Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!seismo!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jclark@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (John Clark) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: QUESTION FASHION Message-ID: Date: 14 Jun 91 03:40:35 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of California, San Diego Lines: 21 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article gibbons@csn.org (Hugh Gibbons) writes: + +The passage in question doesn't make any mention of styles. It +is a prohibition against cross-dressing (for the purpose of +looking like a member of the opposite sex) which was considered +a sexual perversion. Depended on the situation as to the 'perversion' content. There are a number of of references which tell of using 'cross-dressing' during worship rituals and/or theater plays, 'Theater' being derived from a form of worship. In these activities there seems to have been various sexual displays. As for 'cross-dressing' outside of this context it seems that if it was done it was derided, considered in bad taste. I have heard the comment that 'religious' aspect is what Paul was addressing when he made the prohibition against 'cross-dressing'. -- John Clark jclark@ucsd.edu