We’re taking a brief trip outside the manosphere today to take a look at a little posting I found on Jesus-is-savior.com – which, as far as I can tell, is not a joke site — on the evils of women wearing pants.
No need to dilly dally around with jokes; let’s just get right into it:
One of the most controversial subjects in America’s churches today is pants on women; but there is NO controversy if you believe the Bible. 1st Timothy 2:9 clearly instructs women to dress MODESTLY, i.e., of good behavior. A woman’s clothing says MUCH about her character. I guarantee you that women who approve of abortion (i.e., murder) also see no problem with women wearing pants.
Except, one presumes, while they are getting these abortions.
At this point the author, one David J. Stewart, quotes disapprovingly from a song by rapper Chingy, also on the subject of pants, specifically jeans. I won’t bother to quote all of the lyrics; you can get the gist of Chingy’s thesis from this brief excerpt:
Damn Girl
How’d you get all that in
Dem Jeans
Dem Jeans
Here’s the video, if you wish to double-check this transcription.
Stewart continues:
Only a rebellious woman, who deliberately disobeys the Word of God, would wear pants. … Pants on women are adulterous in nature, and cause men to lust and sin. Jesus made this clear in Matthew 5:28, “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” Women who wear pants deliberately cause men to lust, and commit the sin of adultery. …
The average person today scoffs at the idea that Rock-n-Roll, Satanism, and immoral sex go hand-in-hand, but they certainly do. When Rock-n-Roll came to America, so did pants on women become mainstream. Naturally, feminism, witchcraft, abortion, and homosexuality came as well. Rock-n-Roll is straight from the pits of Hell. ALL rock-n-roll women wear pants.
Ah, but it turns out we haven’t really wandered too far from the manosphere after all – and not just because of the mention of feminism. No, what strikes me about Stewart’s argument – aside from the fact that it is completely batshit – is that it is not really very different than the arguments advanced by the critics of the Slutwalks: that the “immodest” dress of women causes men to “lust and sin.”
One of the most common complaints I’ve seen in the writings of the antifeminist slutwalk critics is that women want to “do what they want to, and dress how they want to, without facing any consequences,” as if women who dress in ways these men find arousing have in fact committed some sort of sin that requires punishment from, if not God himself, then from the rapists of the world.
The slutwalk critics invariably insist they’re simply passing along useful advice to women – don’t dress slutty or you’ll get raped – but the talk of “consequences” (and the choice of that word) shows pretty clearly that the real impetus behind the strangely vehement attacks on the slutwalks is the desire to punish women for dressing, and more importantly, doing “what they want.”
Say what you will about the folks behind Jesus-is-Savior.com, but at least their position on the evils of pants is consistent with their overall fundamentalist ideology. The slutwalk critics don’t really have an excuse.
EDITED TO ADD: And, conveniently enough, here’s some douchebag on Reddit making this exact slut-shaming “argument.” Pro-tip: I don’t think “responsibility” means quite what you think it means, dude.
Thanls, ShitRedditSAys, for pointing me to this. And to MFingPterodactyl for the sensible response.
VoiP: The best part of the Irving Trial is that he shopped for the friendliest venue a plaintiff can have for Libel, and lost. If one can’t win a libel case in England, then one can’t win it anywhere*.
*this of course excludes the newsletters, fanzines, blogs; and their comment sections, of fellow-travelling nutters.
Meller: So behave themselves means do things that DKM approves of.
So… just like women, if they please you, you love them and they can stay. If they don’t, wipe ’em out.
But I do have a question… why are Whites, and men, (as a class) exempted from the collective blame you heap on everyone else.
I think it’s because you are a sexist and a racist. But that’s because you write it all down, and I know how read for content.
VoiP: The best part of the Irving Trial is that he shopped for the friendliest venue a plaintiff can have for Libel, and lost.
My favorite part of the Irving trial is that the existence of the Holocaust (or, rather, that a sufficiently-educated observer has grounds to believe that it occurred) is now part of British legal precedent. I don’t think any other event can claim that status.
That’s is true. I was terribly happy, for all kinds of reasons, when Irving got himself so thoroughly slammed by the court it was a day of great rejoicing.
No, but it seems that men who have such a deep-seated aversion to female “pants-wearers” as you do are the ones with the masculinity or dominance issues that you project upon women who choose to wear pants. Perhaps female “pants-wearers” are, for instance, simply choosing garb that is more practical for whatever it is that they are doing.
You, and men like yourself, are the ones equating pants/slacks with masculinity while also equating male/masculine with righteous, God-given dominance over all, including women; so rather than viewing pants/slacks as just another article of clothing, you view them as a statement and see it as an affront to the righteousness of male dominance when women choose to wear them. That is the greater reason for YOUR objections to women wearing pants, or “wearing THE pants” as that is how YOU see it.
Nobinayamu, drinks are on me if you’re ever in TX. You rock, lady.
Mary Tyler Moore.
@Pecunium,
Thank you for the book recommendation. I have read some excerpts and reviews of Paul Among the People, and am looking into acquiring a copy. If you have any other recommendations regarding similar subject matter, I’d appreciate hearing them.
Marilyn Monroe.
Lauren Bacall.
I am going to deal with the above posts one at a time, and try to give the authors the attention which I think they deserve…
Voip-and Sherculese: Comrades: You both Suck too!! There! Happy Now! Go back to your sandbox.
Nobinayamu: I am certainly NOT “obsessed” with women’s curses! In fact, I find the subject rather disgusting. I cite them here because your posts are so venomous, and filled with hostility that, because I understand that women’s troubles often induce emotional instability, rage, and sometimes even hatred, I naturally assume that there may be a condition of PMS, pregnancy, menopause, or something else playing havoc with their hormones.
Kindly dispose of your disagreeable woman’s products in a hygienic manner, PLEASE!
Maybe I am not a ‘repulsive toad” at all. Maybe I am a handsome prince, who was turned into a repulsive toad by a feminist witch who was jealous of an affair that I had a long time ago with one of her friends. She turned me into a repulsive toad so that the affair would end, and now I await a beautiful woman to kiss me and break the spell.
Rutee K- See above with Nobinayamu. You might not have a woman’s problem! You are, however, severely disturbed! Come back when you are feeling better, possibly by being treated with some medication, or (if called for) some kind of demonic possession exorcism. You are clearly Non Compos Mentis (not of sound mind ) as of now, when you wrote your post, even for a woman! Like N. Lose the venom! Hostility and hatred has a way of working its way back very unpleasantly.
Et al… various posts citing various women who were glamarous and stunning even when wearing slacks–Greta Garbo, Marilyn Monroe, Kathrine Hepburn, Audrey Hepburn, Lauren Bacall, were some of the most stunning women of the XXth century.Of course, THEY would look great in slacks, especially since usually the other issues which I cited never materialized in the films they starred in and the focus was on the girl–and the story line–NOT dominance issues which ruin things for women, and everyone else! Just because some of the most beautiful women in history can get away with wearing slacks doesn’t mean the average woman–still less the average feminist–can. She usually ends up looking like one of the men her mother warned her against when she was a teenager,
P- I certainly never exempted “White people” from standards I apply to nonwhites. On the contrary, I think on all of my posts, I am MORE critical, and by large amounts, to white people than I am to nonwhites. Feminism. for example, is an invention of Whites, for example, not nonwhites, although they seem to be the main victims of the resultant family breakdown, the displacement of men from education and employment, the spread of STDs coming about by the appalling female promiscuity encouraged by (White) over-educated feminists, the consequences to boys of all races and nationalities, but especially Blacks orphaned–for all practical purposes–by single women having children from different fathers, etc. Any glance of newspaper material for the past half-century or so will demonstrate the merest surface damages inflicted by that horrid sisterhood from hell–without mentioning the CAUSE, or even worse, blaming the MEN for their own dispossession and disenfranchisement, while calling for MORE woman’s empowerment! The disease being confused with the cure!
This is certainly NOT exempting White people for standards applied to nonwhites! Go to the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, or even Ms. Magazine et al. (renegade- WHITE journals all) if you wnat the REAL Culprits!! Where did the oringinal infection of the feminist plague come from? It was NOT Harlem or Compton, Detroit or Southside Chicago, it was NOT Fort Greene Projects or Hunt Point, NOT Bed-Stuy or South Jamaica! It was–and is–spread from Harvard and the Ford Foundation, Yale and Berkeley, Columbia and UNESCO, SIECUS, and Princeton and Vassar,,,Aim your artillery where it belongs!
One more case where my alleged “racism” falls as dead as a doornail!! You feminists, to say nothing of male-feminist renegade lapdogs, on the other hand, have an awful lot to answer for…
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
I didn’t post Audrey Hepburn!
This is me posting Audrey Hepburn.
Oh, that jesus-is-savior guy is one of the biggest misogynists I’ve ever seen. Do a search for him over at Fundies Say The Darndest Things. The guy’s a nut.
As far as the movie “Hitlar” goes, I haven’t seen it, I have no intention of seeing it, but it seems to be about on your level, Voip! Enjoy!!
Totally fabricated, inconsistant–even on its own terms-and sloppily patched together ‘history’, economics, and politics seems to be YOUR specialty, not mine! However, don’t worry, sheeple will swallow anything, especially in the USSA. They have a lot in common with lemmings, if you think of it.
Have fun with your “graduate studies”. You, and your ‘famous professor’ certainly seem to have a lot of company, although I don’t know if that is good or bad.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
DKM: You are being an obtuse asshole. Would you please, please, PLEASE just GYO fucking W already?!
However, don’t worry, sheeple will swallow anything, especially in the USSA.
The United States Shooting Academy?
Why do these guys always find the concept of “learning things” particularly hilarious?
…actually, I think I know the answer to that one.
You know how it is; you kill just one Jew and then suddenly you’ve killed 6 million. Like eating Pringles. And then suddenly your pants don’t fit and you’re on trial for genocide.
Oh, DKM, you’re so fucking good at coming up with band names! The “male-feminist renegade lapdogs”? Classic.
I for one am thrilled to be a “renegade White” woman, cruelly failing to make white babies for years on end. DKM, my theoretical babies would have blue eyes and blonde hair! And straight noses and high foreheads! But they don’t exist and never will! Because I’m a renegade.
DKM
I think everyone here has seen your picture.
You are an aging balding overweight man between the age of 42-54. Not a handsome man never mind prince (have you claimed royalty now?) by anyones standards.
Ever the most extreme MRA’s have considered you to be nuts.
DKM You are not a founding father of the U.S. You do not make the rules. You are not your own kingdom.
I know however that you actually are living with schizophrenia. I know because I have a brother with your illness.
If your stomach acted in ways that other peoples stomach didn’t wouldn’t you take pause and perhaps see a doctor? Your brain is ill David and it can get help.
USSA:
United Socialist States of Amerika: A totalitarian police state that has degenerated into a disgusting third world slum out of the ruins of what was once the “United States of America”.
What the former USA–United States of America– is morphing into at the behest of a criminal oligarchy with global media/ political/financial influence. Feminism is just one, and not even the most important one, of the ways this oligarchy has of disrupting and corrupting our society, or what remains of it.
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller