Men's Dress Worn By Women
#61
StevusMagnus Wrote:
LaRoza Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:Men wear pants and not skirts.
Where? Ever been to the middle east?

What part of the Middle East do you live in LaRoza?
Does the Middle East have men?

Review your statement and my response. You said "men wear pants and not skirts". You did not say "Men in the time and place I live wear pants and not skirts".

Reply
#62
People, please, in this thread there are obviously individuals who are very passionate about their opinions.  Charity must always be the highest order which is why I've tried to keep my emotions and my opinions out of the discussion and keep it as logical as possible. 

Above all we MUST be charitable in this issue.  For those who would accept women wearing pants, so be it!!!  For those who would not, is it not the wearers final judgment that is their own responsibility?

In the light of abortion, the excommunication, the vicious media attacks on the church, is the question of women wearing pants so important to you that you cannot let it go or do you think it so much more important than the issues I just mentioned?  Priorities people, please!!!!

Reply
#63
LaRoza Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:Good. Wear a skirt to Mass to prove you will not be dictated to. Let me know how that goes.
What? That doesn't make any sense, and you are sort of proving my point. Trousers on women are accepted, as the reaction of society is not the same as a man in a dress.
Right. And your point was that society shouldn't dictate what is masculine and feminine. It's all relative. So prove it and go to Mass in a skirt.


Quote:What is effeminate about a pony tail? The tying back of hair in that way is only for function, not looks. The men of the British navy, the Han warriors, many Native American nations and most of history had instances of a simple tying back or otherwise constriction of hair to prevent it from obstructive the face or getting caught.


Are you in the British Navy?
Are you a Han warrior?
Are you Native American?
Reply
#64
StevusMagnus Wrote:So in other words your proof of this contention comes from one random video on the internet.

If it was some person in a pew with a camcorder, that would be a random video, and I'd agree with you. This one, however, was made by a group of professional videographers for a video which the SSPX uses to promote the Latin Mass. I'm not going to say it's "official", but it's close to that. It's basically like a promotional pamphlet.

Furthermore, this isn't a random place, but as I said, the "flagship church" of the SSPX.

Quote:And you of course have extensive evidence for this claim. Surely it is not an irresponsible libelous assertion with no basis in fact.

If you read the statement, it may or may not be factual. I said, "who seem to be", which is different from "who are". But I have been to chapels with congregations who seem almost as unaware of the Mass as the average NOM parish.

That's certainly a more qualified statement than this one:

StevusMagnus Wrote:Men wear pants and not skirts.
Reply
#65
LaRoza Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:
LaRoza Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:Men wear pants and not skirts.
Where? Ever been to the middle east?

What part of the Middle East do you live in LaRoza?
Does the Middle East have men?

Review your statement and my response. You said "men wear pants and not skirts". You did not say "Men in the time and place I live wear pants and not skirts".


Answer the question. What part of the Middle East do you live in LaRoza?
Reply
#66
Cantus Wrote:For those who would not, is it not the wearers final judgment that is their own responsibility?

No, it isn't the wearers final judgement if the priest says they should not wear them at mass.

Quote:In the light of abortion, the excommunication, the vicious media attacks on the church, is the question of women wearing pants so important to you that you cannot let it go or do you think it so much more important than the issues I just mentioned?  Priorities people, please!!!!

Feminism is a major reason for abortion. The people attacking the SSPX are bringing up Williamson's views on pants because edit: because they are feminists, society has feminist attitudes, and they believe such a thing will hurt its reputation. Well, the SSPX has good reasons for its views so those views should be defended. If it's so unimportant to you why have you been participating in this thread?
Reply
#67
The_Harlequin_King Wrote:If it was some person in a pew with a camcorder, that would be a random video, and I'd agree with you. This one, however, was made by a group of professional videographers for a video which the SSPX uses to promote the Latin Mass. I'm not going to say it's "official", but it's close to that. It's basically like a promotional pamphlet
So in other words your proof of this contention comes from one random video on the internet? Answer, yes.

Quote:
Quote:And you of course have extensive evidence for this claim. Surely it is not an irresponsible libelous assertion with no basis in fact.

If you read the statement, it may or may not be factual. I said, "who seem to be", which is different from "who are". But I have been to chapels with congregations who seem almost as unaware of the Mass as the average NOM parish.

Who seem to be based on what evidence? How do you know that people in SSPX Chapels are unaware of the Mass. How does one "seem" unaware of the Mass? And how can you say this speculative assertion applies to a majority of US Chapels but does not seem to apply in Europe?

Wreckless and rash presumption applied to mass generalization, denigrating all US SSPX chapelgoers based on a handful of specious speculative evidence.
Reply
#68
Gie2me Wrote:I never wear dresses...the odd thing is today I made an exception before reading this forum.

I wear pants to work. I must...with the work I do, and it being part of the uniform. This is a confusing topic. I always wearing dresses and skirts to Mass, but at home or when out and about, I usually wear not so feminine type clothing to avoid the whole "feminity" image. Not because I am feminist nor against wearing feminine things, but just to avoid the men from looking. There are very few things to wear today that are feminine and modest, so I tend to steer away from the feminine dressing for that reason....is it bad? Am I going to hell now?

No. Nobody said you are going to Hell.
Reply
#69
StevusMagnus Wrote:Right. And your point was that society shouldn't dictate what is masculine and feminine. It's all relative. So prove it and go to Mass in a skirt.

That would prove my point that it is all relative. Relative to the time and place I live, men do not wear skirts. Women do wear certain types of trousers in this same time and place.

Quote:Are you in the British Navy?
Are you a Han warrior?
Are you Native American?

Yes, I am part Native American actually, but that is beside the point. The point was that the "pony tail" is functional. Nothing should be without purpose right? I tie may hair back because of the function, not look. My hair is not always tied back though, but my mum doesn't like it when I go out with it down.

Joan of Arc was officialy burned for wearing men's clothing. The Church condemned that notion because her acts were neccessary for doing God's will. She did not cut her hair off, wear men's clothing and armour for looks, but for a purpose. So I believe we all should live.
Reply
#70
StevusMagnus Wrote:So in other words your proof of this contention comes from one random video on the internet? Answer, yes.

Answer: no. A video which the primary branch of the SSPX uses to promote Tradition. Not random at all. Very deliberate.

Quote:Who seem to be based on what evidence? How do you know that people in SSPX Chapels are unaware of the Mass. How does one "seem" unaware of the Mass? And how can you say this speculative assertion applies to a majority of US Chapels but does not seem to apply in Europe?

I don't know.... but there are a few indicators which are described in books like Why Catholics Can't Sing. I'm much more likely to believe that a church (like the one in the video) where the faithful sing very robustly and intimately know the responses and gestures of the Mass has a keener sense of liturgy than a church where only a handful of people sing, more wear blank or confused expressions (like those at NOM churches) or, more innocently, are engaged in private devotions.... which is praying at Mass, but not praying the Mass (to borrow an expression of St. Pius X's).

Quote:Wreckless and rash presumption applied to mass generalization, denigrating all US SSPX chapelgoers based on a handful of specious speculative evidence.

I looked at my statement again. It says, "more than can be said for many American SSPX'ers". Many is not the same as all, as the pro multis controversy reminds us.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)