Women should not wear Pants

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='philothea' date='Apr 17 2006, 10:22 PM']

And you can tell [i]their[/i] skulls, because they have the little horns, right??
[right][snapback]951585[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Of course

[philothea]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 17 2006, 08:23 PM']and all this time i thought we were friends? 
[right][snapback]951587[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Wasn't an insult, dear. Just noting that we all seem to like to argue with you.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='philothea' date='Apr 17 2006, 09:26 PM']Wasn't an insult, dear.   Just noting that we all seem to like to argue with you.
[right][snapback]951600[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


that is true.

[JesusITrustInYou]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Apr 17 2006, 10:59 PM']Don't jump the gun, not the key difference between practice, and appropriateness. This is a matter of what is appropriate, and women wearing pants, unless they are doing some real dirty work, ought not be wearing them. Of course, I mean jeans; why can't women dress like women? It's because they hate us, i know it. All I ever wanted was to see women in dresses, and the only person who does it is that pagan girl in school... Catholics are a dissapointment sometimes..

Some people are of the erronous belief that it's not what you wear but what is in your heart that reflects true modesty. Please, allow me to wear a speedo, and then tell me how modest it is. Yes, women who wear those jeans that hug you more so than a loved one would don't realize that it is quite unchaste, and immodest. I'd ask, but I wouldn't expect anyone here to agree, would you mind seeing Mary depicted in the type of pants, even those that go down to your ankles that women wear today? Most tend to stick to your curves. If you have no problem invisioning the perfect example of feminine chastity dressed in that sort of rubbish, then by all means advocate it. I can see her wearing a dress, or a skirt... and don't find it morally offensive to depict her thus.

God bless,
Mikey
[right][snapback]951518[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I'm not sure whether this post was in reply to mine, but I'm assuming it was. Either way...you said "...women wearing pants, unless they are doing some real dirty work, ought not be wearing them." I'm sorry, but I still don't understand why, as long as they're modest enough. Would you mind explaining your statement by telling me why you think women shouldn't wear pants? (and please let it be understood that I'm talking about modest pants, not the too tight or too low kind)

[MichaelFilo]

Well, it's all quite simple, or complicated, or both. We'll see.

Pants are, historically, a worker's wear type thing, although, they have been more or less refined for royalty at times. Nonetheless, they are man's thing, and have been since the middle ages, because they were meant for physical labor that regular coverings would not do very well for. (like mounting a horse, or digging, or workign in a shop later on, then for mining, etc.) interesting note that I should bring up mining, women were actually working in mines during the dark years of the 2nd industiral revolution... and in those cramped spaces they still wore dresses. Now, men continue to wear pants, and women wear their dresses and skirts and such, and everyone is happy, until you get to about the 1920s.. 30s.. when the contraceptive movement and crazy women feminazis put on pants to show their equality with men.. some.. very few, but there are some. As you go on, slowly by their influence, women began to be seen in pants in the 60s (not 50s.. they stil wore dresses for the most part) . And as we all know the 60s are a decade of evil and sin and anything that came out then was wrong (except for VII.. which was far away from the cultural revolution here). That was a joke, that has a truism in it.

To be more specific, it was an attempt to destroy gender roles... now, I could be wrong, but social reform and strong political statements aren't hallmarks of Catholics.. we are a moral and religious people.. not a revolutionary people. In fact, even in catholic France it was the athiestic intilgista working up the the high class parisians to accept any movement to gain rights at the cost of losing their king. Catholics aren't known for such foolishness as trying to attain rights, we endure suffering and are happy that we are truely free in christ, not oppressed.. so when women start wearing pants, to show that they will do away with some injustice (as in having to be women) and thats a sort of protest of the counterculture of the 60s.. well i tell you, it doesn't ring of modesty and not humility anywho.

So, what the problem then is that women are wearing pants today because of rebelious druggies in the 60s and feminazies earlier who wanted to abort babies and use contraceptives. It's not a matter of modesty.. it's a matter of humility. It is of the fruits of that ilk.. could it possibly be good? It does break down the bearer between gender differences (which may seemingly be good, but then again, the best way to point out gender differences is just to be completely nude, we need not wear clothes and pretend that we are more similiar than we really are.) It is an attack on the proper place of man and woman; that is their different spheres. That is the problem with it. Excuse the ranting nature of all that.

God bless,
Mikey

[missionarybelle]

I do find it interesting that Mary has never even APPEARED in pants....

[indescribable]

i think i'm going to be condemned for saying i'm in love with high fashion.
that's just like artwork being transposed to honor the human body... and certainly one could argue that certain designers focus on a sexualized approach of the human body.


but otherwise i only occasionally bake....

when i put on my pants for school in the morning i don't say "i want to look like a boy today" or "i think that i have the exact same genetic structure as a boy" but usually i'm thinking, "i don't want to freeze in my school" or "i don't want to wear a hoochie skirt that encourages the little boys"




in response to michael... i wear pants bc of druggies and abortion rates? i think it has more to do with the introduction of women into the work force during the first and second world wars. most feminists would say that was where women really got their push into becoming equal or at least as respected as the role of men. not druggies. that's completely different and a much more important aspect of our social morality declining. attributing the want to wear pants to that is just silly.

[MichaelFilo]

I think I said something to that effect... nor is she depicted in pants.. nor even any of teh holy women.. including the saints who died in the camps in the 40's (we did find a picture of a modern day saint who was wearing pants because this conversation never stops.. but you know St. Thomas Aquinas didn't believe that babies were human until the 15th day of pregnancy, not that he advocated abortion).

God bless,
Mikey

Edit: You would say the workforce.. but.. umm that too is a push to end gender roles, which was the point. The same brood that wanted abortion and contraception wanted to see the end of gender roles (that was one of the justifications for legalizing contraceptives).

Regardless of what you think when you put it on, it is and will continue to be an act that is rooted in defiance of your role as a woman to look not like a man... and me to not look like you (which I am not tempted to do as no major movement of men has tried to get pregnant for gender equality purposes).

Edited April 18, 2006 by MichaelFilo

[JesusITrustInYou]

Hmmm...I'm going to think about this, mayhaps...or maybe I'll just try to forget I ever read this thread. No, seriously, there have been good points brought up on both sides, but...I just don't think it's a big deal. Girls who would be concerned about modesty (and don't worry, there [i]are[/i] plenty of those girls out there) either have someone who would tell them whether or not they're dressing modestly, or, if they don't, they follow their own conscience. And girls who don't care about modesty...well, how 'bout we all post a Hail Mary on the Rosary thread on Open Mic for those girls, eh?

btw, Michael, thanks for answering me and explaining!

Edited April 18, 2006 by JesusITrustInYou

[Balthazor]

You know it is funny but this thread when I read it called to mind that proverbial "Catholic School-girl outfit".
Now if you say that I garrauntee the incidence of leading guys into sin with just a phrase is higher than saying "low-rise-jeans"

Interesting.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='indescribable' date='Apr 17 2006, 11:56 PM']but otherwise i only occasionally bake....
[right][snapback]951677[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]



I should like it to be noted that my point about women belonging in the kitchen is the only thing on this thread that is not in dispute.

[JesusITrustInYou]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Apr 18 2006, 12:09 AM']
I should like it to be noted that my point about women belonging in the kitchen is the only thing on this thread that is not in dispute.
[right][snapback]951698[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
oh, would you like me to dispute it? I don't know how to bake, actually...but if you'll teach me, I'll bake you anything you want! :

[Balthazor]

I like to make my own clothes when I get a good idea or when I find a vintage pattern that is rockin. So I have the June Cleaver type dresses in my wardrobe...fun to wear but man what a pain.

But you know I am not going to agree that in general jeans, slacks or pants are sinful not appropriate on a girl. There are always a few that do not realize how...skanky they look. in too tight or too low jeans....but then again, if I had a nickel for every pair of boxer shorts I saw sticking out of the top of some riddiculously baggy jeans that some punk guy is wearing I would have a much nicer car. Obviously there are line that can be crossed with any cloting that makes it inappropriate, but I do not see any threads on here condeming baggy pants on males or calling for the outlaw of boxer shorts.

My suit has been taylored for me...a woman Not a very curvy woman but a woman none the less....it is not a man's clothing it is a womans clothing, it has femanine detailing and flattering cut for me. If this is inappropriate does this concept apply to men?

For example: doesthis does this argument also apply to men thus making kilts...and artical of clothing that is for all practical purposes a skirt made for specifically for a man, inappropriate for men?

Most pant-like clothing now being marketed for women are specificaly made for women....thus the reason you see things like embroidered flowers on jeans in the women's section. Sometimes it is nice to wear a dress yes, but I simply do not see any reason for it to be innappropriate for a female to wear pants.

Wearing pants does not mean we are trying to be men ...I mean who would want to be a man anyway?

[JudgedByGod]

Since it seems to be alot of guys who are in complete favor of women wearing skirts, I figured I would say what I think from a women's perspective. If it was completely 100% possible, I would be happy to wear skirts all the time. I have done many things in skirts like run around and performing outside chores, but most of the time I do choose to wear jeans instead. Not because I can't wear a skirt to do these activities, but because A. I don't want them to get dirty and B. I'm a victim of our society. It is hard these days for women to find modest and fashionably acceptable skirts. Seeing girls walking across my college campus is an absolutely disgusting sight. I would never wear these tight and short skirts. They make these girls look like a sex symbol. If done correctly, we can embrace our feminine attributes. I guess my biggest reason for being in favor of skirts is for gender roles. I'm a huge believer that we have separate roles as men and women and they shouldn't be crossed. Although I know that many women do choose to work and they do become extremely successful, I am not saying that they have sinned or should be condemned in anyway. I think with the change in wardrobe from skirts and dresses to pants has taken away even more of the differences between men and women.

In terms of the discussion about how women wearing pants leads to abortion and contraception, well in a way it is kind of true (streched, but can be related). Women are continuously finding ways to feel more equal. I am not saying in anyway that every women who wears pants thinks this way, in fact, most do not. But when they were first wearing pants, they did so because they wanted to be reguarded as equal to men, therefore beginning the feminist movement in the simplest forms.

I could probably go on and on forever, but that would only lead to tangents and subjects that are not relevant to this thread.

[jmjtina]

I hate the slips that come with the skirts.

[MichaelFilo]

I'd like to note... I don't hate women. In fact, I think women are great in theory.

To a more serious note... indeed, I never said this was a matter of sin (clearly, it's not cross dressing, because women's pants and mens pants are indeed tailored differently). It is more of acceptability. It isn't unreasonable.. certainly, it's not in fashion, but it's all in how you carry yourself, you could get away with murder if you don't seem to notice.

Anywho... i'll put this in some reference, men are not to wear their hair long in Church, but my hair isn't really long enough to put up all the way... and i just end up looking like a samurai. Anywho, I put it up anyway.. it looks pretty bad, btu then again, boys arne't to wear their hair long in church. Also, being in fashion, while nice, is a bit frivilous. Rich old St. Francis gave up his garments for sack cloth.. I don't think it'd work for me per se, because I can't find any sack cloth that fits at SEars, but I know someone who only wears white shirts and khaki shorts (cold and hot, he endures it, for suffering is good). Why does he do it? because it is good to remember that money is illusory. Some peole think he's poor, but I know why he does it. Indeed, thats the same with skirts... it's really a matter of doing what is more appropriate.. or better. It's a simple thing, all in all.

I should note... when I say skirt, i mean something past the knees.. which is what is traditonally concidered safe by all nuns who slap little children's hands with rulers.. >.>

Anywho, I still stick with the fact that the origin of it is to destroy the gender barrier (which, like I said, can be easily counteracted by simply being nude), by setting up a false sense of similarity. It'd be nice to fin da girl who can wear a skirt everyday.. and there was this one girl.. she ended up going to a small private school.. she was so cool. Too bad she wasn't Catholic. Anywho, point is, it can be done, realisticly.

God bless,
Mikey