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

by wizzstick 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Simon

  Who posted pictures of people in tight pants while preaching?

  I posted a video (which I noticed you removed) of women wearing yoga pants while exercising or doing other ordinary, every day activities. None of them were engaged in the "Door-to-door ministry."

  "Who posted" ... followed by "I posted" ??

  Your post was not removed, it's still there on the topic you posted on. The point I was making is that after this whole "tight pants are immodest" meme started people began posting pictures of women in tight pants which demonstrated that they could be very, very immodest. Doesn't this make the point for the WTS?

  You seem to be out on a mission to be argumentative and misread what I say. I think it is obvious to all that I wasn't saying people posted pictures of people on the ministry in tight clothing. You are inventing things to twist things to suit your opinion - not just what the letter actually says but what other people then comment about it.
• 

  Oubliette

  GrreatTeacher: None of these things have anything to do with modesty. They are simply about control. And control is the problem in 'high control religious groups.'

  Exactly!

  This WT letter is not about trying to control people's dress, it's about trying to control their behavior.

  Ultimately, it's not critical of their clothes, it is critical of who they are.
  
• 

  GrreatTeacher

  The OP never mentioned women in spandex. It referred to ToMo's tight pants comment which was about men's slim-fit suits. Women don't wear pants in service, anyhow, so I don't feel like women in spandex was part of this issue of denying people going in service.
• 

  Oubliette

  Your post was not removed, it's still there on the topic you posted on.

  My mistake. I apologize.
  

  But you are still confusing the point.

  You wrote: "When people start posting images of people in tight pants ... it really makes [the WTBTS's] point for them - they are immodest and out of place for a christian preaching setting.

  I asked "Who posted pictures of people in tight pants while preaching?"

  You haven't answered. Where is that post? I must've missed it.
  

  
  
• 

  GrreatTeacher

  Hey, Oub, the quote you attributed to me was actually Simon's.

  And when I said that those things were not actually immodest, I was replying to Simon's postualting that JWs would object to Ex's because we were promoting immodest dress, not your post which ended up being directly above mine.

  Posts have been coming fast and furious, so it's been a little confusing.
• 

  SafeAtHome

  "Sisters with masculine hairstyles and dress"? So what, are they going to start forbidding women to cut their hair like the Pentacostals or Amish? And sounds like no hope for women to ever wear sensible, warm slacks even in the most frigid weather.
• 

  Oubliette

  GT, yeah, I saw that and fixed it, but apparently after you had already seen it. Sorry.
  
• 

  GrreatTeacher

  It's cool, Oub.
• 

  Simon

  I asked "Who posted pictures of people in tight pants while preaching?"

  You haven't answered. Where is that post? I must've missed it.

  No one has. Given it's not allowed and how few images people take of JWs out preaching it's hardly surprising.

  I don't know what you think that proves or disproves though. The point I was making is that the images that get posted are often immodest which helps to strengthen the WTS claim of such and that they are inappropriate - if they are immodest in so many other settings then they are especially inappropriate for christian ministry work.

  No different than if a school teacher wore yoga pants - probably too revealing and not appropriate. Does that mean all schools are cults now too?
• 

  GrreatTeacher

  Well, gym teachers often wear yoga pants. If they were categorically immodest then they would be forbidden.