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

by wizzstick 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Oubliette

  If it is only convincing to people who are already convinced that JWs are a cult then how convincing is it, really?

  Thanks for addressing my comments.

  I have never suggested that this by itself is proof that JWs are a cult. That was never my concern with this issue.
  

  My concerns are how it will affect those in the religion that will be targeted as a result of this new directive from the control-freaks running this cult.

  I have one family member in particular that is still in that I know will be adversely affected by this.
  

  People on the outside aren't going to care.
  
• 

  magotan

  People on the outside will care, body and behavior policing is not the thing to do these days.
• 

  Simon

  growing up queer/gay, I often was policed on not only how I dressed, but how I walked, talked, and acted. I did not intentionally act more feminine or masculine, but I simply did things that the JW's considered "feminine".

  So you were actually gay which would mean the appearance that they picked upon was correct (for them). In general, isn't appearance all they can go on unless you specifically tell them something? (this would seem to especially apply to matters of sexuality).

  This meant that despite any sort of "spiritual qualifications" i still was passed over for assignments, and had limited contact with other members of the congregation because of the PERCEPTION of my sexuality due to my mannerisms.

  Do you think, under the WTS rules, that "spiritual qualifications" would ever negate what they perceive as serious sin? Are you saying that even though their perception was correct and so violated their fundamental beliefs that they should have ignored it? Did you think that was ever likely? How do you see that working in practice?

  It ruined my teens and made me feel like I was not enough and made me hate myself.

  I can imagine - you were living two lives completely at odds which must have created a ton of internal conflict. At some juncture you must have decided that if they hated who you are then you couldn't remain there - was that your decision or theirs?

  Would you have preferred that they allowed you to continue as a JW while they kept their anti-gay belief system? How would that have worked? Wouldn't you always be conflicted in such a community, no matter what?

  I'm trying to understand what you expected to happen differently. How would it ever have been a good experience being a gay JW in a community that so demonizes homosexuality.
• 

  Diogenesister

  ! Downright pogonophobia!

  Ha Ha ! Loveuni
• 

  Simon

  I have one family member in particular that is still in that I know will be adversely affected by this.

  Is that because they are gay or because they are effeminate / metro-sexual?

  How do you define "adversely affected"?
• 

  Diogenesister

  Even for gay hating wtbts it is grossly unfair for the many reasons posted, but mainly as Christians because it is even to them the practice of sin hence:

  1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor etc
  

  1 Corinthians 6:11 - "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

  Interestingly I found this regarding the subject:

  While the scripture may sound clear, the debate actually surrounds the use of the Greek word that this particular version of the Bible translates as "homosexual offenders." The term is "arsenokoite." Some say that it is a reference to male prostitutes rather than to two committed homosexuals.

  Yet, others argue that Paul, who wrote the passage, would not have repeated "male prostitutes" twice. Even others argue that the two root words in arsenokoite are the same terms used to prohibit any premarital or extramarital sexual relations, so they may not refer to homosexual relations alone.
  

  However, even if a person believes that homosexuality is a sin based upon this scripture, the next verse does say that homosexuals can inherit the kingdom if they come to the Lord, Jesus Christ.
• 

  Simon

  However, even if a person believes that homosexuality is a sin based upon this scripture, the next verse does say that homosexuals can inherit the kingdom if they come to the Lord, Jesus Christ.

  Which is pretty much the WTS belief - it's not whether you are born gay or chose to be gay, to them it's whether you engage in homosexual practices or not.

  They skirt around the issue of discrimination because of the biblical source of the beliefs - no one is going to be challenging that anytime soon (at least not in North America).

  I wonder, does any gay person (who isn't internally conflicted about their sexuality) ever chose to join a religion like the WTS that is so openly anti-gay? It seems like it would be akin to a black man wanting to join the KKK.

  Were it not for the fact that being gay is most often down to genetic chance, there would likely be very few gay people in the WTS nowadays. But unlike race, the genetics are not as clearly inherited so the pre-selection / exclusion hasn't already been made (why there are no new black KKK members).
• 

  Finkelstein

  Some good comments on Anthony Morris's ranting on Metrosexaul dressing.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U_sz8MsUqQ
  

  Just my own observation on the clothing industry ,

  The clothing industry is targeting toward selling from the age group of teens to middle age adults.

  Slender and fit body shapes are usually used to sell their products to both males and females.

  They don't focus or target their sales on to the elderly obese like AM.
  

  On this video notice how over the top flamboyant A Morris is dressed.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMG0lc_6NiI
  

  In some social environments and era he would be described as dressing like a gay or Poofter in the British vernacular. So if he can dress like that while on the main JW broadcast presented all around world , what reasonable right does he have to be overtly critical to how other men dress ???
  

  Maybe its because he's in power now, so he knows no one is going to pull him into the back room and counsel him on his dressing choices. ???
  
• 

  TakeOffTheCrown

  Homosexuality is a sin.
• 

  Pistoff

  So you were actually gay which would mean the appearance that they picked upon was correct (for them). In general, isn't appearance all they can go on unless you specifically tell them something? (this would seem to especially apply to matters of sexuality).

  Well, they could practice what they preach in the outline, which is that the important thing is the inner person. (1 Peter 3:3, 4)
  

  Simon, why are you giving the WT a pass, allowing that this is OK for them?

  It's not OK, it is not the same as before; this is putting into print what may or may not have been the unstated practice, of singling out and setting aside men with the outward 'appearance' of being gay.

  Magotan has eloquently stated what will likely be the rule going forward: singled out over the perception along that a man is gay because of his mannerisms.

  He put into words what it is like to be singled out; they did not know he was gay, they only made assumptions, making his life hellish I am sure.
  

  It's wrong, and also off target; does unwarranted and increased discrimination not upset you?

  Is that not what this site is about, for us to air our grievances about the WT?