No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'

by wizzstick 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  _Morpheus

  X2 ^^^
• 

  wizzstick

  That hardly seems like the smoking gun of an authoritarian regime and I think if you try and sell it to people as such they will come away with the impression that the WTS / JWs are good christian folk and we're a bunch of unreasonable, fault-finding nutters.

  Firstly, this is an organization that already has a dress code. It bangs on about modesty, it expects people to wear suits to meetings just to worship God and so on.

  This new rule is intrusive and vague. And given elders are often (read the postings from recipients on here) petty, love any chance to lord it up over others and like to make their own rules up, what do you think will happen?
  

  What, precisely, is 'extremes' of this world?

  What, precisely, is 'repeated counsel? One previous chat? Two?
  

  Why the lack of announcement of not being allowed on the ministry? Hardly transparent is it?
  

  Has anyone on this thread suggested this is some 'smoking gun of authoritarian regime'? I've not seen it if they have. But it is yet another example (of many) of them being such a regime.

  To end on a positive note, personally I see this as a good move. To younger JW's it will help them see the Org as petty, controlling and restrictive and to any would be new recruits it will equally show them how controlling the Org is.

  To misquote Princess Leia "The more you tighten your grip, the more will slip through your fingers".
• 

  Pistoff

  The OP mentions clothing; the scanned outline contains sinister guidelines for flagging 'effeminate behavior' and 'effeminate traits'.

  What is written is one thing, Simon, well and good to have all of those qualifiers, but in small town USA, where I reside, elders will take this and run with it.

  I can think of two young men who would have been taken aside and counseled for 'effeminate' behavior, and one circuit overseer.
  

  FORGET what this says about clothing, the clothing is a fad; this marks the unwritten but real policy of discrimination based solely on the SUSPICION that one has 'gay' traits.

  And just because it isn't 'unreasonable' for that type of religious group doesn't mean it isn't harmful or the signal of a new program of bias against 'the gays', even if they aren't gay!
  
• 

  Pistoff

  Here is what they actually say, in the outline:

  "This trend is affecting some in the congregation

  --Some brothers lean toward effeminate characteristics and grooming habits"

  and:

  "Please note two areas of concern among brothers

  1) The tendency to dress in the so-called metrosexual style, which usually includes tight fitting jackets and pants that highlight the body

  2) The manifesting of effeminate traits, perhaps in one's bearing, body language, and manner of speech"

  and:

  "Any individual who manifests the aforementioned extremes in dress and grooming or who displays gender-blurring characteristics should not be recommended for Bethel service or the School for Kingdom Evangelizers"
  

  So:

  Yes, Simon, they are only as crazy as all the other fundamental religions in their puritanical views of dress.

  But note the last quote: If your dress, grooming is extreme, OR if you display 'gender-blurring characteristics' you are not going to Bethel, or the SKE.
• 

  Simon

  Firstly, this is an organization that already has a dress code. It bangs on about modesty, it expects people to wear suits to meetings just to worship God and so on.

  That is not unusual. Lots of people have the notion of putting on their "sunday best" to go to church. When we drive past any of the numerous non-JW churches on a Sunday morning you see very smart, well dressed people. I'm sure some churches are more "street" but they are not in that group.

  This new rule is intrusive and vague.

  It actually doesn't seem that way to me. It seems fairly straightforward without being regimented. As I posted earlier, what do you want? A set of measurements that people have to check their clothes against? You must be over "this high" to come on this ride / your hem must be down to this measurement to come on this platform?

  Any kind of rule like this relies on some interpretation and common sense.

  What, precisely, is 'extremes' of this world?

  They describe the metro-sexual styles but I think everyone has an idea if someone is dressed conservatively / mainstream or 'extreme' without having to have every possible scenario spelled out. That would be impossible and of course lead to complaints of them having prescriptive rules.

  What, precisely, is 'repeated counsel? One previous chat? Two?

  It seems to suggest previous chats so at least two? Blatantly ignore the elders counsel and the worst that happens is they won't recommend you for bethel? That hardly sounds like an authoritarian regime tightening their grip - more like getting a bit relaxed if anything.

  Why the lack of announcement of not being allowed on the ministry? Hardly transparent is it?

  And if it was announced then you'd be complaining that they were announcing it and making it public?

  This is the instruction to the elders. I think the WT's and meetings already have plenty of instruction on how people should be dressing.

  Has anyone on this thread suggested this is some 'smoking gun of authoritarian regime'? I've not seen it if they have. But it is yet another example (of many) of them being such a regime.

  Yes, yes they have repeatedly. And then you make the claim again.

  To end on a positive note, personally I see this as a good move. To younger JW's it will help them see the Org as petty, controlling and restrictive and to any would be new recruits it will equally show them how controlling the Org is.

  I agree - anything that may make people think is good, but I don't think this is any kind of monumental change. They are just pointing out a recent fashion trend and telling the elders to watch out for it creeping in and how to handle it if it does.

  As we've seen with previous policy and quotes - this is nothing new. The only "new" part is the reference to the new metro-sexual style.

  To misquote Princess Leia "The more you tighten your grip, the more will slip through your fingers".

  I think one thing we can agree on - that bikini would be an extreme. She would not be going out on the ministry dressed in that. No sir-ey bob.

  I need to go watch a movie ...
• 

  Simon

  What is written is one thing, Simon, well and good to have all of those qualifiers, but in small town USA, where I reside, elders will take this and run with it.

  I don't doubt that. But trying to pin the behavior of certain elders on the WTS for doing something that they haven't instructed them to is not going to be a smoking gun.

  Yes, Simon, they are only as crazy as all the other fundamental religions in their puritanical views of dress.

  Is it an issue that the general population feels any outrage over? I would suggest they have a sympathetic opinion with many as it being "a good and decent thing".

  But note the last quote: If your dress, grooming is extreme, OR if you display 'gender-blurring characteristics' you are not going to Bethel, or the SKE.

  And given that those are both their own programmes ... what's the problem?

  If you want to go to bethel don't wear 'extreme worldly clothing'. Does that seem at all unexpected or unreasonable?

  "oh no, my human rights are being violated. I want to go to my religious indoctrination school in a metro-sexual skirt and they won't allow it".

  How likely is it that someone keen to go to bethel would be so 'rebellious' at the local KH level?
• 

  3rdgen

  I find this outline interesting because of it's secrecy. All the previous instructions to Jws regarding dress and grooming have AFAIK been public in talks and in publications. If the ruling class thinks they must root out gender ambiguity why not just say so?

  I am curious about how this will play out in my family. The well liked father is an elder. The mother is opinionated and officious. Their thirty something very handsome likeable son still lives at home and has never had the slightest interest in girls. He dresses in jaunty caps and tweed sportcoats bow ties etc. He has every affect of being gay. He has never worked for anyone but his parents and is totally dependent on them. Will he be counseled? Will he change who he is? Will his elder father be held accountable? So many questions..........
• 

  freddo

  They don't need anything in writing about dress and grooming to decide who goes to Bethel or not. Just having a beard illustrates that.
• 

  DarioKehl

  Side note: I'd love to see the browsing history and hard drive contents on ToMo3's personal computer. I'd bet my life savings that he has stuff on there that he condemns publicly. And tight pants would be nothing compared to everything else.

  Just a hunch. Again, it is my opinion that this guy is deviant and dirty. His actions betray something disturbingly perverse.
• 

  Finkelstein

  This poor guy came to Hall one day and said he would like give a talk, the elders there told him not until he got a hair cut and put on a suit, then he inquired about going out in service this Saturday morning and again he was told not until he changed his personal appearance . The elders informed him they have an image their trying uphold for their organization.

  He apparently walked off in disgust, retorting ... " This is my Gospel not theirs "