In an announcement that upset many adherents to the Latter-day Saint faith, Church spokesman L.L.S.B. Willard Hayes McLellan, Jr., relayed the bad news. "President Nelson has impressed upon my mind the importance of wearing dull colors. Whenever a Latter-day Saint purchases or wears bright-colored clothing, Satan laughs with glee. Consequently, the Church discourages the wearing of bright colors and white clothes, in accordance with the will of God."

satire

Your confusion rests on the fact that you KNOW the church has GAs who you believe would take just such a stand. The plausibility is what makes the satire work.

It's not like you read on Drudge that our sitting President had pledged to give up using Twitter; you absolute very first thought would be, "never happen."

Also known as a poe.

a few yrs ago, there was a rumor that a certain (un-named, no location) SP decreed that a certain (Dockers) brand of slacks were not allowed at SM / to church (!)

I told an ultra TBM friend of mine about this <as a rumor>, friend seriously said that the SP has 'authority' to make that decision.

seriously, folks.

Why shouldn't Satan have a chance to get his jollies like everyone else? The poor guy gets a lot of bad press, and his job isn't very self-actualizing. It's got to get a little boring and discouraging at times....

church spokesman: "L.L.S.B. Willard Hayes McLellan, Jr." is about three too many initials even for a Mormon.

Other than that, it pretty much describes actual policy, except that there is a strong preference for white shirts and dark everything else for men. The earth-tone scheme applies mostly to women's attire. However light pastel tones in season are also acceptable. Some understated pattern, floral prints are fine. Bright colors, such as lime green/day-glo orange combinations would be frowned upon. Halloween black-and-orange themes would be frowned upon. largish bright red polka dots on a white background would be frowned upon. A print with a mickey mouse and minnie mouse head theme would be frowned upon.

You don't want to be frowned upon. You know certain things will be frowned upon. Therefore, there is a real policy for all practical purposes.

You can probably get away with earth-toned pants, dr

Or just wear really dirty pants.

If it is the kind of dirt that creates random patterns resulting in some of the patterns being subliminally suggestive of erogenous themes, then you may be called in for a discussion and a hose down. That's what happened to me several times each year before the laundry center opened up near our trailer park. They didn't mind the odor. Just the subliminally suggestive shapes that the dirt made.

Back when I was still attending, some of the more daring menfolk would wear cartoon character ties. Such rebels!

some of the stuffier stuffed shirts in the ward.

But I was a rebel without claws. So I just shrugged it off.

In the 70s a lot of us ditched the tie and wore turtle necks with a jacket. No one said a word.

I've been in wards where we wore bolo ties and boots.

.

Shinehah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Back when I was still attending, some of the more
> daring menfolk would wear cartoon character ties.
> Such rebels!

I've mentioned this here before...when I was 17, my then-girlfriend made me a Mickey Mouse-themed tie. I wore it to church.
The bishop pulled me aside, and told me my tie was inappropriate. He asked me where I got it.
I told him his daughter (who I was dating) made it for me, and asked me to wear it to church.

:)

Wow, OK--I didn't think my fake article would get this much traction. Yes, it's satire. The church still "recommends" (requires) white shirts for men and white clothes for everyone in the temple.

But, it's precisely because you COULD see them doing something as stupid as this that the satire works.

It's a typical modern lds attack on free-agency, individual choice, and personal freedom, from the misleaders to the mislead.

When I was a kid we were SUPPOSED TO HAVE [had] (there was a thing called) free-agency, WHICH MEANT (means) you could THINK any way you want, dress however you please, say what you felt like saying, and do whatever you wanted . You couldn't do that [ANYTHING] but that's what it meant.

He/ LDS 'church' [mis]leaders are saying DON'T BE YOURSELF, when they say things like these, which is 90% of the time (It takes them 10% of the time to open - and SHUT - their mouths, in a nod to tscc's leasthood body). He was saying "be invisible".

M@t

*I* wrote the original article last week. It isn't real, folks.

...you say no, but in reality, it is something discussed, if only in the Bishop or Stake President's offices. Like "excessive laughter", the idea of flashy or trendy styles reflect the somewhat undisciplined ideas that the "members should be made aware of". I have heard different variants on this topic over the years. No, it's not policy, but it lurks under the surface.

Yes, there is an element of truth, in that I was making fun of the Church's control of its members, their stupidity in following every dictate from SLC blindly, and their disavowal of their own history.

But no, they aren't thinking of banning white temple clothes (yet), so in that sense, the OP can rest assured.

Anziano Young Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wrote the original article last week.
>

I'm not talking about an article - If you are, you might site it - and one wasn't linked by the OP or others.

My comment refers to general LDSpeak.
Curious about this 'article'

It's right here: https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2170690

The OP's post is one paragraph lifted directly from my "article."

Anziano Young Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's right here:
> https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2170690
>

Now are we supposed to comment on that 'particle' [part artifact, part article] first and then come back here and comment on this?

Just saying it might have been good to post under OPie, but, I'm just finishing dinner anyway, and will think about desert later.

I'll consider your article, or comment, and comment, if and when I can. Currently I mostly freeze, dehydrate and juice. Thanks

What about yoga pants? Especially with thin, semi-diaphanous dresses?

Just to chime in here, yes, the original source stuff WAS satire, but my mother lived it.

She married in 1966 to a man who really just needed a maid for his 4 kids. He kept her in the DOWDIEST browns/grays/dark navy blue. I mean he forbade her from bright colors. She kept "his favorite" as a reminder of what a wretched life that was.

He showed up at church one day without warning. My mom was wearing a royal blue dress and he gave her stink eye.

COJCLDS: Tough on happiness, tough on the causes of happiness.