Can We Reclaim This Dress Standard?

[Ukulelemike]

If I can clearly see from over a hundred yards that an article of clothing is absolutely beyond doubt feminine, then I believe it satisfies "not wearing that which pertains unto a man", however, if I am forced to look at a woman's behind or shape (definitely NOT a good idea for me) to determine if those are "mens" or "womens" jeans (I think womens jeans is as much a misnomer as Christian Rock) then it should never be allowed on any Christ honoring woman.  My wife had one pair of trousers and one pair only and it was over the top plainly feminine, strictly as a covering for her legs and thigh in situations where a dress or skirt would be immodest apparel, such as; sledding, water recreation, and high wind locations (it is always infamously very windy at the Oregon coast).  I understand from our women that attend West Coast Baptist College that it is so often very windy there. They all have to sew fishing weights into the hems of their dresses and skirts in order to maintain any hope of modesty. There is a fight to allow leggings under your dress or skirt for this reason.

 

Bro. Garry

In His will.  By His power.  For His glory.

The leggings is what my wife uses when windy, (often here) and cold. Can't see anyone arguning them to be wrong if worn UNDER something. In fact, the priests were commanded to wear knee-length breeches under their robes for that very reason. Can't see why it would be a fight for women to wear them under their dresses. In fact, with our wnid out here, it would take 10-15 pounds of weitghs to MAYBE keep the skirt down. Leggings or shortened sweats are a requirement for modesty.

[Ukulelemike]

fishing weights on hems!

I finally learned how to use my sewing machine last night and sewed up the slits on about 8 skirts and dresses I've had in a basket for a year!

Outstanding! Sewing is quickly becoming a lost art-get skilled on that and teach others! My wife makes her own dresses, as well

[heartstrings]

My Wife sews too and has owned at least 3 machines since were were married. We just got back from a trip to see my aunt who sews all kinds of stuff like "multifunctional" place mats and also owns a big quilting machine. She makes some awesome looking quilts.

[WVPastor]

Thank you for your remarks.  I believe it is high time that it be known my position is not as unusual as some believe it is.  There are many weak Christians who are afraid to be alone in taking a stand.  I am encouraged at the number of you who connect the inward change with an outward result.  Never let someone bully you into believing that outward obedience is legalism.  No one can impose that label on you; you know why you obey even though it shocks the rebellious into violent reactions stirred up by conviction.

 

My bank accounts reflect the lack of popularity I enjoy, so I live with that every day.  And this is not my one big issue!  The reason it comes up now is because every time I candidate in a church, I am overwhelmed at how pulpit committees get completely derailed once this subject comes up.  They immediately assume that I must be straight on every basic doctrine in their church's statement and begin to figure out whether they can live under such preaching.  They become consumed with wondering who might they lose if I become the pastor?  This issue never rose to such a prominent place until pastor's began to let go of their standard.  Now...just being what was normal has become outrageous.  Has the church genuinely grown to achieve such enlightenment?  I maintain that what is being surrendered is the willingness to come out from among them and be separate - a willingness to love not the world or the things of the world.  I have heard and read all the arguments against this standard, but they ring hollow with me.  This issue is not the root of evil in the church, but I believe it is a fruit that is symbolic of the other failures in modern Christianity that brought us to what I consider to be a predicament.

 

Here I stand, and I can do no other.

[AVBibleBeliever]

Oh what if we had the pastors wear bells on the hems of their garments as they did the High Priest's.

 

Now you know where bell bottoms came form. 

 

Hee Hee hee!

[prophet1]

Not if you carefully read what she said...

It is a truth that one's spirituality will show on the outside. We might not like to think about it, but it's true. Does that mean that women who wear pants are wicked? Of course not.


~~~~~~~

Prophet - you are Ojibwe, correct? Or at least Algonquin? Do you agree with Basil Johnston as to the meaning of your signature? I like his definition - beings made out of nothing. I have Narragansett roots, but that is from many generations ago....


~~~~

Prophet pointed out earlier something that has long bothered me. When Deut. 22:5 is preached as the standard for women not wearing pants, it is usually stated that it's an abomination to God. But as was mentioned, it isn't the act that is abomination, it is the person doing it. But that verse doesn't just mention women wearing men's garments - it mentions men wearing women's garments as well.

I have heard it said that when men wear dresses as a joke (in a skit, for example) it's okay - it's not the same as women wearing pants. Huh? But, but...if you cite Deut. 22:5 as a reason for women not to wear pants, then it's a reason for men not to wear dresses...right? I think we've done a good job of obfuscating what's actually being taught in that verse (and the principles contained therein do carry over into the NT).

The pagans of that day had a practice of men wearing women's clothes and women wearing men's (usually the armor) when going in to their temples to worship. That being the background, we can see plainly that God doesn't want men dressing like women or vice versa. We glean the principle of gender identity from that verse - something that God addresses as well in Corinthians regarding hair length. There is a difference, and God wants us to be obvious in that difference (yes, I know...they all wore robes back then. But, among other things [like decoration on the robe], men's robes had girdles (belts) on the outside, women's did not.). Then there is Christian identity - we are a peculiar people. No, that doesn't mean weird - it means set apart, different from the lost.

Culturally for many years, men wore pants (and, yes, priests in Israel had breeches under their robes) and women wore dresses here in America (England, too, and some other countries, but not all). And, yes, pants on women was born in rebellion - claiming that it would free a woman from man's authority if she could dress like him. Because of the decline in standards (because, you know, it's more spiritual to say that it's not spiritual to say that our exterior will change when our interior does...well, according to some, anyway), pants have become accepted wear for many, many Christian ladies. Heh - it was considered very wrong for lost women to wear them back in the day...

Now the culture, it's a' changing again....And, men, you will now have the opportunity to also be free. You can now wear skirts/dresses if you so desire. Of course, that has been going on for a while - the pants-free movement. Men who claim (and these are straight men, not gay, not transgender, and not cross-dressers) that they can move more freely in skirts than in pants. (Isn't that hilarious? Women wanted to be free and pants were the ticket...now men are claiming their pants don't let them be as free as women are )

Just recently, there was a fashion show in England. What was it? Why, the new line of men's dresses. Minis, no less. Yes, it's going to become mainstream soon. And we'll just have to accept it, you know. Because if a Christian man wants to wear a dress, it's okay as long as he buys one made for a man. Right? If it's not okay with you, well, then - you (generic, not pointing any fingers) are doing the same thing those who hold to Deut. 22:5 as the reason for no pants on women but who think it's okay for men to wear dresses when they are joking around....

Plain fact of the matter is: If a person - regardless of gender - is saved and growing in the Lord, there will be a difference on the outside. What will that difference be? I don't know - but it will be. Because God is in the life-changing business. From the inside out.

(FWIW - I don't wear pants.)

Yes, if you ask the Western Ojibiwe, out of Minnesota, they will give that answer, and I like it.

I am Blackfoot, an Algonquin Nation, and Chickasaw, BTW.
Momma' s the barkeater.
Dad's the Chickasaw.

Anishinaabe

[Anon]

It has become increasingly difficult to actually prove from the Bible that "pants on women are wrong".  You can teach modesty, and you can make an argument that most pants are not as modest as skirts.  On the other hand, in our area, most Baptists wear pants on their own time.  At a local IFB church we are very familiar with...they have a "rule" about wearing skirts in youth group for activities, but the skirts are so tight and above the knee and honestly may just as well be pants...pants would cover more.  I do not think the "cross dressing" argument can any longer be made in our society (especially in light of men moving towards skirts, probably within the next ten years.)   So really the main argument that is valid from Scripture is the part about being modest.

 

My husband and I have discussed this at length...I was raised wearing pants (as a Christian) and I gave them up at college, but it has become an increasingly difficult struggle for me, especially in the winter, as probably 98% of all the IFBs in our area (Philly suburbs) wear pants on their own time.    It is wearisome to be one of the only "odd women out", honestly--and honestly, men do not have to face that in their lives.  It is easy for them to make rules they do not have to follow.   It is easy for them to say "I don't want men looking at your crotch" so instead the men wonder why you're wearing a skirt when it's ten degrees outside.  LOL.  (That was just me saying that, I realize it's not Biblical and I'm not advocating that argument.  Just a FYI.)

 

WITH that said.... my husband will state that the main problem he has with women wearing pants is the crotch/butt area.   He says it draws a man's attention and is immodest.  And for that reason, other than very loose lounge pants at home, and this year (due to all the snow!) allowing me to get a pair of ski pants...he asks that I wear skirts in public basically at all times.   In summer, maybe a loose, knee length pair of walking shorts for hiking in or something, that does not show the crotch or butt.

 

I find it frustrating at times, because the line has been blurred between modesty, style, and fashion SO dramatically, especially in larger city areas, that it is pretty much beyond changing, IMHO.   I'm a very casual person big on comfort, and tights and pantyhose are NOT comfortable on my stomach, haha, so it is a challenge to find skirts that look nice in the winter and keep my legs warm without fighting tights or leggings.   

 

Anyway, before you guys get upset with me...I do respect and obey my husband.  He does lead our home.  :-)    But just from my perspective...I defended skirts-only for YEARS until finally I was unable to defend it (as a 100% thing) anymore.  I have had pastors tell me why you can't preach skirts-only.  I have had every argument I've ever made proven wrong...all except the fact that if a guy has a problem looking at a woman's butt, then the pants are not modest.  

 

I do want to know, though...I know girls who lust after men's butts.  And I know men who wear pants and I'm sorry, but so many times there is an unsightly bulge in the front.  So...in all honesty....and true honest question...why is it okay to see a man's butt and, well, you know...in a pair of jeans?   People say "Well women don't lust like men".   Maybe I don't, and maybe you don't....but women do these days!!!!!!   And in the Bible, men wore their trousers as undergarments.

 

I really do want to understand that last question.

 

Once again, yes, I wear skirts in public.  FTR.  :-)

[John81]

It's a fact that many of the skirts and dresses worn by Christian women, including many IFB women, are not modest at all.

 

Most women's pants are designed to show off the feminine form and are immodest. The same is true for many men's pants these days and I was convicted of that some years ago when I overheard some women talking about how they liked the way my backside looked in my blue jeans (I was younger and much more fit back then!). After that, I changed the type of pants I wear to a style that is more loose fitting.

 

I agree there is much inconsistency with regards to the whole issue. Some will denounce a woman who is wearing pants that are actually modest fitting but then won't say anything to the woman in the skin tight skirt or the plunging neckline dress. It's also rare to hear men called out for the way they dress. Is it really modest for men to wear tight and short cut off blue jeans and no shirt in public? Why aren't they called on this?

 

The issue is best addressed in terms of biblical modesty rather than making it too simplistic and rules oriented. I can certainly understand your frustration.

[swathdiver]

Society changes but God's Word hasn't and we shouldn't reinterpret it to suit today's world.

 

Yesteryear, women wore dresses and skirts while tilling fields, picking cotton and working on cars.  If an activity would require them to wear pants, then it wasn't something a lady should be doing anyway so the thinking of the day went.

 

I see the change happening before my eyes, ladies moving away from modest and biblical dress while others are moving towards it.  I appreciate those who have not wavered and point them out to my daughters to help my wife when they do.

[heartstrings]

It's a fact that many of the skirts and dresses worn by Christian women, including many IFB women, are not modest at all.

 

Most women's pants are designed to show off the feminine form and are immodest. The same is true for many men's pants these days and I was convicted of that some years ago when I overheard some women talking about how they liked the way my backside looked in my blue jeans (I was younger and much more fit back then!). After that, I changed the type of pants I wear to a style that is more loose fitting.

 

I agree there is much inconsistency with regards to the whole issue. Some will denounce a woman who is wearing pants that are actually modest fitting but then won't say anything to the woman in the skin tight skirt or the plunging neckline dress. It's also rare to hear men called out for the way they dress. Is it really modest for men to wear tight and short cut off blue jeans and no shirt in public? Why aren't they called on this?

 

The issue is best addressed in terms of biblical modesty rather than making it too simplistic and rules oriented. I can certainly understand your frustration.

 

TMI

 

Three pastors ago, at our former IFB church, men's dress was preached on...even tight pants on men. Matter of fact one man got upset because he liked to wear his shorts(not at church) and the pastor wouldn't allow him to participate in certain positions in the church because of it....the man left.

[Anon]

 

 

I see the change happening before my eyes, ladies moving away from modest and biblical dress while others are moving towards it.  I appreciate those who have not wavered and point them out to my daughters to help my wife when they do.

 

 

Why not ladies AND men?  Why are the ladies always the ones preached to about modesty, when everyone should be modest?  Just curious.

 

Again...I wear skirts LOL.  Don't want to get in a big argument.   But I do get frustrated that men are always the one worried about women's modesty, when they are not the ones that have to struggle buying themselves clothing.   I realize the men are responsible to lead the home, and I get that...but I think men need to appreciate a little more how difficult it is to have strong dress standards in our society right now.  

 

Modesty means "not bringing attention to oneself" and as a true introvert, I sure hate drawing attention to myself because I'm wearing a skirt in winter.  LOL.  (But I do it anyway!)

[2bLikeJesus]

The issue of modest apparel does go both ways.  We have a young man in our church who has a very athletic build and likes to wear t-shirts or sleeveless shirts that are seemingly 5 sizes to small and show every cut and ripple of his upper body.  It doesn't matter if it is raining and 40 degrees outside, if he is running around a track or on the street it is often without a shirt on and in the shortest shorts he can get away with.  The boy sometimes doesn't have enough cloth on him to cover a bicycle seat, but nothing is said?

[John81]

The issue of modest apparel does go both ways.  We have a young man in our church who has a very athletic build and likes to wear t-shirts or sleeveless shirts that are seemingly 5 sizes to small and show every cut and ripple of his upper body.  It doesn't matter if it is raining and 40 degrees outside, if he is running around a track or on the street it is often without a shirt on and in the shortest shorts he can get away with.  The boy sometimes doesn't have enough cloth on him to cover a bicycle seat, but nothing is said?

When I was young and fit I used to wear tight tank tops and sleeveless shirts except for during winter. Not once did any pastor, or any other Christian, say a word to me about it.

 

However, the Lord convicted me one day, and then a few more days after I tried to ignore the conviction, and I stopped wearing such shirts.

[DaveW]

Deut 22:5 is actually about a lot more than clothes.

The word with regard to women wearing men's stuff is actually about men's equipment - it is really suggesting that women and men should not only dress differently, but they also shouldn't take on each other's roles.

[2bLikeJesus]

It's amazing how us men don't seem to realize that women are sexual beings as well.  It finally dawned on us one day at one of our summer camp events why all the girls seemed to come cheer in much larger numbers and more enthusiastically when the boys were playing a game of football with "shirts against the skins".  We now bring enough colored shirts in two distinct colors for these games.