Women pay a higher garment tax than men. What do I mean by ‘garment tax’? I don’t mean the monetary cost of garments. I mean that it costs women more time and effort to find clothing that covers the garment. I mean that the garment makes it harder for women to deal with normal human biology. I also mean that women repeatedly have to make value judgements between what they want to express with their clothing and what the garment patterns permit. Men pay a garment tax as well, but it’s not nearly as high as the cost women are obliged to pay.

Let me first say that I don’t mind paying taxes. I want our roads and parks to be well maintained. I want funding for public schools and libraries. I want safety nets for people who experience poverty or disability. I want these good things for my community, even if I’m not a direct beneficiary. Similarly, I have no problem with expecting members to contribute to the church community. It takes time, talent, and resources to build a supportive community. Each individual may pay a different amount of tax money to the government, depending on their life’s circumstances. A person’s share of taxes may or may not seem fair. Women generally pay a higher garment tax than men. Members have wide ranging perceptions as to whether or not this is fair.

Women pay a time tax. Finding garment-compatible clothing can cost a woman a substantial amount of time, even at stores known for selling fairly conservative items. The time-cost of the shopping trip can easily be more than the value of the desired clothing item, even for low wage earners. If it takes a woman three hours to find an appropriate shirt, those are three hours she cannot spend doing other work. This is a time tax that men do not have to pay, because men’s garments are compatible with the majority of men’s clothing. I’ve purchased shirts in a color or style that don’t look great on me simply because they fit me and cover garments, and I’d already spent hours looking for something I liked. Reducing the width of the sleeve will make it a little easier to find garment-compatible women’s shirts. This should reduce the time-tax, but it won’t eliminate it because women will still struggle to find items that cover the ‘open sleeve’, and the neckline, and the armpit, and the back, and the hem of their garment top.

Women pay a health tax. Many women struggle with garments when they are on their periods. Maternity garments are a joke. I appreciate that the new slip bottoms give more options for women who struggle with infections. A slip is one of the easiest pieces of clothing to make, but women have been paying this tax for decades.

Women pay a values tax. Garments are supposed to teach members values like modesty, piety, and self-restraint. Both men and women can feel good wearing clothing that helps them embody these qualities. Garments are generally compatible with current western male fashions, so men don’t need to curate their wardrobe much to accommodate garments. However, garments compel women to adopt a unique Mormon style, and women are obliged to display their values in the length of their shorts and width of their sleeves. This visibility allows women to be more easily judged by other members of their church community. Women also pay a social cost for wearing garments. The extent of what a woman can express with her clothing is much smaller if she wears garments. This can affect how she is perceived by friends, family, and coworkers, particularly non-members. A woman may be unable to find a garment-compatible way to convey what she wants to communicate through her clothing choices. This difficulty can be related to the time tax: a woman may want to wear garments, but she may not be able to find what she needs in the requisite time-frame. Garments are another way of silencing women because they curtail the socially acceptable range of  what a woman can say through her clothing choices.

I understand that when I pay taxes, I will never agree with how every dollar of my money is spent. When I disagree with the details, I can write to my representatives, vote for people who share my values, or run for office myself. When I disagree with church policy, I don’t have these options. Members have been discouraged from writing to general church leaders. Instead, they are told to go to their Stake President, even if he has no authority to enact the requested change. My sustaining vote represents support for someone selected for a calling, but that selection was ultimately made by a man. Women can only make recommendations. Female church leaders are chosen by men, and men typically choose female leaders who will not challenge their patriarchal dominance. The way the church is currently structured, women are barred from being in any position of ultimate decision-making authority.

The announcement of “open sleeve” and slip garments lowers the garment tax for women, which is wonderful. I wish I wanted to celebrate the new garment styles, and I know many women feel similarly. There are two reasons why this change causes painful feelings. First, the past taxes women have paid are non-refundable. Women can’t get back the unholy amount of time they’ve spent searching for clothes that cover their garments. They can’t forget the high level of emotional work they’ve invested over a few inches of fabric covering their shoulders. This kind of hurt can be soothed with validation. It would be helpful if the institutional church did more to validate feelings members may have when changes are made. The second reason for pain is deeper. Bigger. More difficult, but also more important to address: women are being taxed without representation.

***The Exponent blog welcomes guest submissions. Click here for post guidelines and the submission form.***