Is it wrong for women to wear pants?

What do you believe and why? Here's the place to discuss anything relating to church and God.

Women wearing pants?

Yes, its fine
55
76%
No
8
11%
I dont care
6
8%
I am not sure
0
No votes
I guess so
3
4%
 
Total votes: 72

User avatar
HomeschoolCowgirl
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1340
Joined: December 2013
Location: Odyssey USA!

Post

I saw an episode of the Duggars where the girls wanted to wear fireproof skirts to volunteer for the fire department. I didn't get to see the end but I don't think that would be practical or even very possible in some situations (climbing ladders, working in very tight spaces, crawling through tunnels [almost impossible to do in a skirt, trust me!], etc.). Also imagine how awkward it climbing up a ladder behind/below someone in a skirt.
(Now I know women being firefighters is a whole new topic altogether, but maybe some other time...)
Image
"Musical training is a more potent instrument than any other, for rhythm and harmony find their way into the inner places of the soul... making the soul of one who is rightly educated, graceful" -- Socrates
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4769
Joined: February 2013

Post

John Henry wrote:
Mr. Whit's End wrote:No, but gender's clothes change with time. Who knows, in a hundred more years, maybe skirts will be men's clothes and pants women's clothes. Are you still going to tell women to wear skirts, even though they're men's clothes?
In that case I would agree with you.
Okay, well we're at a point in time where fashion has changed and pants are women's clothes, so you shouldn't have a problem.
King of The Lands of Rhetoric, Lord Ruler of the Debate Vampires, and Duke of Quebec

"It's particularly ignorant to assume malicious or ignorant intentions behind an opinion with which one disagrees." ~Connie
John Henry
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1430
Joined: June 2014

Post

I will no longer debate.

However, I disagree with the last clause. "You won't have problems" It is VERY confusing sometimes now that men are growing their hair and even putting it up sometimes...(nightmarish)
User avatar
SirWhit
Banana Fudge
Posts: 2456
Joined: October 2013

Post

Everything is nightmarish to you.
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4769
Joined: February 2013

Post

Interesting story of a Saint in the early Church that is relevant to our discussion: http://www.antiochian.org/node/16691
King of The Lands of Rhetoric, Lord Ruler of the Debate Vampires, and Duke of Quebec

"It's particularly ignorant to assume malicious or ignorant intentions behind an opinion with which one disagrees." ~Connie
User avatar
connie13
Chocolate Chip
Posts: 46
Joined: January 2014
Location: The saddle of a Horse

Post

I think that as long as the pants don't look like your being squeezed-into-them they would be ok- my dad is a pastor and trust me we have got a lot of Q-A about pants and I wear them all the time. I wear loose fitting, and covering jeans. Does that help #gabbygirl17 ?
User avatar
Ashley
Raspberry Ripple
Posts: 772
Joined: September 2012
Location: Ontario

Post

Do you guys think that maybe, instead of using the 10's and 20's as our standard, that maybe we could use the Bible as our standard of how to dress? Just a thought.
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4769
Joined: February 2013

Post

So are we going to start wearing robes of one type of material with four tassels?
King of The Lands of Rhetoric, Lord Ruler of the Debate Vampires, and Duke of Quebec

"It's particularly ignorant to assume malicious or ignorant intentions behind an opinion with which one disagrees." ~Connie
User avatar
Ashley
Raspberry Ripple
Posts: 772
Joined: September 2012
Location: Ontario

Post

Eleventh Doctor wrote:So are we going to start wearing robes of one type of material with four tassels?
I think you know what I mean :roll:
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4769
Joined: February 2013

Post

I really don't, we've had multiple pages of discussion about what using the Bible as our standard means. Does that mean no pants? Does that mean robes? We've been having this discussion.
King of The Lands of Rhetoric, Lord Ruler of the Debate Vampires, and Duke of Quebec

"It's particularly ignorant to assume malicious or ignorant intentions behind an opinion with which one disagrees." ~Connie
John Henry
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1430
Joined: June 2014

Post

For my last post here, I think we don't have to dress in robes and tassels. Let us consider. Pants are regarded as women's clothes nowadays, but there is a problem (to me): I cannot see any difference even though I observe the pants. In fact, I even am supicious if women are wearing their husband's clothes - (just a thought it can be EXTREMELY ridiculous). I don't know if St. Theodosia was doing right or wrong. I however believe that women CAN put on men's clothes when it is an emergency. (For, when it is an emergency, rules can be broken. I believe that it was OK for Lucy to wear one of Caspian's clothes "The Voyage of Dawn Treader") Yet, I see no difference. You can call me bunch of names, gossip about me through PMs and the ToO chat, or put me in your foes list, but I cannot see differences. I won't bug people anymore, but I cannot see differences between women's and men's pants. I do not rely on our society because it is [Strong Language]degraded, demoralized, and absolutely wicked for it promotes immorality[/Strong Language]. I do not say "Women should never ever wear trousers for in all cases trousers are excluded for men. But, I believe that there must be a clear distinction. You might see a distinction between "Women's" and "Men's" pants. I don't, personally.


I am becoming quite infamous in the SS. I apologize to Sammy for using such harsh language about wearing tattoes. Words like "devilish" I realize, must NEVER be used at all. You think I am TOO extreme and condemning people, while I am shocked how some people tolerate stuff that is horrifying to me. I do not condemn people. When the Bible mentions "condemning" it is talking about saying that a person is going to hell, and there is no hope for him. I dare not say anything 'bout destiny. This was one of the things I AVOIDED talking about. Also, I might have been judging. Say, what is this mockery toward me? "Calls morality cops" - Mr. Whits End. What is this talk about me? Calling me glib? Dweeb? Legalist? Making jokes about me behind my back? Eh? Huh? Huh? :glares: :twisted: :twisted: :x If a person reveals his strictness he is accused of condeming people. :evil: :evil: :evil: . I personally no longer associate with the Holiness Movement anymore. It used to have power, but no longer. It is now Pharasaial. Does this site disaspprove of morality? What is "Clean Gambling"? Why isn't there any "Clean Opium", "Clean Mariana" "Clean Abortion" "Clean Adultery" "Clean Smoking" or "Clean man-eating"? I also wonder what people mean when they say the verses 1 Tim. 2:9 and 1 Pe. 3:3 are actually telling us not to put TOO MUCH jewelry? I finally concluded that wearing jewelry for Pride and Show are sinful, but I do not say so of some people who wore a ring because they love their children or something. I withheld talking of some issues such as men growing their hair nowadays, and women cutting their hair lest the discussion gets HEATED because of me.
User avatar
TigerShadow
Mocha Jamocha
Posts: 2654
Joined: June 2014

Post

John Henry wrote:If a person reveals his strictness he is accused of condeming people.
If you'll notice, people actually thanked you for your perspective when you actually explained it and fully elaborated. No one accused you of anything solely because you were strict other than that you were, well, strict; we accused you differently when you explained yourself poorly or not at all or when you accused the people arguing against your specific ideals on a subject of promoting immorality (such as when you asked Eleventh and me if we supported homosexuality simply because we questioned your strict perspective on providing services to gay people, or when you basically made the assumption that I support gambling in all circumstances because I posted that I didn't think gambling was, in and of itself, a sin).

We criticized you because you made bold statements and did not back them up with legitimate Scripture. We would write elaborate replies with considerable amounts of strong evidence that we actually sourced and you would reply by zeroing in on one thing that, in the totality of the circumstances, had nothing to do with our posts, or you would source something that even you admitted was false or obsolete and try to prop it up as legitimate debating material anyway. We would question you and you would put up the smokescreen of trying to point out our morality that you had no right to poke at, and we weren't going to coddle you when most of your viewpoints proved more that you judge people based on what you see rather than that you considered them human beings. Don't try to play the victim here.

As to making fun of you—I will be the first to admit that I probably got a lot nastier than I perhaps should have, and some of the remarks made about you by the rest of us were not in the best of taste. However, have you perhaps considered that some of what you took as a personal attack was simply us being sarcastic about a general subject? You can't take everything that we say and do here so seriously.
it's not about 'deserve'. it's about what you believe. and i believe in love
Wakko
Pistachio
Posts: 1075
Joined: May 2012
Location: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry

Post

John Henry wrote:Say, what is this mockery toward me? "Calls morality cops" - Mr. Whits End. What is this talk about me? Calling me glib? Dweeb? Legalist? Making jokes about me behind my back? Eh? Huh? Huh? :glares: :twisted: :twisted: :x
I don't believe anyone was calling you a "glib" or "dweeb." Legalistic? Yes, but you have called yourself that also. I also don't think anyone was mocking you either, and morality cops was just a joke. Please calm down, it'd be much appreciated.
John Henry wrote:Does this site disaspprove of morality?
No, it doesn't it's just that most people might find your beliefs extreme, and disagree with them.
John Henry wrote:What is "Clean Gambling"? Why isn't there any "Clean Opium", "Clean Mariana" "Clean Abortion" "Clean Adultery" "Clean Smoking" or "Clean man-eating"?
To be honest I'm completely lost on this part of the post. Where does anyone say anything about clean gambling, smoking, adultery etc? Was the clean gambling part in the gambling thread? What do you mean by "clean?"
John Henry wrote:I also wonder what people mean when they say the verses 1 Tim. 2:9 and 1 Pe. 3:3 are actually telling us not to put TOO MUCH jewelry? I finally concluded that wearing jewelry for Pride and Show are sinful, but I do not say so of some people who wore a ring because they love their children or something. I withheld talking of some issues such as men growing their hair nowadays, and women cutting their hair lest the discussion gets HEATED because of me.
I don't think that wearing jewelery is for pride or show, I think it's to make yourself look nice. So, are rings okay? Why isn't all other jewelry okay? I apoligize if this post sounds a bit harsh, I'm just trying to figure out why you believe the stuff you believe.
User avatar
Doll
Rainbow Sherbet
Posts: 5002
Joined: May 2012
Location: Spoilers!
Contact:

Post

I think really the main issue is not that you have an opinion, no, having an opinion is fine, it's great, wonderful..

The issue is when you assume that everyone fits in a cookie cutter mold of your opinion of something that's wrong, such as viewing that all women wearing pants must be doing so to dress like a man, or viewing someone wearing multiple pieces of jewelry as prideful, especially because multiple people have said, on both of these topics, that it simply isn't the case.

I wear pants. Women's pants. I wear pants because they're comfortable, in windy situations, more modest, and warmer in the winter. I won't say those are the only reasons I wear pants, but I can assure you that I certainly don't wear pants to look like a man.

I wear jewelry. Some is "simple", some isn't as much. I wear jewelry because I like it. I like adding color to plainer outfits. I won't say those are the only reasons I wear jewelry, but I can assure you that I certainly don't wear jewelry because I am prideful.
Image
~Queen Belle of Altanovia, Knight of Montreal & Order of Aristotle, Benevolent Dictator, Catspaw of the SS, & Dan's couch troll~
~"I’ve always found you to be a good person to disagree with." - Eleventh Doctor~
John Henry
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1430
Joined: June 2014

Post

Women's pants...hmmm...I better observe more...
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4769
Joined: February 2013

Post

And this is exactly what we're talking about. TigerShadow and Wakko wrote out long responses to your points and you just ignored them completely and wrote a one sentence response that focused on one thing Belle said.

Why are you not responding to what TigerShadow and Wakko said?
King of The Lands of Rhetoric, Lord Ruler of the Debate Vampires, and Duke of Quebec

"It's particularly ignorant to assume malicious or ignorant intentions behind an opinion with which one disagrees." ~Connie
John Henry
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1430
Joined: June 2014

Post

I responded to Tiger by a PM so that I won't get off-topic. I will respond to Wakko when I get time to.
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4769
Joined: February 2013

Post

As we've said before, if you don't have time to respond then wait.
King of The Lands of Rhetoric, Lord Ruler of the Debate Vampires, and Duke of Quebec

"It's particularly ignorant to assume malicious or ignorant intentions behind an opinion with which one disagrees." ~Connie
User avatar
FlyingRider
Strawberry
Posts: 77
Joined: July 2014

Post

NinjaThrowingStar wrote:I do not think its "wrong" for women to wear pants. But it would be wrong for a Christian women to wear pants if she has been convicted to do other wise. This is not a matter of right and wrong, but more a matter of spiritual maturity and personal convictions. (Just like drinking, dating, movie ratings, music etc.) There are the very obvious wrongs, (drawing the attention of others to the wrong places...) and then there are the not-so-wrongs... Like jeans. For some, they personally find it wrong, but others have no problem with it.

I feel like the same way. I dont feel convicted about wearing pants but people like the duggars do.
The cold never bothered me anyway!!!!! ( just kidding i hate snow)
User avatar
gabbygirl17
Mint Chocolate Chip
Posts: 2065
Joined: May 2012
Location: USA
Contact:

Post

After an absence I have returned to this post haha.. joy. ;)

Wearing pants can be a conviction. Correct. Some people don't feel wrong about wearing them.

You should see people's faces when they find out us holiness people wear skirts in winter haha!
I apologize if I've offended anyone in any way. But did you know it wasn't normal for women to wear pants until World War 2? Women wore dresses and skirts and you could tell if someone was a girl. Just like bikinis were VERY looked down upon when they first came out. A study shows that men don't think of women as people when they seem them in that attire. But back to skirts/pants haha:)

But if I am the only girl wearing a skirt in a room full of people, I feel like if someone never got to talk to me and only saw me from a distance, they'd probably think I went to church.
"Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart, for I am called by your name, O Lord, God of hosts." - Jeremiah 15:16
Post Reply