Is that because they are gay or because they are effeminate / metro-sexual?
Yes.
How do you define "adversely affected"?
Seriously? If I have to explain it then you wouldn't get it.
Oubliette
JoinedPosts by Oubliette
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
Oubliette
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
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.
-
17
We Had My Mom's Memorial Talk Today
by minimus inmost everyone was very nice.
i did get a couple of we miss you soooo much and an elder that said he might drop by someday to say hello when he gets a chance....i'm already prepared for him if he should show up.. over all, it got finished and i'm going to bed..
-
-
Oubliette
My condolences. It's bad enough to have to deal with the loss of your mother without all of the added drama of the cult behavior.
Hang in there, you'll get through this!
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
Oubliette
There are lots of things to pin on the WTS but conservative clothing?
Why do you keep insisting this issue is only about clothing and a dress code?
It is clearly NOT about just that. Indeed, it is about gender identity profiling based on several different things, dress being just one of them.
True, part of the outline addresses an individual's choice of clothing--something they could change. But the entire thrust of this document is really based on things that a person could never completely change about themselves: their basic core behaviors, mannerisms and speech.
If a person did try to change and/or suppress these things about themselves it would likely lead to serious emotional and mental disturbances.
Previously when I tried to engage you on this distinction you responded by pointing out that JWs and the Bible have always condemned homosexuality, as if that was news. It's not news. I know that. We all do.
The disturbing difference here is that this is not targeting homosexual acts, but it is targeting behaviors and personality traits that do not in and of themselves indicate or prove a person is actively engaging in sexual activity of any kind, let alone with those of the same sex.
It no longer matters if someone is a celibate homosexual, they are now in the cross-hairs of the Circuit Overseers and congregation elders simply because of the way they dress, behave as well as any mannerisms or speech that is perceived as "gender-blurring," whatever the hell that means?
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
Oubliette
I think you are taking it a bit too literally.
I know you're responding to Cappytan and not me, but I think he is right on target as you can see by my response to his post.
BTW, how "literal" is the right amount? This is sounding a lot like the "how tight is too tight?" question raised earlier, illustrating one of the problems with this kind of direction from the WT leadership: it's overly vague and gives elders that are already inclined to wield their authority without any compassion or discretion even more power.
t's not intended as a checklist in that manner.
I disagree. In fact, I believe Hassan does intend it as a checklist in that manner. Note that I was able to add eight more items from Hassan's B.I.T.E. model applying it to just this topic. I've been through this list several times before and noted that virtually every item on his list can be applied to JWs.
But if you disagree, please explain how you think Hassan's model is to be applied to cults?
They are signs, not pokemon.
I have no idea what that means. Care to elucidate?
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
Oubliette
Cappytan: Look at Point number 4 under Behavior Control in Hassan's BITE model:
Great point, but let's take a bigger "bite," shall we?
Behavior Control:
4. Control types of clothing and hairstyles
Let's not forget:
13. Discourage individualism, encourage group-think
14. Impose rigid rules and regulations-
Also add Information Control:
4. Encourage spying on other members
a. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
b. Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
c. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group-
And Thought Control:
2. Change person’s … identity-
And finally, Emotional Control:
4. Promote feelings of guilt or unworthiness -
56
Today's watchtower: obey us, no matter what
by Tornintwo intoday's watchtower:.
obey us, obey us even when it seems strange, obeying our man made hierarchy equates to obeying god, sacrifice your own interests, work for us, don't be independent, put your own interests aside, obey some more, preach for us, build for us, enjoy it, obey some more, forgive when we are jerks to you and mistreat you, accept your changed assignment even if it seems cruel and doesn't make sense, don't complain if we move you (eg.
) because you might have to move in the new world, remember you are being trained to obey, remember to put your own interests aside, that's the way we are designed to live - it will only make you happy!
-
-
Oubliette
"The passing of time should not cause us to lose hope that Kingdom blessings will be realized." - w15 08/15, p. 2
Really? And why the heck not?
It's been over 100 years and counting ....
-
30
The Bible can help JWs to stop judging homosexuals. Try this method.
by DATA-DOG ini ask, "did god cause evil?
god did it!
whether they answer with #1 or #2, you've got them.
-
-
Oubliette
Cofty: As a JW I would have said that either homosexuality is a choice or that some people have a tendency towards being gay but are free not to act on that.
Yes, but now--as has been discussed at length on another thread--the WTBTS is ramping up to try to change the behaviors of individuals in the congregation that are even perceived as being non-practicing gays (NPG).
Back to the OP, Data-dog, your logic is flawed because you assume that JWs follow the BIble. They do not. The Bible is merely a prop. Loyal JWs follow whatever the GB/WTBTS tell them to follow.
Let's review: It's a cult!
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
Oubliette
The only change is they want to extend this to now include people who only look or act gay
Point.
And if you've every known anyone like this, you know they cannot change their behavior, mannerisms or speech. It's simply not possible. It's part of who they are.
-
362
No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official - classed as 'disturbing'
by wizzstick inin 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.
-
-
Oubliette
The topic is "No 'Tight Pants' policy is now official". What do you think it's about - being gay?
Actually, I that is what I think it's about.
Have you not read the new CO's outline that started this discussion?
The first sentence of the section under discussion reads: "'The spirit of the world' is leading people to blur the distinction between the genders as never before."
Although the outline does specifically mention the metrosexual style and tight-fitting pants, it is obviously NOT doing so in reference to straight men.
On the contrary, the outline subsequently focuses on "effeminate traits … in one's bearing, body language and manner of speech" referring to such as "gender-blurring characteristics."
This is only superficially dealing with outward appearances. It is indeed an attack on the behaviors and identity of individuals who may or may not be gay, but are perceived to be by intrusive, overzealous elders who have now been given permission to go on a crusade against anyone that dresses, acts or talks in a way they don't like.