...because the poor woman was wearing her bra UNDER her garments. Clearly this would upset God. Alway defer to the Priesthood Authority ladies, even if it makes you uncomfortable.

Why would someone be compelled to tell their bishop this? Did she feel guilty? Is she a member of a cult?

http://community.babycenter.com/post/a43899340/bra_over_garments



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/15/2013 09:14AM by bizquick.

Can some formerly uber-Molly women explain this sort of behavior to me? As in, *why* would such detail ever be appropriate for someone with whom you're not in an intimate relationship?

two thoughts

1. On what planet is talking to Bishop about this correct
2. There has been a policy change and you can now wear over ? ?

Lydia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> 1. On what planet is talking to Bishop about this
> correct

Snarky response: Kolob


> 2. There has been a policy change and you can now
> wear over ? ?

Yes.

: ) ;)

1) what kind of level of guilt pushes someone to divulge this to their bishop?
2) as usual in TSCC, ask different people on a certain topic and you'll get completely different answers, all masquerading as official policy
3) even if the bishop was convinced in his answer, why not just instruct? Why the need to punish? How does treating her like a naughty child help her?
4) if wearing the garments under outer clothing as a reminder of covenants is the main consideration, what difference does it make whether they touch your skin or not?
5) does this lady now consider herself sinful for not wearing them 'correctly' for the last 15 years?
6) whatever happened to 'teach them correct principals and let them govern themselves?
7) how nuts would this topic appear to anyone outside of the church?
8) how sad that so many are controlled and brainwashed to such a degree
9) let's hope this incident spurs her to take a step back and start asking some important questions

all of the above.

the ONLY THINGS this teaches is
-how bizarre application of 'the gospel' is in Morland;
-that Changes in application are hit-and-miss communicated to those concerned.

Now: enter some Nazi / Uber TBM (most likely a male) to say the THIS PARTICULAR Bishop was Inspired to teach THIS PARTICULAR Sister in the 'Higher Law' of garment wearing...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/15/2013 10:13AM by guynoirprivateeye.

The problem with this whole thing is there is no OFFICIAL answer!!! I was told by my mom, mil, and old lady temple worker that your garment had to touch your skin. Bra on top!!

Five year later I was making a joke to my friend that I pretty much was a whole cup size bigger since my baggy top was basically stuffing my bra. She looked real confused & told me I was wearing it wrong. See HER old lady temple worker & relief society pres told her the bra goes on underneath!

How sad is it that I was ridiculously happy that my bra could finally go around my actual boobs. Sigh...

My boobs were always slipping out of the cup because of the stupid garments. I finally started wearing the bra UNDER. My (then) teenage daughter self-righteously let me know how wrong it was. I told her that when Heavenly Father started wearing a bra, then he could tell me how to wear mine!

Stupid bishop, stupid cult.

It is totally bizarre that some old man "should" tell a woman how to wear her underwear.

Cult. cult, cult.

Amazing, they are not happy with women wearing the garments, the PH has to tell faithful women how to support their boobs.

What is also amazing, most PH dudes answer as if they know what the answer is, like there is one.

This is a major infection in the church, PH running it based upon their their past experiences and traditions.

I knew very little about Mormons or even garments until moving here. Imagine my confusion when I saw ladies at the gym putting on bras over white shirts of some sort as they got dressed for work. I figured it out quickly, but even then I was so taken abakc that they put their bras OVER their garments. As well-endowed woman, who truly appreciates a proper fitting and supporting bra at whatever cost, this just seemed horribly uncomfortable. All the downsides of a bra with none of the real perks (like actual support from a well fitting band that would not be sliding around, etc).

It is ridiculous that any church or representative would tell members how and how not to wear their underwear. It is even more ridiculous that a man who has never had to wear a bra or seems to have no clue how horrible a bad fitting bra might feel would tell a woman how to wear hers.

It is just mind-blowing to me that someone would tell their bishop or whatever how they wear their underwear. Reinforces my belief (developed from talking to ex-Mo friends of mine) that there are more than a few Bishops who get their jollies and power trips from invading the privacy of others.

Oh No, all those years I wore my Jock Strap under my G's. I must begin the step's to repentance. LOL I really hope she bails on the craziness and get's to Victoria Secrets where she has choices, creativity,and sanity.

Well I guess she won't have to worry about going to the CK. She can't even get a recommend. I didn't know I could go to hell for not wearing my bra the way my bishop wanted me to.

It would be great if she could bring herself to tell how unworthy she is in F&T meeting. I'm sure there would be people gasping in the room. Others would be on the floor laughing. The whole thing is completely insane.

I wish my bishop would have done something like that years ago. I would have went on line a lot earlier and found out what else I didn't know about my religion.

Maybe we will be seeing babycenter lady here soon. She'll be happy to know that we could care less if she wears her bra on her head.

Right you are! Whether the Bishop was right or wrong, her name will forever be on the Do Not Enter list in heaven because of his priesthood role as common judge in Israel...at least until a new bishop changes the ruling and thus allows God to admit her into His presence.

I was always told that that garments to next to the skin - period. But I never had anyone ask that question in a "worthiness" interview.

What is so sad is the amount of power bishops have. Bishop Jackwagon wouldn't OK a kid in the ward for a mission because he worked Sundays and wasn't keeping the Sabbath day holy. The stake president over-ruled him after the kid's parents complained. My nephew's bishop won't OK him for a mission because of "moral issues" because he has a problem with the M word (according to his mom). He's 20 and has been continually shamed by his bishop for this (denied priesthood advancement, not allowed the sacrament while people watch etc.). Other bishops would minimalize this situation, rather than destroying a boy's self-esteem like that. This kind of thing with the bra over or under - it's all left up to the bishop's discretion and it's just awful because it empowers the bullies and lets those with a decent man for bishop, live by different rules and escape these kind of weird intrusions into personal matters. The lack of training and the sense of entitlement allow Mormon bishops to hurt others in the name of God.

I was told by numerous temple matrons that I could wear my bra however I pleased, so I wore it under. The garment sorta fit if I wore my bra underneath. Also, these same temple matrons told me I was not required to wear white bras to the temple. So I wore nude.

Why is this woman talking about her bra with a man other than her husband? My husband doesn't even talk to me about my bra. So long as I don't wear garments, my husband doesn't even see my choice of underwear as any of his business. I wonder if the bishop was looking for advice because he needed a bra for his man boobs.

The first time I went through I forgot my bra altogether and the temple matron noticed and mentioned it to me. I told her that I wasn't used to the feeling of garments and forgot to put my bra on because it felt like I already had something on. I asked if I couldn't just go thru without any bra at all. She shrugged and said, "I guess so." There wasn't a RULE about it so I went through the session braless. At the time I thought it was a big deal about nothing and still do.

Really? I hear some of the darndest things on here. I've never encountered a church leader who would have asked anything more than the (odd) temple recommend question..."Do you wear the approved temple garments both day and night?"

But maybe out in bum-fu%^ Iowa or some other such place the bishops really let their hair down and get down and dirty asking if a bra is under or on top of the upper garment. I just haven't ever, ever, experienced that kind of inappropriate intrusion into under wear habits....

I guess if I was a woman and the bishop asked me that, I'd say, "well, I'm not sure of the right way to wear the bra, let me show you how I do it, and you can tell me if it is correct..." And just as I was removing the bra, I'd snap a picture with my cell phone as I leaned in close to him and smiled broadly! I'd offer to send the picture the his wife and the stake president.... :)

+1

would U copy me with that pic?

on Second Thought.. NEVER MIND!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/15/2013 11:30AM by guynoirprivateeye.

How one wears her bra with garments is not a question in the temple recommend interview.

This woman isn't getting what she's most likely paid for. Perhaps, she should take up her case with Consumer Protection.

The more time I spend on this board, the more I think I was lucky not to have run into a seriously messed up bishop.

I was never asked the questions without the questioner using the exact wording given them. Most of the time the bishop, stake president or counselors doing the questioning couldn't wait to get it over with. I even had one counselor who had the questions memorized so that the process would go faster.

Are nosey bishop more prevalent outside of Utah where the bishop doesn't live in the same neighborhood as all of the members?

Are rich bishops more likely to be jerks than working class bishops?

I don't think it is that black and white. The Bishop of the ward my son can attend when he is away from home seems to be the most liberal one I have ever heard of. I only have accounts of the conversations from son, obviously, but one of the first things he said to him was that the church preaches free agency and then tries to take it away from you.
This is, from what I can work out, a very educated, wealthy man.I think I would like him.

From Steven Hassan's cult "BITE" model:

(Note #4 and #14)

Behavior Control


1. Regulate individual’s physical reality
2. Dictate where, how, and with whom the member lives and associates or isolates
3. When, how and with whom the member has sex
4. Control types of clothing and hairstyles
5. Regulate diet - food and drink, hunger and/or fasting
6. Manipulation and deprivation of sleep
7. Financial exploitation, manipulation or dependence
8. Restrict leisure, entertainment, vacation time
9. Major time spent with group indoctrination and rituals and/or self indoctrination including the Internet
10. Permission required for major decisions
11. Thoughts, feelings, and activities (of self and others) reported to superiors
12. Rewards and punishments used to modify behaviors, both positive and negative
13. Discourage individualism, encourage group-think
14. Impose rigid rules and regulations

I wore my bra under the garments, maybe that's why I found out the church is fraud. The protective garment didn't protect my b cups and the wire bra infiltrated me with doubts.

That underwire worked as an antenna, capturing anti-mormon transmissions!

Clearly the Bishop is right to pull the recommend. He has a responsibility to ensure that if ever in a fire, that her boobs would not burn.

. . . because then she would have a testimony through a burning bosom. *rim shot* "I'll be here all day folks. Tip your servers."

Yuk yuk yuk!

How did he know she was wearing her bra underneath? Did he ask?

Damnit Stan!

Leave the underwire and boobies alone! God created them in his image.

I guess that means God is a boob...

When there's some minor, petty "infraction", there's usually some Nazi-Mo there to have a hissy fit over it; When there's something MAJOR like child abuse, murder, rape, or financial crime, LDS, Inc can be counted on to provide an excuse/justification.


just sayin'