In the fourth grade, someone started a rumor that I didn’t wear underpants. It was mocking and teasing and typical of fourth graders, but for me it was devastating–suggesting that I was an alien of sorts, completely out of touch with decorum, or that I was so immodest or poor that I’d go to school without panties.
There finally came a time when everyone but one boy (who happened to be in my ward) had gone to recess. The boy and I remained in the classroom momentarily with our teacher, Mrs. Stratton. He was a shy boy, and not given to shouting accusations like some others. But he was faced with a sort of litmus test of his masculinity or of his adherance to the unspoken fourth grade rules that you tease until someone with more authority (and it must be another fourth grader) calls it off.
“You don’t wear underpants,” he said. I think that might have been the only sentence he had ever spoken to me.
“I do too!” I answered. I was near tears. My whole identity was being challenged, and I had already found myself ostracized from the fourth graders. Someone had explained why I didn’t fit in, using a two page list of my faults, starting with my red hair. But this “no underpants” accusation hit a new low.
“No you don’t.”
“I do!”
The teacher was straightening books and didn’t look up, but certainly she could hear this argument.
“Prove it,” he said.
I hesitated. I could either let the rumors persist or I could do the unthinkable: Lift my dress and show him–a BOY–my panties.
I did it. I lifted my dress quickly and then swept it back down. “See? I do!”
Leaving quickly, he said, “No you don’t.”
Even at the price of my utter humiliation, I couldn’t stop the rumor.
Okay, fourth graders of the world and the church, have you decided for sure that Ann Romney wasn’t wearing garments when she appeared on some late night show? Too much knee for you? Or how about that short-sleeved inauguration dress she wore? Did she adjust her garments–something specifically counseled against in temple recommend interviews–to accommodate fashion?
I do not wear garments when I work out. Unlike ideal women, I actually sweat. I see other women at my Provo gym who clearly do wear their garments under their workout clothes, and I hope that they are more focused on their routines than on what I’m wearing.
Years ago, I dated a non-LDS divorced man. He told me several reasons why he could never imagine joining the Mormon Church. For one thing, a neighbor had announced to him and his wife that they wanted their children to play only with Mormons. For another, when his wife tried on some clothes at a department store, she heard one clerk say to another, “She’s not wearing garments.” That kind of self-righteousness was just too much for him.
Do you care whether or not Sister Romney wears her garments night and day? Do you think it’s your business? Is it okay for Gladys Knight to perform in a strapless gown? Should we insist that our unendowed sisters–including children–wear sleeves?
Our Relief Society gossip just made the headlines. How do you feel about that?
By Common Consent, a Mormon Blog 
I believe that how a person wears their garments is truly between them and the Lord. I don’t think children and unendowed sisters should be expected to wear sleeves in all of their blouses, and think that modesty is as much a matter of conduct as it is of appearance.
It’s ridiculous and none of our business. I respect and try to understand the reasons why LDS women and men I know don’t wear garments, and I desire the same for my decision to wear them. Speculating on whether or not Ann Romney wears garments sometimes, all the time, or not at all is extremely disrespectful to her and the way she explores her faith.
I’m offended by the whole discussion, pretty much whenever or wherever it occurs. I’m offended at the idea of sitting across from a man in an office and answering a question about my underwear.
I’ve been to the temple. It’s very hard to see the garments as anything other than a way to control sexual behavior. They’d be a big obstacle to get past. I suppose that’s a reason for them, maybe someone could argue it’s a good one. But the whole thing, even for a life-long member like me, is close to unspeakable.
Holy hell! What hath our obsession with hemlines and shoulders wrought? This is the perfect illustration. We’ve got adult Mormon women acting like fourth graders. What is it that Elder Uchtdorf says? Oh, yeah, “Stop it.”
I wasn’t aware of any rumors until this article repeated the rumor. Seems kinda like that day back in elementary school when someone asked me if I heard that you don’t wear underpants. She doesn’t wear underpants I inquired? And then the rumor spread… So I goggled and found an LA Times gossip column that referenced Mormondiscussions.com as the site with “concerned” LDS members.
Is that a site with mostly members? Here is what a quick scan of the thread revealed… Milf? Tap that? “LUST IS AWESOME” in the signature? Forum user level rankings of bishop, teacher, deacon, god? Doesn’t seem like an LDS site but a post-LDS one, although I assume some members hang out there.
We’ve sunk so low. So sorry to see this become a topic of discussion. If people vote for Mitt Romney, I hope it is because they like his politics and ideology (I personally don’t), and not just on the basis of whether or not they think he or his wife are good Mormons (I personally think they are). I loathe this whole election cycle and what it has done to us.
“So I goggled” = After I put on my goggles, I pulled up bing.com because IE defaults to it for some stupid reason.
I am unsure why if we are against the discussion of her garments posts about Ann’s garments are all over every Mormon blog I follow. Granted, it is about telling people to not talk about her garments or at least lamenting the fact that people are, but more attention is being drawn to it.
I feel bad that people feel someone else’s underwear is their business, but reaction to garments, and reaction to reaction to garments doesn’t rate much difference.
Not surprised to hear the speculation with the long emphasis on outward signs of righteousness. She probably is wearing garments (Do any woman’s garments actually reach their knees? Mine are at least 4″ above.), but it’s really none of our business.
If this is about mormondiscussions.com, it should be noted that although there are some Mormons who post there, it is mainly non-Mormons and ex-Mormons who seem to spend most of their time making conspiracy theories about apologists.
I’m sure that there are Mormons who do judge others this way though, so it is a good reminder.
Nope, mapman, this is from a non-Mormon site: http://jezebel.com/5946988/mormon-ladies-click-tongues-disapprovingly-at-ann-romneys-lack-of-temple-garments
Yes, but the jezebel article references is from this article:http://nymag.com/thecut/2012/09/mormon-chat-forum-dissects-ann-romneys-garments.html, which is clearly from a discussion at mormondiscussions.com. The person making the suggestion is clearly not a practicing TBM mormon.
As a followup, the person making the allegation that she is immodest and not wear garments also said this recently on the same discussion board: “If you are excommunicated you cannot take the sacrament, you cannot hold a calling, you cannot go home teaching, you cannot give talks or prayers in meetings, you cannot perform Priesthood ordinances, you cannot attend the temple, you cannot pay tithing…and it’s classed as punishment?” Not exactly a believing practicing mormon.
Meh. Everyone loves a scandal, someone speaking stupidly, an opportunity to shout … something. It’s a beautiful day and a friend just brought my family over a lasagne because she knew I was up to my eyebrows in projects. Life is good. Ann Romney is smart. People around me are my good friends.
And hey, thanks for the shout-out in your sideblog. We really appreciate it.
Hey Bonnie, I wasn’t the one who sidebarred it, but you’re welcome from all of us! Your blog looks wonderful. Best of luck with it.
You know there is one easy solution to this garmy obsession. According to my mother, God rest her soul, who worked as a secretary in the church offices in the early 1950’s, President McKay and 10 of the 12 apostles had every intention of getting rid of them. Wear them only during temple sessions. The older generation could do as the pleased. But two apostle hold-outs, I won’t name them, refused and they didn’t want to take any action of this sort without 100% support. It really is a shame that two stubborn old men from half a century ago are the primary reason we have not abandoned this silly relic of the past.
For the record, being raised in Utah with an irrepressible congenital obsession of spotting immediately who is wearing them, I can tell you that very few people wear garments outdoors in Georgia where I now reside, especially during about 6 months of summer, including local leaders in bishoprics, stake presidencies, etc. The wearing of the garment could only be perpetuated in a cold dry climate by physically inactive men with uninterrupted access to good air conditioning. It is not very practical at all for physically active people living in humid tropical and subtropical climates where the majority of the church now resides.
I do not find it surprising in the least that Joseph Smith was not wearing them when he was murdered on a hot humid summer day. Strict garment wearing is rather incompatible with the realities of intense sexual activity typical in early marriage that often continues for years thereafter, pregnancy, lactation and also with the entire inherently disgraceful process of growing old and sick and dying. Hardly ‘family friendly.”
I don’t think the garment represents any obstacle to sexual infidelity; the LDS with LDS cheaters probably don’t think twice about them except in mockery, and the LDS with non-LDS cheaters probably find them intriguing. Much like tattoos some have placed in strategic locations to enhance their seduction.
I recommend a sensible course of action, not wearing them when it is not practical which might be most of the time for many circumstances and stop obsessing over it. Establish boundaries. If leaders or anyone else wants to obsess over undies, put it back on them.
Thanks! We’re a writer’s workshop, posting our group’s peer-reviewed writings. We have a lot of raw talent that I know will be refined over time to a great, articulate voice, and a lot of different perspectives to keep us real. We’d love to throw the doors open to devotional-type writings that you’d like to get out to a slightly different audience. I have been deeply moved by many things I’ve read here that would also work well for our audience. Feel free to contact me at any time! Thanks again for your good wishes.
Oy! The only time I cared about someone else’s garmet habits is when I sat in the bishop’s chair and had to read that paragraph and then ask that question.
I observe that my own endowed daughters wear skirts shorter than I thought they might post-endowment. But I would never ever question whether they’ve altered their garments to that end. I suspect the garments themselves are simply short enough to accommodate the fashionable skirts they wear. And, to Chris’ point, I believe they are modest in dress, attitude and behavior.
This is why I am inactive. I left fourth-grade long ago, and I have no desire to return. It’s also why I read this blog; there are adults here.
Yesterday on the article about the Sikh woman who so eloquently stood up for her religion (http://jezebel.com/5946643/reddit-users-attempt-to-shame-sikh-woman-get-righteously-schooled?utm_campaign=socialflow_jezebel_twitter&utm_source=jezebel_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow) I ran into a comment of someone wondering if there were social repercussions for a Sikh woman who DIDN’T so closely adhere to the vows of not altering her physical appearance. The consensus was ‘absolutely not’: “It is between that person who has taken their sikh vows (baptism) to God and to no one else.” I thought to myself, “Wow, if only it were that way in Mormon culture.”
And today, this.
My only comment is, after having just gone through a recommend interview where the majority of the conversation with the SP was about the new guidelines for garment wearing (always wear them!), it seems a bit odd that the premier example of Mormon-hood would be so obviously not wearing them in the prescribed fashion.
Really, I like taking my cloths off. God does not care.
It is like so much of religion, we do it to show that we belong, a test of our dedication. I guess we should be glad that the Church does not require a hijab or burka or untrimmed beards. You-all, be grateful lest some bare-shoulded temptress, or a manly, clean-shaven chest, lead you swiftly to hell.
We attended my grandson’s Marine corps boot camp graduation last week in San Diego. It was HOT, especially after leaving the Garden of Eden (the Bay Area). Each platoon had a chosen best Marine who had to wear a black uniform jacket, white shirt, and tie in the sun for several hours. Mercy. What unconscious need we have for clothing to set us apart. This sort of set a high bar for garment wearing.
Let me just say that I genuinely value my garments. I take them seriously. But another person’s choice to wear or not to wear them is outside of my judgment range. Out of my jurisdiction. I like that.
20. Anon, I’m sorry to disillusion you, but there is a lot of push and pull in at least some Sikh communities over who wears their hair in what way. My friend’s parents freaked out and got upset when their son cut his hair. His grandmother told him he was a ghost now, though he’s not sure what that means. It may mean someone who isn’t part of any community or family. We laughed and decided between us that everyone’s parents wants their hair different, whether it be shorter, longer, straighter, or styled in some different way. This is apparently a human universal. Sure enough, I hate it when my own son shaves his head, and try to talk him out of it. =D
So can anyone point to the origin of this discussion other than a den of antagonistic non/ex Mormons? I agree with EOR. This post seems only slightly “better” than originating the argument in the first place. Getting upset at those who are quick to judge unfairly, and then misjudging some (presumably presumed overzealous Mormons) for the actions of others.
It’s an easy mistake to give in to your spur of the moment prejudices like this post seems to. But now at seems as if this post is to create the controversy it decries?
This moment has been preordained since Romney clinched the nomination–the moment when the Internecine Mormon Underwear Wars go public. (It’s the inevitable and far more titillating successor to the dramatic revelation of the Cold Caffeine Hedge about the Law of several weeks ago.) Myself, I’ve been dreading it ever since I found myself stammeringly explaining my underwear wearing habits to a philosophy seminar of mostly men mostly a decade younger than I. But this too shall pass.
Talking about Diet Coke and other people’s underwear makes me tired. This is not because I am morally superior to such topics. It’s because I’m tired.
Her skirt comes to the middle of her knee when she walks across the stage. At least half of the women in our ward wear skirts that length.
But did you see that mug on the table? What is in the mug? Mugs like that are usually used for coffee:)
Thank you, Naismith, for taking this post in the spirit in which I intended it. I’m in the midst of writing a difficult and probing paper and took a quick break to post on BCC. I didn’t know that others had posted on this subject as well around the bloggernacle, and I’m sorry if this seems like overkill. It was a nice break for me to write it. And now, back to what I’m really doing.
Thanks Meldrum the Less for sharing that!
I wear my garments as much as I can but definitely not for the gym or for other physical activities when I know I would be more comfortable not wearing them (I am one of those jack-mormons that mow the lawn shirtless). I lived in Utah for a long time, and I was only once asked about the absence of my garments. I didn’t really take it too personal and I never became aware someone had a problem with my usage of garments (or lack thereof).
At the risk of sounding sexist, I think the spotting garments practice is more of a woman thing. I had a girlfriend who told me girls become avid garment spotters when it comes to guys. If the guy wears garments, they are most likely returned missionaries, and good ones, who remain active and true to their temple covenants. Thus, they always look for garment lines above the knees, etc. I suspect this is in part where garment spotting comes from.
Temple garments are in fact underwear, so it is strange that so much attention is paid to them in any context. But they are obviously more than just underwear, and while they should not be anyone’s business, they are also part of the temple recommend questions; therefore, their usage is also an element of deciding whether a person is temple worthy or not (a righteousness gauge if you may). I think this is another place where the garment spotting comes from. Ultimately, I guess the lesson learned is “worry about your own righteousness instead of gauging others’ ” So, I agree Uchtdorf’s statement works well here: “Stop it.”
At least women’s garments have been greatly updated throughout the years for fit and usability with more modern clothing. We men have to settle for those very non-supportive bottoms (and some that are meant to provide support but that are so poorly designed that they don’t really work well). :( Every time I wear modern underwear (especially athletic underwear) I go, “ah, that’s what underwear should feel like.”
In extreme warm and moist climates, garments (especially any fabric other than nylon mesh) do become a bit of a burden. It’s like wearing wet towels under your clothes at all times. I hope the brethren one day reconsider easing the usage like they were going to in the early 50s and they become optional in daily life and necessary as part of the temple rituals like other items of clothing are in the temple. That sounds like an ideal situation.
Folks, I think kaphor has the right of it. This appears to be a transcript of a stupid thread in a stupid anti-forum. I don’t think that this is actually representative of internet mormon chatter.
“Does she or doesn’t she?”
Some things never change. http://www.ddrewdesign.com/blogimages/20090731_clairol.png
kaphor makes a good point. Browsers and search engines are like opinions: the default was put there by someone else with an agenda of their own. I encourage everyone to actively choose a browser and search engine that conform to their value system, informed by reliable third-party data, and not just go with default (btw, that goes for opinions as well as for browsers).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers#Security_and_vulnerabilities on browser security
I am overjoyed to read these comments. Thank you, Meldrum the Less and Manuel and everyone else.
It’s odd, but I can’t NOT wear garments any more. Even when it’s hot out or when I’m doing physical activity. I have this constant “Something is wrong” thought going through my head whenever I’m not wearing my garments.
That being said, I really could not care less whether anyone else wears garments. I’ve got enough problems of my own that I really don’t need to worry about anyone else.
Also, I’m excited to see Mormons on Leno/Letterman/etc. to start being given (and even drinking) caffeinated soda. It’s legal now.
#22.
Forgive me, I also honor, paradoxically, with your devotion. I do not wish to ridicule those who feel as you do (even though I guess I did). In a similar way I honor the fact that Jewish people have traditions to avoid pork, but I don’t apply it to myself. (Neither does one of my Jewish friends). I try to not make things in my Dutch oven that are clearly not kosher for the scouts when we have a Jewish boy along. But I am not going to help the Jewish kid keep all the others from eating hot dogs, and funny thing they never do.
I have this odd memory of being about 6 years old and going into the bathroom when my grandfather was taking a bath. He had his garments hanging from one shoulder and draped outside the tub. When he was through soaking he got up and showed me how to put the new clean garment on before taking the old dirty one off so that you would never be not wearing them. He was quite advanced in age and it was a difficult balancing act hoping around on a wet tile floor where one fall could prove fatal, but he did it. He was wearing the old-time “woolies” that went from wrist to ankle and itched like crazy. He had not let one moment pass in over 60 years without being at least partially clad in his garments. He didn’t brag about it and I probably would have never known if I had not been around him enough to comfortably witness this personal situation. He fathered 8 children and worked outside in northern Utah all his life and never had air conditioning. I see it as a way for him to honor his beliefs and demonstrate his devotion. But do I have to do all of it?
What I find objectionable is the tendency (in myself especially) to have been programmed to be constantly judging others. One loud internal voice says, “You wicked bastard, you’re not wearing your G’s.” Then the rational voice says, “Shut up, it is none of your business,” and the moral relative voice says, “besides, it really has no intrinsic meaning beyond what we give it.” Then I see these women in our ward who make bloomers for their babies still wearing diapers that are garment suggestive. Changing diapers is hard enough without this additional complication. I think I can hear my grandfather laughing at us.
Another aspect of this really rips me. At church we have terrible music every week, pointless sermons, boring correlated lessons, no real community service, horrible youth programs; in short the LDS church (my ward certainly)seems to be going to hell in a hand cart. And “the majority of the conversation with the SP was about the new guidelines for garment wearing. ” (#21). Have we no more important topics than underwear to discuss? You know part of me thinks I can hear J.Golden Kimball shouting to that stake president, “the church can go to hell, wearing their garments and photoshopping sleeves onto little girls and swigging their uncaffeinated beverages, and avoiding tea while weighing 500 pounds, and …..(voice fading into interstellar space).
I confess (#28 ) to playing on girls with sensitive garment spotting skills who assumed that they indicate return missionary and good husband material. My little brother looked older than he was in adolescence, thick beard and muscular. While still in high school we used to put elastic bands around our thighs beneath our pants to simulate garment lines and crash the institute dances at the local college and try to get something going with the college girls. It never worked for me, I was so obviously a geek. But it sure worked for little bro.
People for whom the wearing of garments is a stumbling block in their faith baffle me. For me, they have never been the slightest impediment to sexual activity, they’ve never been uncomfortable, and they’re such a thin material I don’t see how anyone could really feel wearing the garment or not is the reason why they’re feeling hot. I think they are a good incentive to dress modestly, and if everyone dressed the way you have to to cover up temple garments, the world would be a slightly better place. They are a reminder of my temple covenants and of my faith that I carry with me at all times. I appreciate my garments. I can understand being a little annoyed about them, but to hate them so much that they become something that weakens or destroys your testimony? Unthinkable to me.
That said, people that judge others on this issue need to stop. It’s no one’s business.
“People for whom the wearing of garments is a stumbling block in their faith baffle me.”
Says the male.
“For me, they have never been the slightest impediment to sexual activity.”
Says the male.
FWIW – I no longer wear garments. After my appendix surgery last spring I can’t stand anything extra around my middle, including underwear. We had a HOT summer and I wore tank tops often. I love the feeling of a breeze on my shoulders and the freedom of movement. I had worn garments for almost 20 years so I know what its like. I’m guessing Ann wore hers and really WHO GIVES A D…? I am so irritated with the church for adding sleeves to angels and little girl photos. I have one daughter left at home and the increasingly mad, crazy, ridiculous attempts to push uber modesty are insane. My daughter and I looked up the definition of modesty and it’s a far cry from what the church is redefining it as.
I’m fairly conservative and I’ve never considered it my job to go garment spotting.I’ve never even heard other people do this. I think this is making a huge deal out of nothing. This and the Harry Reid thing are just combining to make Mormons look judgmental and stupid when we can do that well enough on our own. The media can pick and choose from obscure blogs and forums and present it as the opinion of the whole.
I could easily wear that skirt and not have to hike anything up. I don’t because it’d look ridiculous on my pregnant body. Right now with maternity garments I have a good 9 inches above my knee. They stopped making maternity garments for tall people-I guess they figured tall people just shouldn’t get pregnant any more-I was told they just aren’t in high demand so I could special order which takes long enough that I’d only have a few weeks left anyway.
Pregnancy and nursing and garments….not for wimps.
Holy strawmen, Batman! I would have thought trolling for attention like this was beneath Margaret. I guess everybody has off days…
Yeah, Lindberg, it was just one of those days where I felt like I wasn’t getting enough attention at home, so I decided to write a ridiculous blog post. And I trolled, waving my arms and shouting almost-obscenities.
I saw the links to discussions on whether or not Soeur Romney was wearing garments and found them so strange. I do think you could probably glean one or two good points from my post, though. As I said, I value my garments, but the ways in which we judge one another for wearing/not wearing–and even judge non-Mormons for being ungarmented–is one reason our children are often choosing not to stay LDS. Our habit of judging, while certainly not exclusively our sin (all religious people do it to a degree; I suspect some Catholics would look askance at someone not wearing a cross) is lethal to our main objective of bringing souls to Christ.
“Our habit of judging, while certainly not exclusively our sin (all religious people do it to a degree…) is lethal to our main objective of bringing souls to Christ.”
I absolutely agree with this, I think it is the main take-away from the post. This is such a troublesome thing to me, that I am worn out from dealing with it over a lifetime, it definitely affects my activity in the church, though I have no other significant challenges to my testimony. It breaks my heart that our community is so broken that my perfectly nice family can’t fit in because of all the pharisaical, judgmental, social-climbing, snobbish nonsense. This (Sister Romney’s garment scrutiny) is only one small aspect of a huge elephant in our living room.
Come on, Margaret. I heard you STILL don’t wear underpants!
You’re right, MCQ. About all of it. Thanks!
Had I seen the Jay Leno show with Ann Romney, I would not have even thought about whether or not she was wearing her garments. What a ridiculous thing to even wonder about! Ann Romney is a tall woman. I am short and I can wear short skirts without my garments showing. For those who actually look for evidence that people are wearing garments, get a life!
I’m with Jeremy. Maybe I’m skeptical as a result of my sheltered Mormon upbringing, but I don’t really believe y’all live lives of such tempestuous passion that you can’t wait the extra 3 seconds it takes to whip the g’s off.
Mormon women’s penchant for gossip, pettiness and speculation about so-and-so’s “righteousness” has always sickened me. I am thoroughly embarrassed that it has been spotlighted for the country to see. Never before has President Uchtdorf’s talk “stop it!” been more appropriate. I am so, SO disappointed.
Good post – I love the personal story, and how you illustrate so ably the school room nature of this criticism and the utter silliness of human nature (not just in the church, obviously) in getting their undies in a wad over the would-be first lady’s lacy underthings. Bravo!
kaphor et al,
I have since encountered actual non-anti/exmo discussion of this topic online (at ldsnet or some such). It was fairly benign, but there is the real chance of passive-aggressive judgment in the comments already there (there is some element of “she can do what she wants (I’m not judging), but it makes me uncomfortable (I’m totally judging).”) Anyhoo, I just thought I’d keep everyone updated on this particular bit of stinkin’ thinkin’
This reminds me of when I was much younger. I was somewhere I should not have been, and a girl I had danced with, on her way out the door to go home, whispered something in my ear. The girl standing next to me asked what she said. I said, “she told me she had on red panties.” She then said, “Well, I don’t wear any panties.”
You have red hair? Wow! Not sure I would ever admit that. Just kidding, Margaret. You are well loved, and a treasure, with or without wearing underwear. :)
CEF, that’s a good beginning, but what happened next????
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that when a person states that he has no problem wearing his garments his comment is ridiculed because he’s male, and what could a male possibly understand about the difficulties of wearing garments.
So, I guess it’s ok to bash the garments and spread a rumor (which is more likely than not Mormon urban legend) that but for a couple of stubborn old men we wouldn’t be wearing garments. I was hoping there would be at least one critical response to that, but no. The only critical responses are to the comments from those who like their garments.
What is it with the intolerance? Saying he likes his garments does not have to be interpreted to be judgmental against those who don’t like them.
I also like and wear my garments and have never found them to be an impediment to anything. I’m fortunate to not have any medical conditions that make it difficult, and I recognize not everybody is as fortunate. a
Either way, I can like my garments without judging those who don’t, but would hope the respect would be reciprocated.
Mike, I certainly respect that point of view, but I think I can also recognize, without judging, that you are in the distinct minority on this issue. That doesn’t mean that liking garments is bad, but given the choice between wearing underclothing that is made by those whom, to put it charitably, do not seem to be clothing professionals, and wearing whatever professionally made underclothing you find most comfortable, well, the choice most would make seems obvious.
I’m a non-Mormon, stumbled onto this page accidentally, then got intrigued by the discussion. Can you imagine how bizarre it sounds to hear people debating whether or not to wear clothes? Took me awhile to figure out that, to Mormons, “garments” apparently means some kind of “special undergarments”. Huh. To the rest of the world, the word “garments” means “clothing”.
So, here I was thinking, “Ann Romney was naked on Jay Leno, and I missed it…!?”
Kyle, that is hilarious! Yes, we Mormons would not read “she touched the hem of Jesus’ garment” as referring to our GARMENTS, but we do attach a particular meaning to the word. I wonder what other words take on different meanings in different cultures/religions. Glad you stopped by!