The trend of feminine and ultra-casual clothing for men has several theologians observing the influence of the “gender cult” and the decline of masculine dress, calling the church to model how men should wear clothes. A Kickstarter campaign launched in May to make a one-piece outfit known as a romper, which is traditionally worn by females, for men, garnered significant attention on the Internet. Also called a “bro-romper” or a “RompHim,” the publication of the effort in
a May 15 Esquire magazine article by a “decidedly anti-romper” Christine Flammia, sparked an “immediate and visceral” reaction, as noted in a subsequent article. The Kickstarter project originally intended to raise $10,000 to make rompers. Due to such large publicity, the project has now garnered over $353,000. Esquire asked several fashion insiders why they thought there was such a strong response. Some of them thought the idea was “fun and fresh.” Others called it “ridiculous.” READ MORE
Women aren’t even supposed to wear pants. Cross dressing started long ago. And for all of you saying this is “false”, or “they make pants for girls”, or “God doesn’t care about that”, the Bible calls it an abomination for the genders to wear the opposites garments. ABOMINATION. It also says women should adorn themselves in modest apparel. Not short shorts and skin tight clothes that leave nothing for your husband only. And women haircuts? Men with long hair and skinny jeans? People need to quit going to “contemporary” service and get to the word. Nominal secular churches are to blame. Not the world. Jesus said himself that this was do when he described condemning sin. Are YOU PRESENTING a life of Holiness?
Rompers look equally stupid on both sexes. Save them for infants and toddlers!
There is nowhere in the Bible that says women aren’t supposed to wear pants. The precursor to what we now call pants didn’t start until the late 1600’s. They were basically split robes that were tucked into knee-high boots to make horseback riding and other chores easier. Back in bible times EVERYONE wore robes. Men (gladiators, soldiers and such) wore short skirts. Nowadays if a man wears a skirt ( other than a kilt or a sarong and of Scottish or Irish or Pacific Island or some Asian countries descent) then he’s judged as gay or ridiculed.
As for hair length: I’ve never seen a depiction of Jesus with a short haircut. Men and women have had long hair all through time. Wasn’t King David’s son is depicted as having his head/ long hair caught in a tree and was killed while he hung there. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, George Armstrong Custer (along with most men) had longer hair with ponytails. Gradually men’s hair length got shorter as the 20th century approached probably due to a few factors, (going to war and having military standards for one. Short or no hair so if fighting the native Americans your scalp wasn’t as enticing) Then the 50’s came along and me’s hair got longer (duck tails, pompadoures anyone?) Then the 60’s: if men grew their hair long ( like back in Bible times!) they were ” rebellious.” So the pendulum has swung back and forth over the past 2000 years. Go to museums and look at portraits through the ages and see for yourself.
William (above) says that the Bible states various things about how people should dress otherwise it is an abomination. That women should dress modestly. Is he going to go to Africa and tell those desert-dwelling people to put more clothes on because it is immodest, an abomination and they’re not leaving anything for their husbands? Or for those men that believe as William, why aren’t you rushing out and buying your robes to wear, like back in Bible times? You’d be laughed at probably just as much and probably be mistaken as a terrorist. It wasn’t God that decreed those rules, but men in a ancient culture. You know why I say that? Because God created us NAKED! And it was all good.
And if you go by the above picture of the men in rompers: how can they say that they are wearing “women’s clothes” if pants are considered ” men’s” clothes and the romper is just a shorter version of pants?