No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'

by wizzstick 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  wizzstick

  In short:
  
  - Tight pants is no longer just a AM3 hang up (or is that a hang up on the well hung?)
  - Brothers who have effeminate body language are flagged up
  - As are sisters with 'masculine' hair styles or dress
  - Such dress is 'disturbing to the congregation'
  - The above must heed the (repeated) counsel from the elders...or they get stripped of the right to share on the ministry
  - HOWEVER...this will not be revealed (announced) to the congregation

  Wow. So any gay/lesbian/bi/transgender JW's or simply people wanting to dress differently had better watch out! And if they don't heed repeated counsel they get stripped off being able to go the ministry (so effectively no longer a JW) but the congregation isn't told this.

  What?

  This is a new one on me. I can't help but think that this is to avoid being accused of hate speech against LGBT people. With real problems in the world being addressed by secular authorities and the world getting better and better place to live in what does the WT do? This crap.
  

  More here:

  http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/the-tight-pants-rule-wearing-disturbing-clothing-gets-you-banned-from-preaching

  In tribute to AM3, I'm now humming the Boys and Girls Blur song, Girls who are boys, Who like boys to be girls, Who do boys like they're girls, Who do girls like they're boys...
• 

  freddo

  Elder to keen MS: "... so don't dress like a girl okay? Be more manly."

  Keen MS: "Okay. Thank you for the counsel."

  Next week at the hall.

  Elder to keen MS: "... shave that beard off now."

  Not quite so keen MS. "I'm trying not to be effeminate and to be more manly. Is there no pleasing you?"
• 

  Bonsai

  Elder to not quite so keen MS., " Oh you can please me. Meet me in the back room right now!"
  
• 

  Zoos

  ...or they get stripped of the right to share on the ministry

  
  

  And the punishment is....??? Did I miss something?

  
  

  "Brother, you act like a sissy. From now on you get to sleep in on Saturdays."
• 

  wizzstick

  And the punishment is....??? Did I miss something?

  "Brother, you act like a sissy. From now on you get to sleep in on Saturdays."

  Well quite!

  But it does through up a bizarre idea of people who are JW's but who can't witness.
  

  
  
• 

  stan livedeath

  or they get stripped of the right to share on the ministry

  
  

  right--got that. --so--what's to stop a dub going out door knocking regardless---just that the time dont get counted. some punishment lol
• 

  alcyone

  I am really surprised with stripping 'the right' to share in ministry. AFAIK this form of punishment has never been used before. Even if somebody was reprimanded publicly, still he was expected to share in ministry, the same for reinstated ones. They were but not allowed to comment during the meetings.

  I can imagine funny situations in future: brother Tight-pants stops to share in ministry suddenly (as there is no public announcement of his being stripped of it). Then other members of the congregation will start to encourage him to start again not knowing he is not permitted to go to the service. Is he allowed to explain it? Are elders allowed to disclose this new policy to the one punished?
  
• 

  AFRIKANMAN

  """Over on JW Survey, there's a great leak regarding tight pants from a new CO outline for their meeting with the elders during congregation visits.""""

  Love your choice of words here of course ! I guess the outline could not contain itself any longer !!! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,lol !
• 

  cappytan

  Kudos to Lloyd for getting this leak.

  A Bethelite sent it to him. Do you know how high up you have to be in Bethel to have access to the CO's outline? At the very least, you'd have to be in the service department.

  First the letter leak, and now this leak. This mole is very high up indeed.
• 

  _Morpheus

  This is NOT unprecedented. There was a publisher locally who had mental heath problems. The pub did not get them treated for a long period of time (despite knowing about them) and became an embarrassment at peoples doors, behaviour wise. With the support of the branch the publisher was told they were no longer allowed to go in service although no judicial action was taken.