by Gill 44 Replies latest jw friends
If the F*cking angels are there shouldn't THEY say the prayer if they are so offended?
This makes me so @#!$%@#$% mad!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They would make women wear burkas if they could! @#%$ I'd say sons of bitches but that's insulting to women too!
I can see me throwing a towel at geneive while she prayed! The next scene would be me pulling a fork out of my eye! and good for her for doing it!
Actually if a female JW was studying with either a woman or a couple, she would not have to have a head covering per WTS rules. The headcovering was only if she was acting in the place of a male JW, such as planned field service meetings, praying at meetings. If 2 women got together on an impromptu basis to go in FS, no headcovering was necessary. Also, if a woman reads paragraphs at the book study, no headcovering was necessary nor was a headcovering necessary if a woman reads scriptures.
The problem was when a brother on restrictions showed up; headcovering and pray in front of him? I just decided no prayer so not to embarrass this man further.
I wonder how many rules there are in connection with this one point; and the WTS thinks they don't have a Talmud.
Blondie
The prepared sister will just keep a fresh maxi-pad in her purse for head-covering emergencies.
Even more sticking durability than a post-it and also more coverage. Especially a "heavy flow" pad. With "wings".
:)
-K
After 50 years, I never saw a woman use a maxi-pad as a headcovering, if I had I would have spoken up. Somehow we knew to carry a scarf in our purse or bag at all times. And that's after 50 years and 20 congregations. As I said, I think those women were deliberately making a statement of how they felt about the headcovering policy.
Blondie
The prepared sister will just keep a fresh maxi-pad in her purse for head-covering emergencies. Even more sticking durability than a post-it and also more coverage. Especially a "heavy flow" pad. With "wings".
What about the ones with "optional sun-roof"?? Oh wait a minute-----that would mean part of the sister's head would be showing, thus triggering Armageddon before God's Due Time.
Hey I know a funny party joke.
Ladies: get 2 tissues, poke one tissue in at the front of your shirt collar at the neck and the other one at the back of your neck, just leave a bit of tissue visible, then ask "what's this?"....
The answer? Always Ultra Extra Long.
I saw napkins used repeatedly
My Mum once used a milk-pot cover, it was a white crocheted thing with the little beads on the corners to weigh the corners down over the milk and hence keep out flies.
She looked like a freakin' looney, it was so funny!
It was like this a bit, but with the beads sewn in around the corners....
I remember how surprised I was to discover the interpretation of the headcovering scripture by the early church fathers.
"Because of the angels" referenced the angels who forsook their natural dwelling places to have sex with the daughters of men. Consequently, the early church fathers took the headcovering necessity to be a protection for women against demonic sexual attack by provoking demonic angel lust!!
I kid you not!
The Muslims treat women this way, if you stop and think about it. Women are covered head to foot to "protect them" from the lust their appearance would inspire in men.
Same thing.
Terry - I can imagine that some women would look sexy even in a burka and so still 'inspire lust' in onlooking men!
However, not many women look even remotely sexy with a tea towel, handkerchief or other such mentioned items in this thread!!!
Therefore, the JWs may win when it comes to diffusing those lustful feelings in their men folk. Perhaps Islam can learn from the WTBTS!!!!!
