No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing' (page 20)

Pistoff

For f*cks sake, the disturbing part is NOT clothing, it is that they are trying to get elders to recognize and set people out and apart for perceived 'gay' mannerisms.

Love UniHateExams, it is obvious that to the watchtower, Metrosexual and gay are very close, if not, the same. And of course, not all gays look gays. But this position clearly shows that the WT hate gays, not just the sexual conduct.

Pistoff

LUHE:

Throughout this thread, there seems to be confusion over the terms 'metrosexual' and 'gay'.

Yeah, that's what we are on about; we can discern the difference but the GOVERNING BODY can't tell the difference, they apparently think that wearing tight pants leads one to speaking gay.

So because of Tony's extreme fear of all things he thinks are gay, he is lumping behavior and clothing styles into one box, and warning elders to 'be on the lookout'.

This crosses a line, it may be much more important than some think, including Simon.

LoveUniHateExams

we can discern the difference but the GOVERNING BODY can't tell the difference, they apparently think that wearing tight pants leads one to speaking gay - I'm not so sure about this. Perhaps the GB can tell the difference.

This crosses a line, it may be much more important than some think, including Simon - I agree with what Sparrowdown said earlier - perhaps this will wake up more JWs to TTATT.

I can't believe some people are getting their panties in a bunch over dress codes ...

StephaneLaliberte

the section on the talk outline is:

Concerns regarding conduct, dress and grooming.

Then, yes, it talks about the styles of clothing, but it also talks about

"effeminate characteristics", "the manifesting of effeminate traits, perhaps in one's bearing, body language, and manner of speech".

This is the section that sends everyone crazy about on this thread and you appear to be the only one who keeps bringing it back to be "just about clothing".

If we have fun with statistics, lets assume there are about 500,000 JW kids out there. This means that about 5000 of them are gay. And now, they will be told, as they grow up: We don't hate you, we just hate the way you bear yourself, your body language, your manner of speech, basically, who you are! You need to change who and what you are, otherwise, God will hate you.

Sadly, I expect some of those kids to actually kill themselves over this.

DesirousOfChange

I'd say this means that there are a couple of Bethel Speakers that were at our Dist Conv 2 & 3 years ago (missed the Reg Conv this year -- well.....actually did not MISS IT), who are not going to have the privilege of going out in FS (let alone giving Conv talks).

Obviously(tm) NPG.

Doc

LoveUniHateExams

Good point, StephaneLaliberte

If we forget about dress codes and concentrate on gay and/or effeminate JWs - there is a danger that these will be wrongly targeted for their mannerisms, etc. I fully agree with you here.

This should be campaigned about, and flagged up to local government officials.

Let's not forget that the WT repressive everyone, not just homosexual/effeminate people.

Actigall Ur

@Doc- Half of the Bethelites, male and female are NPG. You ever hear about the "leave the door open" rule? LOL

Diogenesister

Pistoff 👍👍👍yes yes yes!!

Simon

And now, they will be told, as they grow up: We don't hate you, we just hate the way you bear yourself, your body language, your manner of speech, basically, who you are! You need to change who and what you are, otherwise, God will hate you.

I think the WTS has always sent the message to gay people: "we hate you, you're wrong, change or leave". Even when they try and make it less judgmental it still is ("we don't hate you ... just who you are and what you do").

The only change is they want to extend this to now include people who only look or act gay or spend what they consider to be way too much time and money on fashion and clothing (metro-sexual).

They can't distinguish between being gay and "looking gay" and for their branding it doesn't matter - one is a sin, the other makes gives the appearance that they are accepting gay people (perhaps they fear that they are making a mockery of the GB / WTS rules).

To conservative Christians being effeminate or metro-sexual is the same as being gay (except for priests and clergy - they can wear frocks).

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

Share this