Easy for you to say, when you won’t be the one to pay the price for wearing pants (unless you have a female family member who wears pants, and then maybe you’ll experience some residual backlash). It’s amazing how something so inconsequential can potentially result in something so real, painful, and damaging:

http://bycommonconsent.com/2012/12/06/shunning-your-fellow-saints-youre-doing-it-wrong/

I’m wearing a dress on Sunday, because wearing pants will result in zero good and lots of bad. People in my ward already know how I feel and what I think – I’m 100% extrovert, and I consider it my moral duty to speak up for what I think is right. And please believe me when I say that I have paid a high price for this in my ward. Nothing will change positively because of a few hundred pants-clad women!

The handbook talks about the wearing of the garment as an outward expression of an inner commitment to follow the Savior Jesus Christ. I think the pants issue boils down to many saints believing that the wearing of a dress to church on Sunday is an outward expression of an inner commitment to sustain (male) church leaders. That’s really what this is all about. Sure, the church can say all it wants that wearing pants to church is not a big deal. However, if it wasn’t a “big deal,” you’d see plenty of pictures of women in church wearing pants, sister missionaries in pants, the general RS Presidency wearing pants, and so forth. It is a big deal because it’s a sign of conformity. Sure, we all know that wearing a dress to church doesn’t mean you’re a spiritual giant or more righteous than the next sister. Nor does wearing a white shirt and tie mean you’re more righteous than the brother sitting next to you in a colored shirt and facial hair. But it gives the not so subtle message that you are trying to sustain and follow the counsel of church leaders who, at least today, feel those articles of clothing are what is best for Sunday worship as well as in other church related situations. At the end of the day, it won’t be a big deal whether you’ve worn a dress or not. I think it will be a big deal whether you’ve done your best to support church leaders. It’s an individual thing that everyone has to answer for herself/himself. Even the SOY pamphlet says when in doubt of what to wear to church meetings, teens are to ask their parents or leaders for help. What to do if you have half of the parents/leaders telling YW pants are acceptable, the other half saying they are not?

Women wear pants to my ward every once in awhile —I’ve never heard a word about it. I hope if I’m ever going to be a beacon to other women, it’s about a more meaningful issue than this.

I may just boycott the whole Sunday service. I don’t want my Sunday service to be a who is/who isn’t kind of thing. I am too tired to care about pants. I have had to slay my own dragons lately and I just don’t have the energy to rouse for someone else’s dragon.

I’m willing to bet that no one in my ward even knows that this is happening, except my wife, who despite her Democratic Party membership and feminist leanings, is rather disdainful of the idea (and only because I told her about it).

This is probably when we find out how limited the reach of the Bloggernacle really is…

But, yeah, the nacle totally is a small high school with a few insular cliques all talking amonst themselves in a lunchroom. No real reach whatsoever.

Thanks to you all for making me feel uncrazy. Like queno’s esposa, I have not heard a word of this on Facebook, in the news, whatever.

Like 5 & 6, women already wear pants to church where I live, without it being a statement of anything.

I am torn about this. On the one hand, it is plain silly. I don’t care to wear pants to Church. On the other, if it would help any soul at Church to see that someone there was on their side, I’d be happy to wear them for solidarity.

ESO’s comment reminded me of the story Hugh B. Brown told involving N. Eldon Tanner:

“His humility and leadership ability were shown by his actions while serving as a counselor in the bishopric and adviser to the deacons quorum. Some of the boys were not attending their meetings. He soon discovered the reason as he visited them in their homes. They had no Sunday clothes and were embarrassed to wear their overalls. The following Sunday, according to agreement with the boys, he met with them at priesthood meeting in overalls. Needless to say, he won the love of those young boys and they were soon 100 percent active.”

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1972/11/president-n-eldon-tanner-a-man-of-integrity?lang=eng

Naismith #13: It’s now made the news and an official LDS statement:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfaithblog/55445256-180/church-wear-lds-pants.html.csp

http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_22175950/mormon-women-declare-wear-pants-church-day

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=23355976&nid=1016

I find it highly disturbing that you think that quote is so awesome that it merits being posted to multiple blogs. If you are Heidi, and you are posting it yourself, it seems like you ought to be able to comment under your own name. If you are not Heidi, and are simply going around posting someone else’s words, you ought to be able to speak for yourself instead of hiding behind her words like some child hiding behind her skirt.

OK–I just got my first look at the event-in-questions’ FaceBook page and my mind is kind of blown. Who could have guessed that any goodwill or second-glances the American public might have granted us in the so-called Mormon Moment would be squandered on something so ridiculous as a bunch of people getting up in arms and vile about some women wearing dress pants to Church?

I think this makes us look pretty crazy. Let’s HOPE no one is paying attention.

“It made the news”……..well, that’s all that mattered anyway.

Re #19. I guess that in the Intermountain West, a mention in both SLC newspapers might seem like being widely disseminated. But outside of that region, folks don’t read those news sources.

Re # 16 “active, priesthood leadership type men wearing colored shirts is in not the norm in the wards I’ve ever attended.”

I understand that culture varies. When we were in Mexico, my husband was the only one in the room wearing a blue shirt, because they are much more into white shirts in that town. But we’ve also been in lots of places where his blue shirt fit right in.

“That’s why I said it’s a subtle rule of conformity. A PH leader would ask “Is it really necessary that a man or woman be commanded in all things? You can’t look at what we wear and understand what we expect and follow our example?”

But not every PH leader says that. In my stake, several of the bishops go out of their way to be very clear that one need not wear a while shirt.

“But if it truly didn’t matter, you would see members of the general RS presidency in pant suits.”

Do we know that those particular women prefer to wear pant suits? One of the reasons that the handbook is so vague is that we are becoming a worldwide church and there needs to be flexibility for local custom.

Just no reason to inflict that custom or choice on anyone else.

Next week let’s have crazy hair day at church. Currently, although there is no rule against crazy hair, and every week there are a few people at church with crazy hair, I think it’s a way to bring attention to the fact that although no one ever mentions anyone’s hair at church, there is a lot of judging of hairstyles and that is not Christlike. Anyone want to join me in expressing solidarity for those who are having a bad hair day, or chemo, or genetic hair thinning, or just bad judgment on hairstyles? Or are all of you too shallow to care about those of us with hair issues?

E, sorry I don’t care about anyone’s hair issues. Gender equality however, I do care about.

Eva, can you please tell me the prophet’s stance on gender equality? Because he hasn’t spoken on the issue lately and I’m wondering just what it is you think someone who follows the prophet is supposed to do if they bellieve there could be more gender equality in our church.

Prior to 1978, if people advocated for greater rights for our African American brothers and sisters, were they following the prophet or not? Turns out that the prophet was on their side, you see, but prior to June 1978, people might not have known that, so they might have tried to shut down those who wanted greater racial equality by saying “Follow the prophet.” That would have been wrong though, don’t you think?

Can anyone spell out the connection between women wearing pants and gender equality? This is going to be feminine pants wearing, not mannish or androgynous, right?

This whole thing is silly.

Trust me you want me to wear pants on Sunday

bbell, I agree. You should probably stay fully clothed even in the shower. But I don’t know what that has to do with what we’re talking about.

living in Zion,

I am so sorry that my post is so poorly written that you’ve missed the point of it.

My point has nothing to do with governors, with Salt Lake City, or interviews.

My point is that some woman in your ward probably feels isolated, that these are issues that nobody else cares about. Why? Because the way we talk about these issues in our public meetings is so regimented and stilted that someone has to be pretty courageous to give any indication that they don’t endorse any aspect of the status quo.

This is about showing support for that one person. That you want to make your ward (and we each have some ownership of our own wards, they cultures, their biases) a more welcoming place for that sister, who you don’t even know, whose concerns you are unaware of.

liz,
I am not claiming anything about what the the organizers intend.

My point was in a sense that you are exactly right about who won’t notice. The biggest and perhaps only effect this will have will be on an individual basis, making people feel less alone in our wards. Which I why I think it is worthwhile.

John, as I said elsewhere, this deal on Sunday is NOT the moral equivalent of refusing to sit at the back of the bus. It’s a rather silly attempt to say “Look at me, I’m upset.” If these women are active enough to go to church, they can reach out to other women and embrace them (hey, visiting teaching, anybody?) to mitigate their feelings of loneliness. A simple “wanta be friends” to another woman sitting alone can break ice.

I realize they claim this is about more than pants and I suppose “they” claim it’s about more than publicity. But I think, to a large extent, it’s about Joanna Brooks and her cronies wanting to remind the world they’re important.

I can think of a lot of other ways to serve other women in the church, those who feel marginalized and alone (as I often do) and those who feel immense pressure to hate our leaders and castigate male priesthood holders. I hear so much about the “haters” and those who put down feminists, but you know what? I feel put down and hated by feminists because I refuse to toe their line. It’s like being torn between Democrats and Republicans.

Bottom line: God does not give a crap what we wear to church. And I suspect that, come Sunday, nobody else is going to care either.

annegb,

With all do respect, (and you know I love you) I’m going to call you out here and say that you’re full of it.

The argument that God doesn’t care what we wear to church as a defense of the status quo is nonsensical. The idea that nobody in the ward cares what anybody wears is disproved by the fact that along the Mormon Corridor almost nobody wears pants despite many practical reasons to do so.

When we have a culture that is more restrictive than the Gospel would mandate we’ve gone beyond the mark and it is worthwhile to call attention to that on occasion and wonder as to why it is and if it is justified.

Not all the time. but sometimes. Actually, I no longer care about this. I’m bored of the subject

liz, if you don’t feel comfortable in pants, don’t wear them. Something purple with a dress would be plenty adequate. Whether I wear pants or not will depend mostly on how well I fit into my velvet-ish pantsuit that I need to try on sometime in the next 36 hours. If it’s no longer comfortable, I’m wearing a dress and a purple scarf I dug up in my daughter’s stuff. No time for shopping. I’m actually kind of mentally getting used to the notion of wearing nice pants to church. I’m more comfortable in pants than skirts, especially in winter. I never wear them to church because of the unwritten taboo against them. But the official First Presidency (non) Statement that I see cited everywhere is Forty Years Old.

Hm. Maybe we are evolving? Wear your best that you are comfortable with? Even pants? Don’t judge what other people decide to wear? I could get on board with that.

Well, when you put it that way…..

I think this whole subject is ridiculous on many levels. But as I am a lurker, I was not going to comment but I could not let IDIAT’s comment (#3) go. I think that wearing or not wearing a dress or skirt does not necessarily mean that someone sustains their male leaders or is a conformist or is even making any statement @ all re: gender equality. I am quite the feminist democrat & am often @ odds (mostly silently) re: my male leaders in church. But I will be wearing a dress to church this Sunday as always simply because I do not feel it is appropriate to wear pants to church. Nor do I feel it is appropriate to wear them on other more formal occasions in order to be respectful of the significance of that occasion – weddings, funeral, graduations & job interviews, for example. I can wear a dress encouraging my ability to look & act like a lady while supporting many political causes. What is not acceptable is the judgement upon others who may choose to wear or think something that is not the conservative norm or just plain old different than what threy like. Everyone who feels the need otherwise to condemn these fellow Christians (or just humans in general – christian or not) should be absolutely sure that the price of that glass house is well worth its future cost.

I’ve seen women wearing pants at church on Sundays, usually during winter. No big deal.

I’ve only skimmed the comments, but something that I don’t think anyone has mentioned, is that getting a group of people to all wear the same or similar things on a given day, at the same place, is so… so….. HIGH SCHOOL.

I went to a really really cool high school, so to me and my homies, this “let’s all wear pants this Sunday” thing is worse. It’s JUNIOR HIGH.

57-58 *Rolls eyes* If it doesn’t matter to you and you are bored with the discussion why continue to comment? I’m confused. If you don’t care, then you don’t care, but obviously you care enough to tell us we are being silly and so, like….High School-ish.

I guess, at least, you aren’t saying repent because if you were I would probably have to punch something.

MCQ I appreciate your words on the matter. I was talking to my Dad today trying to figure out why I have been so emotional over the matter. I think the original reason/voice is not why some women will be wearing pants. I know it’s not the reason I would (I say would because I’m past due and I’m tired of people telling me I’m so fat I’m going to pop. No freaking kidding….) be supporting this. I support it because as a woman I have felt some pain in this religion. I don’t care if they think it’s a political statement, an outrage, or a mockery. This is my way of saying ‘Sister, I see you. I love you and I care about you.’ And annegb, you know better than anyone how hard it is to tell if you have a fellow feminist sister in the ward.

I am going to send my husband in a purple tie and maybe a purple shirt. I will be wearing pants, and maybe even some purple at home.

MCQ, this might be the first time I fully agree with you.

Thank goodness the world ends next week.

mcq, Well, I definitely march to a different drummer.

Maybe your schools never had organized dress code protests. That’s something I remember from elementary school and jr high. Those were “let’s all break the dress code together” protests back then, kids were too chicken to break the dress code by themselves, and this pants-on-sunday thing reminds me of it. It’s kind of like saying: “they can’t do anything to us if a whole bunch of us do it.”

Whether its a protest of a dress code, or something to just say “look at us”, the sunday-pants thing is remarkably similar to the high school thing.

Since there is no written rule about pants versus dresses at church, the whole thing seems silly to me.

Is it going to turn into another caffeine affair, where we need an official announcement from HQ stating there is no rule against women wearing pants like the recent press release stating there is no rule against caffeine?

If women want to wear slacks at church, that’s fine by me. if some women want to encourage others to wear pants __if and when they want to __, that’s fine too. Wear what you want when you want.

But to say “let’s ALL us women (or as many as we can get) do it THIS particular Sunday” and to encourage people to do it as some kind of message, or solidarity, or show of support for some cause, THAT is the thing that is so high school.

(That being said, I do like those stories of the bishoprics wearing jeans or bib overalls in support of the aaronic priesthood members who can’t afford normal church attire. I think that is a different kind of show-of-support all together, like shaving your head to make the person who’s getting chemo feel better.

For those of you who think it is so high school……I’m an orthodox Mormon. I don’t think I can adequately describe the fact that I can’t wear pants to church. Even though it is not a rule. What this week did is it made me realize this. It is kind of hurtful that you don’t understand that.
It hurt to be raised so thoroughly to wear dresses to church so strongly that only 1% of Mormon women would ever consider doing something different. It’s enough to make me think that maybe feminists need to do this because if our culture is so locked down that we can’t change when change makes sense.
It isn’t even a rule, and yet I would feel unworthy for breaking it. I wish I could describe how this is a surprise to me because I am intelligent, open, not-judgemental and I always try to keep things in perspective….I try to live the spirit of the law, not just the letter of the law, I have moved around in my life and I thought I was objective about cultural influences…..
This has been a fascinating week because of my own thoughts on the subject. Lots of very deep thinking. Yes, over something that to someone else feels so high school which implies immaturity. FOr me, but this is not just about “wear pants if you want” but also about “I have no idea if I want to wear pants or not because that choice doesn’t actually exist, does it?” And then wondering if that is what feminists are talking about when they talk about marriage and motherhood and SAHMhood and deferring to men. Very interesting.

jks, beautiful, insightful comment. Thank you 100 times.

P.S. I love it when people say an idea is silly, but comment about it ad nauseum.

Who did that? I was thinking “silly” and “high school” are criticisms that bother me much more than, say, being called a bitch, which doesn’t bother me at all. The polarity between women over this is more bothersome to me than the contemplation of possible discomfort if I want to wear pants in the chapter (BTW,jks, I just remembered being told it was irreverent to wear pants in the chapel when I first became active and feeling guilty when I’d run through the chapel in jeans on a weekday when I was cleaning, etc. So you have a point).

It has to be clear that this has not achieved the wanted result of bringing women together in support of each other. No one wore pants in my ward yesterday (I abstained in a total meltdown because of a fight over wearing pants. Well, I went from being “bored of” to “sad and upset”—things are all well now).

I’ve been ignored over and over as I’ve said the FMH’ers pretty damn mean to those who disagree with them. If they truly care about women, they will strive for inclusion, not exclusion and hysterical name calling. I am not privy to the crazy death threats, etc., but I talk to “normal” women who often feel frustration at church circumstances. This pants wearing did not engage them or make them feel more united with other women.

Relief Society hasn’t done the job of uniting women. I hear some girls say “I feel more comfortable in primary….or young women….or home.” I love Relief Society, but I also have uncomfortable moments. For some reason, women care about those things more than men. And perhaps, in the case of Mormons, it’s because men are the bosses. Something needs to be done to further oneness but yesterday—that wasn’t it. I recommend Esther Rasband’s book “Man and Woman: Joy in Oneness, abandoning the adversary relationship.”

Is that ad nauseum enough for you?

Annegb: I’m getting the book today. Your book recommendations have always been spot on for me.