Skirts, Pants, and Deuteronomy 22:5

[timemeddler]

deuternomy 22 5 is one of the most missapplied verses in the bible, first, that law no longer applies directly like it did to the jews, it was specifically for israel. It cleary stated in the new testament we are not to be trying to be justified by the law anymore. What matters is the moral principle behind it. There were some forms of idol worship involving women and men dressing as the opposite gender with sexual activity involved. It's not talking about individual pieces of attire, rather roles and overall appearance. What matters is men stay men and women stay women. Anybody bringing this one up better have a lot more to point to than just a skirt.

[Myopic Bookworm]

What matters is men stay men and women stay women.

Given Galatians 3:28, I don't see how this matters either, actually. People are just using Bible verses to reinforce their own social outlook.

[rivegauche]

Any possibility that the people quoting the bible can give the actual quote. I had to Google Galatians 3.28 as I don't own a bible. For the record here it is - you don't hear the God Squad spouting this one, funnily enough:

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

[moonshadow]

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

That makes sense as once a person dies and their physical body rots in the ground... how would gender be determined in such a case?

For it's the gender of the spirit. Most Christians and non-Christians alike would disagree with me on this, but I believe this is the essence of true gender.

To me, the crux of this whole transgender debate seems to boil down to what do we assign "manhood" and "womanhood" to respectively... do we assign it strictly to sex (male/female) or do we assign it to characteristics of the soul?

I am not an authority on this, and honestly, it doesn't matter to me, for we are what we are.

[Ray]

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Well, there you are. God says there is neither male nor female, thereby validating the argument that gender is non-binary

[moonshadow]

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Well, there you are. God says there is neither male nor female, thereby validating the argument that gender is non-binary

Careful there pardner.... world wars have started over less...

I could also go into the notion that the God of the Hebrews was plural and androgynous, simultaneously both male and female.... you know what that implies... "they" would be the correct pronoun and "they" are... dare I say it.... t.... tt.... tra.....no I can't! I'm just not brave enough...

[Ray]

Man the barricades!

Sorry.

Person the barricades!

[STEVIE]

--------- The Barricades
Fill in the blanks, but be quick about it.



Not Sorry

Steve.

[moonshadow]

Don't get me wrong, the book I'm referring to was first published in 1957, and I don't think the author meant to imply that God is trans.

But, suffice to say, gender is a complicated subject, and probably more in the realm of philosophy rather than something scientifically measurable.

My own opinion of gender extends to the scope of my own personal situation, I wouldn't dare speak for others.

If someone were to ask what I believe?...

I believe, it is what it is.

[timemeddler]

What matters is men stay men and women stay women.

Given Galatians 3:28, I don't see how this matters either, actually. People are just using Bible verses to reinforce their own social outlook.

I think that's more of a way of saying we're not to discriminate, and should stay united.

[mr seamstress]

Some of these States in Bible Belt pass a crossdressing law in 2023.

Do tell more... I've not heard of this. I've heard of drag show bans, but that's not a blanket "crossdressing ban", and realistically doesn't apply to us, transgender women, or even crossdressers in general.

In reference in crossdressing laws I include drag show bans as being the same because they are. The laws deals with men in dresses and skirts even in their own property. A man that is topless in skirt can be arrested for performing a drag show from his private property while a man in a speedo is free from arrest. Some States make it illegal for man reading books to children while wearing a dress or skirts. these laws are still in effect. I take it this law include men on internet is also prohibit that are wearing dresses and skirts.
A man in a dress or skirt giving his wife a kiss wearing a dress or is considered performing a drag shoe according to these laws. These laws says man can't do anything considered sexual in public while wearing dresses and skirts. A simple kiss is considered sexual act.
In beginning of 19th century these laws was written in general where women was put in jail for wearing pants. When all pants was considered as man clothes regardless of design just today dresses and skirts are considered female clothes including the kilt. Since then these crossdressing laws have added different features because the old crossdressing laws have been tossed out by court as being illegal and violate the Constitution.

[moonshadow]

@mr seamstress,

True, and I also shared in the concern (especially when I spent more time in a red state... THE red state (Tennessee) that got that crap started).

But like you said, the courts are throwing it out because it is, after all, a violation of the one's constitutional rights.

But to be fair, though the wording of the law could technically be used against guys in skirts, trans-women, etc, most people (including law enforcement) seem to know the difference between a drag queen vs a guy in a skirt. In other words I've not seen any stories of any gender non-conforming people being harassed just for wearing a skirt, unless there was something else going on (e.g., if the man was peeping in a bathroom or something along those lines).

It's not illegal for a man to wear a skirt....in any state, and I don't think that's going to change. A lot of this is just political fear mongering. Stuff candidates say to win votes. Both sides do this..

Thankfully where the rubber meets the road, cooler heads tend to prevail.

[mr seamstress]

In some people views it makes a deference where one lives if it is sin to wear a dress or skirt for man. It depends on the culture where you live if it is okay to wear or dress for men. Then that person says until culture change one doesn't have right to wear such clothing. In that person view the only way a man can wear a dress or skirt is to move to a country that has a culture that embraces it. A lot of people will agree this a sane view, but reality it is crazy.

https://foundationworldview.com/blog/is ... ring-pants

[timemeddler]

In some people views it makes a deference where one lives if it is sin to wear a dress or skirt for man. It depends on the culture where you live if it is okay to wear or dress for men. Then that person says until culture change one doesn't have right to wear such clothing. In that person view the only way a man can wear a dress or skirt is to move to a country that has a culture that embraces it. A lot of people will agree this a sane view, but reality it is crazy.

https://foundationworldview.com/blog/is ... ring-pants

I saw that video awhile back, and it basically boils down to she thing women who started wearing pants of course had "no desire to be like men" but guys wearing skirts "are trying to look androgynous. Talk about baloney, there were literally cartoons complaining about women trying to look like men, so they were violating the society standards at the time too. Unfortunately "social norms" aren't set by those who want to change them, they're determined by everyone else. We live in a society that already condones changing gender by surgery, our society couldn't care less about men in skirts. Unusual is not the same thing as inappropriate.

[crfriend]

How the heck was that piece of dross dredged up?

About the only good thing one can say about Deuteronomy is that if you live in a First World nation you probably wont have that idiotic meme thrown in your face very often. However, if you happen to live in a Third World hole you'll get it quite often.

The reality of the fact is that it simply DOES NOT APPLY any longer with the exception of certain reactionary "Christian" sects who hold the piece of literature and folklore as the literal word of (their) god. It simply does not apply to ANYONE ELSE. In other words, one must ask himself, "What has gone wrong with the society I now must live in?" And the saddest fact is that it's getting worse in the 3rd world, not better!