Deut 22:5

[SayaOtonashi]

I hope you guys don't mind but how do u guys view this verse?

 

[aniello]

Deu 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Seems clear enough.

 

[visionary]

Looking for details as to how it should be perceived?

Like....

Does a woman wearing slacks made for a woman constitute wearing men's clothing?
How would flowing robes back then be different for man or a woman?
If a outfit is not designated to be either, like a scarf, who should or could wear it?

 

[yedida]

It seems pretty clear to me - a man should not wear feminine clothing so as to appear to be a woman; neither should a woman wear masculine clothing so as to appear to be a male.

A Scot proudly wearing his tribal kilt is not a man attempting to be mistaken as a woman. It's a cultural costume (for lack of a better term at the moment) - no one would ever think that Scottish man is hoping his kilt looks like a woman's skirt!
A woman in the military, posing proudly in her "Dress" uniform (which can be pants rather than a skirt) is not hoping everyone will mistake her for a man!

A lot of the southern Fundalmental Baptists (and a few other fundie denominations) frown on women wearing slacks or jeans, but that's just silly. They need to get over it. Sheesh........

 

[spencerian]

Has anyone actually studied HOW women came about to wear pants?

 

[visionary]

Has anyone actually studied HOW women came about to wear pants?

Because what she was doing required something other than a flowing garb that could hamper her efforts.

 

[MessianicMommy]

I hope you guys don't mind but how do u guys view this verse?

No cross dressing.

This means if there is a male only article of dress in whatever culture you find yourself, you don't form yourself, as a woman to look exactly like a man and wear those things. And vice versa for the men.

This however doesn't take into effect any issues such as intersex where there is no definitive line as to which gender someone is. So take that for whatever its worth.

Has anyone actually studied HOW women came about to wear pants?

Yes, and it is different in every single culture.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I hope you guys don't mind but how do u guys view this verse?

Deu 22:5 The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God



Some often use Deut. 22:5 to teach that it is wrong for women today to wear pants. - although I agree with others that the text teaches that there is to be a designed gender distinction in the way we dress and that can change....culture makes a difference.

Historically, with the distinction between the dress of the sexes being less than with us, there was greater need of this regulation. There is rea[bless and do not curse]son to believe that the law was made not merely to preserve decency, but because the pagans were in the habit of pursuing a different course of life as a part of their idolatrous worship. In fact, Maimonides says: "In the books of the idolaters it is commanded that when a man presents himself before the Star of Ve[bless and do not curse]nus, he shall wear the colored dress of a woman; and when the woman adores the Star of Mars, she shall appear in armour." Pagan idols were frequently represented with the features of one sex and the dress of the other, and their worshipers endeavored to be like them. It is not at all unlikely that this custom was as old as the time of Moses, and was a partial reason for the enacting of this law."

The word "man" appears in the book of Deuteronomy about 78 times and it is usually translated from iysh (meaning man, a male) and a few times from adam (meaning man[bless and do not curse]kind). However, in Deuteronomy 22:5 the word
translated "man" is from an entirely different Hebrew word. Specifically, it is geber, meaning a warrior, a soldier. Bearing this in mind, the passage reads as follows: “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a soldier, neither shall a soldier put on a woman's garment."

Adam Clarke, a noted Biblical expositor, has com[bless and do not curse]mented on this verse as follows:

"...keli geber, the instruments or arms of a man. As the word geber is here used, which properly signifies a man of war, it is very probable that armour is here intended; espe[bless and do not curse]cially as we know that in the worship of
Venus, to which that of Astarte or Ashtaroth among the Canaanites bore striking resem[bless and do not curse]blance, the women were accustomed to ap[bless and do not curse]pear in armour before her. It certainly cannot mean a simple change of dress, whereby the men might pass for women, and vice versa. This would have been impossible in those countries where the dress of the sexes had but little to distinguish it, and where every man wore a long beard."

That being said, IMHO, it's rather clear that the abomination in Deuteronomy 22:5 was men and women in that present culture worshiping false gods, in the apparel of the opposite sex for those purposes - and it was not simply a matter of wearing clothes that were worn by females at one point or males at another (if the style of dress for males changed).

And yet there are qualifications.

How the Israelites dressed isn't the same as how dress is today - and today there are female-designed pants perfectly suitable for women to wear in most situations.

There was an excellent treatment of the issue from Elmer L. Towns (former Dean of the School of Religion at Liberty University) in the King James Bible Commentary (edited by Edward Hindson, Woodrow Kroll & Jerry Falwell; Thomas Nelson: Nashville, 1983). As seen here:

Verse 5 has caused divisions and confusion among sincere Christian brethren. Some have used this verse to maintain that women should not wear slacks. The word “pertaineth unto” (Heb keli) in the original language is used elsewhere not only of clothes, but also of decorations or utensils used by the opposite sex. The intent of this law was to maintain the distinction between the sexes. Today, it would apply to any unisex clothing that would cloud the distinction between men and women. The New Testament recognizes such a distinction (1 Cor. 11:3) and maintains that long hair on women was a sign of that distinction (1 Cor. 11:6-14). During the days of Moses, garments (Heb simlah) worn by men and women were similar (robes), so this command was designed to keep a woman from appearing as a man for purposes of licentiousness (to deceive the man). The major difference between male and female robes was their decoration or ornamentation, and not their cut. The principle taught by this passage is that the proper distinction between men and women in all cultures should be maintained. The passage does not teach against slacks per se (or hats, shoes, gloves, etc.–all worn by both sexes), but against men or women wearing any item specifically ornamented for the opposite sex (e.g., a man wearing female slacks, lipstick, etc.). The wearing of slacks by ladies today is not an attempt to deceive men, although some may be immodest and improper in certain situations. The final crieteria are that women look like females, that they are modest (1 Tim 2:9-10), and that their outward appearance reflects their inner character (1 Pet 3:3).

​

We need to be able to sort things like clothing styles appropriately (as with Glam etc. styles of dress) as adopted for attention/shock value/ etc.

One of my friends noted that he felt some of the styles for men seemed to be directly in line with that - especially when examining the many ways that clothing styles for females seemed to become adopted by men and normalized. One popular artist - known as Kanye West - has been NOTORIOUS for this (in addition to others like Rapper Cam'Ron who chose to wear all pink clothing ) - and the reality is that the dress roles on both sides have been switching.... more at Kanye Skirts It Up! - Hollywood Street King and Hip Hop Men Wearing Women's Clothes As the New Fashion Trend ... as well as Ed Fadiel: Male Celebrity in Women's Clothing and Bizarre Fashion: Men Are Wearing Women's Clothing in Hip Hop ...

​

​

​

​

The new thing on the rise with skinny jeans is something my brother felt to be a reflection of that reality with gender-bending and setting the stage for greater confusion as to what it means to be either male or female.


With Kanye, it is interesting to see the "skirting" - or (from the looks of it) "kilting". And in saying that, I realize that what in our culture are called skirts (or dresses) worn by males is a cultural phenomenon ) Both Scotland and Greece, for ex.)

Sometimes such appropriations are from cultures, and other times its a matter of dis-association/criticism of the society and priorities in which one lives (like Punk). Others have considered how the adoption of super short skirts (70s) was a fetishization of poverty.

Sweaters have tended to be unisex in colder cultures (Scotland, Denmark, etc.), and color-sex pairings have shifted. Blue for girls, pink for boys was once the norm - as said best in When Did Girls Start Wearing Pink? | Arts & Culture | Smithsonian Magazine

But with what Kanye and others did, I took what they were wearing as skirts, seeing that they've done worse even when noting it wasn't kilts they were going for and saying they did so to make a point. I think kilts (or man-skirts as some of my friends have called them) are awesome - and I've worn some myself, seeing that I enjoy the dress styles - especially from Middle Eastern and Native American/Latino culture.

For basics:

• MUGs Around the World

​

​

​

From India's dhoti, to the hakama of Japan and Bhutan's gho (and the gho is the subject of royal decree). And of course, we also have the issue of Tibetan Buddhist monks (who wear orange robes..even though robes are worn by women as well)

​

Many have noted how MUGs (Men's Unbifurcated Garment) are here again for the duration. And although they aren't for everyone, they wouldn't be as much fun if they were. And guys over in Scotland, Indonesia, India, Africa and many other parts of the globe are saying, "What took you so long?"

 

[MessianicMommy]

Those are utilikilts. I was looking at them for a function we were going to go for, but they don't make the size my husband wears.

I agree. I believe the level of cross dressing addressed is to do with pagan worship and not "hey that lady's a construction worker/soldier/policewoman..!" or "hey, that guy is a nurse/teacher/other job that has been relegated to women for the last 70 yrs..!"

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Those are utilikilts. I was looking at them for a function we were going to go for, but they don't make the size my husband wears.

Wishing there was an event where things could be custom made ahead of time with the utilikilts (which are cool)...although some things may never pass..

I agree. I believe the level of cross dressing addressed is to do with pagan worship and not "hey that lady's a construction worker/soldier/policewoman..!" or "hey, that guy is a nurse/teacher/other job that has been relegated to women for the last 70 yrs..!"

I remember when I was younger how much (unfortunately ) I'd join in with others in middle-school of making fun of other students who had dads that were nurses. Truly ignorant looking back on it - and the same as it concerns saying things like men can't be fashion designers or wedding planners and other things...or saying women can't dress in a tom-boyish manner.

 

[SayaOtonashi]

In other words Deut 22:5 is that no one wears warrior clothes for pagan worship. So it's not just a average man but a warrior. Well women did worship artemis or athena is armor

 

[yonah_mishael]

I noticed in the other thread that you asked about women covering their heads and being forced to do so.

Are you looking for ways to compel others to what you think the Torah teaches about dress and modesty?

 

[SayaOtonashi]

No, I want to corrected what I think. I guess it did seems I was saying the Torah forced women to wear it. I wanted to corrected if anything I got was wrong. Most of what I though was modesty is culture for God give Eve and Adam the same clothes and many of the women and men rode very similar style

 

[yonah_mishael]

No, I want to corrected [sic, correct]what I think. I guess it did seems [sic, seem] I was saying the Torah forced women to wear it. I wanted to corrected [sic, correct] if anything I got was wrong. Most of what I though [sic, thought] was modesty is culture [sic, cultural,] for God give Eve and Adam the same clothes and many of the women and men rode [sic, wore] very similar style

Your icon says that you are from the United States. What is your native language? Maybe we have a communication breakdown because of our different languages. Perhaps I could write to you in another language to help you understand more clearly.

As it is, I think you’re starting to move in the right direction. “Masculine” and “feminine” are cultural concepts. What Americans in the 21st Century think is masculine is not what Greeks (or Hebrews) in the year 600 BCE thought was masculine. Men didn't wear pants or jeans back then, and yet there are those who judge women who wear jeans today as being too “masculine” in the dress. There are pants that are very feminine in cut, and if a man wore them I would think him feminine in his expression.

Things are not often as clear-cut as those of a more fundamentalist attitude would hope. We need to be flexible with life and with those who live.

 

[MessianicMommy]

Awesome post Yonah.

 

[Lulav]

Basically in what ever culture you find yourself do not allow yourself to be mistaken for a sex other than your own. This is deception. Think along the lines of Tamar, she did not dress as a man but she did dress as a harlot which lead Judah to sleep with her.

Don't be someone you're not is the bottom line to me.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Most of what I though was modesty is culture for God give Eve and Adam the same clothes and many of the women and men rode very similar style

True...

At one point, if a guy sat down with his ankles crossed together (during the Victorian era), he was deemed too feminine ...and in other places, judging by how he rode a horse, he may not have been manly enough.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

In other words Deut 22:5 is that no one wears warrior clothes for pagan worship.

It's basically about switching gender - as in identity.

If wanting a contemporary example of this, one can go here to an interesting documentary on the issue that had me processing a lot:

-Hip-Hop - Beyond Beats Clip (Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats & Rhymes Clip - YouTube )

One Christian rapper actually received death threats on the issue of standing against same-sex relationships that were celebrated at the Grammy Awards during the song "Same Luv"