The Rexburg Response to Pants to Church

As we approach the two year anniversary of my wearing #PantsToChurch, I asked the UVSJ editor to search and send me two of the most popular "letters to the editor" written in response to their front page article they blindsided me with. I'll be publishing a response to these two letters tomorrow over at Wheat and Tares.

I wear a skirt to church

Dear Editor,

In our culture, the strongest meaning associated with a skirt is femininity. It is not weakness or inequality. Especially not these days.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has proclaimed, “Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.” It may not be a very popular view these days, but that doesn’t keep it from being true.

Out of practicality and comfort, I generally wear pants throughout the week, but when I want to highlight my femininity, I wear a skirt. That is why I wear a skirt to church. I believe wearing a skirt helps me pay reverence to my divine femininity and the Creator who made me. This reverence is part of my worship. The way I dress not only shows reverence, but that I embrace the revealed truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I do not believe there will ever be a revelation declaring that women will be priesthood bearers. Women already have the opportunity to participate in the priesthood and in priesthood ordinances as much as men have the opportunity to participate in child bearing and child rearing. It is equal.

While the roles are different, that’s the way it should be. God intended for certain roles of men and women to be different because each is a vital role. He wanted us to realize that we can’t do it alone, that we need each other. If one or the other gender had the ability to perform all vital roles in life, it would make it so we felt that one gender didn’t need the other.

The divine feminine and the divine masculine are inseparable. I glory in the creation and wisdom of God. That is why I put a skirt on when I go to church to worship Him.

Sincerely,

Heather Duncan

Rexburg

Make the best offering possible

Editor,

Regarding the thoughtful and thought-provoking Dec. 19 article regarding Ms. Anderson’s wearing of pants to church meetings, it’s always healthy to live the examined life, isn’t it?

Here are some thoughts also to be considered: as vital as love and inclusion are, scripture and prophets give at least as much weight to submission and deference to God and approaching Him His way.

There are great lessons about making our best offering to God, which specifically includes our dress. I, too, have had the opportunity to travel, and am so impressed with the love for God I see among the poor and, in humble circumstances, their wanting to make their best offering to God, expressed in their dress as they come to worship.

There is the point, making the best offering possible. People initially "come as they are" and are welcomed, then progress to come as God wants them to be. A cardinal principle I’ve found in worshiping and approaching God is that we always do so His way, as He asks.

I can only speak for myself, but if I were to approach God making anything but my best offering, reflected in my dress, that would interfere with my worship. It’s never about me.

Someone who hasn’t given the same amount of thought to issues as Ms. Anderson might make that mistake. And since Paul was invoked, he also spoke strongly to the strong in the faith to not introduce behaviors into the church that might be a stumbling block to the weaker in the faith, for the faithful who are confident in their relationship with God to cause a distraction for others approaching Him. That would be contrary to inclusive discipleship.

He also spoke specifically of customs of the day and warned, though obviously transitory, that not living inside those customs could be a distraction for our brothers and sisters.

Greg Palmer

Rexburg

Moderate Mormon Feminist Wish List 2015

We saw a lot of feminist changes in the year 2014 in the LDS church, big and small. We saw women of color praying for the first time in a General LDS Meeting, CES policy changes of women with children at being able to teach as a full-time employee, and many more.  As a moderate Mormon Feminist, I advocate for baby step changes that help expand the understanding of the role of women in God's plan. This morning on twitter I put together a list of wishes of my own, big and small, that I'd like to see happen as a Mormon Feminist in 2015:

• Women may serve as witnesses in and out of the temple 
• Women can serve in Sunday School Presidencies (and eventually, as Clerks)
• Primary teachers will share stories of women from the scriptures for our young girls and boys to look up to.
• more depictions of biblical characters as not just white Europeans
• That I never hear another lds (wo)man say "I don't respect women who don't respect themselves by covering up" and instead respect all humans regardless of what they wear because they are children of God.
• That lds youth will learn principles of +body image in modesty lessons  
• never give up hope, be grateful and long suffering 
• We begin celebrating all the ways fathers nurture children
• a new policy that allows women to hold their babies for their blessing   
• No more Mormon LGBTQ suicides. No more homeless Mormon LGBTQ youth. 
• the #ldsChurch change the name of priesthood session during #ldsconf to "Men's Session"
• That mothers of children younger than 18 can be temple workers just like fathers can.  
• My daughter's activity day leaders will skip modesty shaming and have a career exploration day
• be grateful for baby steps and bear my Christ-based testimony more often
• a woman of color praying in a general session of #ldsconf 
• that wearing #pantstochurch isn't seen as a protest or statement, but just a valid choice for Sunday best
• when possible, replace "Heavenly Father" with "heavenly parents"
• the #ldsChurch curriculum department produces a "Teachings of Eliza R. Snow" for 2016
• more 8-11 yo girls get to participate in pinewood derbies than ever before 
• when teaching the law of chastity, we cover consent - what it is and isn't, and help a lot of people avoid a visit to the bishop's office this year

Change has got to start somewhere, right? Do you have any Mormon Feminist Wishes for 2015? Remember to be grateful for every baby step change, and remember that the core of what we want is to improve Zion with a heart full of love!

Best Frenemies

I was invited to guest post at Wheat and Tares again. The link can be found here:

 

Best Frenemies

Does Mormon Feminsm Hurt the LDS Church?

There was quite a popular post that made the rounds of the Internets lately, one called "Ordain Women: thanks for nothing" on Millennial Star, a conservative thought bastion of the Bloggernacle.  There is a wide divide of understanding of what people think OW is doing, and what they are actually doing, I don't want to focus on her misunderstandings and mischaracterizations of them, but of this quote:

However, what the OW have done is take their cause to the Court of Public Opinion. Innumerable news outlets have covered the story, painting a picture of courageous, marginalized women finally standing up against centuries of oppression from a religious institution bent on discrimination.

Essentially, dragging my beloved Church through the muck of spin and sophistry.  Some of the headlines are truly nauseating to me “LDS Church says Hugs and Heart-felt Conversations ‘Divisive’” “Mormons Exclude Women from All-Male Meeting” and endless articles more. If you choose to violate the useful maxim “Don’t Read the Comments” you will find hundreds of folks chiming in to damn the Mormon church, Christianity and all religions and belief systems of every kind. 

Allow me to pose a few questions. When a group decides to take an issue to the media, exposing it to scorn, ridicule and hatred, does it increase interest in the Church or decrease it? Will the media coverage inspire individuals seeking for the truth to look at the Church? Or to turn away in disgust?

I submit that the actions of OW and its subsequent media attention will make it more difficult to overcome the wave of anti-religious sentiment that is sweeping our society, that it will inhibit the work of the Lord and the work of missionaries. In this way, it is contrary to building the Kingdom of God. 

Who stands to benefit from the clamor and calumny that result from OW? I’m going to go ahead and say it, Satan. Yeah, I’m sure that he is reveling in the disruption to the work of the Lord because of the methods of the OW movement. And in the resulting contention and war of words between church members because of it.

I have no doubt that Satan is behind the contention and hateful things being said about each other within the Church in this situation (both sides are guilty of a lack of Christlike, empathetic understanding - don't even get me started about the 'they are stoning my prophets' accusation . . . gag).  I do take issue that she represents the troll-hating comments on the internet as representative of the responses of people to the article.  Most people who are open-minded, thoughtful, interested people (1) don't comment (2) don't read troll-hate comments (3) if they do, they see them for what they are, hateful trolls who don't add value to a discussion.  That's just a part of the Internet, no matter what topic. 

I want to take issue with her assertion that public Mormon feminism hurts the Church.  Have you ever heard of the adage, "There's no such thing as bad press?"  First, let's examine another somewhat derogatory, very public Mormon spectacle at the moment:  The Book of Mormon Musical.  What has been the Church's response?  Advertising and using it as a conversion tool.  It's worked, we've had converts from people going to see TBoM Musical.  Second, has every single public coverage been nasty and negative?  I thought a lot of it was rather thoughtful and nuanced, even if it didn't favor the "traditional" viewpoint held by most members of the Church.  Especially the recent front-page NYT article about the growing role for Mormon women.  Seriously, you guys, you can't buy that kind of ad-space.

So why do I think all of the movements of public Mormon feminism isn't hurting the Church, but might actually help?  Well,  The SL Tribune recently ran an article about why did the nearly doubling of our missionary force numbers only produce a 4% increase in converts?  There are a variety of reasons, I'm sure.  One thing that stuck out to me was when I saw this tweet on Twitter.  I follow Neylan McBaine, an executive at Bonneville Communications and one of the brain-childs behind the "I'm a Mormon" campaign.  She also founded the Mormon Women Project.  I don't think she'd label herself a Mormon Feminist, but I love and respect her voice and the work she is doing to lift Mormon women's profile at the grassroots level.  She's amazing.  Back to the point, she retweeted this, which I think is telling, since she's basically one of the people over branding for the Mormon church.

I'm going to make a few assumptions here, but I don't think I'm going very far out on a limb.  I'd say that most non-Mormons closely associate the LDS church with socially conservative politics/the anti-gay marriage movement (prop 8), republicanism (Mitt Romney), polygamy (images of Big Love come to mind), conformity (white shirted missionaries all look the same, stepford wives), and the corporatization and $ the church holds (spent more $ building a shopping mall than on humanitarian efforts).

And what could change people's stereotype perceptions of what a Mormon is, or what a Mormon has to be, than an article about how Mormon women wore pants to church? What if a woman is looking for a Church to join and wants to make sure she'll find one that will welcome her wearing pants?  But she's always thought Mormonism was part of the right-wing Christian political movement?  Maybe she'll take a second look because after reading that article she thinks she might be welcome there, that she might have been wrong about what Mormonism is.  Perhaps changing people's ideas of what a Mormon is needs to happen before they'll let Missionaries in and listen to what they have to say.  That, I think, may actually spread the Gospel.  But not the articles about how they received death threats.   Above the author says, "media attention will make it more difficult to overcome the wave of anti-religious sentiment that is sweeping our society, that it will inhibit the work of the Lord and the work of missionaries."  I think one of the things fueling the anti-religious sentiment in our society is the awful, un-Christlike things said and done in the name of religion.  Maybe the hostility to different opinions on doctrine and perceptions of how to view the Gospel of Jesus Christ is what is hurting the message. In fact I find it telling that the people in charge of the 'I am a Mormon' campaign purposefully present as many of diverse and non-conformist profiles as possible. 

I haven't shared this publicly before, but I was interviewed by a freelance journalist who was doing an article on the complexity of Mormon feminism.  It's not an article about Mormonism, it doesn't want to teach you about our beliefs or doctrines or preach to you or convert you.  Originally The Atlantic planned to publish it and they dropped it in favor of a more controversial MoFem story - the journalist shopped around until he found a publishing space.  It turns out The Toast, a very secular feminist website, agreed to publish it here: "Like Wearing Pants to Church".  I didn't share it before because right next to my article was one on transgender issues - and that most people I know will NOT be comfortable on this website and the things they say or discuss.  If you do choose to go read it, I want to ask you to then read the comments and hear what secular humanist feminists have to say about how it changed their stereotype of religious or Mormons.  This is a good thing, I think.   Is there only one way to be a good Mormon?  We're supposed to spread the Gospel to all the world, but are we going to screen out all progressives, feminists, etc. because they won't be welcome here?  Do we really want to put ourselves into this situation? 

This is one of the reasons I have not joined the Facebook Group "Mormon Women Stand."  Like Lisa Downing, a conservative convert to the Mormon Church living in Texas, in a post about her conversion  on her blog "Life Outside the Book of Mormon Belt":

A new Facebook page, Mormon Women Stand, has gained broad appeal and describes itself as a group of “LDS Women who, without hesitation, sustain the Lord’s Prophet, the Family Proclamation as doctrine and our divine role as covenant women for Christ.” In the Guidelines on Discussion and Tone, we find, “Discussions focused on questioning, debating, and doubting gospel principles do little to build the kingdom of God.” The passage then states: “With this in mind, anything contentious, contrary to or criticizing the teachings, doctrines or leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on this page will not be welcome.”

I’m not sure how to react to this. If this group holds strictly to this platform, I, as a teenage investigator, would have had no place there. I (and my comments) would’ve been rejected for the very doubts, criticisms, and questions that lead to my testimony.  In fact, I don’t think I’m welcomed there now. I continue to have questions–real doubts about some things. Yet, I don’t feel my questions call into question my devotion to the Lord, my commitment to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or my willingness to sustain the current president and prophet.

There are a lot of men and women who feel alone, ostracized, and so afraid to share their thoughts.  Because it's not kosher for people to talk about questions or doubts, even how those lead to increased faith . . . there are many in our culture who need understanding so they don't feel they have to leave.  There really is a cultural belief that you are not a good Mormon if you have doubts or questions.  I know because consistently, several times per month, I get notes, messages, comments, or emails from people I have or haven't met thanking me for sharing.  For being a voice to throughts that they are terrified to say, because they see the reaction and abuse that members get who do share.  There are members of OW that receive the same types of notes.  Here is one note I received yesterday.

 I just wanted to tell you thanks for... all you post on Facebook and your blog. It's hard to find people who have similar views and even more difficult to find those who will share them. I think you are articulate, well reasoned, and brave. So thanks. You've helped me more than you realize.

You have fellow saints around you living in fear, and it's not healthy.  It needs to be acceptable for people to say, "I don't know.  I don't know if that's true but I'm studying it out and pondering it in my mind.  I'm going to give myself room to think/study/ponder/pray about this topic/quote/subject."

Many of these doubts and questions concern our doctrines, practices, and history or past.  I think anytime I'm presented with a perfectly clean history or hero (or even Church organization), a little bit of scrubbing has been done.  One thing that may have been stumbling block was that a some non-Mormons knew more historical facts about the Mormon church and Joseph Smith than a lot of Mormons.  For example, Joseph translating part of the Book of Mormon by putting his head in a hat and looking at a seer stone.  It's a historical fact, and the Church has been wont to publicize anything it doesn't think will build faith - recently it's been taking steps towards transparency, even acknowledging work with the seer stone in a series of essays it's been publishing to make our history more transparent (The essays include the Book of Mormon Translation,  Multiple Accounts of the First Vision,  Race and the Priesthood, Polygamy, DNA Studies, and the refutation that we believe we'll Become Like God and get our own planets).  I mean, they're not having bishops read the essays from the pulpit (I wish) but at least publishing them is a step.  Yay for steps.  This could actually be a step towards retention and new conversion!

In conclusion, I want everyone to get rid of the notion that the only thing good for the Church is to only have one perfect, conformist, foot forward.  The story of the bible is rife with imperfect humans and prophets and their story of their attempting to communicate with God and rise above this world.  You guys, the Bible is a mess!  We find ourselves in their weaknesses, and we know if they can do it, we can too.  Anytime you want to accuse Mormon feminists of being divisive and hurting the Church, I want you to remember the quote I shared from Rachel Held Evans on my own blog post about On Being Divisive and Becoming One:

I suspect Paul combined this call for the Body’s unity with an acknowledgement of the Body’s diversity because he knew that unity isn’t the same as uniformity.
We’re not called to be alike; we’re called to love.
We’re not called to agree; we’re called to love.
We’re not even called to get along all the time; we’re called to love each other as brothers and sisters, as people united in one baptism, one communion, one adoption.
Maybe we need these differences to be animated, to be alive, to mature. Maybe friction isn’t a sign of decay, but of growth.
The world is certainly watching. But this doesn't mean we hide our dirty laundry, slap on mechanical smiles, and gloss over all the injustices and abuses, conflicts and disagreements, diversity and denominationalism present within the Church;  it means we expose them. It means we talk about them boldly and with integrity, with passion and with love. I suspect that talking about our differences is better for our witness than suppressing them, and I'm sure that exposing corruption and abuse is better for our witness than hiding them.
And when it comes to injustice, a far more important question to me than "What will the world think if they see us disagreeing?" is "What will the world think if they don't?"

My Response to the Standard Journal Article

Welcome if you are here from the Standard Journal newspaper article (I could have never guessed that wearing pants would be worthy of first page news, but I digress).

The editor of the newspaper asked if I would be willing to come in for an interview.  I felt more comfortable just sharing the opinions I stated earlier on my blog, but I talked to my husband and we agreed if the message was just about the things I shared on my blog we didn't see any harm.  It turns out what I thought would be a short feature on an inside of the newspaper turned into a front-page article, using a picture from this blog without permission.  I'm aware that I don't have a copyright statement on my blog - but that is not necessary as Blogger's Terms of Service clearly state I retain all ownership and rights to content and only Google is granted a license to use the content I share.  The point being is that by using the picture on my blog without permission (taking a picture my husband snapped for me that I asked him to as we were packing up to leave church -- so that I could keep one in my memory book) it makes the impression that the picture was taken at my church so I could be in the newspaper.  That is entirely not the case and was never my intent.  

I also wanted to state I believe there is a mis-statement in the article published about me.  I expressed that I felt I was the only feminist in Rexburg and it felt lonely sometimes.  The reporter assured me that he thought there were others out there that felt the same way and would I like to know them?  I said, sure I would love to know that I'm not the only one!

The middle and conclusion of the article states:

She feels there are other people in this region who share her feelings and hopes they will reach out to her in an effort to bring the issues to the forefront — and to be able to discuss it openly.

"Anderson said one of the reasons she wants to share her story is that she hopes to connect to other people in this area who share her views.
“I hope to connect with people locally,” said Anderson.
She is hoping anyone who might want to talk to her will visit her blog site where they can then send her an email. Her site is http://moderatemormonfeminist.blogspot.com."

I do not agree with that.  I do not want to start a movement or  get people to connect or bring issues to the forefront and start something.  It is nice to know I'm not the only one in Rexburg, so go ahead and comment and say hi.  But leave it at that.  I'm not trying to get blog followers - I post about once a month.  This is a very personal thing where I decided to share opinions to be a part of the conversation, not to be an activist. 

 In an email to the editor, I said "Would you mind ending with this quote instead of saying my goal is to make connections, but instead to share this message?

"There may be others out there with opinions like mine.  I would say to them it is possible to follow the prophet, be a faithful Mormon, and a feminist!  Others may reject you or decide not to associate with you, but you are a member of the Church of Jesus Christ and you belong here!  You are welcome.  Do not let negative interactions with others be a stumbling block and keep you from full fellowship.  Don't hold feelings of anger or bitterness, but be full of love and faith in the future.  You are not alone!"

The editor left the message about making connections.  I wanted to apologize to any local neighbors and church members who may feel that this was an issue where manipulation was used to get attention and publicity.  Truly and sincerely that is not the case.  I am not apologizing for wearing pants - that was a matter of prayer for me and I have no regret attached to that decision. 

Sincerely,
Kristine Anderson

Why I Wore Pants

I wore pants to church today.  I did not participate in the pants event last year, the stated purpose last year was "to bring attention to gender inequality".  This year the purpose is to "celebrate the inclusiveness of the Gospel" and I decided to this year.  I cannot control what other people think about me, or why they assume I do the things I do -- that is out of my control.  But since I did receive a question about my motivations today, I thought I would share.

(I saw someone else share their reasons this way online so I wanted to borrow it)  Here are NOT reasons that I wore pants. 

1. Because I think women should be ordained to the priesthood.  No, I do not believe this.  I do believe women already exercise Melchezidek priesthood authority in our temples, which proves that priesthood is not gender exclusive.  I also believe there is more to be revealed regarding women and the priesthood, and how the priesthood functions in the next life.  But I do not support the Ordain Women movement.  There may be women who believe this that are wearing pants, I am not one of them.
2. Because I think there are no innate differences between men and women.  No, I believe there are essential physical and spiritual differences and gifts to men and women.  I don't believe those are best described by the words "leader" and "nurturer" -- but I believe there are differences and I have no problem with gendered organizations and meetings, ie Priesthood Quorums, Relief Society, etc.  I also believe that perfection in Godhood is realized by Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother becoming one.
3. Because I want to protest at Church and be in everyone's face about an "issue".   No, I'm not protesting anything.  I came to church to worship God and partake of the sacrament.
4. Because I'm a liberal/democrat Mormon.   No, you may be surprised to know I've never voted for a democrat, although I would describe myself as politically centrist.
5. Because I have a lot of friends all wearing pants together as a group.  No, I was the only woman I know of in Rexburg-land wearing pants.  I'm sure there may be others.  I saw hide nor hair of them today.
6. Because I think all women should stop wearing dresses and skirts to Church and wear pants.  No, we should wear what we all decide is best for us to church wear to church.
7. Because I wish I were a man.  No, my nine-year-old self used to feel this way when I was forced to wear my first training bra; but no, I'm very happy being a woman.

I am a practical girl at heart, I wear what keeps me warm, comfortable, and happy.  Any fellow Rexburgians out there can attest to the fact I wear my large furry Russian winter hat indoors and out whenever I feel cold - even throughout the whole ward Christmas dinner.  Because cold.  So there are many reasons why I wanted to wear pants - these are listed as items 3-7.  The reasons why I chose to wear pants are 1-2, because when it comes down to it, I truly am a practical pragmatist.  

1. Because it is so, so cold in Rexburg.   Truly, I am more sensitive to cold than most people I know.  I wear jackets in 70* weather and don't wear shorts until it's 80* outside.  Last week I also wore pants when it was -20* windchill and exposed skin was at risk for frostbite.  I wore pants again today at 22* and it wasn't too bad.  I think from now on my personal rule is if it's below zero, the pants come out.  
2. Because in Primary sometimes I'm crawling on the ground.  As a Primary Chorister it is easier for me to feel confident I'm not flashing anything to anyone.  I have friends who serve in nursery who find it infinitely easier to live the principle of modesty while doing their callings in pants.  As an aside, I also think sister missionaries should be allowed to wear pants because it's often cold and they ride their bikes.  Who thinks it's safe, appropriate, or modest to ride a bike in a skirt or dress?  Yikes, the stories of accidental flashings and bike crashes!
3. Because I'd like to celebrate and create inclusiveness in the LDS church.  Because there is not one right way to be a good Mormon woman.  Because I'd like to support those who have ever felt excluded at church for whatever reason.  This reason hits several points for me.  First, I have never felt like an outsider until I was not able to have children, and then end up living in a ward with many young mothers.  It was often awkward, painful, and frustrating.  Especially when it seemed every RS lesson would start with, "I know today's lesson is about "faith" (or "prayer" or "tithing") so I decided to teach my lesson about how to teach your children "faith" or "to pray" or "to pay tithing".  There are a myriad of reasons to feel like you do not fit into LDS culture, be you single, working mother, childless, liberal/democrat, feminist, black, LGBT, etc.  Over the past year since feeling prompted to start my blog about my "feminism" I've been called apostate, told that I was destroying others' faith, that I'm not qualified to teach youth lessons on priesthood, that I'm attacking the Prophet, etc.  Last year some women received death threats for wearing pants to church.  This is one way for me to support others and love and include others and say all are welcome here. 
4. Because I personally have come to realize there is a difference between LDS cultural expectations and the pure Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.  The only reasons I had NOT to wear pants to church is because (1) what other people would think of me and (2) because "it's not what girls are supposed to do".  In other words, it's a cultural expectation or norm.  I do not believe I have to wear a skirt or dress to be feminine.  All angels and people in the afterlife in LDS art and movies are depicted wearing robes, regardless of gender.  Our Savior challenged the social norms of his day.  He interacted and loved people the religious leaders shunned: women, prostitutes, publicans, Samaritans, lepers, etc.  He often broke rules that others considered sacred, that weren't based in scripture nor the Gospel.  He fought against the religious people whose outward dress and behaviors were supposed to measure their spirituality.

   The worst sinners, according to Jesus, are not the harlots and publicans, but the religious leaders with their insistence on proper dress and grooming, their careful observance of all the rules, their precious concern for status symbols, their strict legality, their pious patriotism... the haircut becomes the test of virtue in a world where Satan deceives and rules by appearances.

   Hugh Nibley, Waterman, Brian and Kagel, Brian Kagel. The Lord's University: Freedom and Authority at BYU. Signature Books. 1998

5.  Because I want to live by the principle of wearing my "Sunday Best" to church, and I don't think that requires a dress or skirt.   I consider my nice pants to be dressier than quite a few of my skirts and dresses.  In the past when I needed to be warm at church I wore my really long, ankle-length jean skirt (looks kind of pioneer style).  My black pants are much more "Sunday Best" than that skirt.  Also pants are not a masculine form of dress.  During the week when I wear pants I'm not dressing like a boy, pants are now gender neutral in our culture.  So factoring in that I don't think wearing pants is any show of disrespect in sacrament or Sunday - and there is no rule or guideline that women must wear pants, it all just comes down to a decision between me and the Lord about what is appropriate.  Based on my beliefs on modesty I shared earlier, if I feel Heavenly Father accepts what I wear, I don't need to worry about anyone else.     p.s.  Scott Trotter, an LDS spokesman, responded to last year’s event by saying “Attending church is about worship and learning to be followers of Jesus Christ. Generally church members are encouraged to wear their best clothing as a sign of respect for the Savior, but we don’t counsel people beyond that” (Dec. 11, 2012). 
6. Because even though I believe in differences in gender, I don't believe gender roles should be taught so exclusively.  I've shared before that my life was infinitely blessed when I realized we are all sent here as individuals to use our talents to build the Kingdom of God and NOT just to fill our roles as men and women.  For most people that includes men providing for their families and women raising the children and that is wonderful.  Personally, for me, it would have been easier to follow God's path for my life if I had not believed in gender roles so fervently; but if I had been more open to the fact that God very often leads you on a path that is different than the norm.  That it isn't a bad or negative thing to experience, only to be endured to the end, that it can be embraced and celebrated.  That we should spend more time teaching about how to receive and recognize personal revelation in our lives, and less time already assuming what God's will is in our own and others' lives. 
7. Because I feel that is another step of me being who I genuinely am.  That I can outwardly dress and share who I am and what I believe on the inside.   Others don't have to share my opinions or thoughts.  But I should be who I am, and I shouldn't hide or hesitate or apologize.  I should not be abrasive or in your face, but loving and kind and open. 

So that pretty much sums it up - because it's not an easy answer . . . there are many reasons.  There may even be more that I haven't articulated even to myself yet, but I'll stop there - for all of our sakes.
Remember, Love each other!