Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: rona@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Ron Abramson) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Re: QUESTION FASHION Message-ID: Date: 30 Jun 91 18:31:24 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Hewlett Packard - Boise, ID Lines: 81 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu gibbons@csn.org (Hugh Gibbons) writes: [Referring to Deu 22:5] >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. What makes you say that? I'm not flaming you or anyone else, Hugh, I just don't see any evidence to back up this assertion. As with any OT law, there are two things to consider here: 1. Why does this prohibition appear in the OT? (i.e. What is the context?) 2. Does it apply to Christians today? Question 1 is the more difficult of the two. I have read that this passage was aimed at paganist rituals in which the priests would dress as women. Can anyone else add to this? With regard to the second question, I would have to say that the answer is pretty clearly *NO* for most of us. That is, the scripture simply does not apply *for most of us*. Unless a person intends to obey and insist that others obey every law in the OT, why pull a single verse out of context in this way. Let us consider some of the other prohibitions in this same chapter: Deu22:8 When thou buildest a new house, then thou shalt make a battlement for thy roof, that thou bring not blood upon thine house, if any man fall from thence. Deu22:10 Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together. Deu22:11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together. Deu22:12 Thou shalt make thee fringes upon the four quarters of thy vesture, wherewith thou coverest thyself. Everyone with a battlement on your roof and four fringes on your vest, please raise your hand. I am aware of chruches near my home which insist that women wear dresses, and yet the men are not required to wear four fringes on their vests. Now, if a particular church made an honest attempt to follow the entire OT law, that would be something else. As far as "cross-dressing as a sexual perversion", I must really question this assertion as well. Someone has already pointed out that police officers have been known to cross-dress for the purpose of catching criminals. Also, actors (e.g. Dustin Hoffman) have cross-dressed recently for the purpose of comedy. A few hundred years ago, there was no such thing as an "actress" so men played the parts of women. In neither of these cases was this a "sexual perversion" IMHO. Also, what do you say to the "boys" born with the birth defect of undescended testicles when at puberty the male organs suddenly appeared on a person whom everyone thought was a girl. Dressed and trained to be girls from birth, do we tell them that they are to suddenly start dressing as boys because of their genitals in spite of the feminine socialization which they've received since birth? Is a person who has undergone a sex change operation considered to be wearing the clothes of the opposite sex? And what about a person born with both sets of sexual organs? (yes, this does happen) And how about a woman who wears men's rock climbing boots or men's soccer shoes because the func- tion she needs is not available in the clothing of her gender? For that matter what about the man who wears an apron while washing the dishes? And what if a man wears women's makeup on his face to hide a scar? For years my wife wore my Pendleton wool shirt (clearly a man's shirt) not just because it was warm and comfortable but because she liked the style and color. In every case above, it is not the clothes or the behaviour, but the motive which determines how we view that behaviour. IMHO, the clothes that a person wears is a very poor basis to use in passing judgement on another person. Also, IMHO, it is foolish to assume that you understand another person's motives for doing *anything* unless you know that person. I believe that my God does not care what clothes we wear unless our motive for wearing the clothes is wickedness. -- Ron