You're quite welcome to not wear pants while you're around us, Spice!
who is wearing the pants?
OK...thanks to Norm on another site I have the answer:
*** w72 11/1 pp. 671-672 Questions from Readers ***
Questions from Readers
• In view of what is written at Deuteronomy 22:5, is it proper for a woman to wear slacks?—U.S.A.
Deuteronomy 22:5 reads: “No garb of an able-bodied man should be put upon a woman, neither should an able-bodied man wear the mantle of a woman; for anybody doing these things is something detestable to Jehovah your God.” This text is not discussing styles of clothing. The prohibition concerns one’s putting on things specifically designed for the opposite sex.
The distinction between the sexes is of divine origin and the law set forth at Deuteronomy 22:5 served to preserve that distinction. When it comes to appearance and attire, the usual thing is for a man to want to look like a man and for a woman to look like a woman. For an Israelite to have acted contrary to this deep internal sense of what is fitting could have led to homosexuality. Thus the law at Deuteronomy 22:5 also opposed this sin.
At the time the law was given, both men and women wore robes. But there was a definite difference between the garb of men and that of women. Similarly, in some parts of the earth today both men and women wear slacks. But styles of slacks for women differ from those for men. Accordingly, the principle taught at Deuteronomy 22:5 would not rule out a woman’s wearing slacks or pants.
Moreover, Christians are not under the Mosaic law. (Rom. 6:14) Insistence on applying the letter of this law would therefore be contrary to Christian teaching. So if a woman were to put on a worn-out pair of her husband’s trousers to do a job around the house or on the farm, she would not be going against the evident purpose of the law, namely, to prevent confusion of sexual identity and sexual abuses.
The fact that Christians are not under the Mosaic law but are guided by its principles calls for them to use discernment, good judgment and to exercise their conscience. A Christian woman appreciates that whether it would be proper for her to wear slacks or pants depends upon factors other than her personal likes. She would not want to be the cause for stumbling others or bring reproach on the Christian congregation. Clothing that may not be looked on with disfavor if worn in the privacy of one’s home or at work may be objectionable if worn at Christian meetings and when publicly proclaiming God’s Word or carrying on other public activity. Attitudes, too, may differ from area to area. The Bible’s counsel is that women “adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, ._._. in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works.”—1_Tim. 2:9 10.
For additional details on the matter of proper dress, see The Watchtower of April 1, 1972, pp. 222-224.
Its always about stumbling someone and a matter of conscience is it not
Here are a few other quotes:
*** g76 8/8 p. 26 Dressing in a Modest and Attractive Way ***For many women the pantsuit is quite practical and comfortable when shopping or for informal wear. But in some areas people would view it as unacceptable when, for example, attending religious meetings. A Christian woman is, therefore, wise to take into consideration the attitudes existing in the community where she lives. Thereby she can, to borrow the Bible phrase, ‘recommend herself to every human conscience.’—2 Cor. 4:2.
Besides encouraging that others be taken into consideration, the Bible counsels Christian women "to adorn themselves in well-arranged dress, with modesty and soundness of mind, . . . in the way that befits women professing to reverence God, namely, through good works." (1 Tim. 2:9, 10) When a Christian woman’s apparel causes others to question whether she is true to her religious professions, her clothing obviously is no longer modest. The determining factor in this is not whether the item is a dress, skirt or a pair of slacks but what is expected in that locality of one who ‘professes to reverence God.’
Certain clothing, such as slacks, may be worn by both men and women. When that is the case, care has to be exercised not to wear a style that would make it difficult to distinguish a man from a woman. This would be in line with the spirit the law recorded at Deuteronomy 22:5: "No garb of an able-bodied man should be put upon a woman."
Ah, so some "people" would view it as unacceptable to wear a pantsuit to a religious meeting. I like how they phrase that - religious meetings. Of course they would never say "church services." Only witnesses would catch the term meetings and use it to show others why it is unwise to wear these pantsuits. And this is printed in the Awake, a magazine generally geared towards worldly people. I think we are about due for some new light regarding pantsuits. This article was printed back in 1976. Generally today, pantsuits are viewed as being very professional looking - highly comparable to a man wearing a business suit. ***personal note --- When I see a woman wearing a pantsuit, it gives me an extremely good impression of her. If I were to see a sister wearing one to a meeting, I would think she is dressed better than ones who are wearing dresses or skirts.***
*** g85 3/22 p. 28 From Our Readers ***I found your article "Fig Leaves, Fashions and Figures" very informative, but I must also admit feeling a bit excluded from it. Because of a physical disability, I walk with the aid of a leg brace and a cane. I feel very self-conscious about this, and so I hide the brace as much as possible by wearing long pants all the time. This causes me to feel different from other women, especially in situations where they generally wear skirts or dresses. Please give me some tips on fashion for women who feel that they must wear slacks.
M. S., California
Therecan be circumstances, such as those mentioned, where slacks might well be the more appropriate and modest type of dress. If so, the fashion tip would be to select a style of pantsuit that is attractive, fits properly, and meets the requirement of ‘well-arranged dress with soundness of mind.’ (1 Timothy 2:9) Then wear such with the dignity suitable for the occasion.—ED.
Notice how the editor of the Awake says that it would be ok to wear a pantsuit that meets the requirement of well-arranged dress? If this sister who wrote in feels self-conscious about wearing dresses, how much more obvious would it be to wear pants with a leg brace? C'mon, a long dress would be much better suited for hiding a leg brace, wouldn't you think? Unless we are talking MC Hammer pants here!
Another example of Watchtower doctrine NONSENSE performing it's obligatory cult-like control over Jehovah's Witness members. Tell people how to think, what to think, not to ever question, what to wear, what to believe, what to watch or read and what is not acceptable, etc...
I HATE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES WITH ALL MY HEART.
Hey guys, this reminded me of an experience when I was a teenager.
There was this wierd dude studying, he was even going out in service. He was in his late teens. Frequently, he would end up in a car group full of sisters--especially during afternoon service.
One day he started tell us all that pants were not only inappropriate for MEETING attire, but we shouldn't even be wearing them at home, since it was the garb of men.
The rationale he used was the many photos in the "Live ForNever" book as well as others always showed the women in paradise wearing dresses!!!!
One of the sisters in the car was an Elder's wife, and said we sisters maybe should start wearing dresses all the time because it could be a cause for stumbling a Bible Student!!!
My sister and I were like, You have *GOT* to be shitting me. If memory serves, we said then and there we would continue to wear pants.
What a riot. But not really.
I had a chance to ask my mother on this.
Scenario: She was dressed for work and asked me how she looked (can't believe it but she likes my opinion on fashion these days). She was wearing nice slacks, a white shirt and a vest over the shirt that matched the pants. She looked very professional and coul've walked into any busines meeting dressed as such. I told her she looked great and suggested that she wear it to the meetings since she looked so good. She said it wouldn't be appropiate. I asked why not and told her that she was more modest than most of the dresses. Her reply was she wouldn't be comfortable. She couldn't think of a reason except that. I made a joke about how that couldn't be less comfotable that sockings and heels. She laughed and then headed out to work.
Moral of the story: she has no idea why she doesn't wear pants except the fact that deep down she knows she will get in trouble and thats what makes her uncomfortable.
I wonder how many "sisters" are like that. maybe all of them
Anyway, Im working on her and have a feeling that it won't be long before I get her out. Wish me luck.
I've never personally met a sister that thought that the ban made any sense whatsoever, including all the female members of my family. It's one of the rare WTS stances that they feel happy to openly criticise. So we now have sister's as attendants at conventions, maybe this will be the next "gracious" concession that the GB give.