- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have a question here. We are told not to alter garments. However, for some people, they don’t fit even if they are the smallest size. There’s a brother in my Ward who is a bit less than 5 feet tall. He was sharing how the garment hangs down below his shorts when he wears knee-length shorts at home. If he goes out, he has to switch into long pants and suspenders or the shortest garments he can find hang down two inches below his shorts. I suggested he get some pants that he cuts off longer than the garment to hide it. He replied that the shape of his waist and torso make it so he has to wear suspenders if he wears anything but really light, silk shorts, and he gets sick of doing that all day (pants fall down even with a belt tightened he said, due to a straight torso shape). Plus, he can’t find anything that is that length that doesn’t have a crotch that is almost down to his knees given his shape. I suggested tailoring, and he said he doesn’t have the money for that for the rest of his life, which I think is probably true judging by his line of work and the age and condition of his car. Good guy by the way, active and dedicated.
Now, do you think it is consistent with the spirit of the law to alter the garment by say, shortening it two inches and putting any cut off markings back on given his situation? Provided it was done privately in your home, for example?
I’ve seen people have the garment a couple inches above the knee given their above average height, so to me, it makes sense that someone who is significantly shorter than average should be able to make an alteration so the garment fits him, provided the alteration is not meant to violate standards of modesty. I don’t see it as a breach of the sanctity of the garment either as it is simply being altered to fit the unusual shape of his body. Also, i think it’s more sacred to have a garment that is hidden when you wear it rather than having it hanging below your hem. And, given the lifelong commitment of wearing the garment, this makes the commandment more sustainable, simply because it fits his unique circumstances.
Given the emphasis of being “on your own clock” I wonder what you think of this — or, if you think being on your own clock means you don’t even need to ask this question!!!
I’m 6’2″ and wear the regulars and I can still barely find shorts that cover them up. Being the rebel that I am, I have some older ones that have shrunk in the laundry that I wear with shorts. So I can feel for someone who is well below average and having real fit issues. I would not see a problem with hemming or even making your own so they fit properly. I don’t see why they have to come from SLC to be holy. You can make your own temple clothes, so why not garments? As long as they have the same markings in the same spots and go to just above the knee and t-shirt length on the arm. I’ve wonder this too…I’ve lost a good amount of weight and now all my garments are way to big. Which makes it really easy for me to wear lower cut shirts 😈 I realize that is not a good practice to do this, but I don’t have a recommend, don’t plan on getting one in the near future (me and tithing are not in agreement anymore). But they are so big on me that I could fit another person in there with me, it’s actually quite funny at times. I can wear off the shoulder blouses and still have my garments on.:crazy: I can wear backless dresses and still have my garments on…that’s how off size they are now.I don’t wear shorts, never have, ugly legs. So the bottoms aren’t an issue, although they do tend to creep up all the time now.
Can you guess what the answer will be from the guy who is more into asking forgiveness than permission?
>IMO garments were made for man, not man for the garments … to paraphrase a certain Jewish theologian in the name of our church.
I have a feeling it would be hard to find a Stake President who would give explicit permission to alter the garments. I’m not saying it would be impossible, just improbable. On the other hand, if the guy altered his garments so they fit like they are supposed to on him, how would anyone know? They would actually look CORRECT on him! Someone would have to whip out a tape measure or some nonsense and start comparing it to the standard size pattern measurements. Not really gonna happen.
Sometimes we simply ask too many questions. “Don’t ask; don’t tell” can be a good policy with regard to some things.
Or as we used to say about my mission president, BKP, he didn’t tell me, I didn’t ask. This is one of those issues that afterallwecando should be aware of. I wonder if it is already on his list of 613 mormon commandments? I’m not criticizing you SD for bringing this up, because I know it is a real issue and many many members care about this, but the very fact we even have to have these conversations at church or on boards or whatever, is just mind-boggling to me.
I agree with all that has been said! Particularly what cWald said. If you step back and look at this objectively, we are debating whether or not we should wear underwear that fits us. Why? Because the leaders have made comments that have put restrictions on how much we are allowed to customize our underwear.
Can you imagine the kind of reaction you would get if you posted this on a general discussion forum that is not religious, say, in an Off-Topic section?
The following posted on my personal blog exactly a week ago: “How I View the Garment of the Holy Priesthood”( http://thingsofmysoul.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-i-view-garment-of-holy-priesthood.html The conclusion relates to your last comment, SD:
Quote:I personally am not opposed at all to the idea of wearing the garment OVER regular underwear – even though I know that is not the Church’s default standard. I think that would remove much of the “weirdness” for many people – as it then would be seen as “clothing” without the automatic, negative association with “underwear”.
That relates directly to how I view altering them in such a way that the symbols are left intact but they are more comfortable. I have no problem whatsoever with the principle behind that decision.
Sometimes, in the rare moments of wearing shorts or a v-neck sweater, part of my garment will show. DW will say, “Pssst, you are showing your religion!” is hushed tones. I never understood this phrase. In any other context, would it not be good to show my religion? :eh: Of course this makes more sense as code for “showing your underwear.”😮 cwald wrote:…the very fact we even have to have these conversations at church or on boards or whatever, is just mind-boggling to me.
You have come far, grasshopper.
cwald wrote:This is one of those issues that afterallwecando should be aware of. I wonder if it is already on his list of 613 mormon commandments?
I’m not criticizing you SD for bringing this up, because I know it is a real issue and many many members care about this, but the very fact we even have to have these conversations at church or on boards or whatever, is just mind-boggling to me.
I must agree with cwald. I know that garments to some are more than just a piece of cloth, but really they are not what their makers claim them to be. Best advice is to adjust them or not wear them at all, and I would not worry a bit a bout it.
Can I just add how ridiculous it is that we are commanded not to “defile” our garments, when they are to be continually in direct contact with areas of our body that often emit foul substances? Underwear was designed as a barrier to protect our actual clothes and keep them nice from body fluids and waste and now we put these holy garments there instead? I sit there with the garments in my pits and crack all day, and then it is a sin to drop them on the floor? :crazy: 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 😆 Brown, FTW!
Yeah, there is that – hence, my willingness to see them worn over regular underwear.
Seriously, that’s the main reason I feel that way.
Old-Timer wrote:Brown, FTW!
Could you rephrase that, please?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.