|
Post by sharonw on May 21, 2011 12:00:59 GMT -5
"to acheive that "made up" look as convention is often viewed as an opportunity to meet and greet and network and find a professing boyfriend for a possible future professing spouse-which is approved on by friends and workers alike."
This is the very thing that was Paul's dilemna when he spoke to the Greek converts about women having plaited hair, and golden jewelry, etc. It was giving time to getting that "special" look that was in direct contest with other Greek ladies "to gain male attention" the Paul was against. His summation of such problems was this "Let your MODERATION be made known to all men." Not go to opposite extremes....
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 21, 2011 12:06:10 GMT -5
I am far more comfortable with this thread now than I have been. It's been mentioned on TMB how the dress code for women has "lightened up" and become more "fashionable." My own observations have contradicted this. I'm in agreement with these later posts that women still need to "fit in" to a particular dress code. The dress code hasn't changed much, and the attitude toward the dress code is still the same. "Fit in or else" is screamed at professing women. The saddest part is that professing women are not in charge of their physical appearance. Their teen-age years are not free to experiment with different looks. In the end, they have a plain appearance which is imposed on them, not chosen by them. Call it what you will - modest, fashionable, stylish, plain. It's sad. Lot of what you say panders to the flesh. Being stressful about the "looks" or the "appearances" of Professing women is something akin to what Paul mentioned that when looking at the fleshly things or the tangible things is evidence that one is yet "carnal", only able for the milk of the word....I think this fits a lot of the f&w's.
|
|
|
Post by apple on May 21, 2011 12:06:32 GMT -5
Yes, ScholarGal they wobble about in their high heels in the mud and the grass.
As for dressing inexpensively, well, I was never dressed in the brandname clothes and got plenty of sblack persons and sneering looks from groups of fancier dressed girls.And this is not new either, my dad and his siblings used to get taunted for their clothes.
You are very lucky in that you don't have such narrow minded, unChristian people at your convention but for the majority, your experiences and most peoples' experiences do not match up.
|
|
|
Post by apple on May 21, 2011 12:10:14 GMT -5
What is wrong with this forum?
Why is the word s.n.ig.g.e.r.s. replaced with "sblack persons"?
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on May 21, 2011 12:39:06 GMT -5
Because 6 letters are a forbidden word on the forum, so it changed it to a non-offensive word. You just got whacked by the auto-censor is all. It is quite frustrating when it happens, and we all run into it on occasion. Scott
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2011 12:39:39 GMT -5
What is wrong with this forum? Why is the word s.n.ig.g.e.r.s. replaced with "sblack persons"? Try "snickers". That will work better.
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on May 21, 2011 12:59:06 GMT -5
Yes, ScholarGal they wobble about in their high heels in the mud and the grass. As for dressing inexpensively, well, I was never dressed in the brandname clothes and got plenty of sblack persons and sneering looks from groups of fancier dressed girls.And this is not new either, my dad and his siblings used to get taunted for their clothes. You are very lucky in that you don't have such narrow minded, unChristian people at your convention but for the majority, your experiences and most peoples' experiences do not match up. Knowing, of course, that your experience is probably duplicated elsewhere, but, with respect, how are you an authority on "most peoples' (meaning a category, actually) or for that matter people's (I know I sound snobbish) experience?
|
|
|
Post by apple on May 21, 2011 14:37:46 GMT -5
Yes, ScholarGal they wobble about in their high heels in the mud and the grass. As for dressing inexpensively, well, I was never dressed in the brandname clothes and got plenty of sblack persons and sneering looks from groups of fancier dressed girls.And this is not new either, my dad and his siblings used to get taunted for their clothes. You are very lucky in that you don't have such narrow minded, unChristian people at your convention but for the majority, your experiences and most peoples' experiences do not match up. Knowing, of course, that your experience is probably duplicated elsewhere, but, with respect, how are you an authority on "most peoples' (meaning a category, actually) or for that matter people's (I know I sound snobbish) experience? Read what people are saying here and on other forums.Read all compliants about the cliques, the snobbery, the pressure to dress up and the dress rules.
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on May 21, 2011 14:51:18 GMT -5
ok
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on May 21, 2011 15:23:27 GMT -5
Those bible verses do answer the question of biblical modesty.. Really? Some people say pants and shorts are modest. Some people say that pants and shorts are not modest. Please tell us what *the* unquestionable biblical answer is. I have another question too: Some say that sleeves should read the elbow for modesty. Some the wrists. Some the upper arm. Some say that sleeveless is fine. What is a woman to do? What is the unquestionable biblical answer?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 21, 2011 17:01:17 GMT -5
No one should be obliged to spend beyond what they cannot afford just to be expected to fit in.For those who feel they must remain the meetings lest they go to hell, the burden must be hard indeed.But men buy a few suits and that will do them for the meetings and conventions, all they have to do is change a shirt/tie/shoe and they don't look dated.Suits tend to be much better quality than the average skirt and therefore are longer lasting.Skirts, blouses and womens' shoes tend to be such soddy quality so they need to be replaced often and of course that all adds up. Your reality doesn't match my reality. I rarely buy new clothes before convention. Why would I want to wear brand-new stuff out in the dusty convention grounds? Or slop through mud puddles if it happens to be a wet year? Last year I had a near miss on a fashion disaster at convention. I got dressed in the morning at home, then changed clothes after I spilled my breakfast all over myself. When I arrived at the convention grounds, I discovered another woman wearing the same dress as I had been wearing that morning. (I had purchased the dress at least 3 years earlier at Target for $18.) I joked about the "near miss" with her, and she told me that her mother had found the dress at a second-hand shop. Men's suits usually cost as much as 5-6 women's skirts/dresses. Considering the amount of wear I get out of many of my skirts, I don't think the cost per wear is much different for women's clothing. Quizzer says the dress code hasn't changed. I disagree. I see lots of professing women who wear clothing that looks very normal in the workplace or at the shopping mall. ExampleI don't think that it's the ladies in the fellowship that have changed, but that the ladies in the world have changed...any style goes in this part of the country and all styles can be found in a group of mixed persuasions. I'm surprised that the fellowship HASN'T changed and tried to dictate a style that's not found in the world...but then for the present day that's about impossible....even the old black hose are considered fashion. now.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 21, 2011 17:05:27 GMT -5
Really? Some people say pants and shorts are modest. Some people say that pants and shorts are not modest. Please tell us what *the* unquestionable biblical answer is. I have another question too: Some say that sleeves should read the elbow for modesty. Some the wrists. Some the upper arm. Some say that sleeveless is fine. What is a woman to do? What is the unquestionable biblical answer? The fashion catalogs I've received in the past 6 months are showing 3/4 length sleeves for all seasons' fashion...I just thought the other day when I looked through one that the sister workers shouldn't have much trouble finding the requisition dresses, blouses and skirts any more. That is the fashion of the day according to the catalogs.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 21, 2011 18:22:20 GMT -5
The fashion catalogs I've received in the past 6 months are showing 3/4 length sleeves for all seasons' fashion...I just thought the other day when I looked through one that the sister workers shouldn't have much trouble finding the requisition dresses, blouses and skirts any more. That is the fashion of the day according to the catalogs. Ha! F&W wearing pants... coming right up!
|
|
|
Post by traceew on May 21, 2011 18:46:52 GMT -5
I think they should have the rule be for any girls/women to be baptized to wear plain long skirts, flat shoes, no makeup at all and no fancy hair accessories or pins either and no participating in sports and no watching television period. otherwise you have no consistancy since there are some that are not allowed to be baptized because of wearing the wrong clothes and or pants and others wear worse or shorts/ jeans when not around workers and get away with it. some wear fancy high heels and fancy skirts and are very proud and unfriendly. some cut their hair but not too much or not enough that it can show if they stick it up in a bun for meetings. some wear coverup and mascara but never eyeliner or blush, some wear fancy hair accessories or fancy wrissweet thingches but never a necklace. some watch television but only on their computers or they hide it. some participate in sports and hide it. I'm not saying i agree with any of these rules but how do you explain to a girl that wants to be baptized and isn't allowed to because she doesn't hide who she is around others when those that are baptized in this way are doing all of the above? I guess all the baptized women/girls should dress like the women workers-that would solve the confusion a bit! it's alot easier for boys! so much emphasis is put on appearance! so much gossip and judging is done amongst the friends it makes this way very unattractive!so much self-righteousness is felt. i am not the judge but some of these baptized girls are not very friendly and not very humble. this girl that was told to wait was broken and mature. i think most are just getting baptized because they feel it's time and they have no real feeling of need-just my opinion from what i've observed.-sad.
|
|
|
Post by traceew on May 21, 2011 18:48:40 GMT -5
wrist watches
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on May 21, 2011 20:31:45 GMT -5
I think they should have the rule be for any girls/women to be baptized to wear plain long skirts, flat shoes, no makeup at all and no fancy hair accessories or pins either and no participating in sports and no watching television period. otherwise you have no consistancy since there are some that are not allowed to be baptized because of wearing the wrong clothes and or pants and others wear worse or shorts/ jeans when not around workers and get away with it. some wear fancy high heels and fancy skirts and are very proud and unfriendly. some cut their hair but not too much or not enough that it can show if they stick it up in a bun for meetings. some wear coverup and mascara but never eyeliner or blush, some wear fancy hair accessories or fancy wrissweet thingches but never a necklace. some watch television but only on their computers or they hide it. some participate in sports and hide it. I'm not saying i agree with any of these rules but how do you explain to a girl that wants to be baptized and isn't allowed to because she doesn't hide who she is around others when those that are baptized in this way are doing all of the above? I guess all the baptized women/girls should dress like the women workers-that would solve the confusion a bit! it's alot easier for boys! so much emphasis is put on appearance! so much gossip and judging is done amongst the friends it makes this way very unattractive!so much self-righteousness is felt. i am not the judge but some of these baptized girls are not very friendly and not very humble. this girl that was told to wait was broken and mature. i think most are just getting baptized because they feel it's time and they have no real feeling of need-just my opinion from what i've observed.-sad. I honestly don't know how anyone who wasn't b&r would ever make sense of the bewildering and illogical social rules.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 21, 2011 23:53:39 GMT -5
I find it interesting that only one current style of blouse and skirt is considered acceptable on the convention grounds. After all, most professing women wear a variety of styles to their workplaces, schools, grocery stores, shopping malls, neighborhood, and visits to friends and workers. These styles include sleeveless tops, capri pants, jeans, tunics, shorts, and linen pants. Their hairstyles are either loose and down, pony tails, or braids, and cut as short as possible.
These styles are adopted because they are comfortable and suited to the occasion.
The image and style for professing women panders to the flesh. As a group, we have chosen what is most comfortable for women to wear at convention, and judge her relationship with God accordingly. This is done so that we look like a "group." Do professing folk truly believe that a woman can choose to serve God, and still cannot choose an appropriate hairstyle and clothing for an open-air, outdoor event like convention?
A couple of years ago, a teen-age girl accompanied a professing family to preps. She wisely chose to wear jeans and a T-shirt to help clean-up the convention grounds. She was quickly escorted to a small area to wash dishes and utensils by herself. The other teen-age girls (dressed in blouses and skirts and bun hairstyles) worked together with the sister workers.
Somehow, by the end of the day, this young non-professing girl chose not to attend convention and figure out how to modernize the apparel of the sister workers. The friends and workers, too, didn't choose to copy this young girl's attitude, where one helps one's friends regardless of how they dress.
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on May 22, 2011 7:54:06 GMT -5
This is done so that we look like a "group." I don't think this is the reason. The same social phenomenon happens in other groups--especially women's groups but with men too to some extent. The excessive amount seems to be something of a side effect of being too insular/not having enough inflow/input from outside sources. Add a religious quality to it... and mother/daughter dynamics... and well...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 9:20:47 GMT -5
One MUST appear to be professing if one IS professing. This has far more bearing for the women than the men by way of apparel. A woman dressed in jeans and T-shirt most certainly does not appear to be professing. She is a contaminant which must be avoided, or if such action cannot be applied then she must be quarantined.
As for both sexes. Just think how we strove to appear professing by our words when we were amongst other professing people.
A certain degree of professing is the apparition that accompanies the condition. It is like the spirit. It descends upon one when they profess. It confirms to the workers and friends that someone has truly professed and governs their future steps in the way. It allows the workers to say "Behold, a professing person in whom we are well pleased." Without the apparition the workers have no alternative but to denounce an unconformed professing person in the same way as John the Baptist; "oh viper of this generation, bring forth fruit meet for repentance."
That young girl had nothing but jeans and T-shirts in her heart. This was obvious to the professing people because whatever is on the inside is revealed by what is on the outside. I have typed this having just exited from the shower. OOOPS !
|
|
|
Post by apple on May 22, 2011 11:36:53 GMT -5
Really? Some people say pants and shorts are modest. Some people say that pants and shorts are not modest. Please tell us what *the* unquestionable biblical answer is. I have another question too: Some say that sleeves should read the elbow for modesty. Some the wrists. Some the upper arm. Some say that sleeveless is fine. What is a woman to do? What is the unquestionable biblical answer? The figleaf aprons Adam and Eve made on eating fruit from the tree of wisdom were not considered acceptable by God (Gensis 3:7).Even Adam and Eve considered themselves naked wearing the figleaf aprons (Genesis 3:8-10).God instead "clothed" them in garments made from animal skin for them (Genesis 3:21). In Exodus 28:42 God said that the priests had to wear linen breeches to "cover their nakedness; from the loins unto the thighs they shall reach".Even though Exodus 28 refers to dress rules for priests, we learn from Exodus 28:42 that anything that does not cover below our thigh is nakedness.It's clear this standard of modesty was required for everyone not just the priests because it is something which the Orthodox Jews still obey.Orthodox women cover their elbows and their knees and most Orthodox men will not wear shorts or shirts with short sleeves.When this verse spoke to me I was surprised- I had been taught that nakedness was not having any clothes on.This means that when we wear bikinis and very short skirts we are still naked!Could it be that the a bikini is akin to a figleaf apron? These are Jewish rules but we are freed from the Jewish rules under Jesus.There are basic guidelines for the Christians too but they are not as detailed so it's entirely up to you to decide on minor details such as the length of sleeves.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 22, 2011 13:48:47 GMT -5
I have typed this having just exited from the shower. OOOPS ! Take care, ram! Vinyl seats are sticky!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2011 14:21:25 GMT -5
I have typed this having just exited from the shower. OOOPS ! Take care, ram! Vinyl seats are sticky! You could have warned me Quizzer. Part of my fleece has been left behind. Or is it, my behind has been fleeced ? Ouch !!
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 22, 2011 22:56:31 GMT -5
So sorry for the lost of assets with an unexpected Brazilian, ram. I have since learned that towels can truly be one's best defense against loses.
|
|
|
Post by pinky on May 23, 2011 1:23:12 GMT -5
... because whatever is on the inside is revealed by what is on the outside. . I have typed this having just exited from the shower. OOOPS ! Oh dear .. your insides are ... void? ;D
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on May 23, 2011 4:53:19 GMT -5
The reason why mens attire is not being discussed is because they are so few rules for men and so many for women.The average 2x2 male on an ordinary weekday or relaxing on a Saturday does not stand out but the average 2x2 woman always stands out.Regarding dress rules, the men get off so light- they don't get plagued by the guilt women get for simple things like for wanting to trim heavy hair and trousers are never out of fashion the way skirts can be.About 2 months before convention starts women have to start looking for suitable skirts.Some years the fashion changes and there are few skirts to be found but we still have to somehow turn up in the worker required skirts.There's also so much pressure for women to buy expensive clothing because wearing clothes that aren't expensive enough for our peers is seen as "disrespectful".This kind of nonsense is no different to the Catholics being expected to give children hundreds of pounds on their communion and conformation.No one should be obliged to spend beyond what they cannot afford just to be expected to fit in.For those who feel they must remain the meetings lest they go to hell, the burden must be hard indeed.But men buy a few suits and that will do them for the meetings and conventions, all they have to do is change a shirt/tie/shoe and they don't look dated.Suits tend to be much better quality than the average skirt and therefore are longer lasting.Skirts, blouses and womens' shoes tend to be such soddy quality so they need to be replaced often and of course that all adds up. How much money are women allowed spend on a dress, apple? $5? $10? $20? $50? $100? $150? $200? $500? More? At what point do you think we should cut them off and tell them they shouldn't go to church anymore because what they wear isn't right?
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on May 23, 2011 5:05:23 GMT -5
These are Jewish rules but we are freed from the Jewish rules under Jesus.There are basic guidelines for the Christians too but they are not as detailed so it's entirely up to you to decide on minor details such as the length of sleeves. Huh? Earlier you said that the verses you posted answered our questions about biblical modesty: Those bible verses do answer the question of biblical modesty.. Are you saying that the bible does or doesn't have definitive answers to the questions about biblical modesty?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 23, 2011 7:00:14 GMT -5
I find it interesting that only one current style of blouse and skirt is considered acceptable on the convention grounds. After all, most professing women wear a variety of styles to their workplaces, schools, grocery stores, shopping malls, neighborhood, and visits to friends and workers. These styles include sleeveless tops, capri pants, jeans, tunics, shorts, and linen pants. Their hairstyles are either loose and down, pony tails, or braids, and cut as short as possible. These styles are adopted because they are comfortable and suited to the occasion. The image and style for professing women panders to the flesh. As a group, we have chosen what is most comfortable for women to wear at convention, and judge her relationship with God accordingly. This is done so that we look like a "group." Do professing folk truly believe that a woman can choose to serve God, and still cannot choose an appropriate hairstyle and clothing for an open-air, outdoor event like convention? A couple of years ago , a teen-age girl accompanied a professing family to preps. She wisely chose to wear jeans and a T-shirt to help clean-up the convention grounds. She was quickly escorted to a small area to wash dishes and utensils by herself. The other teen-age girls (dressed in blouses and skirts and bun hairstyles) worked together with the sister workers. Somehow, by the end of the day, this young non-professing girl chose not to attend convention and figure out how to modernize the apparel of the sister workers. The friends and workers, too, didn't choose to copy this young girl's attitude, where one helps one's friends regardless of how they dress. About 33-4 decades ago, this non-professing girl would have been welcomed with open arms and treated as if her dressage of the day was acceptable, though she could look all around and see it wasn't.....the workers would have kept her with one of them perhaps to ascertain her interest in perhaps coming to mtgs. She would have thought that the workers were the best people in the world....THAT has changed in the fellowship....the reaching out to the unprofessing that willingly come to a fellowship gathering!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2011 7:38:49 GMT -5
This is done so that we look like a "group." I don't think this is the reason. The same social phenomenon happens in other groups--especially women's groups but with men too to some extent. The excessive amount seems to be something of a side effect of being too insular/not having enough inflow/input from outside sources. Add a religious quality to it... and mother/daughter dynamics... and well... If God's people are a peculiar people it may well be that they have chosen to dress in a peculiar fashion which distinguishes them from others.
|
|