02-17-2021, 08:03 PM
“A man’s good work is affected by doing what he does; a woman’s by being what she is.”
A Note on Customs…
It is necessary to mention that custom can never determine modesty. As we know, custom is not necessarily guided by the True Faith as is evidenced by the people of primitive cultures who, by our standards, live in nakedness. As missionaries spread the Gospel and primitive people became converted, there were naturally taught and encouraged to dress modestly. This was only natural.
Custom also varies with the country and therefore, with the belief of the people. As it is not fixed on the True Faith it cannot be looked to for guidance, though we can learn something from it. The people of India who are Hindu in their belief have a custom by which women wear a trouser like garment under a long slitted tunic. Some would argue then that trousers are acceptable for women. My first response is that since these are people whose Faith is not the True Faith; we should not look to them for guidance in this matter. But it is interesting to note that in India there is still a noticeable difference between the dress of men and women. While women often have richly colored clothes, men have plain colors. So, the difference between men and women is maintained in these cultures. As in the case of biblical clothing it seems at first that the men and women both wore the same. But this is not so. It is known, that in the Bible times, the men’s clothing was but narrower and was shorter. They also wore a pair of short trousers under their robes and women did not. So, when men had some laborious type work, they would pull up their robe and tuck it into their short trousers, this was called in the bible, ‘girding up your loins’. Women’s robes, were fuller and of more vibrant colors compared to the simpler colors of the men’s. Again, the distinct difference between the men and women was maintained. And it is still maintained today in eastern cultures.
But here, in the West, there was a distinct difference in men’s and women’s clothing up until just the last 40 years or so. Our public bathrooms today still note this difference. The men’s bathroom has a figure in pants while the women’s have a figure in a skirt/dress. Trousers in the West have always been solely men’s attire. Proper clothing for women consisted of dresses which varied in style but were always dresses. You could easily determine the difference. So, in Deut. 22:5 where we are told not to wear the clothes of the opposite sex, we take this to mean that trousers are appropriately, men’s attire, as I will attempt to show you.
It is interesting to take note of women’s dress throughout history. Throughout our history we can see only one mode of dress for women: dresses or skirts. There simply was no other proper attire. The styles changed from slim to quite large, especially among the richer classes. Among the pioneers the style changes were less severe due to lack of money and so varied only somewhat. The women wore anywhere from 2 to 15 petticoats at a time to get the fullness needed for the style of the day. These petticoats were quite heavy and were also dangerous to the women for if they ever fell into water they would surely drown just from the weight. Also, the bulk of the fabric was quite flammable and many a woman died tending a fire when a spark got on her dress. This did not deter women from dressing this way, as thy continued to dress this way until the 1830-40’s or so when the hoop was introduced. With the introduction of the hoop, the weight of the bulky clothing was gone, but they still were femininely dressed.
One can see through all these decades one thing that did not change and that was the length of the dress. Never did it ever pass above the ankle. 23. It went through many variations in style, some admittedly quite ridiculous, but it was unheard of for it to ever rise above the ankle. Never would a woman ever consider wearing pants as this was solely for men. Even the rugged and hardworking pioneer women who had to struggle to do much hard work went through great trouble to continue to work in their dresses. Europe was much the same. Most of us are too young to remember the age when women strictly wore dresses, and as Hillaire Belloc says in “How the Reformation Happened” that what does not happen in our lifetimes is soon forgotten.
We are all aware of the roaring twenties, which began very shortly after Our Lady of Fatima’s prediction in 1917, that “Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord very much.” Here we see the introduction of the mini skirt after centuries of women having their legs covered. Mary Quant of London, the dress designer who designed the mini-skirt was quoted in Newsweek, “Mini-skirts are symbolic of those girls who do not want to wait until dark to seduce a man into bed.” The intentions of the designer are sadly obvious in the mini-skirt. How long will it take us to respond to Our Lady who is still waiting for us to hear her request? 26.
World War II, brought the women out to help the war effort in the factories and out of necessity they began to wear men’s pants for safety. And they were just that, MEN’S PANTS. Back then it would have been considered indecent for a woman to wear pants and she would have been considered of ‘ill repute’. Any decent man would not consider going out with a girl who wore them. But they soon became a habit liberating women, or so they thought, of their confining dresses. It is interesting to note that shortly after trousers became commonplace, women also began to leave their places at home and infiltrated the work force. So, in reality, trousers liberated women to be in the work force. The 1940’s soon turned into the 1950’s and pants quickly became the mainstay as each decade passed. The time of feminine women in dresses was slowly fading and soon forgotten. Ironically, the idea of the working mom became commonplace by the late 1950’s and today is still believed to be a necessity.
If we look at the past 50 years, can we honestly say that the world is in a better state? Has the liberation of women into the work force helped out families to become stronger? As Bishop Williamson said to me during a phone conversation, “When you take away the mothers, where are the children?” We see more broken families, abortion and illegitimate children today than ever. Rampant promiscuity, homosexuality and impurity are the sins of this age and we cannot dispute this fact. Trousers having cause the defeminization of women also led to a loss of their sense of modesty. Growing up without this natural protection of modest femininity there is a sense of ‘freedom’. This ‘freedom’ is the case of many a girl’s promiscuity, when she is too young to use her sense of reason. Dresses protect, nurture and help develop this natural modest femininity that girls need and that trousers steal from them. Is it any wonder how these young unknowing girls, manage to find themselves teenage mothers having to face the issues of abortion or early motherhood?
When the heart of a mother has been defeminized, we see the destruction of the family. “If the man is the head of the family, the woman is the heart, as he occupies the chief place in ruling, so she may go and claim for herself the chief place in love.” Pope Pius XI. With the heart of the home missing, the family simply falls apart. The center of love is gone. Women are the glue that holds families together and the embodiment of true womanhood is what distinguishes a woman from a man – her feminine character. Her gentleness, humility, gracefulness and femininity are all the jewels that make a woman truly shine and be what she should be. She is known for her compassion, “She bears the sins of the world in her heart.” 13 and by doing so she becomes the instrument by which God bestows the graces of conversion on mankind. What a beautiful duty we have in being a woman! 13.
GK. Chesterton
Chapter Four (Part 1):
The Disappearance of True Womanhood;
A look at the secular history of dress…
A Note on Customs…
It is necessary to mention that custom can never determine modesty. As we know, custom is not necessarily guided by the True Faith as is evidenced by the people of primitive cultures who, by our standards, live in nakedness. As missionaries spread the Gospel and primitive people became converted, there were naturally taught and encouraged to dress modestly. This was only natural.
Custom also varies with the country and therefore, with the belief of the people. As it is not fixed on the True Faith it cannot be looked to for guidance, though we can learn something from it. The people of India who are Hindu in their belief have a custom by which women wear a trouser like garment under a long slitted tunic. Some would argue then that trousers are acceptable for women. My first response is that since these are people whose Faith is not the True Faith; we should not look to them for guidance in this matter. But it is interesting to note that in India there is still a noticeable difference between the dress of men and women. While women often have richly colored clothes, men have plain colors. So, the difference between men and women is maintained in these cultures. As in the case of biblical clothing it seems at first that the men and women both wore the same. But this is not so. It is known, that in the Bible times, the men’s clothing was but narrower and was shorter. They also wore a pair of short trousers under their robes and women did not. So, when men had some laborious type work, they would pull up their robe and tuck it into their short trousers, this was called in the bible, ‘girding up your loins’. Women’s robes, were fuller and of more vibrant colors compared to the simpler colors of the men’s. Again, the distinct difference between the men and women was maintained. And it is still maintained today in eastern cultures.
But here, in the West, there was a distinct difference in men’s and women’s clothing up until just the last 40 years or so. Our public bathrooms today still note this difference. The men’s bathroom has a figure in pants while the women’s have a figure in a skirt/dress. Trousers in the West have always been solely men’s attire. Proper clothing for women consisted of dresses which varied in style but were always dresses. You could easily determine the difference. So, in Deut. 22:5 where we are told not to wear the clothes of the opposite sex, we take this to mean that trousers are appropriately, men’s attire, as I will attempt to show you.
It is interesting to take note of women’s dress throughout history. Throughout our history we can see only one mode of dress for women: dresses or skirts. There simply was no other proper attire. The styles changed from slim to quite large, especially among the richer classes. Among the pioneers the style changes were less severe due to lack of money and so varied only somewhat. The women wore anywhere from 2 to 15 petticoats at a time to get the fullness needed for the style of the day. These petticoats were quite heavy and were also dangerous to the women for if they ever fell into water they would surely drown just from the weight. Also, the bulk of the fabric was quite flammable and many a woman died tending a fire when a spark got on her dress. This did not deter women from dressing this way, as thy continued to dress this way until the 1830-40’s or so when the hoop was introduced. With the introduction of the hoop, the weight of the bulky clothing was gone, but they still were femininely dressed.
One can see through all these decades one thing that did not change and that was the length of the dress. Never did it ever pass above the ankle. 23. It went through many variations in style, some admittedly quite ridiculous, but it was unheard of for it to ever rise above the ankle. Never would a woman ever consider wearing pants as this was solely for men. Even the rugged and hardworking pioneer women who had to struggle to do much hard work went through great trouble to continue to work in their dresses. Europe was much the same. Most of us are too young to remember the age when women strictly wore dresses, and as Hillaire Belloc says in “How the Reformation Happened” that what does not happen in our lifetimes is soon forgotten.
We are all aware of the roaring twenties, which began very shortly after Our Lady of Fatima’s prediction in 1917, that “Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord very much.” Here we see the introduction of the mini skirt after centuries of women having their legs covered. Mary Quant of London, the dress designer who designed the mini-skirt was quoted in Newsweek, “Mini-skirts are symbolic of those girls who do not want to wait until dark to seduce a man into bed.” The intentions of the designer are sadly obvious in the mini-skirt. How long will it take us to respond to Our Lady who is still waiting for us to hear her request? 26.
World War II, brought the women out to help the war effort in the factories and out of necessity they began to wear men’s pants for safety. And they were just that, MEN’S PANTS. Back then it would have been considered indecent for a woman to wear pants and she would have been considered of ‘ill repute’. Any decent man would not consider going out with a girl who wore them. But they soon became a habit liberating women, or so they thought, of their confining dresses. It is interesting to note that shortly after trousers became commonplace, women also began to leave their places at home and infiltrated the work force. So, in reality, trousers liberated women to be in the work force. The 1940’s soon turned into the 1950’s and pants quickly became the mainstay as each decade passed. The time of feminine women in dresses was slowly fading and soon forgotten. Ironically, the idea of the working mom became commonplace by the late 1950’s and today is still believed to be a necessity.
If we look at the past 50 years, can we honestly say that the world is in a better state? Has the liberation of women into the work force helped out families to become stronger? As Bishop Williamson said to me during a phone conversation, “When you take away the mothers, where are the children?” We see more broken families, abortion and illegitimate children today than ever. Rampant promiscuity, homosexuality and impurity are the sins of this age and we cannot dispute this fact. Trousers having cause the defeminization of women also led to a loss of their sense of modesty. Growing up without this natural protection of modest femininity there is a sense of ‘freedom’. This ‘freedom’ is the case of many a girl’s promiscuity, when she is too young to use her sense of reason. Dresses protect, nurture and help develop this natural modest femininity that girls need and that trousers steal from them. Is it any wonder how these young unknowing girls, manage to find themselves teenage mothers having to face the issues of abortion or early motherhood?
When the heart of a mother has been defeminized, we see the destruction of the family. “If the man is the head of the family, the woman is the heart, as he occupies the chief place in ruling, so she may go and claim for herself the chief place in love.” Pope Pius XI. With the heart of the home missing, the family simply falls apart. The center of love is gone. Women are the glue that holds families together and the embodiment of true womanhood is what distinguishes a woman from a man – her feminine character. Her gentleness, humility, gracefulness and femininity are all the jewels that make a woman truly shine and be what she should be. She is known for her compassion, “She bears the sins of the world in her heart.” 13 and by doing so she becomes the instrument by which God bestows the graces of conversion on mankind. What a beautiful duty we have in being a woman! 13.