Yesterday I shared a blog post about why I stopped wearing garments a decade ago. It’s obviously been awhile since I shopped for new garments because of that, so last night I logged into my account at store.churchofjesuschrist.org and looked at what has changed over the past few years. The pictures of garments brought back so many memories! I can feel them on my body even though I haven’t worn a pair in years.
In the past decade without garments I’ve also learned how to better dress for my body type. My main issue fit-wise is that I’m on the short side (at 5’2”), so clothing tends to have too much fabric and bunch up on me. I no longer shop anywhere that doesn’t have a petite department, because I know that most regular clothing fits pretty awkwardly on me. (And yes, I know there are petite garments. They were never anywhere short enough to actually be considered petite in my opinion.)
My second issue fit-wise is that I’ve never had a flat stomach, and three pregnancies have only made it less flat. A waistband on underwear that cuts directly across my soft stomach is very unflattering.
Before I go any further, I want to reiterate that I only speak for myself, and no one else. If you are a person who loves wearing garments, I am genuinely happy for you! I really struggled with garments (and I covered my journey in the link in the first sentence of this post). Don’t worry about anything I have to say if it doesn’t apply to you personally.
That said, I looked at the garments available for purchase online with my own body in mind. In no particular order, here are some things that stood out to me:
First off, I’m unclear why everyone is excited about the new sleeveless garment top, and how this is going to revolutionize anything for women in hot, humid climates. It looks almost exactly the same as what you could already buy. What am I missing?
These bottoms look incredibly long and very skinny to me. To fit my thighs into these, I would have to size up quite a bit, making them hang well past my knees and the crotch sag very uncomfortably.
These tops would look comically long on a short body like mine. Even on the mannequin (who looks about a foot taller and 20 lbs thinner than me) it hangs below her crotch.
Other short people will know that capris are just pants for us. And these pants would just be pants underneath my other pants. Unless I was really cold, I can’t imagine ever wanting to wear two pairs of pants on purpose.
The full-length bottoms would be hanging out at my socks.
Would it okay to show your garments if they’re peaking out the end of your sleeves or the bottom of your pant leg? I feel like it would be fine to roll them up if that happened, but that begs the question – if it would be okay to roll them up in those scenarios, why can’t someone also roll up other styles of garments to not hang out of their clothing awkwardly? (I’m probably thinking about this too much for someone who doesn’t wear garments anymore.)
I feel claustrophobic just looking at maternity garments covering up so much skin, because the best maternity underwear (for me) were the bottoms that sat underneath the belly. (I wore comfortable ones like that for the last few months of my last pregnancy – but otherwise I wore maternity garment bottoms just like in these pictures!) Pregnant bellies vary quite a bit in size from beginning to end, so this will be a circus tent under your clothes one month and cut off your ability to breathe the next. Pregnant women can’t justify spending so much money on underwear that will only fit for a few weeks though, so usually they purchase the largest size that will fit at the very end and deal with the excess fabric in the meantime. Real maternity underwear is designed to work with a pregnant body at all stages comfortably and is made of considerably less material.
And those legs – they are stick thin! I have deep stretch marks on my inner thighs to remind me permanently of the weight I gained in my legs while pregnant. What percentage of women have cute little basketball bellies on super thin legs like this while nine months pregnant?
Since this tent of a top is already covering your entire pregnant belly, I ask again: Why can’t the bottoms go underneath the belly rather than up and over the top of it? So many women deal with nausea and heartburn during pregnancy, and I’ve heard many say it was made worse by the extra layers over their stomach.
I wore one-piece garments for a time underneath dresses because my tops kept coming untucked and the only way to re-tuck was to go into a bathroom stall and take my dress off. The trade-off for that convenience was the gaping, sagging crotch flap.
I tried these with pants but it was too uncomfortable when the flap wouldn’t stay shut and my lady bits were rubbing against the inside of my jeans. My deepest sympathy to those of you who wore garments when this was the only option!
These are the new garments that will be available in the U.S. a year from now. This option (and all of them available for purchase, actually) do not look like they were designed to fit a female body. These are shown on extremely tall and thin mannequins that resemble a very small percentage of actual human women.
***Do you have your own thoughts to share about garments, either for them or against them? We would love to hear from you! Submit a guest post and let us share your voice on Exponent II.***
11 Responses
These garments seemed to be demo’d on a pre-pubescent 11 1/2-year-old girl… no boobs, no curves, definitely not a post-partum body….
Still looks like underwear mandated, designed and made by men— that do look like men’s underwear.
I’m a medium hight, non-curvy, slender woman who has a hard time finding pants small enough to stay on my butt in a typical women’s department. The mannequin is absurdly skinny.
Do you think they bring in the 5’10” size 00 mannequin to show the new garment styles to the bethren for their approval? (Obviously they can’t have real women come in and model for them because that would be super weird – but also, what a unique modeling job that would be if they did use real women. 😅)
Hi graphic designer here. So these images all appear to be 3D renders to me. I’m not convinced this is a great representation of what the new garments actually look like. That is not meant to undermine any of the completely salient points made here. Likely fit will be a different story when on the body and I could see that “sleeveless” top in particular really overcompensating for the lack of 1 inch in the sleeve by being over tight on the armpit. Making me squirm just thinking about it. I REALLY want someone to buy these and give a IRL review. I need the tea.
As far as maternity garments go I am AGHAST at these. Last time I bought maternity garments was 9 years ago and the fit was so comically poor that I avoided them at all costs in subsequent pregnancies, non preggers garment habits aside. The amount of fabric at the top of the pants that would JUST HANG about my middle bc even my almost full term pregnant belly didn’t ride high enough was insane. Like truly baffling to even my most TBM self. I couldn’t keep the pants up bc there was no way to hold them up. Underwear that straight up fall off are a hilarious side effect of an overzealous and under researched effort to cover the female form. As a tall, basketball shaped current pregnant person these new garments STILL would not even begin to serve my needs even were I closer to the mannequin. Under the bump maternity panties are saving my life right now and I am never ever ever going back to tents and shorts.
I can definitely see them as being a 3D rendering now that you say that. Since it’s just a computer image, wouldn’t it be pretty easy for them to like, show it in a non-alien size? 😅 Why do you think they choose to use such a non-typical human body, and does it have to do with our culture’s obsession with thinness?
If the images resembled the female figure more closely, they might become pornography for those viewing them 🤣 (referencing d.h. Oaks)
I can’t reply directly to your comment on my phone, Lonicera – so hopefully you see this. But oh my gosh, maybe that’s part of the reason they refuse to use normal looking female bodies or ever make women’s garments look cute – because they have to sell them online… and images of cute women’s underwear online would be pornography. They’ll never change them to look better! Dang it. 😅
Good comments from developed world sisters. How would you feel about garments if you didn’t own a washing machine or had access to clean water? On my mission in a developing country, I watched women washing the family’s clothing in a river contaminating it with sulfated soap. The Church could use climate change as a great reason to stop manufacturing, shipping and washing garments. Give us a 1-2 inch stretchy band with the symbols to wear under our clothing.
So, the new top looks like it has a high neck. The scoop top drisilque, which I wear over my bra (as any g’s under my bra always make any bra I’m wearing slide up and over my boobs), already has a high neckline and I can’t wear my previously-garment approved shirts. I imagine this will have similar issues.
Also, am I the only one who detests that every single women’s style bottom has a butt crack seam? Thus unless you get several sizes too large, it rides up the butt?
I told my male coworker about the butt crack seam, and he just gaped at me. He had no idea ours all have butt crack seams.
Some of my husband’s garment bottoms have seams between the cheeks, as well, but other styles have seams across both cheeks. Which…I’m not sure. Is that better or worse? He hasn’t complained about either.
I find that really comfortable underwear that works well is hard to find, and expensive, garments or not.
I have mixed feelings about the criticism of garments in general. I disapprove of leaders’ approaches, paternalism, and male dominance. They have done harm recently. And the health issues really need to be addressed, which we have baby steps toward. But we’ve already received a lot of criticism and unkindness for garments from people who’ve never been members, which contributes to it being a raw spot for people wearing them. And I feel a responsibility to treat religious practices, esp. ones this mainstream and through which family relationships and relationships to rituals and places of worship can be impacted with some distance and dignity.
I also feel uncomfortable with the regular emphasis on the benefit of dropping the practice feeling sexy/cute. I get how this is important, and how a lot of LDS women have a genuine need to tap into a more positive body image, and prioritization of their personal desires. But freedom from long-held modesty boundaries is nor a very compelling or interesting change of values for me. Women opting in to abide by principles like modesty of dress is something that is easy to criticize (I’m thinking here of women from more orthodox faiths than ours with stricter modesty standards, including Muslim and orthodox Jewish women) but these practices are also something very personal that I don’t want to dismiss or deconstruct, I think in some cases this can lead to harm or discouragement in others’ spiritual lives.
I have large calves (I’m a dancer), and I wanted the thermal garments on my mission. I wore them twice, and then never again because I couldn’t pull them up high enough to have the crotch sit comfortably because they got stuck on my calves. I never loved garments, but I did eventually despise them because I was struggling with weight gain and body image issues (like so many of us). I had several non-member friends say that garments looked like Victorian underwear, and honestly it’s true. Garments were first introduced when women wore corsets and stays, and had a chemise layer anyway to keep them from rubbing. Garments made practical sense then. They don’t now for women’s fashion or health.