Still no pant suits, for sisters

by Quarterback 30 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Anony Mous

  The "Who are Jehovah's Witnesses" tract with the two people on the front (which is still being distributed by the way) says it all.

  The rules won't change and they are hemorrhaging their young members. I've discussed the silly rules before. In the 80s and 90s it was "to look like we were serious" as business people sometimes still dressed that way. These days the reason is "because we're different" and with that reasoning they will stand out like Amish in a decade or two while everyone else is wearing tight space suits.
• 

  exwhyzee

  Pant Suits for Sisters

  That sounds like a good name for an Apostate rock band.
• 

  rebel8

  When the religion was founded in the 1800s US, it was taboo for women to wear pants. This taboo was so strong and long lasting that in some cases laws had to be passed to protect the right to wear pants. Little about the religion has changed since then.

  Far from distinguishing them from "the world" and "Babylon the Great", the pants ban makes them similar to other religions and other extremists.

  It also shows a fundamental disrespect for women (which makes them hypocrites).

  When I was in, we had to wear a full slip, granny panties and nylon stockings every time we went in fs or to any meeting. The weather here is extreme and makes that outfit uncomfortable most of the year.

  And I'm sorry if this is TMI but that outfit is also not hygenic and promotes infections in the hot weather. Senseless.
• 

  FlyingHighNow

  In the Bible days, men did not wear pants. Think about it, everyone wore dresses.
• 

  Quarterback

  Yes, and then they invented bicycles
• 

  rebel8

  I happen to be reading a book on the history of fashion and happen to be on the chapter about trousers!

  Apparently it was taboo for women to wear 2-legged underwear until the 1800s when hoop skirts came into fashion. The only reason pantaloons were ok at that time is because the hoop skirts would often accidentally flip up/out, showing the goods. Otherwise even pant-like underwear were too manly.

  Apparently a piece of fabric on top of your legs is good but touching the inside of your leg made it bad!

  The wts did not invent the pants ban--the worldlies did. The pants ban imitates The World.
• 

  hamsterbait

  Do you remember the saying of Jug Rutherford when he was decrying marriage?

  I was told it by an old guy who had been with the borg since the 30s:

  "A woman is just a bag of bones and a hank of hair."

  One Sister said even the women used to laugh when he came out with that one at conventions.

  How can a woman serve a mans every whim when denying easy access?

  HB
• 

  Quarterback

  I love that bag of bones, and hank of hair of mine. Now, let's put some pants on her. Isn't he romantic?
• 

  PaintedToeNail

  I remember a JW calendar, maybe 10 years ago or so, and it had a picture of a couple witnessing in a cold area (Alaska? Norway?...)anyway, the sister was wearing pants at the door. I was really surprised at the soundness of mind being shown. Usually every sister I know in a cold area wears long undies or tights under a hideous long skirt and high winter boots to cover the fact they are wearing long underwear. Personally, if I were a householder, it would be less distracting to me to see a woman dressing in pants in the middle of winter instead of a skirt. The skirt thing would make me wonder if they were freezing their buttocks off...or what was under that skirt anyway to keep them warm?
• 

  ziddina

  Hmmm...

  During the Elizabethan era, women - well, women of European cultures - wore "pants" - two-legged underwear...