FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Men's Dress Worn By Women - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Archives (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Theology and Philosophy (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Men's Dress Worn By Women (/showthread.php?tid=25362)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26


Men's Dress Worn By Women - didishroom - 02-07-2009

Quote:I wear special clothes to bed, it is called (clean) underwear with my robe nearby in case I need to get up before I'm ready to get dressed.
No I meant pajamas; like the whole blue and white striped ones with buttons and everything. I wear similar things as you.  



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Historian - 02-07-2009

didishroom Wrote:No I meant pajamas; like the whole blue and white striped ones with buttons and everything. I wear similar things as you.  

You wear my underwear to bed?!

(And yes, I knew you meant that, and I was showing we all aren't crazy)


Men's Dress Worn By Women - didishroom - 02-07-2009

Oh you didn't know? I borrowed them last week.
It bit too small for me, if you know what I mean.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Schatz - 02-07-2009

PaxVobiscum Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:
INPEFESS Wrote:
Quote:Rafael and INP, great insights. You're 100% right.

Thank you. It's just morality, really.

Yes. Some are simply blind primarily because they are trying to justify whatever they are wearing out of convenience and apathetic to the larger picture.


Gotta tell you, Steve, women were wearing pants to Mass as early as 1964, when, as you surely know, all Masses were still in Latin and ad orientem. That was also before the women's movement began. Women and men were also wearing shorts to Mass in summer. Oh, the scandal!

Edit: But all the women and girls covered their heads, whatever they were wearing.

Before "The Women's Movement"? That depends on what historical events you want to refer to. You can put the beginning of the "Women's Movement" (in the UK and US) as early as the time of Mary Wollestonecraft, or as late as that of Emmaline Pankhurst - but it would be rather silly to claim that the "Women's Movement" started in the 1960s.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - didishroom - 02-07-2009

Yes, you are correct. Femenism began with the Woman's Sufferage:you know, the old hags Anthony and Stanton. The same broads who pushed prohibition.
I think Femenism has had like three "Waves" actually.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Historian - 02-07-2009

didishroom Wrote:Yes, you are correct. Femenism began with the Woman's Sufferage:you know, the old hags Anthony and Stanton. The same broads who pushed prohibition.
I think Femenism has had like three "Waves" actually.

Three waves, and a flipping of the bird.


Men's Dress Worn By Women - Cantus - 02-07-2009

LaRoza Wrote:
didishroom Wrote:Oh I have no problems with men shaving. Please, don't mistake me. I'm just using the logic of those that say if women wear pants there are blurring the lines of gender. One of the persons on these boards think Cary Grant was the epitome of masculinity, when it fact he only thinks that because of the culture he was raised in. See the point? Culture and fashions change. We shouldn't take past cultural assumptions concerning women and pants and apply them to morality.
That is exactly correct.

I'm all for modesty, but I take issue with those who make dogmatic decrees on what is appropriate clothing (like trousers in general, not skin tight trousers) and what is appropriate hair styling based on a single period in time. When one tries to point out standards have changed, as they always have, we are accused of being moral relativists, and when we point out past styles are in direct contradiction to the proclaimed styles of choice we are accused of living in the past. I suppose it is only the past period of time (which was 40 years before I was born!) in which they choose, and anyone else doesn't have the ability to have an opinion.

Thank you Laroza, we can state the argument that fashion changes all the time (with undeniable historical proof) yet we're called feminists or radicals because we're trying to remain humble by being both modest and by blending into todays society.  And yet when people try to make a fixed moral aspect (such as women must wear dresses all the time) from a moving standard we present scientific and logical sylogistic foundations for our arguments and we're called radicals and enemies of modesty.  An arguement of scientific and logical foundation does not follow from opinion or a few rhetorical and vaguely related ideas from the subject line.  Nor does it come from personal insults or accusations toward the presenter but from a first premise combined with a minor premise (or many) and then a conclusion.  Well, for those who need it spelled out.
Major Premise:  Fashion is a fluid system throughout history with changes that are radical at times and slow at other times.

1st m premise: todays fashion includes pants on women.
2nd m premise: todays fashion is moving radically and quickly.
3rd m premise: women wear both dresses and pants in todays fasion.
4th m premise: fashion is appropriate to the occasion.

1st fallicy: women wearing pants excite my libido, therefore it is immodest
response to 1st fallicy: a single representation of and example is not a universal standard, there are men who become more excited with women wearing dresses than pants.

2nd fallicy: women wearing pants are supporting feminism because it was the feminists that wanted to assume the authority of men and therefore wore pants to do this. 
response to 2nd fallicy: I'm still waiting for any specific testimony of feminists who have publicly stated it.  If the reason were solid and universal as to why women wanted to wear pants there should be no shortage of examples to choose from.

3rd fallicy: It's universally accepted that women who wish to wear pants are feminist or liberal. 
response to 3rd fallicy: If it were universally accepted this argument never would have come to this point and we all would have universally accepted the argument (without any examples of note or an overwhelming foundation of facts) 

Conclusion: As long as the occasion calls for it, wearing pants is perfectly acceptable on a woman just as wearing a dress is perfectly acceptable when different occasions call for it.  Comment: It is irrational to argue a fixed point from something that has a moving standard throughout history.  It is also irrational to take a standard of 50-100 years ago when the standard is moving drastically fast in todays society.



Men's Dress Worn By Women - Historian - 02-07-2009

Schatz Wrote:
PaxVobiscum Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:
INPEFESS Wrote:
Quote:Rafael and INP, great insights. You're 100% right.

Thank you. It's just morality, really.

Yes. Some are simply blind primarily because they are trying to justify whatever they are wearing out of convenience and apathetic to the larger picture.


Gotta tell you, Steve, women were wearing pants to Mass as early as 1964, when, as you surely know, all Masses were still in Latin and ad orientem. That was also before the women's movement began. Women and men were also wearing shorts to Mass in summer. Oh, the scandal!

Edit: But all the women and girls covered their heads, whatever they were wearing.

Before "The Women's Movement"? That depends on what historical events you want to refer to. You can put the beginning of the "Women's Movement" (in the UK and US) as early as the time of Mary Wollestonecraft, or as late as that of Emmaline Pankhurst - but it would be rather silly to claim that the "Women's Movement" started in the 1960s.

I was referring to the latest women's movement, presuming that most people here were smart enough to realize that, given the date of 1964. Clearly Mary Wollstonecraft, Emmeline Pankhurst, Susan B. Anthony and others were fighting for women's rights long before the 1960s and 1970s.


Men's Dress Worn By Women - Historian - 02-07-2009

didishroom Wrote:Yes, you are correct. Femenism began with the Woman's Sufferage:you know, the old hags Anthony and Stanton. The same broads who pushed prohibition.
I think Femenism has had like three "Waves" actually.

It's uncharitable and rude to refer to women as "old hags" and "broads." Neither is an appropriate way to refer to women on a Catholic forum.

Do you call your grandmother an "old hag"? Do you call your mother a "broad"?


Men's Dress Worn By Women - piabee - 02-07-2009

StevusMagnus Wrote:Chicks in boots.

I can't wear boots now?