Change to dress and grooming rules for JWs in USA soon?

by RayPublisher 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • RayPublisher
    RayPublisher

    My guy with the lurk account on JWtalk (where all the kool-aid drinking JWs go to talk about how wonderful 'The Twoof' is) sent me some more interesting threads, here's one:

    --------------------------------------------------------------------

    Spoiler: Starting new the new service year September

    "There will be new directives from the Branch through the Circuit overseer on Dress and Grooming that will disqualify one to be a congregation publisher. I have heard what some of the info is but not all. Guess we will have to wait to see what is all included in new instructions."

    .

    .

    "Part of the direction is on anyone dressing heterosexually. Seems like this has gotten out of hand especially in large metropolitan areas around the world. Those that even give the appearance of such (Example: Skinny Jeans) Will be disqualified as a publisher. There are other areas to be covered both male and female but this is one."

    .

    .

    "This information came in letter form from the branch to CO's and future directions will be implemented Starting in Sept. We have been given suggestion on proper dress and grooming for some time. I guess in order to get the attention of those whom like to walk the line its time to lay it on the line if you want to look like like the world then be in the world. If you want to be recognized as a witness of Jehovah then obey. The choice will be given"

    --------------------------------------------------------------------


  • Garrett
    Garrett
    Ha, if this is legit, it would make my day.
  • FayeDunaway
    FayeDunaway
    I was thinking when I saw this subject title that maybe they were finally EASING the rules. Maybe allowing women to wear dress pants? But Just when you think maybe they are getting slightly more liberal cuz it's about time!!!...they get worse.
  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    Counselling against the "unscripturalness" of skinny jeans (no mention made of how stupid they look)...

  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    Dressing "hetero" is bad?? Did he mean "metro?" BTW, the WTBTS uses the term "metrosexual" incorrectly.

    Just look up the term "metrosexual", it doesn't mean a person who wears tight pants. Also, a homosexual and a heterosexual could both be "metrosexual" according to the definition, unless the definition has evolved within the last year.

    DD

  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    " "Part of the direction is on anyone dressing heterosexually. "

    So, this means that Sisters cannot dress as females, and Brothers cannot dress as males ?

    Do you think the Poster meant "Metro-sexually" ? Skinny jeans are Tight Pants I suppose.

    Here in the U.K, "Tight Pants" (tight underwear to us) make your balls ache. Skinny jeans are O.K, if getting a little dated now.

    If there is any truth to this rumour, it just shows how out of touch the G.B etc are, and the controlling effort will send even more young ones scurrying away.

  • cognitivedizzy
    cognitivedizzy

    lol, this would be epic,from I live , even wearing a regular Jean is frowned upon, crazy batshit club

  • sir82
    sir82

    anyone dressing heterosexually

    What does "dressing heterosexually" even mean?

    Based on the context it seems they might mean "dressing homosexually".

    But even so - I still don't know what that means. Wouldn't it differ by country, or even region?

    This is so vague & weird I suspect it is just an unsubstantiated rumor. Probably some elder or CO was ranting about "I wish the Society would come out against homosexual dress", and someone overheard it and ran with it.

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99
    This is a bollocks thread. The op has a history of creating threads with unsubstantiated rumours and never backing them up. I wouldn't waste time speculating on it here.
  • NewYork44M
    NewYork44M
    This does not seem legit. Perhaps they could as someone to go home if dressed inappropriately but to disqualify does not seem manageable.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit