Wednesday night when Ann Romney walked out onto the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, apparently some people were more concerned about her hemline than what she had to say.
Looking at photos from Ann’s appearance on the show, Mormon blog sites blew up accusing Ann of not wearing her temple garments, something all LDS people are expected to do who've been through the temple.
One writer on lds.net commented - "The first thing I noticed was there was no way she was wearing garments." Others said "In this picture, it's clear she's not, or that she's pushed up the sleeves." And – "Is it possible Ann is tall enough that they would not have shown when she sat down?"
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints doesn't like to talk about garments, they consider them sacred. But for people who wear temple garments it's common knowledge that the bottom part is supposed to come down to about the knee.
Ann's skirt was questionably close, and many web writers came to her defense. On jezebel.com one person commented "I'm a Mormon, I wear temple garments, and I'm having a hard time seeing why it would be assumed that Ann isn't wearing them." Another wrote "She's probably wearing garments. Garments tend to ride up a little bit. The skirt probably just barely covers her garments."
Still I think the Mormon bloggers are on to something. Using that picture up above for comparison I ALSO think that Latter Day hussy totally went on the tonight Show without her prayer panties on!
Well so much for her getting HER own planet now!
Cults are cults are cults.
ReplyDeleteSo this is, like, Mormon commando?
ReplyDeleteIt's actually considered a point of gossip in the Mormon church if you're not wearing your garments. I used to hear my mom and the old ladies on Sunday clucking softly in disapproval about so-and-so who wasn't wearing their garments. To not wear the magic underwear is ... it's basically saying that you're not living righteously.
DeleteIt is not uncommon for church members to go up to someone and ask what underwear they are wearing. When it comes to the church, you're not allowed to have privacy (not when bishops used to deny temple recommends to married couples who gave blow jobs).
I suppose foregoing your garments is less like going commando than a priest being caught with a playboy. It's a point of shame. But mind you, I was born and raised in an older-fashioned Mormon family-- my understanding is that the upper echalon of leadership knows they're losing members (and therefore $$$--LOTS of $$$) so they're trying to whitewash their history once more to appeal to a younger crowd.
Used to be you couldn't drink coffee, tea, or alcohol. I recently heard that someone high up said "we never said that! we believe in responsible drinking!" Liars.
Those things are obscene! Just like Willard & Annie!
ReplyDeleteWTF? I'm sorry, even though I am an atheist I tend to not comment on people's religion. I try to respect other's belief systems even if I think them frightening, silly or perplexing. But you've got to ask yourself about a religion that expects people to wear "sacred underwear". That is about control and nothing else to my mind no matter what they parse theologically.
ReplyDeleteSome church subsidiary must make a hell of a lot of money on those garments. And the idea that people were arguing about what was underneath the woman's clothes!? Fucking insane and extremely creepy. But lets face it--so were Mitt and Ann.
"Fucking insane and extremely creepy. But lets face it-so were Mitt and Ann."
DeleteAnd so are they even now. I agree completely and well said. Thanks.
People can obviously believe whatever they want but it's nearly 2013. If your religion tells you that you have to wear a certain kind of underwear, maybe you should reconsider your religion (or religion in general).
ReplyDeletebut ...but...but...they're Magic!
DeleteNot just what kind of underwear. They are all about control. A bishop can pull your child (at ANY age whether 4 or 14) out of Sunday school class, bring your child to their office, close the door, and ask them any question they want; usually about sex, masturbation, etc. Too young to know what that is? Don't fret, this man with no formal training will be more than happy to explain it to your son or daughter-- without your prior knowledge or approval. Have you specifically threatened him to never take you child without your permission? Too bad, he's "called by God" and is protected by religious laws.
DeleteI shit you not.
Modern polyester blend garmies do have tendency to ride up. The important detail on the bottoms is supposed to be immediately above the knee.
ReplyDeleteTops have capped sleeves, so unless she's wearing muscle shirts like Michelle Obama, she'd technically be in compliance.
Garmie styles have changed with fashion. The original garments looked a lot like old-fashioned long underwear. This is the style favored by the compound fundies. They're not always white either--military personnel can get them in green.
Been there, done that with the garmies.
This is a better pic of her going sans bullet-catchers
Delete(for never-mo's, mormons used to believe they would stop bullets)
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ap_ann_romney_nt_120724_wblog.jpg
Polyester BLEND? That's mixing threads. In the Old Testamant the punishment for wearing garments of mixed threads is stoning.
DeleteLove the old lady picture; that’s a keeper!
ReplyDeleteLeave it to the "church lady(ies)" to focus on important matters........
ReplyDeleteThe most disturbing thing about this is that it shows the Romney's have no intention of disappearing from my TV. :(((
ReplyDeleteFret not. This article (and her appearance on Leno) is from September.
Delete:)
Oh, thanks, Anonymous 5:09. I was as concerned as Happy Doc. I had visions Queen Ann replacing the Idiot from Wasilla on TV for the next four years. You made my day.
DeleteWTF? How far is this from, "her burka didn't cover a stray hair!!!!!!?"
ReplyDeleteSpeaking as someone with familiarity with such garments, I don't believe it's possible that she was wearing them, unless she alters them which is not acceptable. What I'm not so clear on is how big of a deal this is sin-wise. It's likely pretty small potatoes, if sinful at all. It does show a certain less-than-ultra-devout Mormon faith, which, I think is the interesting part. People like the Romneys are fairly comfortable, though, with feeling that rules apply to everyone but them.
ReplyDeleteWhy are these people still making the rounds on tv talk shows? The election is over. What is it about "no way" they don't get?
ReplyDeleteTook place in Sept.
DeleteI had noticed in the "kitchen picture" that it sort of looked like she wasn't wearing a bra but that there was "something" under her shirt. Now I get it.
ReplyDeleteAt the Al Smith dinner she was sporting some cleavage that is not possible in those garmets.
ReplyDeleteAnd there are pics of her on google wearing sleeveless shirts/dresses. Big no-no.
DeleteBoy, they look uncomfortable.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't wear them either.
I assume that at least one member of perhaps the most famous Mormon family got a pass on the magic panties.
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine how Marie Osmond would have fit her special undies under those costumes on Dancing with the Stars or in her stage shows.
Guess it's okay if you're bringing in that much money for the church.
I remember people talking about this when Carmen Rasmussen was on American Idol.
DeleteThe only undergarments that Ann wears come from Lord and Taylor's and are made from French silk, certainly not some lumpy cotton/spandex blend one size fits all underroos. And Mittens only wears silk boxers don't cha know!
ReplyDeleteAnd now we know the reason they didn't win the election! LMAO!
What a CULT, demanding them to wear special underwear. Nothing more than a CULT.
ReplyDeleteThey don't just expect you to wear the garments-- you are expected to BUY THEM. And the only approved salesman? The Church. (Hmmmmmmmmmmm)
DeleteI wouldn't be surprised if she had them on but hemmed them up.
ReplyDeleteI'll bet plenty of other Mormon wives tailor the magic underwear.
I had a choir teacher in High School who was Mormon. He wore the magic underwear under his pants. You could see the hem line of them under the pant legs and his pants were NOT narrow leg or form fitting. The guy was over fifty and not a fashion plate.
I find the whole thing bizarre. Could it be that there was a Mormon Bishop way back that owned a factory that manufactured these and that is why the flock was required to buy them? Just to keep the ol' Bishop in business and making a nice profit off the sheep?
Women don't get their own planets in any event -- only men do.
ReplyDeleteThe most Mormon women can aspire to in the afterlife is to be the chattel of husbands who are masters of their own planets.
Holy crap, how did they manage to knock out 5 kids with those on???
ReplyDeleteGryphen! The absolute LAST thing I needed in my head was this picture - even if it IS badly PS'ed!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteI don't care about their nasty old underweirds.
ReplyDeleteI am wondering why she looks like modelling after Sarah Palin with the black leather/pleather biker grandma look.
It seems much too youthful for her.
And we chuckled when Bill Clinton was asked "boxers or briefs?" Hard to take someone seriously when they wear magic underwear.
ReplyDeleteSo, out of curiosity, how does one go swimming if you have to wear those all the time?
ReplyDeleteThey are only magic if the skid marks left behind "majically" disappear...
ReplyDeleteAs someone who stupidly spent 20 years wearing the sacred magic Mormon underwear (hey, I wised up, okay?), I can tell you that I have seen plenty of pictures (and some video) that lead me to believe conclusively that Ann Romney does not wear garments. She wears sleeveless dresses and tops that couldn't possibly accommodate the cap sleeves of the garment tops, and she wears skirts that are just too short and tight to cover garment bottoms, even the petite length. And I've also seen her with necklines too low for her to be wearing a garment top.
ReplyDeleteMost Mormons, if they're honest with themselves, also acknowledge that Queen Ann does not wear garments. But their explanation (at least the one I've heard) is that she got special permission from the First Presidency not to wear them for the campaign. Doesn't really make any sense, but hey, Mormons tell themselves a lot of things that don't make sense, so whatever.
My theory is that, as usual, the Romneys don't think that the rules apply to them. Or maybe Queen Ann isn't really the true believing Mormon she claims to be. After all, she wasn't raised in the faith. She only converted when she and Mitt were about to get married. Maybe she never *really* converted, if you know what I mean. Maybe she just went through the motions to land a guy from a rich family, a guy that she thought had earning potential. And if you don't really believe in the creepy religion, why wear the creepy underwear?
Someone has made a very lucretive living off this underwear.
ReplyDeleteThis underwear thing is a hoot. DidJesus wear garments to be the holeiest man ever to walk this earth?Did god make this a commandment?
ReplyDelete