Garments and body image

[Anonymous]

Quote:

rrosskopf wrote:

Please educate yourself or at minimum, don’t assume you know more than real women who have women’s bodies.

I have nothing against designing more comfortable garments. I have a wife. She is going through menopause. You don’t think I know the issues? I’m pretty sure that all those men who designed women’s garments had wives as well, and I’m not entirely sure they weren’t designed by women. I can’t picture men doing the sewing in 1840. So please – fill free to explain how it is all the fault of ignorant men.

Not experiencing the issues means that no, you don’t really know the issues. My dad had an enlarged prostrate, and I can tell you for a fact that I have no idea (nor does my mother) what that is like.

There are 49 recorded possible symptoms of menopause. Different women have different symptoms. Some women take hormones, and others can’t or don’t. There are many different manifestations. While women may be seamstresses, that’s not the same as the approvers of designs. That is done by the Q15, and last I checked, they were all men. None of them have ever been gynocologists, either (although even in that case, it’s all theoretical knowledge, not experiential).

[Anonymous]

Old Timer wrote:

Nobody answer that last question. Sarcasm is fine here, but some people might not recognize it as such and answer it seriously.

I explicitly put up the “devil” emoji, to indicate my sarcasm. I don’t think it is a sign. But it’s also a “though experiment”, since it is very similar to other evidence given for the “will and mind of God”. While rhetotical and admittedly sarcastic, I do think it is something important to critically consider. Why we accept certain things as evidence when it’s in favor of what we already believe, but quickly reject that same evidence when it points in the opposite direction?

[Anonymous]

I get it, dande48. It’s just a rabbit hole we don’t need in this discussion right now.

[Anonymous]

rrosskopf, as an admin here I am telling you directly that your comments often are not in line with our mission. An orthodox perspective is fine; delivering it in a judgmental, condemning, patronizing, and/or confrontational way is not.

Please read the rules of etiquette for this site and our mission, if you have not done so yet. We moderate relatively infrequently compared to many sites, but we do moderate. Our mission is important to us. If you can support unorthodox members trying to stay LDS in their own way, you are welcome here. If you are trying to help others have orthodox views and practices, this is not the site for you.

Your call. No hard feelings whatsoever if you pick either option.

[Anonymous]

Old Timer wrote:

I get it, dande48. It’s just a rabbit hole we don’t need in this discussion right now.

Fair enough, you are right. I apologize.

[Anonymous]

rrosskopf wrote:

hawkgrrrl wrote:

Please educate yourself or at minimum, don’t assume you know more than real women who have women’s bodies.

I have nothing against designing more comfortable garments. I have a wife. She is going through menopause. You don’t think I know the issues? I’m pretty sure that all those men who designed women’s garments had wives as well, and I’m not entirely sure they weren’t designed by women. I can’t picture men doing the sewing in 1840. So please – fill free to explain how it is all the fault of ignorant men.

I believe the message that is trying to be expressed is that men have the final say in church related resources, such as the garments. Keep in mind that the majority of the men in the first presidency and quorum are of several generations past when cultural expectations and historical events were a lot different than they are now, and likely have forms of biases influencing the imperfections we observe today. Some women are comfortable or can deal with the garments, some women cannot. Same with men. I think that the problem is less that we as members should be faithful to a design and material flaw that causes medical issues, and more that we should encourage each other to determine for themselves how they wish to display their commitments to God, be in the form of underwear or otherwise. Many other (and even members in the lds church) Christians wear cross necklaces to represent their commitments. I think the Lord is less concerned about the physical abilities of man and more of their intentions to demonstrate their commitments.

[Author]

Posts