G's...

Public forum for those seeking support for their experience in the LDS Church.
Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16808
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: G's...

Post by Curt Sunshine » 19 Jul 2014, 12:41

I like that it isn't defined or explained, Sam. That makes it appropriate for each person to define it in whatever way makes sense to him or her.

It's when people try to come up with the one true, universal meaning that things get all wonky.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
SamBee
Posts: 5448
Joined: 14 Mar 2010, 04:55

Re: G's...

Post by SamBee » 19 Jul 2014, 14:44

Seriously I don't understand it. How do other people interpret it?
DASH1730 "An Area Authority...[was] asked...who...would go to the Telestial kingdom. His answer: "murderers, adulterers and a lot of surprised Mormons!"'
1ST PRES 1978 "[LDS] believe...there is truth in many religions and philosophies...good and great religious leaders... have raised the spiritual, moral, and ethical awareness of their people. When we speak of The [LDS] as the only true church...it is...authorized to administer the ordinances...by Jesus Christ... we do not mean... it is the only teacher of truth."

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16808
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: G's...

Post by Curt Sunshine » 19 Jul 2014, 15:16

"defile" = "to make foul, dirty, or unclean; pollute; taint; debase;" "to violate the chastity of;" "to make impure for ceremonial use; desecrate;" "to sully"

Spiritually / symbolically, I interpret it to mean that we commit not to do things that would be an offense to the idea of wearing something that symbolizes the priesthood with which we are endowed in the temple. That generally is discussed in terms of sin, but I like to think of it more expansively than that.

Physically / literally, I also interpret it to include treating it just like a regular old pair of underwear - like leaving it lying on the floor for a long period of time while it gets ripe and nasty.

It's that second interpretation that causes me to be totally fine with wearing it over regular underwear - or not wearing it while doing things that cause heavy sweating (like yard work, ironically) or the likelihood of extreme wear and tear - or anything else that a person sees as making it foul, dirty or unclean.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

amateurparent
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jan 2014, 20:43

Re: G's...

Post by amateurparent » 19 Jul 2014, 21:39

I am always surprised when I hear someone talk about wearing g's during intimate situations. I consider sex a sporting event that requires the appropriate apparel for the sport -- such as good lingerie.

Also .. I think God cares more about our kindness and compassion than he cares about our underwear.
I have no advance degrees in parenting. No national credentials. I am an amateur parent. I read, study, and learn all I can to be the best parent possible. Every time I think I have reached expert status with one child for one stage in their life, something changes and I am back to amateur status again. Now when I really mess up, I just apologize to my child, and explain that I am indeed an amateur .. I'm still learning how to do this right.

Kipper
Posts: 291
Joined: 27 Aug 2012, 07:45

Re: G's...

Post by Kipper » 19 Jul 2014, 21:52

It's slightly annoying to hear garments referred to as underwear so often. If that is truly how garments are perceived then something basic is missing.

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16808
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: G's...

Post by Curt Sunshine » 19 Jul 2014, 22:18

Amen, ap and kipper.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
SamBee
Posts: 5448
Joined: 14 Mar 2010, 04:55

Re: G's...

Post by SamBee » 20 Jul 2014, 07:11

Yeah, I know the general meaning, just couldn't get the specific meaning.
DASH1730 "An Area Authority...[was] asked...who...would go to the Telestial kingdom. His answer: "murderers, adulterers and a lot of surprised Mormons!"'
1ST PRES 1978 "[LDS] believe...there is truth in many religions and philosophies...good and great religious leaders... have raised the spiritual, moral, and ethical awareness of their people. When we speak of The [LDS] as the only true church...it is...authorized to administer the ordinances...by Jesus Christ... we do not mean... it is the only teacher of truth."

ShipwreckLo
Posts: 11
Joined: 07 Jul 2014, 17:29

Re: G's...

Post by ShipwreckLo » 21 Jul 2014, 08:57

It's slightly annoying to hear garments referred to as underwear so often.
So, what are they, then? I was told to wear them "next to the skin." Yes, ladies, a mere 7 months ago I was endowed and given instruction to wear my bra OVER my garments. They are therefore, my "underwear." It follows, that the Church is somehow concerned with my underwear, and it is enraging.

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16808
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: G's...

Post by Curt Sunshine » 21 Jul 2014, 09:38

ShipwreckLo, fwiw, that instruction is not the default standard anymore. It's a good example of why it takes so long to change some things: older members hang on to how they viewed things / were instructed when they were young - and, sometimes, that means they are passing on practices and policies from 50-60 years ago.

Enraging? That is something you need to address. Frustrating? Understandable. Understandable, in historical context? Yes. It's no different, in theory, than any other people wearing something to remind them of their religious commitments - and LOTS of people do that, including mainstream Christians who wear necklace crosses. Absolutely, there is a practical difference - but, seriously, if the concept is "enraging" (causing rage), it is from a more fundamental issue of what you see as control mechanisms, not the fact that the garment is worn under your clothing and/or like underwear.

You have multiple "solutions" - the easiest of which is to wear the garment over regular underwear. What you decide is up to you, but this is a great example of becoming an "agent unto yourself" to "act and not be acted upon", as the Book of Mormon says. This one is within your power to change and control without having to go to great lengths.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

ShipwreckLo
Posts: 11
Joined: 07 Jul 2014, 17:29

Re: G's...

Post by ShipwreckLo » 21 Jul 2014, 13:56

Yes. Enraging. I am extremely anxiety-ridden, and OCD, and have previously spent hours upon hours making sure my clothing doesn't touch anything I don't want it to and doesn't make me feel claustrophobic. These thing seem like an over-exaggeration for "normal" folks. And truthfully the gospel has helped me with some things a great deal, and I'm very grateful. It has allowed me a sense that everything is okay. But this is one area that has consumed me for the worse. The idea that I have been instructed to wear something completely uncomfortable and touches my armpits all day every day is compounding my anxiety to the point where I feel angry about it.

Wearing the garment over regular underwear is only a solution for developing yeast infections and rashes. Just sayin!

Getting back to what drove my original post...My husband is the kind of guy who finds these psychological things to be almost imaginary, and questioning church teachings, whether they be the official standard or not, is a no-no in my home. I have no idea how to approach him, or if I should just stop wearing them except on sundays/temple days, and hope he doesn't ever say anything...that feels dishonest, but I'm not super confrontational.

Post Reply