LDS want their cake and eat it too? i.e. Garments, Polygamy, and Gender Topics

It seems I only get around to posting about once a month these days. I wish I had more time to post. There are so many things I would like to share. Here is just a few thoughts I had today.

The LDS Church and its members seem to want it both ways. They want their cake and eat it too.

Here are three examples:

1. LDS Church maintains that Latter-day Saints should be a "peculiar people," especially in our stance on modesty and the wearing of garments—yet we're changing the garments to better fit into the world, to the point where we can't tell who's wearing them and who isn't.
2. LDS Church teachs that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy and had many wives—yet cling to the image of him as only married to Emma. 
3. LDS Church emphasizes the importance of men being men and women being women, yet we removed the very masculine Christ statue at the Hill Cumorah and replaced it with a much more feminine-looking Jesus.

First of all: The New (less than modest) Garments 

Today was a big day for LDS members across North America—especially here in Utah. It marked the first day that sleeveless garments were available for purchase. Women (and men) arrived early at Deseret Book stores before they opened to snag the much-anticipated items. I drove by our local Deseret Book later that morning to check if the rumors were true. Sure enough, the parking lot was packed, and a line still stretched out the door. I heard that some distribution stores in Utah County had lines wrapping all the way around the building.

One LDS woman shared on social media that she had bought the new sleeveless garment and showed what you can now wear while still wearing garments.  

___________________________

Second, We teach that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy and had many wives—yet cling to the image of him as only married to Emma.

Case in point: the newly remodeled Joseph Smith Memorial Building in downtown Salt Lake City. I walked into the grand main lobby—hard to guess how many millions were spent—and noticed just two portraits hanging on the wall: Joseph and Emma.
That’s it.

Where are the portraits of his other wives? If God commanded him to enter plural marriage, and we still teach this to our children in Sunday School, why hide it in our most prominent historical spaces? We don’t deny the doctrine, but we quietly erase the evidence. It feels like we’re preserving a monogamous myth while preaching a polygamous past. And now, we're even teaching it to kids as young as 3. As I mentioned, the LDS Church is now including Joseph Smith's plural marriages in a Primary storybook—"Doctrine and Covenants Stories"—released earlier this year (2025). It's a cartoon-style chapter aimed at the youngest kids, framing polygamy as a tough but divinely commanded act of obedience. But it sparked major backlash from members upset about introducing such a complex (and painful) topic to toddlers. Within weeks, the Church pulled it, made edits to soften the language, and even deleted a few pages. Here's a side-by-side of the original version (first released) and the edited one—see how they dialed back the emphasis on "obedience" and Emma's mixed feelings:We seem to hide that, if he really was married to more than one wife, but still teach it.. even now to the children.

Here are the front doors that you enter into the newly remodeled Joseph Smith Memorial Building

This is what you see when you walk through those doors in the above photo.

Close of the only two painting hanging on the wall. Where are his other portraits of his other wives?

 See below the side by side of  the original version that was first released and then the edited version. 

___________________________

And Lastly, We emphasize that men should be men and women should be women, with Jesus Christ as the ultimate prototype of masculine strength and divine authority.

For decades, a powerful, muscular statue of Christ stood in the visitor center at the Hill Cumorah—one of the most sacred sites in Latter-day Saint history. It embodied that ideal: a strong, commanding Savior.

But a few months ago, the Church quietly removed it.

 Original statue of Jesus Christ.

A closer view of the original statue of Jesus Christ close up. 

In its place? A much softer, more feminine-looking Jesus.

Here is the new statue. From a distance, it almost looks like a woman. 

Here is a close up of the statue. 

If Christ is our model of godly manhood, why replace strength with such a feminine looking man than looks like He is wearing a dress? Seriously makes me wonder who approved this statue.