The Great Pants Debate

[Victrixa]

Really, we can see the 'body contour' of guys in their pants as well... not just the gals'!!!! (and the back and front.... :o)


And also, we can see the body contour of women who wear skirts (and blouses)... unless they wear a potato sack... In a potato sack they can hide everything but in normal clothing, it's impossible to hide yourself... really it's so easy to understand a kid could understand that...

 

[Rois]

interesting discussion....I've had to wear more skirts, only because my workplace requires skirts/nylons (an archaic dress code IMHO). I miss pants.

 

[isabella1]

Really, we can see the 'body contour' of guys in their pants as well... not just the gals'!!!! (and the back and front.... :o)


And also, we can see the body contour of women who wear skirts (and blouses)... unless they wear a potato sack... In a potato sack they can hide everything but in normal clothing, it's impossible to hide yourself... really it's so easy to understand a kid could understand that...

It is not about hiding yourself at all. It is about modesty. And yes if a man wears tight enough pants of course you can see everything clearer. But for the most part there are not as many women lusting over men as a result of what they are wearing as there is vis versa. But I see there may be a few who think that way.

 

[Victrixa]

Hiya Isabella!

What it really all comes down to is modesty for everyone. Of course, some things can't really be hidden on our bodies but as long as we don't wear anything tight, we're fine.

 

[isabella1]

 

[Antigone]

Let's take some advice from a pants-wearing pioneer:

If this is trashy, then I'm perfectly content to look trashy for the rest of my life.

Actually ladybug, to show off off ones body is just that. Showing if off, which is not of God. Yes a woman is built beautiful, in all shapes and sizes. And God doesn't create anything ugly, or shameful. But we don't live in a society where everyone has holy eyes or thoughts.

I have big...headlights. The garment that doesn't show them hasn't been invented yet. That doesn't mean I feel the need to flash 'm at everyone in sight, but I'm not about to hide every inch of cleavage either. I have broad shoulders, too - turtlenecks make me look like I play for the NY Giants. So yeah, I show a little skin. And to those who have I problem with that I would like to say THEN DON'T LOOK.

I find the thought that there is no middle ground somewhat disturbing.

And for what it's worth, I've worn dress pants, jeans, and skirts varying from mini to ankle lenght. I never noticed any difference in the way people treated me, men and women alike.

I will give you another example of how modest clothing and women in dresses are treated with more respect...At work there is a Mennonite family who has a baby in our unit, the women are treated like gold with anyone who comes in contact with them. It just blows my mind. They all have plane white bonnets on with their hair put up under it, black shoes and dark stockings, all have the same patterned dress, and the only body part that is showing on them is their hands, top of their neck and front of face. People watch their language, manners, and more in their presence. They have gotten more respect and red carpet than anyone else I have seen. And I know it is because of their extreme modesty.

Not that we have to go to that extreme, but the treatment they receive speaks volumes.

Yes, it does. It tells me that there is something fundamentally wrong with society, not with women's dress code. Kindness and respect should never be conditional, especially towards the way people look.

I thought this was interesting from Colleen Hammond's book...

Colleen says, "Do parents realize that 'ladies of the night' wouldn't wear on the street corners in the 1950's what some girls wear to the mall these days?"

No offense Isabella, but the Victorians would probably say the same thing about the sort of outfit you wear now...

 

[Lady Bug]

showing elbows is a sin Antigone, don't you know that?

 

[Antigone]

showing elbows is a sin Antigone, don't you know that?

Yes, I know. In fact, I often go to church wearing absolutely nothing but elbow pads.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

Personally I like wearing skirts because I am treated with more respect and dignity (by both sexes).And I like being treated like a lady. There is a major difference in how I am treated wearing skirts vs. pants. People are more willing to lend me a hand, I have doors opened for me, and elevators held, even asked "what floor", LOL. I even find that I am trusted my women more, which I found odd.


I took the challenge of wearing skirts all summer to work with a few days of pants in between. Boy did I have an eye opener. You should try it.


Keep in mind that I did not wear skirts above the knee, and my tops were never lower than three fingers held together below the adams apple


Deuteronomy 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 an abomination unto the LORD thy God.


I got this from another site and blog that I was reading on the subject
So, why dresses? First of all, the scripture doesn't say for a woman to wear dresses and the man wear pants! Besides, back then, didn't both sexes wear similar clothing? Weren't robes like dresses? Jesus wore robes...so didn't Jesus wear a dress?"

The research I have done so far...

What did Jesus wear?
(or in other words...did Jesus wear a dress?)

In Jesus' time :
Men wore--
Tunic (short, usually stopped below the knee to mid-calf. No this was NOT a dress, although it was not pant either!)
Girdle (a belt)
Mantle (outer garment - like a robe)
Sandals *(Interesting fact... to "gird your loins" meant literally to take your Mantle and bring it up between your legs and tuck it into your girdle to keep it from getting in the way while you were working or running! Men often showed a LOT more leg than girls and when girded had a look that was similar to shorts... Women wouldn't have done this...it would have been very indecent!)

Women wore--
Tunic (very long -- or in other words a dress, definitely NOT pants or something that showed any leg!)
Girdle (belt-more ornamented that a males)
Mantle (ornamented and LONG)
Veil (Head covering)
Sandals

So- Jesus did NOT wear a dress. And, He did not wear pants either!

If we look at Deuteronomy, the point is that it is NOT appropriate for a woman to wear that which is considered mans clothing.

Think about an image of the restroom sign. She should wear that, which is womans clothing... (which, back then and up until the sexual revolution was modest dresses -regardless of what the man wore!).

There are many, points that could be argued here...

Yes, there are obviously pants that are womens pants that could not really be worn by a man...the question is, is it truly appropriate for a woman to wear pants at all? I've been malling over this issue for a while now and, I'm not sure.

What about this...is it appropriate for a man to wear a womans dress? We raise our eyebrows at that because, really...it isn't. A dress is womens clothing. At least here in the U.S. and in many European culturesis. Of course, there are some individuals who cross dress...but, that is not the point.

As for what constitutes "mens clothing" that all depends on the culture in which a person is living. In the middle east for example both men and women wear robes but colors vary. Women also wear the hijab of course covering their hair, neck, throat. In the Pacific islands we find again that both sexes wear what we'd call a dress/skirt. It both of the above cultures it's vitally important to wear these items as it helps the body maintain a healthy body temp & prevents overheating. In colder climates among Innuit peoples in Siberia/Alaska/Canada we find that the dressing standards among the sexs is identical. Again it's a matter of keeping the body temperature regulated in a harsh environment.

Also in the Asian cultures we find that both sexes wear similar clothing tradtionally with color & pattern being the only real difference.

As of today those are the only true variations between the sexes within Western culture. People of both sexes tend to dress comfortably in whatever way best suits their individual needs. As we saw the need for women to crossover into jobs that were traditionally held by men we found that they began to adapt their dressing style to suit their workplace environs. For instance women can't work wearing dresses inside a factory setting as the loose garment could easily become entangled in fast moving equipment resulting in catastrophic injury and even death. The same goes for women who began to operate farm equipment once it became mechanized. It's too dangerous to work around thrashers/hay bailers/etc... in a skirt so they changed their attire.

Historically, a lot of things changed during WWII when it became necessary for a woman to wear her husbands trousers while she worked on heavy & dangerous machinery... but interestingly enough, most women did not wear pants during social activities. It was still 'not done.' I wasn't until the late 60s (the sexual revolution man! peace! love! etc...) that everything changed.

It has only been in the last 50 years or so that wearing pants became 'OK.' My mom has told me that, for her, even up until late elementary school, it was required that girls wear skirts to school....because...well, girls wear skirts. Boys wore pants."

I'll also be reviewing an interesting book I read by Colleen Hammond called "Dressing With Dignity." Just to give you a taste, Colleen says, "Do parents realize that 'ladies of the night' wouldn't wear on the street corners in the 1950's what some girls wear to the mall these days?" Yipes! I know I've seen this! Have you?

Also... What do you think a mans eyes are drawn to when a woman wears pants? What about when she wears a nice, modest skirt? I'm still looking for facts and figures on this one... Women who advocate skirts insist that mens eyes are drawn directly to your crotch in front...your booty in back. I'm still researching this and will see if I can get more on this before the 7 Day Challenge is over.

So, I did wear a skirt today. It went really well. I've actually been pretty comfortable and I don't think anybody thought anything of it. I ran a couple of errands and now just hanging out at home while the girls enjoy "quiet time."

As a quick Afterward:
NO! I am not trying to convince you to wear skirts. =) But I do feel something working in my own mind and I cannot help but study this out to see where it will go. I have had a couple of people ask me, "Do you feel the Holy Ghost is prompting you to wear dresses?" It is NOT culturally necessary in the LDS Church and I would be the cheese standing alone if I decided that this was the case. Honestly, I don't know. I did ask my husband (bless his heart-he supports me in these wild ideas I get) what he thought. I wondered if I were truly being prompted to wear skirts and dresses...then why am I the only one? His response was, "because you asked." Hmmm... good point. I can't imagine too many of my friends asking a similar question. LOL! When I mentioned it to a few friends many of them thought I was crazy...and usually ended up saying something like..."I'm afraid to ask because I don't want to find out the answer!" I did get a few comments about how, if it was truly an issue the President Monson would say something about it... but, would he? I mean, do we need to be commanded in all things? He is awfully busy combating bigger issues right now like inappropriate contentography and Provident Living. I believe there are some things we just have to decide for ourselves... And NO WAY! I did NOT throw out my pants... This is a 7 Day Challenge... Which is not only challenging me to dress femininely for a week...but challenging me to think about my wardrobe and decide what is modest and feminine and what makes me look like a bag lady and to thoughtfully consider new scriptures."

Oh my!, a woman who actually understands modesty on this forum! There is hope! lol. I was expecting the usual flippant ad-hominems(antigone, shannon) from my response but I have to say, great post! someone with true wisdom on christian modesty

 

[Auburn88]

Hmmm.... I do occasionally wear pants, but I can manage to wrestle a tantrumming 5'2" 110 lb autistic kid to his room while I am wearing an ankle length skirt. It isn't any more difficult in a skirt than in pants.

I really don't find any of her reasons convincing.

We have seven children and skirts and dresses don't seem to have slowed my wife down any.

Except when they're riding or out on the boat, my wife and daughters wear skirts and dresses most of the time.

 

[Antigone]

Oh my!, a woman who actually understands modesty on this forum! There is hope! lol. I was expecting the usual flippant ad-hominems(antigone, shannon) from my response but I have to say, great post! someone with true wisdom on christian modesty

I love irony.

 

[CreedIsChrist]

And men in pants don't arouse women and are modest??? Do you wear a robe or skirts to keep women from looking where they shouldn't look?

for men it is shirt/undergarment or work-suit and work-pants, work shoes(not sneakers). Men don't have curves around their hips and legs like women do. Monk robe is fine too for devouts. However men should not wear shorts, tight shirts, super tight pants, nor have very long hair. Men should be formal. Both men and women should not show their thighs or legs. There is a verse I believe in the OT about not showing the thigh also.

 

[Antigone]

for men it is shirt/undergarment or work-suit and work-pants, work shoes(not sneakers). Men don't have curves around their hips and legs like women do. Monk robe is fine too for devouts. However men should not wear shorts, tight shirts, super tight pants, nor have very long hair. Men should be formal. Both men and women should not show their thighs or legs. There is a verse I believe in the OT about not showing the thigh also.

I'm sorry CiC, but this is still just your opinion. There is nothing in the Bible, nor the Cathechism, about exact specifications of dress code in the 21st century.

 

[_Shannon_]

I can see that Shannon, I am sure with all you have going on in your house you hardly notice. I might notice more because of being out there in the work world. Also just shopping and in my daily dealings with people, weather it is at Mass or other.

I'm not a hermit. I do actually leave my house. I just genuinely don't really care what other random people are wearing or doing. I can be responsible for me (and of course, my children). Focusing on the flaws and shortcomings of others, would just be a way for me to not have to work as hard on myself.

And maybe that's not entirely true..I do notice things about dress--I notice when people are dressed inappropriately for their surroundings--being formal in an informal setting makes you stand out like a sore thumb, likewise being informal in a formal setting. (Both of which are just as immodest as wearing too little clothing).

I also notice shoes--it just kills me that women still subject their bodies to wearing heels--there are few fashions which do as much harm to women's bodies as heels--they throw your pelvis way out of alignment, and remove your body from bearing weight on the hips, pelvis and legs--leading to prolapses, urinary incontinence, arthritis, and osteoporosis, pronation of the knees and feet just to name a few things. I also notice panty hose--which again are just heinously bad for women's health--they restrict circulation and well, um, airflow to your girl parts. Those two clothing items just make me sad and lament that we are still so hung up on our ideas of proper women's dress and beauty to the point where it actually harms women. Guess that probably makes me a radical feminist.

I hate that quote from Ms. Hammond you posted...it's just inflammatory. Has she made some sort of study of prostitute fashions of the past? Or is it just simply more of the "Oh the 1950's were just so much better than now...." which is just a crock. It sounds so appealing, to long for the days of yore---but there were obviously some very fundamental problems and issues...or the 1960's (those times of Babylon) would never have happened. There are problems in every time.

Women are still not treated with dignity and respect based on their personhood, one of the biggest reason being that we are still entrenched in being objectified by men, and well heck--even by one another. In the parameters of this discussion--a man saying what women "ought" to wear--is blatant objectification. It's just a matter of wanting women to conform to a set of male-produced standards. Men want women to dress a certain way, AND want to blame women for their own inability to achieve self-mastery.

I honestly don't understand how women can bear the onus for this. As with so very much--what we're called to is mutual respect. As long as we have people telling us that they'll only respect us if we conform to their standards of dress and beauty--we will NEVER achieve mutual respect. And quite frankly, it keeps us focused on the realm of externals, rather than the much more difficult internal.

 

[_Shannon_]

Let's take some advice from a pants-wearing pioneer:

,

Stone her!!! Stone her!!!

 

[isabella1]

Let's take some advice from a pants-wearing pioneer:

If this is trashy, then I'm perfectly content to look trashy for the rest of my life.

I have big...headlights. The garment that doesn't show them hasn't been invented yet. That doesn't mean I feel the need to flash 'm at everyone in sight, but I'm not about to hide every inch of cleavage either. I have broad shoulders, too - turtlenecks make me look like I play for the NY Giants. So yeah, I show a little skin. And to those who have I problem with that I would like to say THEN DON'T LOOK.

I find the thought that there is no middle ground somewhat disturbing.

And for what it's worth, I've worn dress pants, jeans, and skirts varying from mini to ankle lenght. I never noticed any difference in the way people treated me, men and women alike.

Yes, it does. It tells me that there is something fundamentally wrong with society, not with women's dress code. Kindness and respect should never be conditional, especially towards the way people look.

No offense Isabella, but the Victorians would probably say the same thing about the sort of outfit you wear now...

here we go same old OBOB. LOL. Have you read all my posts? I am guessing my your comments here, it is not possible. Go back and read dear. I am not against modest dress pants and shirts at all. And as far as your "BIG HEADLIGHTS" go...please, spare me. I could care less about your or anyone else's personal body parts. We are respectfully and maturely discussing modesty, skirts and pants here, not your chest size. And if you have not personally noticed the difference in how people treat you when you wear a dress vs pants, then maybe you just are not paying attention. Don't know what to tell ya. I remember about a year ago you posting a statement that you wear your hair up at Mass because you get to many comments from men wearing it down and pretty. You notice that, but not anything when you wear a skirt. LOL. Personally, I think you are just looking to be contrary and argue. You don't want to look at options, what ifs, or perhaps when we act, dress etc.. in a certain way, we affect others around us, and that means taking responsibility for what we are personally doing, and HO MY GOSH...that may possibly mean change. Nooooo, let's not look at ourselves personally, and maybe reflect, lets jump up, rant and rave, and point fingers at others. You are missing every point I am making. From what I remember you are a teacher right?

showing elbows is a sin Antigone, don't you know that?

***Rolls eyes***

 

[isabella1]

I'm not a hermit. I do actually leave my house. I just genuinely don't really care what other random people are wearing or doing. I can be responsible for me (and of course, my children). Focusing on the flaws and shortcomings of others, would just be a way for me to not have to work as hard on myself.

And maybe that's not entirely true..I do notice things about dress--I notice when people are dressed inappropriately for their surroundings--being formal in an informal setting makes you stand out like a sore thumb, likewise being informal in a formal setting. (Both of which are just as immodest as wearing too little clothing).

I also notice shoes--it just kills me that women still subject their bodies to wearing heels--there are few fashions which do as much harm to women's bodies as heels--they throw your pelvis way out of alignment, and remove your body from bearing weight on the hips, pelvis and legs--leading to prolapses, urinary incontinence, arthritis, and osteoporosis, pronation of the knees and feet just to name a few things. I also notice panty hose--which again are just heinously bad for women's health--they restrict circulation and well, um, airflow to your girl parts. Those two clothing items just make me sad and lament that we are still so hung up on our ideas of proper women's dress and beauty to the point where it actually harms women. Guess that probably makes me a radical feminist.

I hate that quote from Ms. Hammond you posted...it's just inflammatory. Has she made some sort of study of prostitute fashions of the past? Or is it just simply more of the "Oh the 1950's were just so much better than now...." which is just a crock. It sounds so appealing, to long for the days of yore---but there were obviously some very fundamental problems and issues...or the 1960's (those times of Babylon) would never have happened. There are problems in every time.

Women are still not treated with dignity and respect based on their personhood, one of the biggest reason being that we are still entrenched in being objectified by men, and well heck--even by one another. In the parameters of this discussion--a man saying what women "ought" to wear--is blatant objectification. It's just a matter of wanting women to conform to a set of male-produced standards. Men want women to dress a certain way, AND want to blame women for their own inability to achieve self-mastery.

I honestly don't understand how women can bear the onus for this. As with so very much--what we're called to is mutual respect. As long as we have people telling us that they'll only respect us if we conform to their standards of dress and beauty--we will NEVER achieve mutual respect. And quite frankly, it keeps us focused on the realm of externals, rather than the much more difficult internal.

Not going to come back at all at ya. Peace Shannon. I personally think we are actually on the same page with variations.

Dressing modest and teaching the young girls and teens around me this is just a passion of mine. I know from my past how showing body parts can get a girl sexually physically harmed (along with other reasons) and that is probably why I am so passionate about this subject.

 

[City Smurf]

I completely support the stoning of women who show their elbows. Do you women not understand how mad thine elbows drive me? Cover up! Cover up for my sake!

!

 

[Peaceful Dove]

I spent most of my life being told what I can or can't wear. This started with me being a redhead. Ya can't wear red, ya can't wear certain colors of pink , ya can't wear this and ya can't wear that. We had to dress in a dress for dinner each night, no pants at the dinner table, and no, we were not rich, in fact we were pretty poor.
If we went to church it was hat and gloves and then all accessories had to match.

Well, slowly things relaxed...to a point. Red was and still is my favorite color, but still I couldn't wear it.

Then almost 8 years ago, I developed lung cancer. It was bad. I lost part of a lung and yet, God spared my life and as shocking as it was to my doctor, I am totally cured.

Guess what, now, I do not sweat the small things. I wear red whenever I feel like it, pink too. I wear pants to church if it suits me and even knee length shorts GASP!!!!

If the Holy Father tells me I must wear a dress or skirt to Church, I will obey him. Until that day, I am not the least concerned what someone on a website says I should wear.

Not rebelious, just set free.

 

[Victrixa]

for men it is shirt/undergarment or work-suit and work-pants, work shoes(not sneakers). Men don't have curves around their hips and legs like women do. Monk robe is fine too for devouts. However men should not wear shorts, tight shirts, super tight pants, nor have very long hair. Men should be formal. Both men and women should not show their thighs or legs. There is a verse I believe in the OT about not showing the thigh also.

Maybe men don't have curves around their hips and legs but let me tell you, their 'squareness' (men are made in a straigth line) in shape sure can turn women on! I have to look away sometimes myself... :o Some don't realize how their manliness (testosterone) arouses women with the way they wear their clothing!!!! You ain't a woman eh?

I agree with you about the tight clothing...

As for the Old Testament, I personally am under the era of grace of the New Covenant... (which talks about dressing modest... as long as it is modest!!!) I'm no harlot, believe me!

BTW I love dressing as a Victorian (in Victorian festivities over here) or even as a modern Victorian... you have to know me!