I just saw a commercial for the diet company Marie Osmond promotes (Nutri-system?-I really don't know since I was paying attention to something else.) In the commercial she is wearing a white shirt and it is quite clear that she is not wearing a garment top underneath. As a matter of fact, on a wide shot you can see that the torso area is skin color. Now I know that many will conjecture that she "gets away with it" because she's royalty but I'm starting to wonder if it may be something else.
Do you think perhaps this is a conscious effort on the church's part? I'm thinking that due to all of the outright expose of garments to the general public (not too many years ago most people had never heard of "Mormon underwear"-now I think it may be common knowledge) that the someone came up with the idea that it might be a good idea to let high profile people go visibly without this Mormon sartorial peculiarity for the sake of dispelling the idea that they actually DO wear them? I mean it's really a weird weird custom and sours people's view of Mormons. If they can call the practice into question in the eyes of the general public-"Gee, I saw Marie Osmond and there was no way she could be wearing weird underwear like I've been told so it must not be true".
....or she's gone NOM but TSCC keep it quiet because she has been used by them for propaganda in the past? She also might not want to tell people because of pride and not wanting to admit she was wrong
Celebrities in Mormonism are always exempt from garments. Garments are for the rank and file member only. The Cult always looks the other way because it likes the PR. See this celebrity that is Mormon? See how normal we are? Usually celebrities hand over large sums of cash (see Romney) on an annual basis. Money and PR always trump rules.
I remember my mother having a hissy back in the early 80s that Marie wasn't wearing garments after the birth of her first child (in her first marriage). So this may be a long-standing practice of Marie's. Good for her. Way to stick it to the man! (There is some sarcasm in those last two sentences.)
If that is the case then how is it she remarried her first husband in the temple a few years back? I know that Mormon "royalty" gets a break on some things but I don't think that public drinking would be one of them.
Some people marry in the temple without it being a sealing (if that's the right word). My brother, a widower, married again in the temple but it was just a plain everyday marriage.
It's called marriage in the temple for time only. One of the requirements to be able to do this is that neither the man or the woman has been involved in any divorce while a member of the church. That requirement seems to be arbitrary. My brother and his second wife had a time only ceremony and they were both divorced, and Marie was definately divorced.
In winter 1992/3 in Green Bay,WI Marie and the Oak Ridge Boys came to town. The local arena was packed. Somehow, by the grace of Joseph Smith, somebody in the ward called to ask us mishies if we wanted to go. Again, by the grace of Brigham Young, we got backstage passes. (Even now I don't know how it all happened, truly a blessing.) So we got to hang out in a tour trailer with Marie. I got my picture taken with her.
Then I asked her how she dealt with not wearing garments...
She said "not when I perform."
OMFG- I asked a female celebrity, as a mishie, about her panties.
I'm so embarrassed. My mom still has the pic if you don't believe me.
Garments are not appropriate for many ocassions. I learned that early one. We don't wear them swimming for instance. We don't wear them when they are clearly in appropriate in any manner.
Ms Osmond has a right to wear what she thinks is appropriate for the activities she is engaged in. Many times, the garment would not be appropriate or draw undue attention to her underwear. Many LDS believers understand this principle.
I respect Ms. Osmond's right to know what is appropriate and what is not!
TSCC has No Need to publicaly jetison their sayings/'requirements' about garments, they're part of the Temple/revenue stream model.
IF they ever commented about Marie, Steve Young, etc.. it w/could only be like: 'We teach people, we don't control them; individual cases shouldn't be a guide or example for others (ha ha).
Whats with judging people for doing what many of us do here. I don't wear garments and occasionally attend boring shot a hole in my head Mormon meetings. Does that make me a hypocrite?
I don't think it's about Marie not wearing garments while she entertains, I don't care. The church makes such an issue over their celebrity members and the world does not know the issue made about wearing garments night and day, when you are doing yard work etc. To the everyday mormon the double standard prevails and it gets tedious.
First of all, at work here, I can't listen to the sound so I made some assumptions...
She's on their talk show with her brother Donny, talking about DWTS...understandable.
Another clip from a news/morning show showed her talking...and again her brother is there. I've seen many other shows where she was interviewed and Donny seemed to always be with her.
She's FIFTY years old and a seasoned performer/entertainer. She does NOT need her brother with her. If it's the preisthood thing where the man has to always be with her for some sort of approval/editorial of her comments, why isn't her husband with her?
When you hear about the magic undies, and no one remembers Ann Romney dressing weird or anything, no one gets any mental pictures of how ugly and weird they are, unless they come across the actual pics of people in the garmies. They just think it's a special bra and panties or camisole or something.
PR always always always trumps rules in TSCC. Especially for Mormon royalty. But I do also think people like Marie Osmond and the Romneys and Gladys Knight and others have absolutely zero belief in the church. They are total cultural mormons because there is no reason not to be and many bad ramifications if they left.
Gladys Knight might have been a convert, and from what I can tell, she has children and grandchildren who were raised in TSCC. It's possible that if she no longer believes, she's a cultural Mormon because of her family as she's really the reason they're TBM.
Mitt & Ann "believe" in LDS, Inc. as much as it benefits them financially and professionally. That's all the cult really expects out of them, because of their money.
Technically, any clothes Marie wears in her capacity as a performer & presenter are considered costumes. Costumes are basically exempt whether she's in a NutriSystem commercial or singing in concert.
I've worked with TBM actors before in the professional theatre, & they absolutely did not wear their garments under their costumes.