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
Audrey
Cookies & Creme
Posts: 404
Joined: January 2014
Location: Twin Cities

Post

Eleventh Doctor wrote:Women can be tempted by the lust of the flesh as well, why is there never any talk of men dressing more modestly? Why is it always on the women? Why when youth groups put out modesty rules the women's list is about twice as long?
THAT.
Just saying, guys around here run around shirtless all the time. 9.9 Why don't they put a shirt on or something? Girls also lust.

And regarding modesty rules: I think the majority of them are extremely stupid. (Now, I'm addressing school here. I thankfully do not know a church that sets out modesty rules. Yikes.) I get that they don't want girls to be wearing something that resembles a lingerie ad. (I'm bolding that because things I plan to say may look like I disprove it.) But for example, my best friend was sent home from school for the entire day last year, missing two tests, just because she wore shorts that were a few inches above the knee. She also wore leggings underneath the shorts, just so she was still covered.

I saw a quote the other day that could apply to this: "When you interrupt a girl's school day because she's wearing a tank top, or her skirt is a half inch too short, you are telling her that hiding her body is more important than her education. You are telling her that making sure the boys have a distraction free learning environment is more important than her education. You are telling her that boys are more entitled to an education than she is."

I understand that the topic is about women. But we should probably discuss guys as well.
An owl and a squirrel are sitting in a tree, watching a farmer go by. The owl turns to the squirrel and says nothing, because owls can't talk. The owl then eats the squirrel because it is a bird of prey.
John Henry
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1430
Joined: June 2014

Post

Wakko wrote:
John Henry wrote:1. My definition of nudity is misunderstood. In fact, it's not as rigid as you think it is.
I think it's very rigid and misunderstood. Nudity is when you have no clothes on whatsoever. Your definition of nudity is if you are wearing shorts or something. =p
Sorry, I must have made a misleading statement. My definition of nudity is if somebody's wearing only an underwear, or no clothes at all. Then, half-nudity if someone's wearing bikinis or extremely short pants, and breast-exposing shirts or dresses.
Audrey wrote:
Eleventh Doctor wrote:Women can be tempted by the lust of the flesh as well, why is there never any talk of men dressing more modestly? Why is it always on the women? Why when youth groups put out modesty rules the women's list is about twice as long?
THAT.
Just saying, guys around here run around shirtless all the time. 9.9 Why don't they put a shirt on or something? Girls also lust.

And regarding modesty rules: I think the majority of them are extremely stupid. (Now, I'm addressing school here. I thankfully do not know a church that sets out modesty rules. Yikes.) I get that they don't want girls to be wearing something that resembles a lingerie ad. (I'm bolding that because things I plan to say may look like I disprove it.) But for example, my best friend was sent home from school for the entire day last year, missing two tests, just because she wore shorts that were a few inches above the knee. She also wore leggings underneath the shorts, just so she was still covered.

I saw a quote the other day that could apply to this: "When you interrupt a girl's school day because she's wearing a tank top, or her skirt is a half inch too short, you are telling her that hiding her body is more important than her education. You are telling her that making sure the boys have a distraction free learning environment is more important than her education. You are telling her that boys are more entitled to an education than she is."

I understand that the topic is about women. But we should probably discuss guys as well.
Yes, that's why guys shouldn't be naked in front of women. Speaking of education, I noticed that here in Korea, bullies dye their hair (not black or brown, but yellow, white, pink, green, blue, rainbow, and who-knows what), and probably some tattoes and an earring.

Back to topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_piracy
User avatar
Belle
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4997
Joined: May 2012
Location: Spoilers!
Contact:

Post

John Henry wrote: Sorry, I must have made a misleading statement. My definition of nudity is if somebody's wearing only an underwear, or no clothes at all. Then, half-nudity if someone's wearing bikinis or extremely short pants, and breast-exposing shirts or dresses.
Except, the normal definition of nudity is no clothing, and half-nude would be underwear.
John Henry wrote: Speaking of education, I noticed that here in Korea, bullies dye their hair (not black or brown, but yellow, white, pink, green, blue, rainbow, and who-knows what), and probably some tattoes and an earring.
What does this have to do with the topic..or rather..anything..

Bullies, when I was in school, wore the same thing I wore.. :P
John Henry wrote: Back to topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_piracy
You say back to topic, yet paste a wikipedia link to an article about women pirates? The correlation would be......?
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

...would be that those pirates wore pants. I just thought it would be relevant to our conversation.

In Korea, goody-goodies or nerds dress normally. But, bullies dye their hair to the extreme, put on tattoes sometimes, and probably an earring as well.
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4766
Joined: February 2013

Post

Or we could not judge people by how they dress. JH you seem to place a lot of importance on how people look and make sweeping generalizations on how entire groups dress or look, why?
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

Inward and outward are both important. Shall I emphasize the inward as well?

And what is judging people on how they dress?
User avatar
TigerShadow
Mocha Jamocha
Posts: 2654
Joined: June 2014

Post

John Henry wrote:And what is judging people on how they dress?
Deciding on aspects of a person, physical or personal, based on what they wear and how they wear it. Like, oh, I don't know, declaring that women are obviously trying to look like men when they wear pants or stating categorically that a woman suddenly looks indistinguishable from a man because pants are "a man's garment"?
it's not about 'deserve'. it's about what you believe. and i believe in love
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4766
Joined: February 2013

Post

Yes you should focus on the inward after all what good is it if someone outwardly if fine but inwardly are bad?
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
gabbygirl17
Mint Chocolate Chip
Posts: 2065
Joined: May 2012
Location: USA
Contact:

Post

Eleventh Doctor wrote:When I say dress for God I mean that to be up to the individual.

This idea that men are more visual in terms of sexuality is a myth. I'm not sure where this comes from but I hear this all the time and it's stated as general knowledge when in fact I've never heard any evidence for this.

Actually, I've heard it said by some guys. They didn't say it like that, but implied they have more thoughts on it.

& Yes, guys should be modest too. I think it might be easier for guys to be modest because they don't have as much fashion sources as women.

& What's wrong with being able to tell what someone believes by the way they dress? The Muslims dress in a way you can tell who they are. So do the Amish.
"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
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4766
Joined: February 2013

Post

But why is it okay for guys to wear shorts or tank tops but if a gal wore the same thing she might get called immodest?

Because you can't tell what someone believes by the way they dress unless you have strict rules like some Muslims or Amish. We should never look at someone and say I bet they believe this because of their outward appearances, we don't know that person. Did Christ only talk to people who were dressed right?
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
gabbygirl17
Mint Chocolate Chip
Posts: 2065
Joined: May 2012
Location: USA
Contact:

Post

For us we don't really have guys wearing tank tops and shorts in our denomination. (I'm not saying it's bad..) So, I'd see it differently then alot of people on here.

Same for the Holiness people. We try and dress in a way to stand out. & Most of the people were dressed modestly since they wore robes.. unless they weren't like the Jews and such. But Jesus went to all people. Like we should try and witness to whoever. Agreed.
"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
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4766
Joined: February 2013

Post

Gabby, you make a good point that your denomination holds guys to a high standard as well, most don't. But are guys and girls held to the exact same standard? So guys wear jeans or khakis and long sleeved shirts all the time?

Why don't we say Christians should all wear robes so they really stand out? If we're going by Biblical standards or why is today's modest fashion the standard? Today's dresses, skirts, and blouses are immodest by say pre 1920s standards, why pick today's fashion?
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
Wodfamchocsod
Cookies & Creme
Posts: 290
Joined: January 2014

Post

Gabby girl,
The verse you pointed out is in Deuteronomy, written for the Jews at that time.
Christ died and put us under grace.
Wearing skirts will not make you any holier.
Girls just wanna have fun!
John Henry
Peach Cobbler
Posts: 1430
Joined: June 2014

Post

Wodfamchocsod wrote:Gabby girl,
The verse you pointed out is in Deuteronomy, written for the Jews at that time.
Christ died and put us under grace.
Wearing skirts will not make you any holier.
Not skirts, women's clothes. Deuteronomy 22:5 and 1 Corinthians 11:15 have the same theme not to forget that God created "male and female".
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4766
Joined: February 2013

Post

As we've brought up many, many times. You seem to be the only person here who has difficulty telling the difference between men and women's clothing these days.
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

Eleventh Doctor wrote:As we've brought up many, many times. You seem to be the only person here who has difficulty telling the difference between men and women's clothing these days.
God did not create unisex.
User avatar
Eleventh Doctor
Chocolate Bacon Drizzle
Posts: 4766
Joined: February 2013

Post

That has nothing to do with what I said. These clothes are only unisex to you. Everyone else can tell them apart.
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

Maybe guys should all wear dress pants and girls should wear jeans then you could tell the clothes apart??? *ideas*. Just a thought...
The cold never bothered me anyway!!!!! ( just kidding i hate snow)
User avatar
ArnoldtheRubberDucky
Butter Pecan
Posts: 2912
Joined: June 2012
Location: Unknown
Contact:

Post

Why should it matter to you, John Henry/Flying Rider? Do you really, honestly need a certain type of clothing to tell the difference between genders? I guess I just fail to see why it has to be this difficult. Do you honestly believe, John Henry, that a woman who wears pants is committing a condemnable sin?
Sir Arnold, Knight of the Order of Augustine, Debate Vampire
Mr. Yorp wrote:You don't need a degree to shovel manure.
User avatar
FlyingRider
Strawberry
Posts: 77
Joined: July 2014

Post

I wasn't being serious i forgot to add *sarcastic tone* to my comment i dont really care if i wear jeans and the next person does. Your outward appearance isnt something to judged ( in most cases)
The cold never bothered me anyway!!!!! ( just kidding i hate snow)
Post Reply