You wear tight pants and you will be in trouble

by wannaexit 57 Replies latest jw friends

  • rebelfighter
    It dawned on me this morning why Toni might be so obsessed about tight pants. Maybe he is jealous he just can't get them up over that big fat tummy.
  • stillin
    I still wear some pretty snug-fitting jeans in my personal time. But I like taking them off, too. Let the boys have some space. Lately I'm leaning toward relaxed fit jeans. What does TOMO have to say about my jeans, I wonder.
  • snugglebunny

    They've always been obsessed with dress and grooming. Back in the days of the mini-skirt (sigh) our CO's wife demonstrated to the sisters the acceptable type of skirt that could be worn.

    If the lady was to kneel down on the floor, and the skirt completely covered her legs and feet, the skirt was deemed to be OK.

  • sp74bb
    Totally nerd obsession... Commandments of men :)
  • GrownMidget

    I agree with TheOldHippie.

    I once was discussing with a guy who had sex with someone. He shared his feelings with me after the committee and I asked if he still can go to field service. He looked at me weird but I guess I was right about that it is possible to disqualify you from it despite that I never heard of it before.

    Also, I asked an elder once that what is the absolute least thing you need to do to get to the paradise. Guess what he said? Field service.

    Makes me wonder how that "tight pants rule" goes along with the fact that if you are with the organization you are saved as they are stating so much. How can you be if you are not allowed to go to field service...

  • KateWild

    Lol hahaha......the rules are really getting stupid now.

    Jwfacts thanks for the letter.

    Kate xx

  • ctrwtf
    Why don't they just say what they mean?: If you can't pray the gay away, at least don't dress like a queer.
  • Pistoff

    This was much discussed on this forum earlier, with a heated argument.

    I see it as codification into Watchtower law of the extremely radical viewpoints of Tony Morris, who has demonstrated his bias against anything he sees as 'homosexual'.

    Tony is the one who said that homosexual clothing designers came up with tight pants so that they could look at men in tight pants.

    (Really, how many witness men can wear them? 5%, if that, and those are teenagers or young adults. Certainly not Tony, the thought of that is troubling. PS, this is fashion; if you don't like it, it will change in a year or two.)

    This directive to CO's is even more troubling; now even appearing to be effeminate or gay will get you counseled, or barred from service.

    It is just the latest chapter in the Witnesses obsession of how they look to outsiders, not the actual culture they cultivate in the congregation.

    Are you a 'known' child molester (WT's term, they avoid the use of the word pedophile)?

    You can go in service, hell, you can probably be an elder, it the congregation has not found out.

    But if you have 'the lisp' or are a little minty, and can't change, you can't be out there representing Jehovah.

    The WT is becoming one of the most duplicitous religions in the world.

  • ScenicViewer

    "to disqualify him from being a publisher"

    That was strange. It was always stressed that being a publisher is required, is a right, that as a JW you both have the right to and the obligation to preach. I remember it stated at a JC that we had absolutely no right to deny a person the right to preach. He could be told to better preach in a specific area or to avoid an area because of Things that had happened - but not to stop preaching. The only way to stop a person from preaching is to df him.

    If you are disqualified from preaching - you by definition is no JW. Strange.


    I agree with TheOldHippie.

    I agree with TheOldHippie too. I remember a time when Witnesses were barred from field service as part of reproof, but that changed because preaching was viewed as a 'Christian requirement,' and a 'requisite for life,' therefore it was an activity that could not be taken from someone.

    I had to do a double take when jwfacts posted the outline where it clearly says "the person no longer qualifies to share in the ministry." This represents another flip-flop back to the old way of doing things.

  • sir82

    I agree with TOH, this is unprecedented.

    I'd also just like to happily point out that it used to be well-nigh impossible to get copies of correspondence & outlines meant for COs only; now they are routinely leaked.

    The cracks in the org. are growing & extending upward.

Share this