skirtcafe.org

2009 article. And the Methodists, yet.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/tiny-f ... 5763255884

This issue raises an interesting question. Suppose men were REQUIRED to wear skirts, as women once were? We currently have a society which, overall, does not permit men to wear skirts (although it is not actually illegal), and we hope for a society where men have the option to wear skirts. But having a government requirement requiring men to wear skirts, aside from being totalitarian, would be like what we have now except the required item of clothing to be worn is different.

Brad wrote:Suppose men were REQUIRED to wear skirts, as women once were?

I image we'd be just as torqued off at the situation as we are with the situation regarding skirts now -- the problem is not so much the garment as the perception of the compulsory wearing of same.

Note, however, that the "requirement" is being promulgated by one religious sect, and I do not believe that Fiji is a theocracy. Ergo, the "ban" cannot be thought of as being general or even intended for all members of the local community (even if many belong to that sect).

We currently have a society which, overall, does not permit men to wear skirts (although it is not actually illegal), and we hope for a society where men have the option to wear skirts. But having a government requirement requiring men to wear skirts, aside from being totalitarian, would be like what we have now except the required item of clothing to be worn is different.

Would one call France "totalitarian" for the (just-recently repealed) law prohibiting Parisian women from wearing trousers (which was completely unenforceable and very widely ignored)? As men, we start from a position of relative privilege -- there are no laws, at least in any jurisdiction that I'm aware of, in the Western world that expressly prohibit guys from wearing skirts.

No doubt handy if anyone ever tries the old Leviticus argument on you - a man shall not wear that which pertaineth to a woman, or however it goes. Something which fortunately is not likely to happen to me here in the UK.

Yeah, except for the fact that nobody in Leviticus (or in fact the entire Bible) ever wore trousers.

Quite true, but that small point is overlooked by users of the argument.

Hmmm...interesting...and just when I thought all there was to us (sometimes) Methodists was serving on the right committees...

Good-Day Everyone!

It is my understanding that the prohibition in Duet. 22:5 is to discourage dressin as the opposite sex in order to:

1. Avoid military service by appearing as a woman and thus exempt or if you were female to pass as a man in order to participate in military campaigns.

2. Since worship activities were segregrated by gender apparently there were some men who donned womens' attire in order to sit by someone they may have cared for. There were women who disguised themselves as men in order to have the education offered to "men only". Years ago there was a movie called Yentle with Barbra Streisand that featured this aspect.

Now (stpping on the soapbox) making laws/rules/regulations that mandate a specific mode of dres in everday circumstances is mark of snobbish intoerance and thus is not in keeping with the morality of the Judeo-Christian ethics. Worship is a matter of the heart and soul and and how one is dressed does not affect ones nearness or distance spritually. (stepping down from soapbox.)


Slainte'
Bill & Sir Brinkley the Exubrant!

My church (Mormon) has missionaries all over the world (you've all seen them). Their standard "uniform" consists of a typical business-type suit to make them look professional and respectable. I don't know if it's still the case or not, but a standard "uniform" for a Mormon missionary on the south seas islands consisted of a black sarong-style skirt instead of pants. And I've got friends from Tonga and Fiji who say that trousers are considered to be impolite in many circles, such as business, worship, and government.

I visited the Polynesian Cultural Center in Laie, HI in 1987. This is a sort of "theme Park" without rides which allows visitors to be immersed in the culture of several Polynesian nations in one day. It is run and staffed as a project of Brigham Young University which has a branch in Laie. The LDS students working there wore mid-calf length skirts but no mention of the reason or history of this practice was ever explained. I never did find out anything more about this and now I wished I asked.

I've been to the Polynesian Cultural Center as well, but I think the sarongs and grass skirts were always just traditional dress. The islanders had no need for trousers and just never invented them.

We are being reminded that the choice of one-pipe-or-two? is cultural. Different cultures may reach different conclusions regarding that. So Jesus Christ probably wore skirted garments his entire life; and church going is modified to conform to old Fijian tradition, in contrast to Western suits. Actually, I am reminded of the rule that men must wear the gho (resembles a bath robe) in Bhutan. These cultures have reached very different conclusions regarding the number of pipes a man should wear.

The old rules have been severely challenged in recent years, so we now seem to be at a point where not just one, not just two, but three pipes may be considered. So question becomes modified-should I wear one pipe or two, or combine them to get three pipes? The results can look so ghastly, however-skirts over jeans, for example-that perhaps this will just be a fad.

Grok wrote:We are being reminded that the choice of one-pipe-or-two? is cultural. Different cultures may reach different conclusions regarding that. So Jesus Christ probably wore skirted garments his entire life; and church going is modified to conform to old Fijian tradition, in contrast to Western suits. Actually, I am reminded of the rule that men must wear the gho (resembles a bath robe) in Bhutan. These cultures have reached very different conclusions regarding the number of pipes a man should wear.

Right: There's nothing inherently masculine or feminine about single- or double-leg-hole garments. Any such distinction is cultural.

I just got home from a CP'R (cardio pulmonary resuscitation) class. One student was wearing a dress over slacks. The weather was chilly but dry. I've reached the conclusion that the skirt-over-trousers mode is here to stay, at least for winter weather.

At least skirts over slacks looks better than skirts over jeans.