Men wearing tights - the objections - I

Funny, I thought that this would provoke some comments! I am completely underwhelmed by the response so far.

I am starting to sort out some thoughts for continuing the topic, but it would be helpful to know what people think about this. If you think that there are live issues here, please let me know what you think the live issues are.

If you don't think these are live issues, please bear with me. I know some people do - I would just like to let them have a chance to speak out.

Geraden

just wear lifes shit as it is enjoy yourself have fun

Hi Steven

Thanks for commenting. I am sure many (?most) people will think like you, and that is fine for them. You and they can get on with the business of enjoying their hosiery, which is one of life's little pleasures.

But there are people, and I was once one of them, who think there is something wrong about wearing hose if you are a man. I want to talk to these people show them, if they will listen, that these hang-ups or scruples (call them what you will) are based on misunderstandings of a factual and/or ideological nature.

Geraden

hi Geraden i think this series should be continued because by discussing issues openly the barriers that are there for whatever reason are slowly but surely eroded.i spent many years struggling with guilt about my love of wearing tights.It is only now in my forties do i feel the same as Steven

Ref the biblical quote, "A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the Lord thy God." Which gender actually wore hosiery first, becuase if it were men then surely this doens't apply to us wearing tights.

That is a very interesting point, Nygelon. Undoubtedly men wore tights before women did. So taking the point to its logical conclusion, the women who wear tights these days are an abomination to the Lord! There are several reasons why I personally would not want to go down that road! What do others think?

One day I will get round to continuing the series.

Geraden, frankly I didn't know about that verse in Deut. but it is an interesting point to discuss on who wore tights first. I think we need to consider the era and culture of that time in order to make good "personal" judgement of whats right and whats wrong to wear. Men wore tights during renaissance, which could be normal then but if we travel back in time, does it look weird to you? the same thing if you transport a woman in hose back a few centuries, is that acceptable? will she get stoned? this is really tough...

I wear tights during cold weather and I think its quite normal to wear them under jeans, unless you want some exhibition, i think thats a different story. You see, some guys just like the feel of tights under their jeans while cross dressers want to be seen, so i don't think you should lump them together. I wear mostly opaque tights and have no guilt at all especially in my dance and yoga classes. I'm happily married and have no intention of cross dressing whatsoever but I think tights are essential to me. let me know your thoughts.

nylonluvr

Hi Nylonluvr

Thank you for a good contribution to the discussion. I am glad that there is some debate on this issue now, though I realise that it will not be a live issue for many of the readers of this blog.

Yes, I would agree that what constitutes a man's garment or a woman's garment is not determined for all time by the Deuteronomic Code, though some fundamentalists might wish to take that line.

If the prohibition is still binding (and I really only speak from a Christian, not a Jewish or any other, point of view) then firstly, it is binding according to the modern meaning of the terms and secondly, it cannot be divorced from the question of motivation. That assumes that it is still binding, and there are some good reasons for believing that it is not, which I will come to when I get round to continuing the series. I find the comments here useful for illuminating the areas that I need to address when I do so.

Reading your second paragraph, I can relate to a lot of what you say about personal circumstances, wearing habits and general outlook on the topic. Like you, I do not see myself as a cross dresser, but one could argue for hours on the semantics of that phrase. I do not mind being seen around wearing tights – I have nothing to be ashamed of. I may sometimes cover up my tights out of consideration for others – that is a different thing. While I am not an exhibitionist, I have worn obvious tights to see if anyone would notice (some did, no-one said anything).

Yes, tights are important for me. Essential, I hope not. Really the bottom line for believers has to be this: tights must not become an idol; if they become more important to you than God himself, then you have broken the commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before me", and that one is binding.

Geraden

Geraden: As a Christian, I do have serious guilt issues, but not because of the Deuteronomy text. My feelings are derived from the fact that I do not wish to be shunned nor exiled from my church family which is important to my wife and me. A handful of our family do know of my dirty little "secret" and daily pray for my redemption. All the others have no idea. So what's a guy to do?... I keep it in the closet where they are concerned and only wear openly outside the community. Jim

Jim

Thank you for sharing this. I understand well the conflict because it is one that I have experienced, and to some extent still experience.

Is your wearing really a 'dirty little secret'? Secret, yes, for the reasons you have said, but dirty? I guess that you do not personally share the view that wearing is a sin from which you need to be redeemed? Are the feelings that you describe really of guilt, or of something else (fear of rejection, misunderstanding, ridicule)?

I belong to a traditional church, and like you I do not think it appropriate to make known my wearing among my fellow worshippers. Not because it is wrong, but because they are unlikely to understand. And we have to avoid causing our brothers and sisters to stumble.

Do you think that shunning is a real prospect? I can understand it as a matter of church discipline if you had refused a request not to wear openly in church (for the reasons of 'stumbling' that I mentioned), but on account of wearing alone, I would not see it as a very Christian response.

Why do members of your church family pray for your deliverance from this 'evil'?

** Because you are breaking the commandment in Dt 22:5? – Your comment implies not, but I might have misread it.

** Because of the sin of idolatry? – This is the most serious possible reason, but it is unlikely to be apparent to any but God and yourself. So again, I doubt it.

** Because of the impure thoughts and actions that they imagine are associated with wearing in your case? This seems more likely. But to the pure all things are pure, so why should they have such imaginations?

** Or because of some ill-defined sense that it is 'just not right'?

Here we leave religious and moral objections and move onto societal ones. If what you wear on your legs is morally indifferent, then a true Christian response would be to challenge the prejudice that rejects a man on that account. It is all about not being conformed to the world.

I take it that your wife understands and supports you, which is indeed a great bonus.

Regards

Geraden

I personally dont see anything wrong with a man wearing tights like what you wear nor do I see anything wrong with a man wearing pantyhose like me.I am a catholic.I wear pantyhose 24/7/365 they give me more energy,stamina and with the fact that I have diabetes and congestive heart failure I have to wear them for circulation in my legs.I think society is wrong to treat us the way they do.Besides what about these men who wear earrings and have pierced ears?That should be wrong too but society accepted that and women started that and men wear them openly so why cant anyone accept us who wear pantyhose and tights?I plan to try an experament and wear mine out in public with shorts.I think we should go on t.v. and see what people think.I live with my older sister who doesnt want me to wear pantyhose because she is afraid of what her friends and co-workers would think I personally DO NOT care what anyone thinks this is my body and I will wear on it what ever I choose and I choose to wear pantyhose!

Hi James

Thank you for your comment. I will come back to this theme some time!

Your sister is very kind, being so concerned about what others will think of you for wearing pantyhose and tights! Actually I suspect that she is far more concerned about what people will think about her for having a brother who wears such things! If you are not concerned, why should she be? (It would be different if you had children who might be teased and bullied at school because of what their Dad wears.)

Wear your hose confidently with shorts. Unless they are dark coloured opaque (what you would probably call tights) they will most likely not be noticed. Or if they are, people usually realise it is none of their business. (I suspect some might think that if they challenge you on the subject, they may be embarrassed to learn that you are wearing them because of some medical condition.)

Regards

Geraden

Oh thank the LORD!!! I'm not the only one trying to get a biblical perspective on this!! I'd like to know more of your background Geraden.

I'm now 31, and wasn't until I was 27 I found out I was actually NORMAL after talking to some Christian Counsellors. When I finally let out, it was like "... and your problem is??" Until then, I didn't know what to make of myself.

I've pretty much worked through all the issues, and I'm ok with it, I'm beleive God's ok with it, and I hope if and when I meet a woman, she'll be ok with it. It's just really ANNOYING that sexual expression for men in western culture is so narrow, anything that falls outside it is a perversion!

Anyway, there's is one issue I've yet to resolve. Let's say we engrave on stone saying it's ok for men tro wear tights. BOOM. There it is. It's now a social norm. Ok, what if a man wants to where a skirt? Will we allow that? I've got no problem with that. What if a man wants to wear an evening frock with make-up and the works? That, I have a problem with. I don't know why, but I do. I think a line has to be drawn, the question is where and how.

I think nylonluvr comments are helpful. Motivation has allot to do with it. I think the upside to Deut 22:5 is that God wants us to CELEBRATE our sexuality as the men and women, and not to confuse them. I think part of that is being able to keep distinctions between men and women. So it's very unikely a man will be mistakened for a woman just because he's wearing tights. Interestingly, it seems women have been throwing gender distinction out the window for the past 50yrs. But thats another story.

I've rambled on too much. I'll be interest in comments.

Hi Jason

Thank you for posting.

You want to know more about my background?? My story is in the How I started wearing and the About Me series.

I understand what you say about drawing a line somewhere. Different people would no doubt draw it in different places. Wearing a skirt would be ok for me personally; I would like the feel of nothing between my nylon clad legs, but I would not do it because it would be a step too far for my nearest and dearest. They put up with enough from me already!

It seems to me that there are two things here. One is to do with societal norms and expectations. These can change over time; become wider, become narrower. They narrowed in the 17th century under the Puritans, and again in the 19th century under the Victorians. In between and at present they are widening. Along with the norms goes the question of how far the behaviour in question deviates from those norms.

The other is as you say the motivation issue. Certainly one of the answers to those who see an absolute prohibition in Dt 22:5 is to ask what it is that is being prohibited? A case can be made out for saying that what is forbidden is the attempt by a man to pass off as a woman. In theological terms this destroys God-given distinctions between the sexes. In sociological terms it tends to weaken the fabric of society.

Whether or not this is the right explanation, it is not the only possible one, and I think that people who are confused anyway about their sexual identity would have a hard time coming to terms with it.

One day I will get round to collecting my thoughts and continuing the series!

Meanwhile I hope this helps.

Geraden

I want to add my own take on this for what it is worth. Reading this thread, there are a couple of things that made me think. As far as tights are concerned, tights were invented during the Roman Empire, thy're intent was for warmth for Roman soldiers in the colder northern climantes. What I don't know if today people are looking at deu. 22:5 backwards or using it as an attempt to make men conform to modern unwritten rules, however, I hardly see anyone follow that futher to deu. 22:30. As far as ear piercings, no that wasn't started by women, that was started by men on the high seas. The earring was I believe used as a form of identification. So when it comes to wearing tights, men had been wearing them as a normal item up til around 100 years ago, all one has to do is look at the Sears & Roebuck catalog from 1895 for proof of that.

Hi Jolt

Thanks for your comment – good to see you have time for things other than keeping hosiery sites on line (despite the best efforts of hackers and others!)

Of course you are right. If you read the whole of Deut 22, let alone the whole of the Deuteronomic Code, you will see that cross dressing is only one of a number of practices referred to as 'abominations'. Certainly one valid approach to this topic is to look beyond verse 5 at the range of prohibitions, then to consider in what context such prohibitions make sense, and finally to decide whether that context has an application for a current situation, say, of a man wearing tights. For example, Deut 22:11 prohibits the wearing of garments made of mixed fibres "as of woollen and linen together". Anyone who seriously thinks (on account of Deut 22:5) that a man wearing tights is a abomination, will surely have a hard job keeping the commandment in Deut 22:11. He or she will have to avoid wearing clothes made out of any of the many blended yarns that exist today, such as cotton/polyester or wool/nylon. Even a woman who wished to be scrupulous in this matter would have to avoid nylon/lycra tights and stick to the 100% nylon ones.

Geraden

"A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the Lord thy God." ('Deuteronomy' means 'the second law-giving'.)

• Does that mean women can't go around wearing pants?? Actually neither sex wore pants until centuries after the bible was written.

• A Catholic priest once told me not to worry; he has a picture in his room of Jesus wearing what looks more like a dress than anything else (btw - I'm not Catholic).

As far as I've noticed, not a lot of people really care that much about men wearing tights. I openly wear opaque tights in all sorts of colors, including some that are really noticeable (my favorite burgundy pair). My friends all know I wear them (they've either found out or I've told them) and none of them have any objections to it. Really, the main attitude seems to be, "Well, if it makes you happy and you like it, it's fine with me."

It just seems like only a few people object out of the many, and let's face it: do we really care what THEY think? If we wear tights out openly in public, we obviously don't need any confidence boosters or the support of anyone else to accept ourselves and our little habit.

Thanks Chris (and Pamela belatedly) for your comments.

Fashions do change, and a garment that may have been a man's garment at one time might become a woman's at another time (eg tights) and vice versa (eg, to some extent, trousers). So any moral theology has to take this into account or it is dead in the water. I am not a great fan of 'situation ethics' in general, but in this context at least it seems to have some validity.

If there is a binding prohibition (other than that against idolatry, which I mentioned in response to a previous comment) it would have to be along the lines of not attempting to pass oneself off as a member of the opposite sex, or of not wearing a garment for cheap sexual thrills. The former, because it tends to destroy the fabric of society, and the latter, because it is basically selfish.

"It does not matter what people think" is true to a certain extent, but with our nearest and dearest, it should matter to us what they think. That is not to say we have to agree with them always, but we should, out of respect for them, be prepared to negotiate and compromise on our activities. That is true in this context, as in any others that may give concern to those close to us (drinking and smoking for example).

Geraden

Found a link on related scriptural issues. Makes some good points: http://ww w.spiritualabuse.org/issues/standards/dress/pants.html

Geraden

Geraden, I have enjoyed reading this thread. I believe the scripture in discussion here could be related more to trying to pass ones self as the opposite sex. I don't feel that wearing pantyhose/tights is cross dressing, it is just an article of clothing that I like (a lot!)

That being said I cannot explain why I like them as much as I do. I wonder if it is idol whorship because I don't want to take them off and I do think about them a lot. Satan uses very crafty methods for distracting us from God so I have to wonder if this is the case. My wife doesn't like my wearing and wants me to pray to have this desire taken away, but I sure don't. I suppose I could look through the lens of whether this takes my focus from God. Well, my focus isn't very good, but there are several other things that also work against this. I would like to understand the motivation behind my wearing and why those of us with the nylon gene are so adicted to legwear.

Hi Littledog and welcome!

That is one probable explanation of the prohibition and the one that has most relevance for today. Passing oneself off as a member of the opposite sex can be seen as undermining the fabric of society, which in the Judaeo-Christian tradition is built upon lifelong exclusive heterosexual marriage.

Another explanation that I have heard is that cross-dressing was part of pagan fertility rites and associated with temple prostitution and the like. So you have the twin themes of idolatry and immorality intertwined.

Anything can be an idol if it comes between us and God. We are bidden even to pluck out an eye if it prevents us from entering the Kingdom (Mk 9:47 etc) – how much less pantyhose? But these extreme measures are for extreme cases, which hopefully apply to no one here.

Why do we like tights or pantyhose such a lot? Because they feel good to wear. I think it is something to do with the smoothness and silkiness. It you feel good quality tights like Gerbe Sunlight, Falke Seidenglatt, Oroblu Magie and Wolford Satin Touch, they feel much more silky than silk, even. Then there is the fact that they fit close, like a second skin, so you feel them on every inch of your lower body and legs. It is like being hugged all over, contained even. Maybe someone else can express it better than I can, but that is how I feel.

God made everything good, and what is good cannot be sinful in itself - only if it is taken to excess.

Geraden

Hi Geraden, I was reading back on some of your older stories. I’ve always wanted to consider and comment on the relationship of clothing to religion. I am a conservative Catholic with lots of flaws! I am a sinner in my own eyes and know I cannot live up to my own expectations. What I would like to express, is my thoughts on the relationship of clothing to religion. I would like to give my understanding to an interpretation of your quote from the bible. As you well know in the Catholic faith interpretation is mainly left up to the church, but there is always a level of understanding for the individual, in any religion, to figure out on his own.

One thing to remember when reading scripture, whether it is Old Testament or New Testament, is the fact that it is so old. Language had different meanings then from now. Between translation and the addition of more words to all languages, we now can better define our ideas. The statement made about men wearing women’s clothes and women wearing men’s clothes is a literal statement. But can it be better said in today’s words? I think it so. When one reads the Old Testament, many things are said that just don’t make sense in the literal terms of today’s language. I believe this is one of those statements.

What do I think it really means? Well I think it is really an idea. That idea is, a man should not try to pose as a woman and a woman should not pose as a man. The idea to imposter as the opposite sex can pose harm to others, but simply wearing clothing does not. At the time the context was written, they could only say it in a way they knew. We all know that one article of clothing is not what makes a man look as a man or a woman look as a woman. If I put on only a pair of tights or pantyhose, it would be very obvious if I was a man or a woman. It is more than that. If I completed my dressing with more clothes that oriented me towards my own gender, than I am not really trying to be something I am not.

I do feel clothing and religion have a relationship. In the idea of religion, part of the need, is to show respect to our creator and to our fellow man. I have always felt respect is inclusive of appearance. I feel if one is to go to a place of worship, he should be in respectable appearance. If one feels wearing tights or pantyhose over bare legs improves their looks in a respectable fashion with the remainder of the clothing chosen and with good intention, so be it. We should dress to be in good taste, not a spectacle of foolishness. Interpretations of fashion are always changing and what may seem foolish today may have been once very good fashion and may be again tomorrow.

P.S. As I consider my sins, based on the 10 Commandments, I cannot find any reason why, wearing pantyhose, might be a sin. God knows, I can find lots of other things I have sinned on!

We must not expect ancient writers, even inspired ones, to have written in our terms.

Words have changed their meaning; ideas have developed and become more refined and nuanced. We must not read the prologue of St John's gospel and expect to find there a discussion of the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son, as found in the creeds, but when St John says that the 'Word was God' he is expressing the same belief that was later to be expressed with much more precision by the Fathers of the Church.

Even more so with the Old Testament. Unless you have studied Biblical Hebrew (which I have, for my sins) you will find it hard to appreciate what a primitive language it is. A powerful language, but a primitive one nevertheless. Part of its power and primitiveness comes from a severe shortage of abstract nouns. Hebrew is a concrete language.

I agree with your reading of the verse. What it is saying, whether we agree or not, is that when men and women try to pass themselves as, or assume the role of, the opposite sex, they are undermining the fabric of society. Try saying that in a primitive language, and it will come out something like: A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the Lord thy God.

Geraden

hi or should it be ????????? why do we go on about the good book surely like m,e if you feel very comfertable wearing tights then good on you its your life and life is too shorrt is it the point that because i wear tights a skirt top & make up also stilletoes but no wig & certainly no false boobs to me this makes me a crossdresser not a transvestite as i do not wish to lookl like a woman but to wear what they wear im not breakin any laws nor am i slashing my wrists (no disrespect to any unfortunate soul whom has had medical issues that lead them to do this)or crying out for attention i just get on with my life strange however that i am gay & crossdress but thats my life & im very haappy sure nothing like when i get out of bed jump in the shower shave my legs & torso then moisturise my legs then pull on a clean fresh pair of tights FEEELS SOOOO GREAT god bless tights/pantyhose

Freddie,

I guess for many of us we can't leave the good book out. It is part of our lives and we need to feel comfortable with ourselves and how we percieve our life within terms of what is important to us. How we see ourselves does not mean we think we have condemed souls. We are mostly struggling to know if we may be doing anything wrong. That is a personal issue and not a judgement on others. If you are comfortable with yourself, than you do not have a problem.

ifeel i oughta apologise seems i have upset somebody may i explain i do not disregard the good book i currently own three copies of the holy bible (one of which is the johovahs witness version)also at one point i did have a mormon ( church of jesus christ and latter day saints {what a mouthfull})version but incadently if wearing tights/pantyhose is a sin well sod it ill be a sinner i believe (baer with me) that every sin or comandment was writing as it was back in the begining of time so as to give the populus of that time some gidence as we now have a heavily populated planet these rules at a guess no longer aply after all the good lord our creator could easily just put forth his hand to destroy us all correct me if im wrong but he hasnt as yet just a thought i could just as easily be wrong couldnt i

Freddie,

If you think you have upset me, you are wrong. I was just trying to explain, many of us struggle with our own thoughts of right and wrong. That is why we reflect on scripture. It is also interesting to think how our modern lives relate to ancient times. It is clear in the New Testament; we are not to judge others. There is good reason for that. We are man, full of flaws. God is infallible, that is why it is his job to judge.

manleggs sorry i dont feel any of us is wrong or right what we are is just human male poeple whom have a very innocent love or passion for wearing tights/pantyhose but with the modern world what we seem to have lost sight of is back in the 14th century or perhaps before and for a few centuries after lords of justice kings and men of gentry wore tights as part of every day wear

I had this teacher when i was at school, he was a right pirck he was, mr waters. He would ride his bike to school wearin black tights, through which we could see his hideous hairy legs, an anorac, trainers and a jumper, and when he got into school he would walk through the school wearin it, then he would change into normal trousers before lessons. At lunchtime he would sit at his own table in the canteen and have like a fuckin banquet in front of him. When i first passed my drivin test i was drivin my mums little brown mini, and i came up behind him really fast and handbraked the car right infront of him and asked him to be my bitch, u should have seen the look on his face!! I used to rag the balls out of that car all the time!!

You can't have it one sided:

There is no doubt that, in the minds of the general public, a woman wearing trousers is cross-dressing, and should therefore be disapproved of. We start to look at the moral and religious reasons behind this attitude.

TW You rephrase the article summary as: "There is no doubt that, in the minds of the general public, a woman wearing trousers is cross-dressing". This no longer works: it may have worked 75 years ago, but not now. However that is the whole point: we male tights wearers are just 75 years behind our trouser-wearing grandmothers. Avant-garde fashion has already made some moves in our direction. Public opinion is starting to move our way. The only question is how long to full acceptance? - G

Geraden,

You say it no longer works but the fact is women wearing trousers is no different to a man wearing tights (and a skirt or dress). If a man wearing tights and a skirt or dress is cross dressing than it implies a woman wearing trousers is cross-dressing. As you say things have changed a lot in the last 75 years and we have now reached the stage where women feel they are cross-dressing if they wear a skirt because they lack the confidence to stand out and be different. If things change as much in the next 75 years as in the last 75 years men will all be wearing skirts or dresses, and cross-dressing men will be wearing trousers.

Regarding the Biblical perspective, I had a pastor once who didn't believe women should wear slacks. I commented about Jesus wearing a 'dress'. He couldn't say that Jesus was an abomination, so he researched it and found that the clothing at the time had quite minor differences. I think the Biblical reference was actually meant to prevent dressing AS the other gender, not that any particular style belongs to one gender. I personally like the feel of spandex and love the renaissance type look, but like it better on women (but then, women just look better!).

Much of it is undoubtedly what we are accustomed to seeing. Women also wore leg coverings in cold climates, but they never lost the long dresses, so we don't see them. I would certainly think a man would look more manly if he wore a sword (today he might want an assault rifle or RPG) with his spandex. Armored look spandex (like some of the movies) would also be interesting.

Unfortunately the old testament story falls down when you look back throughout history only to find that men were wearing hose back in the early Renaissance period. The extract that follows refers to a very famous English king, King Henry VIII, and his son, Prince Edward, and can be found at the following website: http://www.renaissancedancewear.com/history_of_hosiery.html. Silk knitted hose had been available to the upper class since the time of King Henry VIII and perhaps before. We know that both Henry, and later his son, Edward, were given pairs of luxurious knitted silk hose imported from Spain. But Henry, apparently, continued to prefer cut and sewn hose, and poor Edward was not given enough time in this world to prefer much of anything. With this in mind it looks as though hosiery is Unisex, end of story!

It comes down to definitions, what is women's clothing and what is men's clothing? The bible does not say which is which. Men were wearing tunic, robes, tights and skirts long before the they were deemed to be female clothing. When the Bible was being written men wore tunics and robes, these were merely forerunners to the modern version called a dress. Except now women wear them because the conditioning of society. In the times leading to and including the medieval times men wore skirts and tights. The horse culture changed that. Societies that did not embrace the horse strongly did not change. Today the Greek's have a military uniform that has a skirted garment and white tights. That is also the Greek national dress for men. The Scottish also maintained the kilt. In cold weather leggings that looked suspiciosuly like tight would be worn. Sorry your interpretation of the bible is too narrow. I understand the Bible to say :"do not dress as a women if you are a man." I have worn tights for years, I have a beard and I am straight. I don not believe that I am any less than any other man. Women can wear what they want, so can a man.