Skirts at work

[lefebvre_fan]

School on a Saturday? Egads! What is the world coming to? First women in pants and now this! :lol:

[rosie02_2003]

 

There's definitely a lot of cultural blindness. As one person said earlier, "we are all children of our age, whether we'll acknowledge it or not." Due to the omnipresence of pants among the women in our society today, we easily forget that it was, not so very long ago, a very revolutionary thing to wear them.

This alone should predicate that they be abandoned, "for the cause of counter-revolution." Sure, they're convenient, but the easy way isn't always the best.

 

 

That aside, you probably won't see too much more of me in this thread -I'm going back to school today, and have more important things on my plate than debating the finer points of a woman's attire!

  I completly agree with Eric on this point. Traditional Catholics need to be 'in the world, but not of the world'. With that said, this most defintely applies to fashion. But 'everyone else is doing it, why can't I?' Well, as pointed out before Our Lady told Jacinta Marto ''the sins which bring most souls to hell are sins of the flesh. Certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much...the Church has no fashions; Our Lord is always the same...''

    It has always been the norm for women to wear some type of flowing dress or skirt throughout the ages, why suddenly can we dress like a man? Even if I wore loose pants, I would not even want it to be an occasion of sin for others. We must hate sin above all else just as the three little seers at Fatima did. I do not want to put even a stranger's soul in harm by wearing something that accentuates my body thus causing that person to sin in thought,word, or deed (now don't get me wrong there are most definely immodest skirts that can do just the same and so we must be careful  and apply our modesty guidelines to our purchasing of clothing always) We should not think of ourselves and what we feel comfortable in but think what would most please Our Lady. If it is inconvienent or uncomfortable to wear skirts, well we should offer this up as a little sacrifice to Our Lord. However we are not to judge others or condemn them for wearing trousers with bitter zeal and pride. Instead we should inform them of the dangers of immodesty in a humble and charitable way, always wanting the best for their souls.

[lefebvre_fan]

I completly agree with Eric on this point. Traditional Catholics need to be 'in the world, but not of the world'. With that said, this most defintely applies to fashion. But 'everyone else is doing it, why can't I?' Well, as pointed out before Our Lady told Jacinta Marto ''the sins which bring most souls to hell are sins of the flesh. Certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much...the Church has no fashions; Our Lord is always the same...''

   It has always been the norm for women to wear some type of flowing dress or skirt throughout the ages, why suddenly can we dress like a man? Even if I wore loose pants, I would not even want it to be an occasion of sin for others. We must hate sin above all else just as the three little seers at Fatima did. I do not want to put even a stranger's soul in harm by wearing something that accentuates my body thus causing that person to sin in thought,word, or deed (now don't get me wrong there are most definely immodest skirts that can do just the same and so we must be careful  and apply our modesty guidelines to our purchasing of clothing always) We should not think of ourselves and what we feel comfortable in but think what would most please Our Lady. If it is inconvienent or uncomfortable to wear skirts, well we should offer this up as a little sacrifice to Our Lord. However we are not to judge others or condemn them for wearing trousers with bitter zeal and pride. Instead we should inform them of the dangers of immodesty in a humble and charitable way, always wanting the best for their souls.

The best post yet.

[Clare]

Can I ask why you keep bringing up short hair?  As far as I know, having short hair is not a sin against modesty.

As far as I know, neither is wearing trousers!

 

I bring it up because women never used to have short hair. It was a fashion started by Coco Chanel (as I read recently somewhere), who was also behind other questionable fashions. St Paul says we shouldn't cut our hair. It's our "crowning glory". Solange Hertz says we shouldn't too!!

 

So why does the modern fashion of short hair on women slip through the net?

 

Clare.

[Clare]

Traditional Catholics need to be 'in the world, but not of the world'. With that said, this most defintely applies to fashion. But 'everyone else is doing it, why can't I?' Well, as pointed out before Our Lady told Jacinta Marto ''the sins which bring most souls to hell are sins of the flesh. Certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much...

We cannot be sure that that includes trousers! IT MIGHT INCLUDE SHORT HAIR!

 

It has always been the norm for women to wear some type of flowing dress or skirt throughout the ages, why suddenly can we dress like a man?

Sigh! It was the not the norm for men to wear trousers! Why did they suddenly start?

 

Even if I wore loose pants, I would not even want it to be an occasion of sin for others.

How many of the menfolk on this thread have said they find women more attractive in dresses?

 

Which is the occasion of sin then?!

 

Clare.

[Sophia]

Traditional Catholics need to be 'in the world, but not of the world'. With that said, this most defintely applies to fashion. But 'everyone else is doing it, why can't I?' Well, as pointed out before Our Lady told Jacinta Marto ''the sins which bring most souls to hell are sins of the flesh. Certain fashions are going to be introduced which will offend Our Lord very much...

 

...like tight, short skirts and low-necked or see-through dresses.  Oh...and bras too.  Back to the corset ladies! and down with skirts! 

 

 

[LovelyKatieLynn]

I don't know if anyone has made this point already, as I have not had time to read ALL of the posts yet.  I just wanted to comment on this before I forget it, lol. 

 

A while back (on page 10 I think), a couple of people were saying that a woman should conform to the standards of the community she's in, out of respect for the community.  I can't say I agree with this 100%.  Here's why: 

 

I'm 20 years old, unmarried and living with my parents who require me to have a part-time job and be a full-time student in a public university.  I have to be a part of my non-traditional family, non-Catholic profession, and non-Christian school.  Should I have to conform to their ideals of dress out of respect for them?  Should I have to wear pants in my house out of respect for my mother? 

 

I'm willing to accept the ridicule that my family, friends, co-workers, teachers, and classmates inflict on me because of my beliefs.  But I have no intention of conforming to a corrupt society's standards out of respect for them.

 

 

[MikeSearson]

Katie, that is the most intelligent post I've ever seen on this issue.

Thank you.

 

Oh and I disagree with Sophia...I say Up with the Skirts!

[liliaagri]

 

I'm 20 years old, unmarried and living with my parents who require me to have a part-time job and be a full-time student in a public university.   

What would you do otherwise?

 

Like it or not, we live in this society. It's impractical, irrational and impossible to behave as though we were living in the same society our grandparents and great-grandparents lived in. We can't live their lives, much as we'd like to. That means that to some extent we do have to conform our current situation. Otherwise we're just living in some isolated little bubble instead of living our lives. And if a girl has to work to help pay her way through college (or for whatever reason) and it's a choice between wearing non-immodest pants and losing her job, the practical thing is for her to wear those pants since there is no sin involved.

 

I see this again and again. We do have to resist sin, yes. Absolutely. But we DO NOT and I would argue that we SHOULD NOT sacrifice the sensible and the prudent to some abstract ideal, however heroic it makes us feel.

 

 

[Ancilla_Indigna]

I know I'm going to be murdered for this, but . . .

  Does the Lord have a voice on this issue?  And if yes, did he           establish any clear distinctions between the apparel of man and women?           These and other questions will be answered in this article.  Now,           let us read God's position:
           
Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.
           

AMEN. AMEN.  AMEN.

Scary thing, that the Protestants got it right on this one!  And they don't believe in the 10 Commandments, but the 10 Suggestions.  Man!  Blessed Mother, pray for us!

I know back when I used to be a pants-defender that I wore them to show off, not because they were more "practical".  Please!  Unless you are running track or jogging, it makes no difference.   Heck, you can wear them under a skirt, even.  

Hold the tomatoes!  This guy's got it right!  May the Blessed Mother keep you under the protection of her Mantle, and may the good Lord bless you for your little (but very good) sacrifice of writing all that and putting the quotes together.  

You know, I know you did that for others, while most people, in my opinion, who look to defend immodest dressing do so to protect themselves (in their own blind obstinancy).  Well, at least I can say that was certainly true about me, that was, before I did the PREPARATION FOR TOTAL CONSECRATION (to Jesus through Mary), as put together by St. Louis Marie de Montfort.
I'll say it again:  The Blessed Mother set me straight!