Back to Basics...some questions.

[FlorenceHamilton]

I understand many of the dress code rules for women. In context, even the obssession with modesty mae sense at many times in history because the takeing of women for sexual purposes was commonplace and people would want to protect their pubescent daughters for marriage. I get the biblical comments that give the girls a hair obssession and the need to not have a painted face.

Where did the standards of appearance for men/boys com from? It clearly was not the bible. In biblical times, men had long hair and beards. They wore a sort of a dress. In the Jewish religion, Leviticus commands males to keep sideburns. And iltte boys keep a long piece of hair in fromt of their ears to give this appearance. The bible does not comment on a short cut as is done at this time. Although there were not pants as man wear now, they were commended not to dress as a woman. I am sure that the drapes of fabric around a woman covered more territory and did not allow for as much freedom of movement. This would be a good reason, considering gender roles, to make the dresses worn by the genders appear different. When did it become pants? And for the Hasidic Jews, Why the black suits and top hats? I am told that the black color was because European Jews were required to wear black at certain points of history. It has become a tradition. (Although if that is true, one would think that a rule imposed upon them by others would be kicked to the curb when the oppressive ruler is gone.) If I were orthodox, I would keep the peyos (sideburns), but dress like a rapper!

Does anybody know the history of "proper male dress" for a Christian young man?

[apple1]

Does anybody know the history of "proper male dress" for a Christian young man?

I truly believe that it has no roots in the Bible at all (other than the interpretation that there should be gender differences). Rather, I think it has mostly to do with the romaticizing of the 1950s as an "ideal" time, a time when women did not work outside the home, there was one male breadwinner, families were like Leave it to Beaver, strict gender differences were ob served, everyone went to church, etc, etc.

A false ideal, if it were. So the male dress and haircut of the 50s sort of became the "standard".

Just my opinion.

[Hane]

I truly believe that it has no roots in the Bible at all (other than the interpretation that there should be gender differences). Rather, I think it has mostly to do with the romaticizing of the 1950s as an "ideal" time, a time when women did not work outside the home, there was one male breadwinner, families were like Leave it to Beaver, strict gender differences were ob served, everyone went to church, etc, etc.

A false ideal, if it were. So the male dress and haircut of the 50s sort of became the "standard".

Just my opinion.

I couldn't agree more. Fundies jump through hoops to justify standards of male dress (which, in the past couple of centuries [in Western civilization], has changed nowhere near as much as female dress has), but, for the gals, they point straight back to the Bible. I see the same sort of thing among conservative Jews and Muslims as well.

[Rosa]

I don't know about Frum people, but I was taught that the preference for dark colors among Amish & Mennonite men is a relic of the 19th century - other people were picking up new chemical dyes that allowed for brighter and brighter colors, but the separatist anabaptists stuck with colors they could make at home or that were sober and cheap to buy - black was one of the really cheap mass-produced chemical dyes of the time, when reds and greens were expensive and sometimes hard to get.

[fundiefan]

I believe it is entirely contextual. In the 16th century what was standard dress for men is so far from what is standard now, or was in the 50's. It was also different in Asia than in Europe at any given time; different in Africa than in the Americas.

The way the world is now, we know what is going on on other continents all the time. Fashion is shared and styles cross cultural lines. Back in the real 'old days', before regular, reliable international interaction, people dressed according to their climate and their culture. Men and women alike.

Was King James not really a 'man' since he wore pantaloons and doublets and high heels with bows; hose and ruffles? Given the way some fundies worship him, or at least the bible that bears his name, you'd think he'd be the epitome of how men should dress. But, that's not the case because if a man dressed like that now, he'd be stoned by the fundies for being genderless or effeminate or *gasp* gay. (Never mind the speculation since he was alive that he was gay...).

In the 50's, men wore black suits and women wore dresses. They, too were attempting to fulfill some sort of ideal. It was after WWII when men went to war and women worked. The entire culture of the time was about getting back to home and family and perfection in life. It was, as it always has been and always will be, a facade. Real life goes on behind the clothes in every culture and generation and society.

[pomology]

I understand many of the dress code rules for women. In context, even the obssession with modesty mae sense at many times in history because the takeing of women for sexual purposes was commonplace and people would want to protect their pubescent daughters for marriage. I get the biblical comments that give the girls a hair obssession and the need to not have a painted face.

Where did the standards of appearance for men/boys com from? It clearly was not the bible. In biblical times, men had long hair and beards. They wore a sort of a dress. In the Jewish religion, Leviticus commands males to keep sideburns. And iltte boys keep a long piece of hair in fromt of their ears to give this appearance. The bible does not comment on a short cut as is done at this time. Although there were not pants as man wear now, they were commended not to dress as a woman. I am sure that the drapes of fabric around a woman covered more territory and did not allow for as much freedom of movement. This would be a good reason, considering gender roles, to make the dresses worn by the genders appear different. When did it become pants? And for the Hasidic Jews, Why the black suits and top hats? I am told that the black color was because European Jews were required to wear black at certain points of history. It has become a tradition. (Although if that is true, one would think that a rule imposed upon them by others would be kicked to the curb when the oppressive ruler is gone.) If I were orthodox, I would keep the peyos (sideburns), but dress like a rapper!

Does anybody know the history of "proper male dress" for a Christian young man?

I can actually answer the question about Hasidic Jews. Basically, that is just what traditional Jews wore in Eastern Europe, not because it was required (at least not by the time that Hasidism came around) it was just what they wore. But then members of the Jewish Enlightenment came along and were like "You need to stop speaking that mongrel, corrupt language Yiddish and you need to stop wearing clothes that make you look so weird and different, so you can actually fit into society and be respected by the Poles and the Russians and the Galicians etc. And the Hasidic Jews were like, "Hell, no, we don't need to try and fit into Russian, Polish, Galician society" and from that point on Hasidim dressed the way they did not because it was what they always had, but as an ideological statement.

Anyway, this is a simplification, but it basically illustrates the forces at work.

[bananacat]

I disagree that the dress code for women comes from the Bible. Current fundies would have been considered highly immodest in plenty of cultures throughout history, and too modest in some. There's not universal old-fashioned modest. Even "biblical times" is a really long era that had all kinds of changing standards. Skirts weren't always for women, and the thing about men and women no wearing each others close never meant to apply just to the bottom half anyway. Fundies take a little but of Victorian modesty and then try to apply Bible verses to it. Anything the Bible says about face-painting doesn't refer to make-up in general, and usually refers to specific practices where groups and cultures would be identified by their face paint. It's also fallacious to assume that forcing modest clothing on girls would prevent them from being kidnapped or stolen. No, the modesty standards were never about protecting daughters, even when they were viewed as property.

[Hane]

I don't know about Frum people, but I was taught that the preference for dark colors among Amish & Mennonite men is a relic of the 19th century - other people were picking up new chemical dyes that allowed for brighter and brighter colors, but the separatist anabaptists stuck with colors they could make at home or that were sober and cheap to buy - black was one of the really cheap mass-produced chemical dyes of the time, when reds and greens were expensive and sometimes hard to get.

The idea about black dye makes sense. During a tour of Amish country, we were told that the particular community we were visiting* allowed women and girls to wear all colors except red and yellow, because those were the colors worn by soldiers who persecuted their ancestors in Europe. Men were forbidden to wear mustaches for the same reason--because of the mustaches popular with those soldiers.

*In another Amish community a few miles away, we saw women who wore floral-printed aprons, some with rickrack edging. Among the "black-bumper" Mennonites (who were allowed to drive black cars and use electricity), all the women and girls wore white kapps and knee-length bib dresses with 3/4 sleeves, usually in pastel floral prints (this was in the summer).

[VeraAnne]

I don't know, but I do know that my in-laws left the UPC because they thought it was absolutely ridiculous that there were all these rules for "modesty" when women would wear dresses that were skin tight but didn't expose any skin. Meanwhile, my MIL was banned from singing at a wedding because her elbows showed half an inch when she raised her arms.

[mirele]

I see these fundie-style dress codes in two ways. First, they limit the freedom of movement of the women involved. Yeah, unless you want everyone to see your underwear, there's just some stuff you won't be able to do. Second, and more importantly to me, the men are allowed to dress conservatively, but normally, but women wear clothes and hairstyles that mark them out as different from the larger culture. In other words, the women are made to carry the burden of looking "different" from the world.