Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Men's Dress On Women  (Read 988 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline stevusmagnus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3728
  • Reputation: +824/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • h
Men's Dress On Women
« on: July 17, 2009, 12:51:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Masculine and feminine attire must be judged in the context of the revolution which roared through our culture in the 60's and 70's. Part of this revolution was the "sameness" of the sexes and the feminist movement equating women with men in every respect. Out of this revolution came the pushing of pants for women as skirts and dresses were discounted of all value and seen as "feminine" and therefore symbolic of oppression, subjection, and degradation of women. It was a vestige of the patriarchy oppressing women. Pants were a sign of female liberation. "We're just like men". "Who wears the pants in your family?" was an oft used phrase in the 50's, before the revolution. One of the things that had to go in the feminist revolution were all of the vestiges of male authority.

    Ironically the feminist revolution was, at its essence, a rejection of femininity. They so devalued women's God given roles, talents, and place in society throughout Christian history that they made anything associated with motherhood, staying at home, raising children, and dressing feminine, and acting feminine, something to be deplored as vestiges of oppression. We can see today the desire of society to have hard chicks and soft guys. It is the plan of Satan to topple God's order. If God has ordained men as heads of the family, Satan wants women to head the family. God made them male and female, Satan wants no distinction. Therefore women must become like men and men like women. The ultimate end of this diabolical plan is complete gender confusion and finally homosexuality pervading mankind.

    So the "pants" issue must be placed in it's proper historical and cultural context keeping in mind the recent societal and cultural history in America. If one becomes myopic and only sees pants as a piece of neutral clothing at this date and second in time, one misses the point and the recent historical implications this issue has.

    Once you put this in proper context you'll see that ancient, medieval, renaissance and other historical examples as well as other cultural examples are irrelevant. Those examples are completely divorced from our particular time and culture and how it is just in the last few decades, we got here. Clothes today mean something and that meaning is tied to the unprecedented social and moral revolution we experienced that goes against all Catholic principle.

    Those good priests, Cardinals, Saints (Padre Pio) who were against pants on women are not some mean curmudgeons who were simply not "with it" and wanted to deny women any form of freedom. These were wise and holy men imbued with a true Catholic spirit who saw what was coming and the hidden agenda behind these new fashions and styles that was directly opposed to the social order of Christ. They gave their warnings, but the devil has apparently boxed up these warnings and thrown away the key by spreading the lie that these views are "outdated", "closed minded", "trapped in their time" as he appeals to our love for personal freedom and freedom of choice.

    It all goes back to the apple. "Who says you are not to eat the fruit of this tree? God? He simply wants to take away your freedom. You have a right to this apple. He knows if you eat it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods!" And so it is today. "Who says God's plan makes man the head of the family? Who says you are any different from a man? Who dares to tell you that you really shouldn't wear pants? Men are wearing pants." In the end the devil tricks us into thinking its about power and freedom when it is really about nature and divine order. His methods worked then and they are working now.

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 21835
    • Reputation: +19176/-112
    • Gender: Male
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #1 on: July 17, 2009, 12:58:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Excellent post! Very well-written.

    It really hits the nail on the head.

    Thank you for posting it here.

    Matthew
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!


    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #2 on: July 17, 2009, 01:09:41 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I also posted it on Catholic Answers. Sort of like throwing firecrackers into a chicken coop.  :laugh1:

    We'll see what happens!

    Offline Elizabeth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4847
    • Reputation: +2190/-1
    • Gender: Female
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #3 on: July 17, 2009, 01:10:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Satanists adore androgyny, it's part of their "tradition".

    I also appreciate the article.  In the bigger picture, as our lives become so complicated and confused, wearing skirts all the time is just so EASY, it is so easy and fun.  

    Anyway, Our Lady warned us that certain fashions would be very offensive to Christ.  

    Not that people should act like jerks if some curious woman comes to their chapel in pants with no mantilla.  I find that downright churlish and embarrassing.  A girl can figure out how to blend in after a few tries; craning your neck and allowing your kids give her those looks with their beady little eyes is just plain rude.


    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #4 on: July 17, 2009, 01:14:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Elizabeth I agree. So often those that this idea hits a nerve with immediately judge me as maligning individuals. That is the farthest thing from the truth. We need to be lions in proclaiming the truth, but lambs in charity on an individual basis in helping people see this truth. Your words are well taken.


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 21835
    • Reputation: +19176/-112
    • Gender: Male
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #5 on: July 17, 2009, 01:20:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Exactly -- that's my philosophy too.

    I want to be charitable always, but that doesn't mean denying the truth or Catholic principles (same thing).

    If I saw a woman at Mass wearing pants or without a veil, I would know she was "new", but I wouldn't be rude. I would be friendly and helpful.

    Charity applies to individuals -- but error must be disemboweled alive with a dull butter knife!

    I'm brutal with error, because it has no right to exist, and no soul that might worship God forever in Heaven. People get confused these days -- they are confused and sentimental.

    Matthew
    Start your Amazon.com session by clicking this link, and my family and I get a commission on your purchase!

    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #6 on: July 17, 2009, 01:38:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here is a female Catholic Answer reply that was applauded by another female poster.

    I post it here because I find it humorous.  :laugh1:

    What's sad is that I do believe she's serious!

    Quote
    I believe YOU typed this. I guess it's OK for men to be "GUYS", but you felt it was OK to reduce females to "CHICKS"!!! We're not women or girls anymore, in YOUR typing! Sentient beings, of course, but nothing more than FARM ANIMALS! And if we are thought of in THIS context, no wonder why some of us continue tor strive for RECOGNITION, let alone equality!

    Offline clare

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2261
    • Reputation: +880/-34
    • Gender: Female
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #7 on: July 17, 2009, 01:43:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Elizabeth
    Anyway, Our Lady warned us that certain fashions would be very offensive to Christ.  


    Noone denies that. What is not so clear is that she included women's trousers in that.

    She could just as easily have included short hair in that warning! (A point I keep labouring!)


    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #8 on: July 17, 2009, 02:59:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Clare,

    I personally think it is quite obvious that women wearing traditionally male dress of the time is included in the warning, along with the immodesty of the revolution. And we must remember it is the revolution she is talking about there.

    Certainly very short hair on women and very long hair on men fits into the androgyny of the revolution quite well. They will be happy with anything that seemingly turns the previous Christian culture and notions of masculine and feminine on their head.

    Offline clare

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2261
    • Reputation: +880/-34
    • Gender: Female
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #9 on: July 17, 2009, 03:53:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: stevusmagnus
    Clare,

    I personally think it is quite obvious that women wearing traditionally male dress of the time is included in the warning, along with the immodesty of the revolution. And we must remember it is the revolution she is talking about there.

    Certainly very short hair on women and very long hair on men fits into the androgyny of the revolution quite well. They will be happy with anything that seemingly turns the previous Christian culture and notions of masculine and feminine on their head.


    "...traditionally male dress of the time..." Mull that over!

    Fashions are not immutable. Even what is viewed as masculine and feminine can change.

    Beards, and the absence of them, for example.

    Offline Caraffa

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 818
    • Reputation: +451/-2
    • Gender: Male
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #10 on: July 17, 2009, 04:00:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pray for me, always.


    Offline stevusmagnus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3728
    • Reputation: +824/-0
    • Gender: Male
      • h
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #11 on: July 17, 2009, 06:25:46 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: clare
    "...traditionally male dress of the time..." Mull that over!

    Fashions are not immutable. Even what is viewed as masculine and feminine can change.

    Beards, and the absence of them, for example.


    Any judgment on clothing must be made in the context of the recent history in which we lived through. It set the stage for the controversy.  As I explained we just went through a revolution meaning to topple Christian order and thus clothing means a great deal. At least it did and does to the revolution. It is in this context that we must judge the Christian value of clothing and not some other irrelevant standard.

    The revolution picked the clothes they would change very carefully because each rebellion meant something. The pants rebellion was a direct rejection of the Christian role of woman and the "liberation" from patriarchy it represented to them.

    You can't just separate out the article of clothing from its intertwined role in our recent unprecedented history and the reality the revolutionaries wished to overthrow.

    This argument wishes to judge the morality of women in pants in a vacuum, or in some other time in the past which we do not live in, or some other completely different culture or context. Therein lies the error.

    The revolution, the feminist movement, the overthrow of Christian order, the denigration of the feminine and the mother, the glorification of male attributes as "powerful", the war against nature. The wearing of pants was but one cog in the gradual social overthrow of the established order. It was a move towards androgyny and obfuscation of God give gender roles.

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12714
    • Reputation: +5/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #12 on: July 17, 2009, 08:04:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Catholicism:

    Man is fallen and must cover his shame in accountability to God.

    Humanism:

    Man is innocent and has nothing to be ashamed and has no accountability to God

    Feminism:

    Woman is innocent and has nothing to be ashamed of and no accountability to God or Man.

    In Humanism we see the body cult and obsession with the nude human form, and also with the pursuit of pleasure.

    In Feminism we see the attempt to remove all moral responsibility from the moral acts of women.

    One Example:

    Women may dress however they want, the problem is all in men not controlling themselves, and whether or not a woman tempts a man or not she cannot be held responsible for any negative consequences.

    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12714
    • Reputation: +5/-0
    • Gender: Male
    Men's Dress On Women
    « Reply #13 on: July 17, 2009, 08:11:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  •  

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16