They have young people battling anxiety and depression and a high rate of suicide, but they are obsessing about this? I thought this was just a pet peeve of tight pants Tony, an off hand remark soon forgotten, but no, they really are going to go there. It's just a fashion trend, not really specific to gays, nor are the pants usually tight enough to be immodest, I personally like that whole hipster look. That they have the lowest retention rate of any religion, yet continue to fixate on how pants fit shows just how clueless and out of touch they are.
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Simon
Simon, I think you're missing the point.
Both the language and the intent of the letter are disturbing for their vagueness.
So what do you think should be the alternative? WTS provided clothing? Mandated dimensions for people? That is simply not realistic and demanding it is petty and misguided IMO. Making a big deal over unimportant triviality diminishes genuine complaints as just more of the grumbles by people who find fault with anything and everything.
They are a conservative christian religion - is it really a surprise that they are not at the forefront of fashion trends promoting them? It's not the military where someone will cut your hair and give you the approved uniform to wear.
Most dress codes are not absolutes, they are guidelines that define a spirit and yes, someone someplace will interpret them. In one cong you may get some hard-liner and in another you may get a more relaxed approach. This has always been the case.
I'm sure Disney-Land or Apple Stores have standards that their people have to measure up to, same for the Salvation Army and Walmart.
If our complaints about the WTS would equally apply to many other groups and companies then isn't it a sign that we're maybe going a bit too far in our condemnation and getting a little carried away?
-
Oubliette
Simon, it's not really about clothing.
It's really about the out of touch men on the Governing Body trying to enforce their antiquated ideas of what is and what is not acceptable on people that possibly have gender and sexual identities issues that do not conform to the overly restrictive beliefs of the cult.
The Governing Body is trying to "solve" complex personal identity issues by mandating a nebulous and ill-defined dress code. And they are attempting to do it by sending vague and not well thought out directives to people in positions of authority that lack any kind of appropriate sensitivity training in dealing with these matters.
Many people's lives are going to be very messed up because some overzealous elders don't like the way they dress, walk or talk.
THAT is worthy of ridicule.
How do you not get that?
-
done4good
The difference is a company does not judge a person's worthiness by their style of dress. The WTS does.
A person can leave a company if they find the dress code to be too constricting for their taste. This is a whole different matter. While certainly not as important as direct abuses, it is a type of ambient abuse in of itself, and very much a legitimate concern to be noted. No one is getting carried away by bringing up such points.
d4g
-
blondie
What do they do when it is an elder's wife that wears dark blue or black nail polish after the CO said it was wrong or wearing multiple pierced earrings in each ear....? It will be hard when it is the elders and their families that are disobeying these "rules"
-
Simon
Whether some particular congregation applies rules in a fair and equal manner is a different issue to what those rules are and whether they should be allowed to have them. Of course they are differences between congregations - that would be apparent when you got to a district convention or visited another cong and things that were 'wrong' in your hall seemed OK in others.
Look at it this way. Would you honestly try to convince a 3rd party that the WTS is an "evil cult" by claiming that the conservative christian religious group was using scriptures about modesty to say people shouldn't wear immodest clothing when doing their ministry?
I think you'd get blank stares and inside the person would be thinking "this bloke is some obsessive nutter, how do I get away ...".
Both the language and the intent of the letter are disturbing for their vagueness
it's not really about clothing
You seem to be deciding what it's about for you. I'm talking about what it actually says which is clearly all about fashion. You can't have it both ways - that it says something terrible but at the same time is vague and unclear.
-
Oubliette
Would you honestly try to convince a 3rd party that the WTS is an "evil cult" by claiming that the conservative christian religious group was using scriptures about modesty to say people shouldn't wear immodest clothing when doing their ministry?
Of course not.
There is plenty of other evidence this religion is a high-control, authoritarian cult. I'd use that.
But you failed to address my point: these "rules" are not about clothing; they are an ill-conceived attempt at controlling behavior.
I had my own retail business years ago and I had a dress code for my employees. It was very specific. For example: No visible body piercings other than earrings.
This WT letter gives very vague guidelines on what is "appropriate." Again, for example: How "tight" is too tight?
This kind of language is a license for power-hungry, homophobic elders to ride roughshod over people they don't like.
When I had my business, I in no way tried to censor, control or otherwise any exert pressure on my employees to conform to my personal standards of what is "appropriate" or not concerning their sexuality or other aspects of their personal life and identity. That was their business, not mine.
This WT letter is an attempt to control exactly those things that should be off-limits.
Again, this is not really about clothing. It is about trying to control behavior.
-
StephaneLaliberte
Simon, I understand what your saying and from that angle, you are right, it is defensible. However, I see it as a major problem in that they vigorously protect the right of pedophiles to share in the ministry, and, yet, have no issue taking that right away from someone who "looks" gay.
They want to start regulating who can share and who cannot? They better start with the pedophiles. Otherwise, this shows me that they are more terrified of what they look like rather then actually protecting kids!
-
DATA-DOG
Disney or Apple or even Starbucks have uniforms and dress codes. The difference is that the aforementioned organizations are not discriminating against gender, or sexual orientation. They are not using psychological warfare to abuse individuals who may already be somewhat compromised because they are trying to find themselves in this world. Starbucks is not trying to "out" people of a particular orientation. They don't have secret meetings with District Managers, informing them to seek out and pressure homosexuals.
The WTBTS is abusive. PERIOD. Shedding light on their abusive tactics is not petty, it's never a waste of time, it is totally justified and necessary. Who cares if it's Cedars, or Jwstruggle, or JWN, or some other blog that's bringing this to light? It needs to be done.
People don't hate themselves and commit suicide because Starbucks doesn't allow giant gauges or three earrings to be worn during business hours by employees. They don't commit suicide because Apple asks their emloyees to be neat or wear a company shirt. They don't commit suicide because Disney asks them to arrive on time and smile at children, whether or not you feel like Snow White on Monday morning.
There is common sense, and then there is abusive, controlling, soul crushing, life threatening behavior. If you want to wear three earrings, you have the freedom to leave Starbucks and work somewhere else. Your life is not affected negatively, you still have your friends and family. That is a world apart from a letter to Church officials, asking them to actively seek out and discriminate against members who look "gay."
Anyone who cannot see how wrong that is, needs to take a step back and reason it through. The WTBTS wants uneducated Elders, men with no training in any type of counseling, men who think that chanting, "I'm an integrity keeper", and baking cookies is a remedy for suicidal thoughts, to approach "gay looking" people with an ultimatum. "Stop looking "gay" or we will forbid you to serve God in a specific manner."
This comes down to the "special relationship" that exists between Elders and the flock. Just like a Doctor, or Fireman, or Teacher, there is an implied trust that is legally recognized. Some have used their position and that "special relationship" to abuse others. That is immoral and deplorable.
A rank and file witness believes that Elders are Dukes and Stars of Revelation, secret weapons against evil. What message is sent to these "gay looking" members when Elders strips them of "privileges"? The message is abusive, "You are bad. You are flawed. You don't deserve to serve God in such and such manner. You are the problem. You are like Satan. Change or else."
This letter and any talk outline that shares its sentiments are abusive and discriminatory. It's not a small thing. It needs to be brought into the public eye. The WTBTS needs to be publicly shamed. They need a taste of their own medicine. When every single door that opens to a JW is fully aware of the abusive nature of the leadership, then it will be enough. Until then, we must continue to expose the abusive hate-speech and hate crimes of the WTBTS.
Really, that's what this policy amounts to. It's a thinly veiled form of hate. It will have far reaching consequences, like all bullying tactics. It's no different from demanding that certain races sit in the back of the bus, or drink from a different water fountain. It's disgusting, and that cannot be overstated.
Rant over...
DD
-
Oubliette
Stephane: They vigorously protect the right of pedophiles to share in the ministry, and, yet, have no issue taking that right away from someone who "looks" gay.
This is a HUGE inconsistency and yet further evidence of how clueless the men running this religion really are.
They have a long history of covering up criminal activity against children, yet they obsess over petty issues such as the cut of a man's coat or the color of his socks.
It is really ridiculous.