzette
Jessawhy, In answer to your question of why I wear skirts, this is a personal choice that sets the day apart for me and reminds me to think about God. I actually wear a dress or skirt all day on Sundays. For me personally this isn’t a doctrine issue it is a reminder that the Sabbath is important and differs from the rest of the week. There are many ways to remind ourselves of the importance of our relationship with God and this is just one small thing that reminds me. I am sure you have things that help you grow closer to God I wish you joy in your journey!
I am a nursery leader, and I think I will start wearing pants. I don’t know why I didn’t think about it before. But I’m totally going to start. Thanks for the idea!
i wear pants to any meeting i attend, sacrament, relief society whatever. i get a dirty looks from some of the older ladies. one recently offered me some of her old skirts that didn’t fit her anymore.(i am sure she meant well).
i feel like as long as they are “modest” and my sunday best, they can stuff their old lady dirty looks.
palmetto,
Thanks for your comment. I have surprisingly not gotten any strange looks, but partly that’s because I’m in the nursery. 🙂
Hello I’M a male age 42 from Macomb, MI. wear pants. I wear sheer Knee Hi’s in tan or Black with all my dress pants/jeans as i think they make you look dressed up more I even wear ear rings to each there own. just look Good for God
I don’t care if this is 2 year old post. I just want to say that I have been thinking about this for some time, and finally decided to look into nice pants to wear to church under long tunic tops. Some days I just don’t want to wear a skirt or a dress. Especially in the nice cold winter. I at first was scared of doing it, but finally decided just today actually that I would try it. No looks, it helps i think that I’m in a young married ward.
I just think the phrase is “Don’t judge”, people can wear whatever they feel is best for church.
The first time I went to the temple to do baptisms for the dead, as an utterly clueless 12-year-old, I wore jeans. I figured it wasn’t like church, and I’d be changing my clothes anyway. The fact that no one said anything—not my YW leaders, not the other girls, not anyone in the temple—is one of the reasons I’m still here.
I wore pants all the time when I went to church, mostly, because on a Sunday, especially in the winter time buses are never on time and by the time I get to church (a half an hour early, to make sure I’m there on time)no one said anything, but, I will say, that on those days I was never asked to give a prayer or participate.
I like wearing pants in the winter, and when I don’t want to shave my legs. I hate shaving my legs.
It’s interesting that you had an impact on whether you were asked to participate. That seems rather sad.
On not shaving your legs, I’m an Italian girl, I understand completely, in the summer time my legs look the Sherwood forest if I don’t shave.”nuff said.
My thoughts on this event were the same as yours DefyGravity. I thought “Isn’t it ok to wear pants to church? I’ve heard of women wearing pants to church. I certainly wouldn’t wear pants to church but I wouldn’t judge someone else for it”. And then I asked myself why I wouldn’t occasionally wear pants to church. I love wearing dresses. I love being a woman and wearing heels, and church is one of the only places I get the chance to do that…But I’ve definitely considered it on cold days or days when I feel more sensitive to the elements like when I’m sick or on my period. I’ve thought about how nice it might be to wear dress pants to church. Why didn’t I? The answer is: Fear of judgment. I’m actually shaking at the thought of committing to wear pants to church.
The worst case scenario in my head is social suicide: being labeled as an apostate, feminist (in the negative sense that so many people think the term implies) or other members thinking that by supporting other women’s desires to wear pants to church I’m saying that women who wear dresses or skirts to church are un-conciencious dips (which I wouldn’t be saying). With my tendency towards social anxiety and my appropriately LDS tendency of equating priesthood leadership with Godly authority of which I have none, I think a gentle reprimand from a church leader would even rock me pretty hard. Just the fear of finding out that leaders and members of the church really would judge me based on my wearing of pants to church is disheartening. I’m still not sure if I’d be willing to do it. That’s pretty sad. If I do it, it will be to hopefully prove positive that I’m just being paranoid.
Annie B., thanks for sharing your thoughts. It makes me sad that something so simple as pants can be so frightening. The first time I wore pants to church I was terrified; looking back on that it seems so strange. I’ve never been worried about my clothing in any other situation.
Good luck with whatever you decide, and don’t feel pressured to do something that doesn’t work for you.
Here is a great podcast interview with the women who are leading this movement: http://www.theculturalhallpodcast.com/2012/12/wear-pants-to-church-day-live-interview/
You know I find this conversation a little odd. Mostly, because the standards of dress (as well as polygamy) were introduced my men and yet, the most critical comments about the event are not coming from men, they are coming from other women,
Not sure what to make about that, other than maybe that’s the way women in the church either subconsciously/consciously get their control, by being both passive aggressive and aggressive in the same breath. One hand trying to advocate for change, while the other questioning the motives by making statements how they don’t see the need, or there’s no room for contention at church. I don’t really know how to verbalize what it is that I find this behavior so disturbing.
One of the most disheartening parts of today was opening Facebook this morning and seeing all the AWFUL comments on my FB wall – one of my friends had posted the link to the story from KSL and then commented that well then, those feminists just want to be men – why don’t they grow beards and sing bass and etc. I was disheartened. That’s NOT what it’s about or what it stands for, she obviously did not read more about the issue or even want to TRY to learn more about the issues – many about policies and NOT doctrine issues. And the comments got worse from there. Right into the judging of people’s testimonies and how any thoughts they have must be from Satan. Sad, sad, sad.
I was very upset by the “they just want to be men” discussions because that’s been the argument against every feminist movement ever – recently someone even wrote an article about anti-suffragette trading cards/post cards* where one of the main complaints was how women just wanted to be men. sigh. Can’t we be over that argument by now. It’s the 21st century – we’ve had the vote for almost 100 years (so close!)
I find it completely astounding sometimes, that we are a church that believes in personal relevation, and yet we so often discount other’s experiences by questioning their testimony, making them “the other” just for asking questions or being different or having different viewpoints. I also find it strange that when people question certain aspects of our religion people totally freak out. We are a religion based on one child asking questions. It confuses me sometimes and disheartens me most of the time. sigh …
*You can see some great images if you google anti-suffragette post cards there are images, but I like the little article that buzzfeed put together.
It amazes me that wearing pants means you want to be a man; do none of these women wear jeans?
I’ve noticed a complete lack of desire to understand in many of the threads, as though anything, even something that is not church policy, must be defended to the death. We seem to have switched from a church that asks questions to one that cannot have any.
When I looked at the page, the only comments I saw were people saying an event about wearing pants to Church was wrong because it was turning Sacrament Meeting into a political event. I’m not sure where you saw the comments you posted here, and I didn’t scour the facebook page looking for examples, but when I was there almost all the events were at least 3/4th’s if not more “This is wrong because it’s political, not because it’s pants.”
I’ve noticed that trend, but it was not there when I wrote the original piece. The trends there are changing quickly, but this is what they were when this piece was written.
If I participate in this event and wear pants, it will not be as an act of defiance, but because I want to support women who have worn pants to church out of necessity or personal preference and been turned away or barred from participating in opening/closing prayer and such. I hope that is the main reason for others participating but I can’t speak for others on why they are choosing to participate.
I agree that the event as a political move is off-putting, but women have been speaking up about things like this outside of worship services with little to no acknowledgement. It’s our worship service too. If we have no voice in our place of worship then what is the point?
I personally feel that the reasons you mentioned are among the best reasons for those who might be interested in participating.
I am also quite pleased with my previous ward, which included women giving talks and closing sacrament prayers while wearing pants.
Annie B., I totally agree with you. Especially the idea that this is our worship service too, so we have a right to a voice as much as anyone else.
I haven’t posted much on the page, but I had a bad experience wearing pants to church. My bishop’s wife felt it was inappropriate and disrespectful, and I believe how it went down is that she asked her husband to call me in to talk to me about it. Eventually, it led to me being released from my calling, since the bishop was uncomfortable with me being the Primary chorister and wearing pants in front of the children. I wasn’t offended or bitter, but it did make me feel like the church didn’t have a place for me. I will be going to church this Sunday specifically to support this event. I haven’t been in a while, but it’s something that has directly affected my life. Gender roles, equality and LGTB rights make up the majority of my struggles with the church.
That story makes me sad, because it didn’t need to happen. A convert I know in Minnesota wears pants each Sunday, including those Sundays she stands in front of the whole ward to (very exceptionally) lead the choir.
It also reminds me of one of the simultaneously best and worst parts about the church, and that it is led by lay leaders, who for the most part try the best they can, but sometimes make unfortunate (and sometimes hurtful) mistakes. It also reflects how local wards and branches occasionally has more influence than the overall church, which in this case has stated that we are to wear our best, and left it up to us to interpret what that means.
In the MTC my branch president’s wife told me that my bangs were inappropriate. I smiled as politely as I could, while inside I was slightly burning. I kept my bangs and got out of there (happily) two weeks later.
Inappropriate bangs? What does that look like?
I had an MTC teacher (not mine) call me out for wearing white cotton socks and lace-up brown shoes. I thoroughly enjoyed asking her, “Then how should I treat the athlete’s foot problem I got from the showers?”
That makes me sad too. I wore pants when I taught Primary and didn’t hear word one. I got garbage for other things, but not that. I agree it’s a lay leadership problem; each leader will react differently.
And Libby, bangs? Wow. My husband got crap for wearing an orange tie on his mission. Then an apostle wore one in General Conference so he put his back on. 🙂
Here’s a new comment on the site that left me slack-jawed (from a man named David Waite):
“every single person who is a minority activist, should be shot.. in the face… point blank… GET OVER YOURSELVES….”
…
Oh sorry! His name is Travis James Richardson! Not David Waite. (Where did I even get that? Sorry people named David Waite!)
I’ve seen other death threats too. Really? It’s that big of a deal? That’s beyond frightening.
It is sad that there are women in this church who feel that they are oppressed because they have been asked to wear dresses to church. I personally would never ask anyone to leave the chapel because of what they are wearing but it is up to the missionaries and church leaders to instruct those who dress inappropriately that this is the way we are asked to dress and leave it at that. When Adam was asked why he gave sacrifices his response was he didn’t know but that he was asked to. He was blessed because he was obedient even though he didn’t understand why. I think that the way we dress is another example of a test of obedience. We may not understand why women are asked to dress in dresses and skirts for church but if we are obedient we will be blessed.
That’s the typical response that I’ve been seeing, and here is truth of the matter, Wearing pants is not about how women in the Church feel oppressed. At least, its not for me, its that Men in the church are continuously, trying to tell women How we should dress. I am not an infant, I am not a toddler, I am not a teenager. I am a 47 year old woman, with a fully developed mind, who is fully capable of making my own decisions about how to dress. There are some troubling statements in your response to the event. There is nothing in the Church Handbook of Instructions that says men/missionaries are responsible for teaching women how to dress, absolutely, unequivocally nothing. Missionaries are responsible for teaching about the Gospel of Jesus Christ and converting people to the cause. Not for disciplining peoples children as I have seen in my Branch, and certainly not for telling women how to dress(I would have no problem telling a 18/21 male to go hell if he tried)
If having the men in the church tell you how to dress appropriately than yea for you( I mean it with all sincerity) but please don’t assume,nor question my righteousness because I not only look better, but, feel better wearing pants.
Who has asked us to wear dresses? It’s a Utah cultural thing, nothing official. “Sunday best” can be a lot classier in a pantsuit than a denim or floral skirt.
I respectfully disagree with you. I am not an organizer, and may not even be a participator, so cannot speak for those two groups, but one of the many points that I have gathered is that no one HAS asked us to wear skirts or dresses. That is one thing they are calling attention to. It appears to be the command because in many wards/stakes/areas it is so culturally ingrained that that is the area.
It is the missionaries job to invite their investigators to wear their best, whatever that is, and it is everyone else’s job to love them and welcome them, even if their best is a matching pantsuit. Even if it is a matching sweatsuit.
I would also agree with this author, that it wasn’t about pants or “women…feeling oppressed because they have been asked to wear dresses,” but that it became about the pants: http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2012/12/12/it-wasnt-about-pants-but-then-it-became-about-pants-and-thats-why-im-wearing-pants/
We are asked to dress in our best. That doesn’t have to mean a skirt. My question is, would you rather someone be in church in whatever they have to wear, or would you rather they not show up because they don’t feel comfortable? Is it more important to you that everyone look the same or that people come to church?
I work with data, and when there is one datapoint that is totally wacky, we might declare it an outlier and delete it from analysis so that it doesn’t skew the average and give a false impression.
MoFeminists often complain that they don’t want to be judged because of the “fringe” voices that are anti-family, anti-male. So why not extend the same courtesy to others? Sure, there are wacko people complaining. That doesn’t make them typical. That doesn’t provide further justification for the protest.
My experience in the church is that pants are a non-issue. When we lived in South America, of course 85% of the ward walked to church, some several miles, and when weather turned cold, women wore pants. No big deal. Where I live now, women regularly wear pants.
I am not saying that there are not problems with sexism in the church. There are. But those problems should be addressed rather than shifting the focus to pants.
There is a possibility that sisters may think they are accomplishing something when they should be using their efforts on something real that will make a difference, such as asking how Personal Progress can be celebrated as much as Eagle Scout completion, as it is in other wards. Or complaining that a youth leader discouraged a young woman from serving a mission. Or offering to teach a class on breadbaking to the young men.
And there is no way that those around the pants-wearers can win. If we fail to notice, they will be disappointed. If we do notice and say anything, it will be deemed judgmental since the sisters are making such a big deal about it.
And in the midst of all this, the women who would have worn pants to church anyway, because it is cold in December after all, will be viewed as part of a movement when they were just trying to make it to church one more week.
I don’t think anyone is saying that these comments speak for members at large. If it sounds like I was saying that, I apologize. What is interesting to me is that these reactions exist at all, even if they are a minority. It seems like such a non-issue that this kind of vehemence, even from a small percentage of the Mormon population amazes me.
Your statement that the women who are involved in this can’t win assumes that the point is to be noticed. For me, that is not the case. For many, it is simply a statement of solidarity. For others, it is claiming the right to choose what to wear. Both can be personal, and have nothing to do with the reaction of others.
You are also assuming that this is all that Mormon feminists are doing. You are wrong. There are many groups trying to make changes in the church in a variety of ways. See Feminist Mormon Housewives, LDS WAVE for a few examples. This is one event, not the beginning and end of Mormon feminist activism.
Actually, I wasn’t assuming either of those things.
My concerns about no-win were not for the participants themselves but rather for those around them.
How would it be a no-win for those around them? That is not clear.
As far as no-win situations go, here is a comment from Jana “I feel like the church is going to have to make a statement in response to the pants thing. If they say that pants are okay, that’s a huge concession to changing The Way Things Have Been Done. If they say that pants aren’t okay, they are going to look stupid and women will start wearing pants anyways (since they’ve broken down the pants barrier). Either way it’s a win for the feminists.”
Thanks for “putting me in my place”, Amelia. Honestly, though, the vast majority of church-goers don’t have an opinion on the pants-wearing thing. Those who are outspoken enough to “attend” and talk about it or vehemently oppose this movement are on the extreme sides of things. Women can wear pants, and have been able to for a very long time. If women are made to feel inferior for wearing skirts, and approached and made to feel “out of place” for wearing pants, and it causes them real pain, then the problem is with those who have confronted them about it, and forced their opinions on them. I support women who want to wear pants, and have worn them myself in the past, but what is this movement going to accomplish? What will change? Are those women looking for some mandate from the higher-ups in the Church (a la, caffeine is now OK) that says pants are ok? Honestly, do we have to be commanded in all things? Does there have to be a guideline for everything? It frustrates me, too, that the GA “prescribe set roles rather than teaching principles and allowing women to exercise their agency in realizing those principles in the best way they can in the particular circumstances of their own lives”. But now that I think about it, they don’t do that. They have their opinions, and so do the local authority, but my individual agency is not at stake- not now, not ever- by some man’s opinion of me and what I wear to Church, what I put in my body, how I raise my children, or what the contents of my purse are. The closest the temple recommend questions come to addressing modesty is is asking if we wear our garments appropriately. I feel ostracized daily by the fact that I am at Church and don’t agree with the speaker 100%. I feel ostracized when the Bishop has to call my husband to get to me. I feel ostracized when people make comments at church as to why I’m not doing my wifely duties of bearing my husband children. I feel out of place in a Church where the Female GAs speak to me like a 3 year-old. I feel angry when GAs lump all women into the same category of happy little homemakers who don’t think for themselves. People suck. But, that has nothing to do with- does not infringe upon- my personal agency. If you want to wear pants to prove the point, awesome. I fail to see, however, what this will change. Women who’ve wanted to wear pants have always worn pants. Their agency is not in question- what’s in question is the unrighteous dominion their leaders are placing upon them.
In my opinion when an organization, its members, and leaders systematically ratchet up the cost of exercising agency in certain ways to what amounts to an unbearable burden, then they are infringing on agency.
The church does this all the time. Yes. I can make my own choices. Can and do and have always done. But I do not make choices in a vacuum. I make choices in a social environment populated by people I care about. I make choices that affect relationships that are important to me. And the church (in my opinion consciously and purposefully) makes some choices nearly impossible to make by demanding a very high price for making them. So there are some choices I did not make, in spite of wanting to, because the cost was too high. There are other choices I delayed making because of the high cost. There are choices I have made that I now pay ridiculously high costs for making. This is most obvious with large scale decisions. Do I live with my partner before marrying him? Do I marry a member of my same sex? etc. But the fact that it’s most obvious with large decisions taken singly, does not mean it doesn’t also play out that way in terms of small decisions taken cumulatively.
Yes. Many of us make those small decisions over an extended period of time and don’t suffer the consequences. Because the people in our lives are decent people. But that is in spite of the instruction and attitudes fostered at church, as much as because of them. Mormons are trained from a very young age to measure other Mormons’ level of commitment and police their behaviors, exacting a cost for violating boundaries that are really pointless (articles in the Friend about not wearing sleeveless dresses anyone?).
all you have to do is read the comments here about people being afraid to wear pants to church to see that this is not some thing I’ve come up with in my vivid imagination. Could these people who are afraid choose to wear pants any way? Sure. They could. But their church and its culture and membership has chosen to make sure that they know they could be asked to pay a high price if they do so. If we were talking about the church making such demands for doing things that are significant (abuse, theft, etc.), that’s one thing. But we’re talking about making the cost for non-conformity in small ways unreasonably high. To the point that people feel they cannot choose to do something without having to pay a disproportionately high cost.
The requirement that I pay a disproportionately high cost–one that is out of balance with the significance of my action–is an infringement on my agency. Which is what the problem with unrighteous dominion is in the first place. Not just that the person is wrongly trying to wield power. But that by doing so, that person is violating others’ right and responsibility to exercise their own agency.
Amelia, there is validity to the cost-benefit analysis of the choices we make in the church. I don’t disagree. What I don’t understand is that if you are not going to make choices for yourself, and the culture of the church is dictating your actions more than the weight of an actual eternal consequence, then your priorities are not with the Lord- and your view of agency is wrapped up in the culture of the Church instead of the actual doctrine of Christ. I agree that a lot of women don’t wear pants to church already because it is taboo and there will be judgments coming from all directions. There have been things I haven’t done due to cultural norms and pressures (prayed to Heavenly Mother over the pulpit despite my compulsion to do so or raised my hand to the square during the “objection” part of a calling announcement, to name a couple), but that doesn’t mean my agency is out of my control or at the mercy of my peers. That only proves that I am putting too much clout in their opinions, too much validity to their judgment, and not enough faith in my relationship with the Lord, knowing I am being honest with Him and myself. There will never be a leader that will be perfect. There will never be an organization that will be 100% liberating and egalitarian for all its members. I find it sad that we get stuck in the rut of ALLOWING our leaders to exercise unrighteous dominion over us with their opinions that become cultural doctrine. I hate it when I do it. But, Again: What will wearing pants change? What will wearing pants prove? To me, it only signifies that those who chose to wear pants are somehow more liberated than those who wear skirts, and thus ostracizing those who don’t conform to that new cultural edict. I will be much more in support of a cause that rallies women and men to calling upon the name of our Heavenly Mother in an auxiliary prayer or RS presidents walking up to the stand and taking a seat among the other stake and regional leaders or getting a woman in the SS Presidency or man in Primary Presidency.
Amen, NaismithIf we shouldn’t be judging people for what they wear to church, I don’t understand the logic in creating a movement based on our Church apparel. If women want to be treated equally as men in the Church and be recognized as they are for priesthood-office advancement or notable callings, wearing pants is not the way to make that happen. Some women have been wearing pants to church for years. In 2012, are we still equating “power” and “authority” to “wearing the pants”? What a specious argument Let’s shift the focus away, like you said, and start challenging the real issues of sexism in the Church. How can you change something (the idea that we can’t wear pants to church) that was only ever an assumed restriction? Wear pants. Then tell how much more “equal” you feel.
How’s this for a “real issue” of sexism in the church:
There are many women in the church who are not comfortable expressing the pain they feel because of the church’s rhetoric about sex and gender and the kind of limits they experience due to those things. And they are not comfortable doing so because of the very kind of backlash that is happening as a result of this call to action, so to speak. They worry that if they speak up, doing so will be turned back on them in the form of questioning their worthiness, their testimonies, their motivations. It will be used to challenge their commitment to “real” compassion and service.
And we can see very easily, not only in the grossly vitriolic comments that have happened on the FB event page, but also in some of the milder comments here that such concerns are valid (e.g., saying that these women should stop making specious arguments and focus on “real” issues).
To me, that is a very real problem of sexism. The silencing of women because their experience is not “real” enough. The confining of women because their desire is not substantial enough.
What’s at stake here is not wearing pants. Nor is it some ridiculous notion that wearing pants equates to wielding power (I challenge you to find one sponsor of this event who has actually said that in the reductive way you suggest they are saying it). No. What is at stake here is the autonomy of individuals to determine for themselves the best way to fulfill God’s will for them. Church leadership has said, on the issue of Sunday dress, to dress in your best. It is a matter of individual agency to determine what that means. When your community polices your behaviors in the way some elements of the larger Mormon community have attempted to police women’s behaviors in all of this brouhaha, then that is an infringement of agency.
Is it kind of a small thing, the wearing of pants to church? Yeah. It is. Which is why I kind of shrugged my shoulders and dismissed the whole thing when I first heard about it. It wasn’t even a big enough thing for me to bother commenting on when it arose in our Exponent permablogger email list. But you know what isn’t a small thing? Extreme policing of the boundaries of femininity and womanhood (or any other identity marker, frankly), whether we are talking about the policing that community members are attempting to do by lashing out, or the policing that the church leadership does by prescribing set roles rather than teaching principles and allowing women to exercise their agency in realizing those principles in the best way they can in the particular circumstances of their own lives. That is not a small thing. That is a very serious, very real, egregious violation of agency because it attempts to substitute the opinions of some people about what is right for everyone, for the opportunity of each person to make right decisions based on their personal circumstances.
That is a “real” form of sexism in the church. And while wearing pants is not a large thing in and of itself, it apparently has enough power to reveal this very real form of sexism in the church for what it is–fear-driven misogyny. Because if there wasn’t a core of misogyny and fear underlying all the efforts to police women’s behavior and make sure they enact their gender (that allegedly eternal unchanging trait) properly (and I’m talking about both the grass-roots policing of FB comments and the overt policing of General Conference instruction re: minutia of performing womanhood), then no one would be responding with animosity and venom to the idea that a bunch of women would collectively decide to wear pants on the same day in an effort to silently make clear that they feel some pain about the church’s treatment of issues around sex and gender.
I’m on the fence about whether to wear pants or not. A lot depends on how my old velvet pantsuit fits. I’m not going with my thighs sausaged into tight pants, that’s for sure. However, regardless of what I end up wearing, I have already decided that if I see another sister in pants, I’m going to put my arm around her and tell her how terrific she looks to me. I think that would be a win-win.
I replied in the wrong place… oops. so I’m reposting.
Thanks for “putting me in my place”, Amelia. Honestly, though, the vast majority of church-goers don’t have an opinion on the pants-wearing thing. Those who are outspoken enough to “attend” and talk about it or vehemently oppose this movement are on the extreme sides of things. Women can wear pants, and have been able to for a very long time. If women are made to feel inferior for wearing skirts, and approached and made to feel “out of place” for wearing pants, and it causes them real pain, then the problem is with those who have confronted them about it, and forced their opinions on them. I support women who want to wear pants, and have worn them myself in the past, but what is this movement going to accomplish? What will change? Are those women looking for some mandate from the higher-ups in the Church (a la, caffeine is now OK) that says pants are ok? Honestly, do we have to be commanded in all things? Does there have to be a guideline for everything? It frustrates me, too, that the GA “prescribe set roles rather than teaching principles and allowing women to exercise their agency in realizing those principles in the best way they can in the particular circumstances of their own lives”. But now that I think about it, they don’t do that. They have their opinions, and so do the local authority, but my individual agency is not at stake- not now, not ever- by some man’s opinion of me and what I wear to Church, what I put in my body, how I raise my children, or what the contents of my purse are. The closest the temple recommend questions come to addressing modesty is is asking if we wear our garments appropriately. I feel ostracized daily by the fact that I am at Church and don’t agree with the speaker 100%. I feel ostracized when the Bishop has to call my husband to get to me. I feel ostracized when people make comments at church as to why I’m not doing my wifely duties of bearing my husband children. I feel out of place in a Church where the Female GAs speak to me like a 3 year-old. I feel angry when GAs lump all women into the same category of happy little homemakers who don’t think for themselves. People suck. But, that has nothing to do with- does not infringe upon- my personal agency. If you want to wear pants to prove the point, awesome. I fail to see, however, what this will change. Women who’ve wanted to wear pants have always worn pants. Their agency is not in question- what’s in question is the unrighteous dominion their leaders are placing upon them.
Thanks for the summary and analysis, DefyGravity. I haven’t been following this closely and am having a hard time getting excited about it either way. I really sympathize with this group’s sentiment, but am not so excited about wearing pants as some form of protest because
a) It focuses on women’s appearance. There’s already way too much of that.
b) It plays into stereotypes of feminists wanting to be men
c) It’s an easy target for the small-minded critical voices, although I suppose they’d criticize anything…
However, one comment I saw on FB was that the backlash against this demonstrates its need. Maybe that’s true. I do hope All Enlisted will continue agitating for improvements in women’s visibility and opportunities to serve in the church.
I agree that this would not have been my first choice for activism. But I am one who thinks that the backlash does demonstrate the need. I don’t know that this plays into the stereotype of women wanting to be men, as most LDS women wear pants in everyday life… Can you elaborate on that?
I guess I’m just thinking that the tacit uniform for men at church is pants, so to some people women wearing them to church is taking on a male pattern of dress. I think it’s a ridiculous thing to think, but it’s such an easy target for the anti-feminist.
Anyway, the more I think about this the more I’m fine with joining in. Especially after thinking of it in terms of solidarity with others in their pain at the gender divisions at church. My only hangup is that I’m substitute teaching RS this Sunday and I really don’t want my clothes to speak louder than my words. So I’m torn. On any other Sunday I’d have no reservations!
Emily U, I’m still not sure if I’m going to participate. Like you, I’m worried about the judgment from small-minded critical voices. I fear that the majority of people see it as an act of defiance, women wanting to do whatever men do, and don’t get that this event is to reach out sympathize with those that have been treated badly. But then I realized, I would not be doing it for those small-minded people, I would be doing it to show love for and give hope to people just like me who might be too afraid to speak up, but want to know that there are others out there like them. On my journey it has been really scary at times to put my beliefs out there, but finding one or two people who believe the same has made it worth it so far. So I’m still trying to get up the courage.
Emily U – May I suggest that if you feel so torn about wearing them this Sunday because you will be teaching RS, that you don’t. But maybe that next week, when you aren’t teaching you do it. No, it won’t be on the same day as this event, but if the purpose is solidarity then it shouldn’t matter which Sunday you do it on. Personally, I don’t know what I’m going to do. I’m going to talk with my husband and see if he has any strong opinions either way before I make MY choice. Either way, good luck to you!
What exactly do you mean by this? “I do hope All Enlisted will continue agitating for improvements in women’s visibility and opportunities to serve in the church.” What are you hoping to see? Women apostles? Women with the priesthood? What is the end goal?
You’ll need to talk to the organizers of All Enlisted about that. They are seeking for greater gender equality in many forms; if you want specifics, go to them directly.
As a female member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints I would like to express that I personally do not feel inferior or unequal since I am a woman & I feel a responsibility to reach out with love, understanding and empathy to those that may. There has been a lot of attention recently on the “Wear Pants to Church” campaign. I know that it isn’t a rule that I have to wear a dress to church. It is a personal choice I make to do so because I feel it is an expression to the Lord of what my personal “Sunday best dressed” is. I wear pants every other day of the week out of convenience & comfort. Sundays are a special day for me when I renew my covenants with Heavenly Father by choosing to partake in the sacramental ordinance. I would feel like it wasn’t special if I wore what I did every other day of the week. It is an extraordinary opportunity that I would feel uncomfortable to participate in wearing ordinary clothes. Personal feelings & choices aside however, I extend love and acceptance to all and welcome any who would like to worship with us regardless of what they choose to wear. We must remember that “God looketh on the heart” & we must not judge others but invite, welcome & love
I appreciate your comment. i realize that many women don’t feel unequal in the church; thank you for realizing that some do and for loving rather than judging them.
Thanks Lindsey! I love wearing dresses and skirts to church too, and heels. I feel like putting that little extra effort makes it special for me, and I believe God wishes me to wear what feels best for me. I have on occasion, when it’s been very cold or I don’t feel well, felt as though nice pants would have been my best and most special and comfortable, but did not wear pants because of fear of judgment. There are women who regularly wear pants to church out of necessity or personal preference and some of them have been judged negatively because of their clothing choice. So while I love my skirts and dresses, I’m seriously considering wearing pants this week. Not to say to women like you and me who wear dresses that they are lesser, but to show those that have had bad experiences wearing pants that they are no less for their clothing choice.
http://heidisommerfeldstevenson.blogspot.com/2012/12/wearing-pants-really.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Delicious%2Fmillennialstar+%28mstar-worth-reading%29
“I find it highly disturbing that during a month when we should be focusing on the birth of the Savior and all the wonderful things He has done for us, there are those who think that it is more important to bring division and politics into our Sunday worship, taking the focus off of Him and putting it onto themselves.”
I would argue that I’ve been to LDS meetings where Christ was not mentioned once, and politics was taught over the pulpit. We will not be teaching against Christ, nor discussing our reasons over the pulpit.
Christ came to earth to atone for the pain of the world. Many Mormon feminists are in very real pain when they consider their position in the church. Christ understands that pain. And these women are trying to show the love Christ did by standing with those in pain, those who feel different, those who feel unloved by their church and/or it’s members.
And this is supposed to do this how? Have you talked to someone in real pain? Have you gone to their house and comforted them in need? What have you done other than decided to wear pants that many women wear anyway? Nice try, but if your argument holds water then you should mention Christ when He isn’t mentioned or walk over and comfort those who you see in distress, rather than shut your mouth and wear pants. The great thing this will do is marginalize those women who wear pants normally or make others question why a woman isn’t wearing pants. Its division of the highest fashion and the Scriptures continually say negative things about creating division.
You’r making some major assumptions about what people are and aren’t doing. As I have said in other comments, this is not the only thing Mormon feminist are doing. We share pain and comfort in many ways. Your assumption that we don’t is pretty nasty.
This event is a public display of what is normally private. Often we comfort in private but do not show solidarity in public. This is an opportunity to show, publicly, that we stand with each other. I have felt very alone at church; I have spoken out about being different and had people thank me afterward. I appreciated that. I would also have appreciated it if they stood with my publicly as well as privately. That is part of what this event is trying to do.
Mystery, many of the women that post here do so because they are in real pain, or because they care about those that are. If you really want to know you can stick around, do the work, read through personal experiences and gain some insight.
I’m a nursery leader in my ward but I can guarantee you that I would not be even attending church at all if it were not for the Exponent Blog giving me hope that I still belong, that there are people there that understand what I’m going through, and care enough to engage with me.
I find it highly disturbing that during a month when we should be focusing on the savior and reaching out to our fellowman with love as Christ taught us to do, that there is such vitriol and backlash towards an event that was organized to do just that.
And Mystery, can you explain why this event would create division? The purpose of the event has been clear that it is not saying that women who wear dresses are lesser, but saying that women who choose to wear pants are no less than those who choose to wear dresses.
In other words the event is expressing inclusion rather than exclusion, as opposed to what I’m seeing many lay-members express, which is that pants are not acceptable church attire for women, and that women who wear them are rightfully judged negatively for it.
[…] show the importance of the event Kaimi at FMH a few years ago, discussing pants and individuality Exponent blog talks about the narrative created by this event Awesome post by Jana Riess last year about pants-wearing Kimberly interview with the Cultural […]
I am curious to see how many women will actually wear pants to Church AFTER the 16th.
I kind of am too. I’m mostly curious to see if I’ll actually wear pants on the 16th, and to see if I’ll see anyone else wearing pants. And I’m curious to see if wearing pants will bust me through my fear barrier and if I’ll wear them anytime thereafter when it’s especially cold or I’m especially feeling pantsy.
It will be interesting to see. I know I will be, but that’s because I do anyway. Guess we’ll find out.
[…] calling-fulfilling, temple-attending (for those who feel right about it), tithing-paying, pants-wearing women. So if the women of the church, are keeping our covenants, then according to the visiting teaching […]