Dress Codes

[ncn]

A word of warning. 

I'm not saying it has happened yet but,,,,

In the past, there have been many heated discussion on this topic. 

 

Please do not turn this thread into a battle ground or it will be shut down. 

 

God Bless, 

 

Nigel. 

[OakWood]

All I can say is women wore dresses and skirts and did just fine with them till about the 1970s.  As a matter of fact, that was required in public schools and most work places.  Amish women still wear dresses all the time, even working outside.  They ride bicycles in dresses.  They do everything dressed like a lady.  How in the world do they manage?  How did women manage all those centuries, including in cold climates?  There are Independent Baptist women who wear skirts and dresses all the time, with no issues.  How can that be? 

 

I would also ask another question.  Since you brought up how men used to wear robes, why is there outrage today about men wearing dresses, and why does that outrage often come from women?  Go to the web-site run by Concerned Women For America, and read their comments about a book that promotes a little boy wearing a skirt.  They were raising money to oppose the book because it taught boys to dress like girls.  It is funny how that argument about robes only pertains to women wearing pants, rather than men wearing dresses.  Again, there is a clear double standard.  And let me ask you this.  Would you feel ok going out on a date with your husband if he were wearing a dress?  If not, why not? 

 

Little boys wearing skirts is a deliberate attempt to feminise them. In our society men do not wear skirts nor are they expected to have the option of wearing them. Women do not wear jeans in an attempt to masculise themselves. I've already pointed out to you that women's jeans and men's jeans are cut differently. There are jeans that are designed for men and jeans that are designed for women. They are two different types of apparel. You are comparing apples to oranges.

As for your comments about women managing for centuries with dresses and skirts, I don't see the point of it. Men managed for centuries without wearing trousers or pants too. Perhaps we should all go back to wearing robes and loin-cloths.

I believe that you have misunderstood the point of Deuteronomy 22:5

You also mentioned earlier that society expects people to do all sorts of things today and then you mention sinful acts. I agree with you about sinful acts, but not everything we do today is sinful. Is riding a motor car sinful or having a bank account sinful? Is owning a computer sinful? We didn't used to do those things either. Likewise women wearing jeans is not sinful. If anything trousers are a more modest option for women. The Bible mentions climbing up stairs and how one has to be cautious not to reveal one's modesty to people beneath the stairs. That's because in those days people did not wear underwear and you could see up a robe if you were beneath it. You can see up a skirt - you can't see up a pair of jeans.

 

We'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one, but I personally think that you're comparing today's clothing with a tradition with women only wearing skirts that goes back fifty or a hundred years or so. It's almost as if you're wanting to hark back to the less sinful days of the 19th century. But, If you want to really compare tradition then you should go back to Biblical times when nobody wore pants because that's the only time that is relevant if you need to make such comparisons. If this is the case then not even men should be wearing pants!

[John Robinson]

A friend of mine and his wife own a working horse ranch. She wears a skirt to church on Sundays, but other than, she's in jeans nearly all the time.

[OakWood]

A friend of mine and his wife own a working horse ranch. She wears a skirt to church on Sundays, but other than, she's in jeans nearly all the time.

 

You raised a good point there. Although women may have managed for centuries wearing skirts, it depends what you mean by 'manage'. There were lots of things they couldn't do such as riding bicycles or riding horses. They could ride horses side-saddle but that's actually quite dangerous. In fact the only way that a woman can do such things freely is by wearing a very short and very immodest skirt. Trousers solve that problem immediately.

Of course you could argue that women may wear jeans that are designed for men or wear tight figure-hugging jeans that are sexually immodest but that really is another issue altogether.

[OakWood]

The issue is distinction in clothing, not returning to Bible times clothing.  Pants traditionally pertain to a man, and you even see that on the universal symbol for a man and a woman.  I have brought this up before, but I will do so again here.  How long did women sin before pants were no longer sinful?  Let me explain what I mean.  You said that it is wrong for little boys to be taught to wear skirts because it is feminizing them, and society accepts women in pants but not men in skirts.  At some point in our history, women had to be wearing pants when they were not accepted by the majority of society, so how many sinned before those trend setters won people over?  Don't men need to become trend setters today to break through those barriers?  In addition to that, the argument keeps coming up about robes to defend women in pants, so why isn't it used to defend men in a dress? 

 

Why did I bring up how women got along for years wearing dresses to do all types of things and in all climates?  To show that the arguments that women can't survive without pants are ludicrous.  People are making out like it is an impossible thing for women to wear dresses and skirts all the time, when that is clearly not the case. 

 

What you described is pretty common John.  I know some conservative women that wear dresses working in the yard. 

 

I understand your point about women having to sin in the first place by wearing pants in the first place in the days when they were not acceptable but now that barrier has been broken and now pants are acceptable.

But.. were they sinning anyway? I still think it's all about deceit and that is the relevance of the passage in Deuteronomy.

Women didn't start to wear pants because they wanted to be men, they wore pants because they were practical. They were deceiving nobody. Nobody mistook them for men because they started to wear pants. Pants are practical. You can do things in pants that you can't do in skirts.

The entire point of Deuteronomy 22:5 is about sexual immorality. Men should not deceive others nor arouse unnatural desires in others by dressing like women, nor should women do the same by dressing like men. The Bible is referring to transvestism and other immoralities such as male prostitution. In fact any attempt to deceive along these lines is wrong. God forbid transvestism for that reason. There were clothes that were designed for men and clothes that were designed for women. The same principle applies to the hair. A man who grew his hair like a woman and wore a woman's robe was using sexual trickery to deceive others. Even if they knew that he was really a man, they were still allowing themselves to be deceived for unnatural lustful purposes. God put his finger down on that one and warned people not to even go there.

You could argue today that women wear tight jeans for sexual purposes but that raises another question. They can also wear short skirts for sexual purposes.

[OakWood]

Women did ride horses in a dress, and they still ride bicycles in a dress today.  Women's bicycles were designed without a bar that men's bikes have because women who rode them used to all wear dresses.  I drive through Amish country on a regular basis, and see Amish women riding bikes all the time and in a dress.  I have seen women ride a horse in a dress, and not side saddle. 

 

Of course they can, but it's not ideal. They can never ride as well as men under such circumstances. You are basically saying that women have to suffer discomfort because of your outdated and somewhat chauvinistic opinions of what is male apparel and what is female apparel. That's nonsense. Perhaps you think that the women should all wear long frilly bloomers under the skirts and whalebone corsets too.

[Littlelambseativy]

Sorry, I just got back on ...I did no realize I said women should not wear jeans....wow I wear them and slacks and dress pants all the time....to church too...

When we had people come into church with green or red hair or in shorts in the summer...we said nothing because it is better that they hear the Word of God than not hear it at all because the dress.

I believe God says He looks on the heart not on the outside....I am glad He looks at my heart, the rest are man's rules. Why just look at the way men dressed in Henry VIII days!!

[Fez]

A word of warning. 

I'm not saying it has happened yet but,,,,

In the past, there have been many heated discussion on this topic. 

 

Please do not turn this thread into a battle ground or it will be shut down. 

 

God Bless, 

 

Nigel. 

My thoughts exactly, here we go with the pants no pants thing again.

[Fez]

 

A word of warning. 

I'm not saying it has happened yet but,,,,

In the past, there have been many heated discussion on this topic. 

 

Please do not turn this thread into a battle ground or it will be shut down. 

 

God Bless, 

 

Nigel. 

My thoughts exactly, here we go with the pants no pants thing again.

This is about a woman wanting to be flat chested. I suggest we leave it to the women to discuss.

[OakWood]

Oakwood, In the book about the boy who likes to wear skirts, it wasn't about deceiving anyone into thinking he was a girl.  He just liked wearing skirts, and in the book, it was made for him by his Mother.  Concerned Women For America have condemned the book for teaching boys to dress like girls.  And yes Oakwood, I am saying that women should dress like women, even if it is less comfortable.  There are times where I consider jeans very uncomfortable.  They tend to ride up.  They can become very tight, especially after eating.  They don't stay up good, and I have to keep my belt uncomfortably tight.  I honestly would think that a loose dress would be more comfortable than jeans for most things.  I have to wear things all the time that are uncomfortable.  I have to wear uncomfortable steel toes boots for my job.  It is a requirement.  Frankly, I don't care if my view are Chauvenistic, although I don't think they are, based on what my understanding of the term means.  I don't think men are superior to women in every area.  I do however believe in God defined gender roles, and I have zero concern with keeping up with the times or societal evolution when it comes to such matters. 

 

Littlelambsitivity, I know you weren't taking the opinion it was sinful for women to wear pants, but you did admit that it was dressing like a guy.  Your view is that outward appearance doesn't matter, regardless of what the Bible says when it comes to clothing or hair length. 

 

The discussion Fez was about dress codes and women looking feminine.  The OP actually mentions how the OT comes against men looking like women and women looking like men, so this is relevant. 

 

But women DON'T look like men because they wear jeans, so you're arguing against your own principle there.

Should women not wear hats because men also wear hats? Should not women not wear shoes because men also wear shoes? Should women not wear gloves because men wear gloves?

And if you think that women should dress uncomfortably in order to confirm with your ideas of what defines feminity, do you think that they should also wear burqas like the Muslims do?

Your steel boots are a health and safety requirement for the job. Nobody expects you to conform by wearing them all the time.

You're defining femininity by skirt-wearing because of norms of the past three four hundred years or so. What about norms before then? Men used to wear tights, so that does that mean that women shouldn't wear tights? If you're going to use a time-period in history to define a norm then you should put your money where your mouth is and go back to the very time period that you are quoting from. In Biblical times nobody wore pants.