 |
The Town Hall Archives
Ahh, the nostalgia.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hawkeye
Linux Geek
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 2408
Location: Inventors Corner
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2003 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
Sorry it took me so long to reply, I ve been busy....
AlwaysHis: I fully agree that it is a two way street. A guy should not wear tight or overly baggy clothing (I.e., the ankle pants). A guy should also wear loosefit clothing so as not to draw undue attentio to himself. Somthing like baggy (but properly sized) pants and loose shirt, or even the 'preppy' look of dress pants and polo shirt serves this purpose. Does anyone disagree?
AlwaysHis, HisGirl: Your welcome!
E87M2: Thanks!
| Sydney Bristow Vaughn wrote: | | Ok, first of all, I wasn't attacking YOU, I was attacking legalism, which is what those sites are. Legalism, pure and simple. The site is not representative of the Bible, it is representing legalism. GRANTED, some of it is good, but most of it is crock. Absolute crock. |
My only question is which definition are you refering to? Strict adherance to laws is only a bad thing in extraneous curcimstances or when the law is wrong. Following the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law, I do agree is usually wrong. But the issue of skirts/dresses, as I presented it, it isnt legalism. As the site presented it, it does not say you are not going to Heaven. The site only said that the Bible says a woman should dress in modest apparel, and doing otherwise is not submitting to authority, and thus is wrong. The woman who wrote that arguement makes a fair case. And, yes, you can view that as legalism, but it would be the former rather than the latter definition. But I will attemt to make my case another way.
| Sydney Bristow Vaughn wrote: | | Second of all, it wouldn't matter if one had been pondering this since one was in one's playpen. A wrong belief is a wrong belief, no matter how long its been mulled over. |
What is so wrong about thinking women should dress in long flowing clothing, at least in public?
| Sydney Bristow Vaughn wrote: | | Quite obviously, the Bible states nowhere, that women should not wear pants. Why is this? Because NO ONE wore pants back then. Not even the men. So I'm not going to say, "Well, the Bible doesn't say we women shouldn't wear pants!" |
True. But there are lots of things the Bible doesnt say we shouldnt do that we shouldnt.
| Sydney Bristow Vaughn wrote: | The Bible does say that men should dress in a masculine fashion, and women should make sure their apparel is feminine. However! A pair of pants can be VERY feminine, and if you disagree, I'm sorry, but thats your problem. You obviously haven't shopping in the girls department lately. (Thank God.)  |
LOL! Yes, thankfully I havent been there. I agree that pants are not a masculine only article, but that is not the issue, in my mind. Some people will take this position, but considering the pants are rarely baggy for women, then the pants reveal the woman's figure, which makes it obvious, in most women.
Ok. Ive given it much thought, and I have my view, and my reasons. They are as follows.
Go to your average public gathering of teenager and adults, and introduce an attractive young lady to the area dressed as you consider modest; t-shirt, jeans. Watch how many guys, (usually nonChristians) stare, make comments, or perhapse whistle or try to talk to her. Take an equally attractive young lady, or even the same one, and have her walk the same path, and see how many of thise guy notice her. Anyone who has been to such public places knows exactly what the reaction will be. The lady dressed on the jean will get attention, whereas the lady dressed in a skirt wont. This proves that I am not alone in what I admitted. It also proves I am doing a fair job at controlling myself and my thoughts. I bet you, if you asked in a safe environment, any guy, Christian or not, will admit that a woman in jeans does catch is eye in most cases. And it is not easy to focus just on her face. It is (male) human nature) Dont get me wrong. I wholeheartedly strive to do what God wants me to do, and treat women with the utmost repsect, but there is no denying they way God made us. To put it simply, tshirt and jeans, while quite modest, especially when compared to some choices of clothing, still dont say "dont look at me in a gender specific way." That stuff called clothing that covers as litle as possible, tells guys "Look at me, I want attention, ..." However, t-shirt and jeans says "It is ok to look at me as a female (specificly), as I dont care if you stare at me". But a dress says "You dont need to be staring at me, because I am saving myself for the ONE guy for me.
If you havent caught on yet, all too many guys go where women are just to stare at them. Some uys go so far as to comment on and even rate how much they like specific aspects. And this is modern culture, sometimes even, sadly, youthgroups and churches. I ask you, considerig this, is t-shirt and jeans really all that modest if it allow this, rather than discouraging it? I realize it is the modern cultural norm, but does this really have not appearance of evil? Only discouraging something evil within reason has no appearance of evil.
And why, does any guy but the ONE guy God has for you need to be looking at you in a sexual manner? (as that is why most guys, stare)
Im not even saying anyone is wrong or sinning or going to hell on this issue. Im not being legalistic. I am merely pointing out that wearing a dress is actually best. You can expect Christian guys to more respectful, adn strive toward God more, thus not playing the rating/staring game, but you cannot expect non Christians to follow suit. And they are the ones you should be covering yourself for most.
I am not stating anything but that wearing a dress is wise as it is part of being pure and conserved for the one guy God has for you. And, yes, after all that thought, I would want my wife to follow that, not just encourage.
And for the burka, that makes a woman nothing better than a ghost, so, I dont agree with that. |
|
 |
Coralfish
Town Hall Judge
Joined: 17 Dec 2002
Posts: 1790
Location: Southern Academia
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2003 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
I decided to comment on this topic, as it seems to be one of great debate.
While I have not personally thought about this issue much, I can, in a way, understand both sides to this debate. But perhaps it would be better if I offered my perspective on the issue.
I suppose it would be best to mention that I dress for the specific purpose of not to be noticed. I go out of my way to accomplish this, whether it be wearing pants and a t-shirt or sweatshirt(depending on the weather) or, as is most often the case, my favorite jacket. Actually, come to think of it, after they initiated a code of modesty at our orchestra practices, I was immediately pointed out as the one person who would never have to worry about breaking that rule! Other than that though, I suceed quite well at being ignored. In school usually, it requires a few loud "ahems" to get someones attention (whether it be guys or girls). But this is ideal...
But on the other end of the spectrum there is church, where I do always try to wear suitable attire (i.e a skirt or dress). The people there are used to seeing me dressed up all the time, as we usually never meet outside of church, but just the same as in school, I manage to dress discreetly enough to be ignored while still looking nice and presentable. It seems to work, and just as my long running pants are acceptable in school, the dress clothes are what I wear on special occasions or to church events and services...that's just how it has been for as long as I can remember.
Finally, I guess that I am in agreement with the more conservative views presented as far as the dress issue is concerned, but so far, I have still continued to dress as I always do, which, if I may be so bold as to speculate is quite modest, as my clothes are usually on the long or baggy side of things. It's more comfortable, preactical, doesn't draw attention, and works for all the outdoor activities I am involved in. Of course, as a final note, if I were tall, blonde, and stunningly gorgeous, then yes, I would consider dressing even more conservatively than I do now (dresses all the time, and that), but for now, I haven't had a problem, and I am nearly positive, that what I wear is not causing undue distraction for anyone.
Looking back..that post was a bit on the verbose side! |
|
|
rosie
Inquisitive Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 1197
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
| E87M2 wrote: | | I've heard of the argument "Well, the guys need to control their thoughts!" That is SO NOT true! Girls, the Bible commands us not to be "stumbling blocks" for other believers. If dressing in pants makes us that, then we ought to care enough about our brothers-in-Christ to help them guard their thoughts. |
Sure. We need to try not to be stumbling blocks. But, it's not just our problem. Guys most certainly do need to control their thoughts, no matter how a woman is dressed. If someone took the view, "Well, it's their fault for dressing that way", they would be wrong, also!!!
There are two extremes... dress however you want, don't bother about the guys. If they stare, that's their problem. And the other... uhoh, she's a stumbling block all right!! Quick, cover her up better. Not good enough... lets hide her somewhere, don't let her out of the house. It's all her fault for causing such thoughts.
Obviously, both are very wrong. Very, very wrong. There's no other option, so like most things, I think we need to settle somewhere between the two.
About how guys react to women in jeans vs. skirts... well, I'm not a guy so I don't know much about this. However, I think it might have a lot to do with how STYLISH someone is dressed. My friend once told me I was pretty, but no one would think I was "hot" unless I dressed stylishly. I have no desire to look "hot". The alternative is how I normally dress... loose jeans. I'd like to add, that quite a lot of dresses are far worse than jeans....... |
|
|
The Top Crusader
Job is to annoy Bennett Charles
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 2718
Location: Yarr.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
| Sydney Bristow Vaughn wrote: | | Quote: | | I've heard of the argument "Well, the guys need to control their thoughts!" That is SO NOT true! |
So, guys don't need to control their thoughts? Well, thats a new one. Guys, go ahead! Let those lustful thoughts run wild! |
WOOHOOO!!! Alright, thanks!  |
|
|
hawkeye
Linux Geek
Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 2408
Location: Inventors Corner
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2003 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
Rose: Let me put it this way.
When a woman wears jeans, and sits down, it is *IMPOSSIBLE* for any guy to not be tempted to look in that area. No matter how strong he is, no matter how Godly he is, no matter how respectful he is, he will be tempted to look. It isnt an easy temptation, like stealing a candy bar. It is the biggest most powerful temptations men can face. Why? Because this temptation is at the core of what God made man to be. God made humans male and female. That means He made us sexual beings. And that is the temptation the devil plays from in men. It is the most powerful thing a man has, and not something to be treated lightly.
So, when a woman wears a short skirt/dress, or a low cut 'blouse' or too short shorts, she is provoking the most powerful thing man has, and the devil loves to play this.
When a woman wears a knee length dress or a pants, the same temptation exists. A knee length dress is a temptation for obvious reasons. But pants are a temptation for near similar reasons. The temptation is the same, and in fact, even relaxed fit jeans are similar to nothing, as with every step, or when you sit down, your pants pull tightly to your body. And the temptation continues.
I cant provide this in the format Ive become known for, as there isnte a logic to it that can be explained. It is just how God made men. He made us Male, and to enjoy Female. Thus wearing clothing that pulls to your skin or doesnt cover it draws attention to you.
So, Christian guys usually are controlling their thoughts, but there is no way you can expect them to control their temptation. So, even though you have gone beyond the societal norm, you truely didnt understand that that is a stumbling block. Its not your fault, as you had no way of knowing, but now you know, and so now you can decide. Ask any guy to be honest and straight forward, and he will agree with me.
The reason it took me so long to realize this is because I have been desensitized by society and because it isnt an easy issue. However, I do not say anything here to try to put anything on any woman, but to point her to Christ. Truely submitting to the verse on dress, and the definition I am bringing is an act of being a servant.
Matthew 20
26Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27and whoever wants to be first must be your slave--
A servant is the greatest among the church. It is a truely great place to be, and it mirrors Christ greatly. There is no greater example.
And, no, men should not ignore the vers either. |
|
|
rosie
Inquisitive Member
Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 1197
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2003 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
| oh. |
|
|
Eugene Kendall™
The Official Town Hall Nutcase
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Posts: 3713
Location: Grandma Land!
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2003 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
| alwaysHis324 wrote: | | Sydney Bristow Vaughn wrote: | | Quote: | | I've heard of the argument "Well, the guys need to control their thoughts!" That is SO NOT true! |
So, guys don't need to control their thoughts? Well, thats a new one. Guys, go ahead! Let those lustful thoughts run wild! |
oh boy, here we go again.
*runs and hides under her bed*
No more fighting please!!!!!! |
u havent heard about fighting till youve been to jsi |
|
|
Hisgirl84
Junior Member
Joined: 16 May 2003
Posts: 199
Location: US
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2003 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
I asked my brother, hawkeye...he's usually very honest with me. He said it depends on the clothing, but that he doesn't think *all* jeans/shorts/shorter skirts draw attention.
Not to sound controversial or anything. I don't totally believe him, but thought I'd add *his* remark on the topic. |
|
|
Rachael Blackgaard
Thinks She Can Outsmart the Admins
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 798
Location: XY coordinates Classified
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
eagleeye- what's jsi?
I actually got my first cute skirt in a bag of handmedowns two days ago and keep wearing it. Actually, I've been wearing skirts a lot lately, since I keep getting so many cute ones. Most of them are dress skirts- knee length, black, very Ms. Parkerish, but I also got two okay cotton dresses, two very nice dresses (forest green and dark blue), and a long pink skirt. I think I'll save the pink skirt for some kind of holiday at my synagogue...
It's amazing how nice some clothes can be and still be modest... I threw the baggy brown dresses away : - ) |
|
|
Eugene Kendall™
The Official Town Hall Nutcase
Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Posts: 3713
Location: Grandma Land!
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2003 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
| jsi is a web board |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Search
Memberlist
Log in