Left cheers Harry Styles In Dresses on Vogue Magazine Cover

  • Thread starter Thread starter gam197
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tis_Bearself said:
48.png
gam197:
I am not sure they ever took an issue of what clothing people could choose to wear.
Click to expand...
Im pretty sure the Church would simply apply modesty and appropriateness standards, and isn’t concerned beyond that.

So, to me this is a big non-issue.
Click to expand...
No the Church does not get into personal choice of clothing as long as one is modest.

I do not believe that Candace is addressing that. She certainly knows the past and how flamboyant musicians are. She sees the clothing as a representative of the change in her generation, a change on the idea of gender fluid and gender sexuality and that is why she addresses it.

I have gone to a number of library group where little three year boys wear skirts. Does that matter, no. Baby boys wore dresses years ago.

On social media, little blips of a conversation that Candace expresses don’t go over clearly as they should.
 
Last edited:
Well they are false equivalences though. Robes and dresses are not the same.
 
Last edited:
I’m.44 and video games are a kind of hobby. We generation Xers grew up with them.
 
Yeah who cares.

He looks better in a dress than I do and I’m a woman.
 
Take Indonesia for example. The men and women both wear sarongs. Only difference is how it’s folded. Men wear theirs folded in a certain way and women wear theirs folded in another way.

Truth is, dresses and skirts aren’t any more intrinsically feminine universally. If you take Vietnam, women wear the ao dai, which has slacks. The South Asian Salwar Khameez also wear slacks partnered with a long tunic top.
 
Actually at night they wear a monochrome blue with a beret. The more colorful uniform is a dress uniform. The blue one is a utility uniform.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
I agree. And I believe that even during the time of Moses, the clothing that was worn by men and women was similar.
Customs (not fashions) are different between eras and even within eras. But it is so much fun to take the Torah out of context and use it to bash people about the head and shoulders.

https://www.christianbiblereference.org/faq_dress.htm
 
Last edited:
I wore something like that for PE in the 7th grade. Even the color was close. We called them bloomers. (San Francisco public schools in 1966). We didn’t have to wear the gloves and the sleeves were short.

P.S, We weren’t allowed to wear pants to school.
 
gam197 said:
I am sorry I have not had time to read this thread so posting only from one take on this. .Will read . Candace Owens took this on and I think that is relevant.
Click to expand...
Did you notice that you never answered the question? In some sort of converse (or convoluted) way, if Ms. Owens is against it then leftists must be for it?
 
Kind of disappointing to see how many Catholics on here seem to have no problem with cross-dressing. What’s the big deal with men wearing dresses quickly becomes what’s the big deal with letting people of the same gender get married in church?
 
WanderingPilgrim said:
What’s the big deal with men wearing dresses quickly becomes what’s the big deal with letting people of the same gender get married in church?
Click to expand...
That’s what the Jesuits call “a leap of faith”. In other words, it does not follow.
 
Yes it does. Cross dressing is wrong, by all accounts. It is immoral, possibly even sinful in many if not most circumstances (though I leave that up to a priest to discern). People who see nothing wrong with cross dressing will almost always see nothing wrong with gay marriage. After all, if two consenting adults love one another, who are we to judge? That kinda thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top