The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Costume and Fashion makes the following observation on the issue of pants on women: "The real pants revolution came in the 1960s, with unisex fashions, though even at this time women wearing pants were often refused entry to restaurants and the whole subject was one of heated debate. By the 1970s rules and social attitudes had relaxed and pants of many lengths and styles had become an acceptable part of female dress for both casual and formal attire." This secular book
admits that the growth in the popularity of pants on females in Western culture was part and parcel with the sexual revolution and the unisex phenomenon, both of which are an affront to the
God of the Bible.
Deuteronomy 22:5 - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a womans garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God.
abom.i.na.tion -ba:m-*-na--sh*nn 1: something abominable 2: extreme disgust and hatred : LOATHING
And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, AND WEAR OUR OWN APPAREL: -Isaiah 4:1a-
"Yeah, but what makes you think that pants are a mans garment?"
- "Breeches" were an article of clothing designed by God for the priests who were all men. The word does not occur very often in scripture, but in every case its mens apparel (Exodus 28:42, Leviticus 6:10, 16:4). According to my Hebrew lexicon, "breeches" means "trousers that extend to the knee, below the knee, or to the ankles." This would include pants, shorts, or culottes.
- Until the advent of Hollywood and the movie screen, everyone (including lost people) knew that pants were mens apparel and dresses were womens apparel, and they dressed accordingly. Our cultures (and sadly most churches) acceptance of cross-dressing has resulted largely from the influence of television, the placement of women in the workforce, and the pressures of twentieth century feminism.
- The universal symbol for designating a mens bathroom is a stick figure wearing a pair of pants. The universal symbol for designating a womans bathroom is a stick figure wearing a dress. Coincidence? Hardly. Even our sinful society recognizes that there is a difference in a mans and womans clothing.
- Pants are a symbol of authority, as evidenced by the saying " Im the one who wears the pants in the family." Sadly, most women might as well wear the pants, since they rule their homes anyway!
"Yeah, but thats in the Old Testament, so it doesnt apply to Christians today."?
II Timothy 3:16 - ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God, and IS PROFITABLE for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
It is often a good idea to cite the place you copy information from -- leave a link...
http://www.pricelesswoman.com/Other_Pages/What_About_Women_Wearing_Pants.html
The truth is, logically, men started wearing pants when their skirts/robes were less practicle and later, the same thing occured with women.
I'm not sure of the specifics, but I have heard about records of women wearing pants in acient times in places such as India, Greece and China.
Here
http://www.answers.com/topic/women-s-history, it says: "For example, ancient Greeks often considered the wearing of trousers by Persian men as a sign of an effeminate attitude."
There is a really good article which also deals with the original hebrew words and the context of the bible verses found on cross-dressing:
http://www.actseighteen.com/articles/women-pants.htm
Excerpt:
"However, the usage of the word abomination in Deut 22:5 does not necessarily make it a timeless moral law because any violation of Gods mandates is an abomination to Him, whether it is a violation of ceremonial law or moral law. Furthermore, Deut 22:5 is placed squarely in the middle of, and is completely surrounded by, ceremonial laws. If it is indeed a principle to be literally followed today, why would God choose to bury this verse in the middle of what are clearly ceremonial laws?
The second argument against Christian women wearing pants is that pants have historically been worn by and associated with men and are therefore mens clothing. One problem with this view is that it is not a consistently applied principle among those that advocate it. Many of the articles of clothing have histories of originating with a certain sex. Consider t-shirts these too were invented for men and originally worn exclusively by men. The t-shirt was introduced to America during WWI when American soldiers noticed European soldiers wearing them. By WWII, the t-shirt became standard issue in the American military and was quickly introduced into American fashion.6 Not only were t-shirts originally invented for men, but they were invented specifically for the military. Considering this in light of the true meaning of Deut 22:5, which seems to be forbidding women from wearing the habiliments of a soldier, it would logically follow that a woman wearing a t-shirt would be in much greater violation of this verse than a woman wearing pants. Furthermore, there is no distinction between mens and womens t-shirts."
Here is a short, but very interesting article that I found on the history of women wearing pants.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/54701/the_history_of_pants_and_women_wearing.html