While organizing long term storage boxes the other day, I found a pair of garments that my mom had saved. They were in a box that contained my grandmother's and great grandparent's things.

They are to the ankle and to the wrist. There is a collar around the neck. They close with 4 pairs of strings and the marks are quite different in that they actually "pass through" with a tiny little speck of fabric sewn on the back, exactly like the veil in the temple.

I would expect this to be a cotton, but it seems more like a rayon or a silk.

Does anybody on the board have knowledge of the details of vintage garmies?



I guess I scored some crotchless grannie panties. Yay for me.



https://imgur.com/a/LGIz287



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/17/2019 06:41PM by Levi.

Here you go.

https://www.religiousstudiesproject.com/podcast/lds-garments-and-agency/

thank you very much!

My pleasure, Levi.

Temple garments haven't really kept up with the changing fashions, especially for women.

In the 1800s they weren't a big deal because woman wore many layers of clothing with long skirts/dresses and blouses.

Today, women wear shorts, sleeveless shirts, shorter dresses/skirts and tighter pants - thanks to the new stretchy fibers in everything, and have to select clothing that will hide the garments, which isn't always easy. When I was TBM I always dressed modestly but still those pesky garments poked through my cloths and the garment lines were visible through my bluejeans and other pants. An obnoxious guy once pointed to the bulge of the garment line in my pants and asked me if I was wearing a girdle. I was so embarrassed.

I've got a pair in my closet that meet that description, probably from the 40's? not sure, I inherited a lot of junk. They must have been used in temples but not worn around everyday.

I've also got an authentic WW2 navy outfit. They also use the draw string, no buttons.

These are the old "ordinance garments" that we had to wear not all that long ago in the temple. When you went to the temple for anything, even including dead-dunking, you could not use regular (the temple people called regular garments "street garments), but had to wear the old-fashioned long-handled garments. Please note that they have no crotch, causing men to often have visible pubic hair when wearing those tight jump suit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/20/2019 11:55AM by cludgie.

In the back of my head was ordinance garmies, but that practice ceased long before I went, and I went 30 years ago. Any idea when that practice ended?

As with many changes in the church, it was probably because a sufficient number of the right people (GA family members) complained enough.

It was still going on in the 1980's at some point. I attended the temple less and less frequently. The abandonment of ordinance garments was announced in priesthood meeting, but I can't remember when.

My TBM grandmother wore that type of a garment. She was from pioneer parents, and dressed accordingly as a young woman growing up in rural Idaho and Wyoming. After she and grandpa were sealed in the temple that was the garment style she wore at least until they were modified later in maybe the 1930's or 40's. I'm really not sure of the timeline changes. But slowly they shifted to what they are today. Still course and un-sexy. Albeit my grandpa found my grandma very desirable throughout their married life. For him it was love at first sight from the time they met. They married 2-3 year later and had a very long lasting and loving marriage.

Gramps used to say (according to my dad,) that he wished grandma could have held the keys to the priesthood. He saw no reason why women should be denied the priesthood. He felt they were as qualified, sometimes moreso than their male counteparts. He considered my grandmother his equal, not his subservient. Maybe that's why their marriage stood the test of time. That, and he adored her. :)

Haw-haw-haw! Still laughing!

"Crotchless grannie panties"

You described them perfectly, without anyone's help!

My aunt wore what they used to call "open crotch" garments, and her legs were too thick for her to keep her knees together when she sat on her low couch. Everyone got an eyefull!

Typical of Mormonism: the outcome is the opposite of the supposed intention. In this case: modesty.

It would be interesting to know exactly when, and under who's authority, garments were shortened. My great grandma used to wear the full-length, until the 1960's. She was tall and long-legged (gorgeous in her day) and they reached about mid-calf, so she was able to show some ankle in her dresses.

exminion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> It would be interesting to know exactly when, and
> under who's authority, garments were shortened.

It was Heber J. Grant, who became the prophet in 1918 after Joseph F. Smith died. Smith had specifically said that the garment style would never change in deference to modern fashion, but Grant did it.

Wearing the newer version was optional, and many faithful older Mormons continued to wear the old style. Partly because that's all they had and didn't want to buy new.

And the old style was still required for endowments in the temple at least through the 1950s - I had a pair that was in my temple suitcase, along with a white towel for use in the washing/anointing (which you had to go through for every endowment)