Crossdressing...Just how does a woman participate?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Your leaning towards no pants is quite evident.

Basically, the idea needs to be considered... Pants became men's apparel when robes used to be men's apparel, not due to God's leading. It was purely cultural. To say women should not wear pants today is ignoring this historical fact and refusing to apply the same principle in accepting pants for men to pants for women. God never had pants in mind whatsoever when words were written about masculine attire as opposed to women's. And dresses and skirts can be as immodest as SOME pants on women, while pants on women are often more modest then those immodest skirts and dresses. There are very modest pants for women. When we time lock ourselves into the last few decades we lived, we fail to realize God surveys all of time since the beginning. And he made no pants for man. Just a coat, and the same was for Eve, for that matter. And the only reason anyone would push for no pants on women is a cultural issue amongst some denominations, alone. People just have to admit that.

Well, they won't.

And, a point that we have discussed before - women in pants doesn't show their "stuff" as much as some men do. When a man sits down, has his knees two feet apart it leaves little to the imagination. Is that modest?

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Well, they won't.

And, a point that we have discussed before - women in pants doesn't show their "stuff" as much as some men do. When a man sits down, has his knees two feet apart it leaves little to the imagination. Is that modest?

So men need to go back to wearing robes?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Amanah

So men need to go back to wearing robes?

Sure!

The argument gets old when they say pants are immodest on women when, to me, pants can be much more revealing on men.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Saying what is modest and what is not is far too slanted in many folks. I know the power of a trend in a fellowship firsthand.

And the western culture feminist issue you cite from the same source where I found words that ancient women wore trousers is based upon the idea that what was involved in something's origin is more important than what the actual something is in and of itself, while you agreed Europe influenced our culture with men dressing like modern-day fruitcakes in France () when they first wore pants. To be consistent, your emphasis on stressing feminism's roots with pants for women ought to cause you to abandon pants for men for the French reasons of origin in our culture.

That's a good thought. It is just that the "origin" of trousers didn't begin with the fruitcaked men in France.

Anyway, you keep going back to the idea of upholding a standard. I wish you could wash that out of your head for a bit.

I am coming from the point that trousers have, it seems, been universally a male garment and so I want to see where in culture and from who in culture made the transition. I don't have any nefarious plans or ideas here. I am just curious about the subject. So, you can now give a sigh of relief and give me some information that is better than, "thought to have been worn by women". If I gain some type of knowledge, I want it to be accurate.

Maybe a fact finding history lesson is out of place or too much of a tangent on this thread?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Sure!

The argument gets old when they say pants are immodest on women when, to me, pants can be much more revealing on men.

I'm thinking that it is because women are normally held to a higher degree of keeping themselves modest.

I mean look at all the skanky things that men can say and do, but if a women does it - Good Lord!

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm thinking that it is because women are normally held to a higher degree of keeping themselves modest.

I mean look at all the skanky things that men can say and do, but if a women does it - Good Lord!

Didn't start out that way.....God made both Adam and Eve clothes to cover them.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Didn't start out that way.....Adam and Eve both made clothes to cover them.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Well, they won't.

And, a point that we have discussed before - women in pants doesn't show their "stuff" as much as some men do. When a man sits down, has his knees two feet apart it leaves little to the imagination. Is that modest?

I agree totally.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

I agree totally.

Are you going to stop wearing pants if you think they are immodest?

[Sister Alvear]

I could go into the robe making business for missions...we might need locust and wild honey for those that want to follow John the Baptist...
A bread for those that want to follow Jesus and a few other items we might find if you folks would buy from us....lol...
Dear ones we are all earth creatures and we generally follow culture of our day whether we say we do or not.
Like my sister asked me last night, Janice, what is the difference in a fancy dress or a ring?
I will leave that to the forum...some might not like my answer...she asked me a bunch more questions....lol...