That's my view on the matter, and I've brought the matter up with other christians and while not universally accepted, it's a commonly held view.
Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
- timemeddler
- Distinguished Member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2023 2:35 am
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
- skirtyscot
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 3471
- Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:44 pm
- Location: West Kilbride, Ayrshire, Scotland
- Contact:
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
God's moral law ...
He killed the entire population of the world except 8.
He sent bears to maul youths because they mocked a man for being bald.
He told Abraham to murder his son as a test of loyalty.
Et cetera, et cetera.
And does that woman actually read her books, or does she just buy them so she can arrange them in colour order?
He killed the entire population of the world except 8.
He sent bears to maul youths because they mocked a man for being bald.
He told Abraham to murder his son as a test of loyalty.
Et cetera, et cetera.
And does that woman actually read her books, or does she just buy them so she can arrange them in colour order?
Keep on skirting,
Alastair
Alastair
-
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 1923
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
- Location: Somerset, England
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
...and there are well-meaning folk who are induced to do evil in the name of good by misguided belief systems.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.
-
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:46 pm
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
Note the actual issue here is whether someone is progressive (advocate for change to improve things), or conservative (advocate to keeping the old ways). While these days christians are often associated with conservatism, this wasn't always the case. We actually have a progressive christian party here (CU) which is pro-LGBT because they beleive god created everyone and values everyone. And of course a conversative christian party (CDA) which is trying to make same-sex marriage more difficult (and voted against when it was introduced).Coder wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2023 5:25 pm That’s the part I’ve been struggling with - because I do think in 100 years it will be more common, and what’s so wrong with being a trendsetter? Does that mean true christians are to avoid trends, and blend into society? What does that say of people who buck those trends, are they heathens to be damned in the fires of hell?
In the end, all change is eventually achieved by people wanting to change things. Some christians will be for, some against.
- Jim
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 1584
- Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:39 am
- Location: Northern Illinois, USA
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
Yes, sadly that is so. There's the Inquisition and the Communist re-education camps.
- denimini
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 3291
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
- Location: Outback Australia
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
Some religions forbid eating pork; I eat pork.
Some ban alchohol; I like a glass of wine.
Some have strict clothing rules; ................
Accept other's rights to their beliefs and assume that they accept yours.
Some ban alchohol; I like a glass of wine.
Some have strict clothing rules; ................
Accept other's rights to their beliefs and assume that they accept yours.
My name is Anthony, please accept me for the person that I am.
- JohnH
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 1077
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 12:46 am
- Location: Irving, Texas USA
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
While I disagree with the narrow opinion of men's clothing clothing that Elizabeth Urbanowicz of Foundation Worldview (Christian Bretheren) expresses, she is free to express her opinion.
Not all Christians, myself included, agree with her that men should not wear skirted garments. I do not attempt to pass as a woman - when I talk with my voice deep for a man the illusion that I am a woman is shattered.
John
Not all Christians, myself included, agree with her that men should not wear skirted garments. I do not attempt to pass as a woman - when I talk with my voice deep for a man the illusion that I am a woman is shattered.
John
I renounce the Great Male Renunciation!!!
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
Not that I care, but what's her Opinion on Women Wearing MEN's Pants.?JohnH wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 4:22 am While I disagree with the narrow opinion of men's clothing clothing that Elizabeth Urbanowicz of Foundation Worldview (Christian Bretheren) expresses, she is free to express her opinion.
Not all Christians, myself included, agree with her that men should not wear skirted garments. I do not attempt to pass as a woman - when I talk with my voice deep for a man the illusion that I am a woman is shattered.
John
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
It's something she and most people don't even think about, so of course because it's normal for women to wear JUST pants in general, regardless of what sex they're geared towards, she'd probably have zero issues in that double standard. Hypocrites are everywhere these days.phathack wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 4:26 amNot that I care, but what's her Opinion on Women Wearing MEN's Pants.?JohnH wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 4:22 am While I disagree with the narrow opinion of men's clothing clothing that Elizabeth Urbanowicz of Foundation Worldview (Christian Bretheren) expresses, she is free to express her opinion.
Not all Christians, myself included, agree with her that men should not wear skirted garments. I do not attempt to pass as a woman - when I talk with my voice deep for a man the illusion that I am a woman is shattered.
John
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
It's interesting, though, to note that she's operating under the masculine version of her surname. Does this tell us that the Christian Brethren are more tolerant of cross-gendered names than of cross-gendered clothing?
-
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 1498
- Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:28 pm
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
She literally judges a book by its cover, judging by her bookcase
I'm not a church goer but my kids all went to faith school which kind of made me religious for a while. I'd say the good book is a good book and has some value but it's more guidance, rather than something for the prudes to lecture the rest of us on.
As for the podcaster, she's more onside than she realises. Don't pretend to be something you are not. I agree with that. Job done!
I'm not a church goer but my kids all went to faith school which kind of made me religious for a while. I'd say the good book is a good book and has some value but it's more guidance, rather than something for the prudes to lecture the rest of us on.
As for the podcaster, she's more onside than she realises. Don't pretend to be something you are not. I agree with that. Job done!
Last edited by Uncle Al on Fri Dec 29, 2023 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typo
Reason: typo
-
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 424
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2015 11:24 am
- Location: Brisbane, Australia
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
Having only seen a part of the video in question, I get the impression that she contradicted herself in saying that men wearing skirts was unacceptable in Western culture, but in other cultures such as parts of Africa etc that it was quite OK. That men in Western countries who wear skirts are doing so for attention and to appear as female.
There is an island in Fiji where the men are forbidden to wear trousers on a Sunday, and certainly to church, I don't think those guys would give her the time of day to even say Hi too. Not them or the male population in most, if not all of the Pacific Island countries.
She is approaching the issue from an old testament perspective, and it is my understanding that old testament law was in place for valid reasons, but Jesus came into the world to forgive, that grace superseded old testament law. I am certainly no theologian. You also need to read a verse like this in context with the verses before and after, otherwise you could derive any meaning you like from a single verse to suit your mood and your emotions.
There is an island in Fiji where the men are forbidden to wear trousers on a Sunday, and certainly to church, I don't think those guys would give her the time of day to even say Hi too. Not them or the male population in most, if not all of the Pacific Island countries.
She is approaching the issue from an old testament perspective, and it is my understanding that old testament law was in place for valid reasons, but Jesus came into the world to forgive, that grace superseded old testament law. I am certainly no theologian. You also need to read a verse like this in context with the verses before and after, otherwise you could derive any meaning you like from a single verse to suit your mood and your emotions.
Last edited by Uncle Al on Fri Dec 29, 2023 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typo
Reason: typo
-
- Member Extraordinaire
- Posts: 2721
- Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am
- Location: Southeast Michigan
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
I think we all missed the best part of this video, where the question is asked:
Anywhoo - as to her video - she makes some big assumptions:
I also felt her lack of research into women wearing pants a bit disingenuous. It's a decently close parallel to what's sort of happening today, with the exception that no external situation is forcing us to wear skirts except we'd just like the option, and are tired of male drab.
That being said... I didn't feel any animosity from her, nor was it inflammatory. I didn't care for her assumption about why we wear skirts - but that's where adding a positive comment to the YouTube video could help enlighten her. Overall it was a compassionate take on the matter, and she did not interject any of the current day buzzwords to stoke up fear or hate.
Finally, it feels sometimes these questions are rooted in an unspoken fear that men will take away the pretty things women have all to themselves. As if there is some god-given right for women to wear pearls - shiny baubles and the like.
The key words are becoming more prevalent. That is to say, it is becoming more common, enough for these people to notice it and have to deal with it on a frequent basis. Eventually, it will run even them down and they will have to admit it's just another style choice.How should we guide our children when seeing men or boys wearing dresses, pearls, makeup, nail polish, et cetera? It makes me uncomfortable and is becoming more prevalent, but I don't really know which Bible verses would be relevant. I also keep thinking back to what people must have been saying when women wanted to wear pants, when dresses were more acceptable. I don't have a problem with women wearing pants. How should I deal with this?
Anywhoo - as to her video - she makes some big assumptions:
This sweeping broad statement just doesn't apply to most of the folks here, and really - from her perspective - means we are all in the clear (if we care about such things - some of us do, some don't).It's not that a man putting on a skirt or a dress is inherently evil. However, in our culture, men who are wearing skirts are doing so to appear female or to appear androgynous,
I also felt her lack of research into women wearing pants a bit disingenuous. It's a decently close parallel to what's sort of happening today, with the exception that no external situation is forcing us to wear skirts except we'd just like the option, and are tired of male drab.
That being said... I didn't feel any animosity from her, nor was it inflammatory. I didn't care for her assumption about why we wear skirts - but that's where adding a positive comment to the YouTube video could help enlighten her. Overall it was a compassionate take on the matter, and she did not interject any of the current day buzzwords to stoke up fear or hate.
Finally, it feels sometimes these questions are rooted in an unspoken fear that men will take away the pretty things women have all to themselves. As if there is some god-given right for women to wear pearls - shiny baubles and the like.
- crfriend
- Master Barista
- Posts: 14612
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
- Location: New England (U.S.)
- Contact:
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
It depends on how one reads the question. What I see in that question is a woman who is made uncomfortable by the way that society is changing and is looking to weaponise the Bible to shame/coerce/badger/browbeat people into conforming to her wishes.Coder wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 3:00 pm I think we all missed the best part of this video, where the question is asked:
The key words are becoming more prevalent. That is to say, it is becoming more common, enough for these people to notice it and have to deal with it on a frequent basis. Eventually, it will run even them down and they will have to admit it's just another style choice.How should we guide our children when seeing men or boys wearing dresses, pearls, makeup, nail polish, et cetera? It makes me uncomfortable and is becoming more prevalent, but I don't really know which Bible verses would be relevant. I also keep thinking back to what people must have been saying when women wanted to wear pants, when dresses were more acceptable. I don't have a problem with women wearing pants. How should I deal with this?
In part, this is natural, but several mistakes of logic are made including
1) The Bible in general only applies to Christians,
2) The Old Testament of the Bible applies only to certain highly "Conservative"/reactionary sects of Christianity,
3) The most popular translation of the Old Testament has some whopping errors of translation in it, and.
4) The Old Testament is obsolete doctrine having been supplanted by the New.
What worries me is not that types like this exist, but that they have substantial influence in various legislatures and can "wag the State" into compelling the general populace into behaving in ways that they otherwise would not.
That's an error in thinking, and I can see that happening very easily in her little world. Yes, it's true some of the time, but in most cases -- if it wasn't for the perceptions -- it likely would not be, and certainly is not the case for most men in skirts. It's like the old saw about a stopped watch being right precisely twice per day [0]; however, a stopped watch is entirely incorrect for all the other moments in said day.Anywhoo - as to her video - she makes some big assumptions:
This sweeping broad statement just doesn't apply to most of the folks here, and really - from her perspective - means we are all in the clear (if we care about such things - some of us do, some don't).It's not that a man putting on a skirt or a dress is inherently evil. However, in our culture, men who are wearing skirts are doing so to appear female or to appear androgynous,
[0] Only if you use a 12-hour watch. I run on 24-hour time and have watches with 24-hour dials (the hour hand goes 'round once per day, not twice). I also use UTC for important stuff and when travelling. Its the navigator in me.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
- timemeddler
- Distinguished Member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2023 2:35 am
Re: Christian Bretheren lumping us in with the crossdressers again.
you nailed it, culture has already changed to where its not a big deal. Problem is a lot of Christians who aren't me don't venture much outside the Christian circle and see the world through a different lens, and the news which only shows extreme examples paints us as something we're not.Coder wrote: ↑Fri Dec 29, 2023 3:00 pm I think we all missed the best part of this video, where the question is asked:
The key words are becoming more prevalent. That is to say, it is becoming more common, enough for these people to notice it and have to deal with it on a frequent basis. Eventually, it will run even them down and they will have to admit it's just another style choice.How should we guide our children when seeing men or boys wearing dresses, pearls, makeup, nail polish, et cetera? It makes me uncomfortable and is becoming more prevalent, but I don't really know which Bible verses would be relevant. I also keep thinking back to what people must have been saying when women wanted to wear pants, when dresses were more acceptable. I don't have a problem with women wearing pants. How should I deal with this?
Anywhoo - as to her video - she makes some big assumptions:
This sweeping broad statement just doesn't apply to most of the folks here, and really - from her perspective - means we are all in the clear (if we care about such things - some of us do, some don't).It's not that a man putting on a skirt or a dress is inherently evil. However, in our culture, men who are wearing skirts are doing so to appear female or to appear androgynous,
I also felt her lack of research into women wearing pants a bit disingenuous. It's a decently close parallel to what's sort of happening today, with the exception that no external situation is forcing us to wear skirts except we'd just like the option, and are tired of male drab.
That being said... I didn't feel any animosity from her, nor was it inflammatory. I didn't care for her assumption about why we wear skirts - but that's where adding a positive comment to the YouTube video could help enlighten her. Overall it was a compassionate take on the matter, and she did not interject any of the current day buzzwords to stoke up fear or hate.
Finally, it feels sometimes these questions are rooted in an unspoken fear that men will take away the pretty things women have all to themselves. As if there is some god-given right for women to wear pearls - shiny baubles and the like.
Last edited by Uncle Al on Sat Dec 30, 2023 4:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Typo's
Reason: Typo's