- This topic has 35 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Does anyone know of a clear halachic reason for women not to wear pants?
The only one that i could think of is lo silbash. more on that later.
for tznius, a think that pants are more tznius, for a couple of reasons.
1. pants cover the entire leg, usually.
2. skirts ride up, especially when sitting. Pants don’t have this problem.
But even if its lo silbash, i don’t really understand it. Today, pants are as much clothing of women as they are clothing of men.
And if you want to say that it goes back to matan torah, then it should for sure be no problem. In those days men did not wear pants at all, so it is not clothing of men.
But, what i suspect the real reason for this practice is, an influence from the chassidim, whom we live amongst (mostly).
A brief history – until the 1970s, women generally did not wear pants. Since the 1970s, it has become acceptable, and fashionable, for women to wear pants.
Chassidim place a value on sticking to the clothing that was worn in Europe. Since pants were not worn by women in Europe, chassidish women do not wear pants.
Somehow this idea crept into our minds as well. But for us, it doesn’t really make sense. Our men don’t wear clothing that was worn in Europe, like the chassidim do, so we obviously do not keep this practice.
So in conclusion, i still don’t know the reason for this. Maybe you can help me out 🙂
Blame it on Chasidim, the scapegoats of the Modern Jewish World. Why don’t you see Hagaon Reb Moshe Feinstein’s Tshuva on the topic?
you forgot that pants create a very clear outline of the body, which is ossur as well.
Do you think Sephardim were influenced by chassidim in Spain, Morroco, Syria, Tunisia, Irak, etc?
It has nothing to do with Chasidim. Skirts hide the outline as opposed to pants which accentuate it making them very untzniusdik.
btw, it used to be considered very immodest for a women b4 it became common among the gentile population, because it outlines the body form.
An argument can be made that Lo silbash would possibly not really apply, since the pants made for women are made for WOMEN specifically. If we posit that women may not wear any clothing made for men, then that would mean that even though the following clothing is made for women, they should not wear hats, tailored shirts, sox, etc. which are primarily clothing items also worn by men. Since we know that this is not so, and women wear WOMEN’S shirts, women’s sox and shoes, women’s hats. etc. it would seem to make sense that they could likewise wear pants made strictly and obviously for ladies.
So clearly there has to be another even more compelling reason, and I would think that the fact that pants outline a woman’s body more definitively than a skirt does, thus calling more attention to her figure and parts of her that are normally less defined (v’hamyvin yavin), is more likely a reason (among others)for the issur. What I do not understand is why culottes (the best of both worlds, a wide-legged pants skirt, which looks like a skirt, and is not easily seen as having divided legs. This type of clothing is MUCH more tzniusdig than a regular skirt, as it does not fly up on a windy day, or ride up when a woman gets in and out of a car. So there has to be more to the inyan than I know about.
Does anyone know of a clear halachic reason for women not to wear pants?
yes, all the Poskim poskin that this is the Halachah.
as to their reasoning, you would have to read their Psakim and Tshuvos, or discuss this with a Talmid Chochum.
As to the logic you presented, this is not the way we determine the Will of our Creator.
It is because of the lack of tznius in today’s era that the OP is mistaken. Skirts and dresses are SUPPOSED to hide the outline or ‘tzuras haguf’ of a woman. Unfortunately today’s skirts do just the opposite. They accentuate the woman’s figure, hence the OP’s conclusion that pants would be more tzniusdik.
What I personally don’t understand is the tayvah of a pregnant woman to wear tight fitting clothing. I mean, like, hello? (If somebody could explain that, greatly appreciated.)
he didnt write them so that everyone could poskin Halachah for himself
i am a talmid chocham
we apparently disagree as to the meaning of that phrase. it does not mean a “talmudic scholar, or professor”
and, in the gemara an argument was accepted from anyone, if it made logical sense.
when you become a Tanna or Amorah, let me know
And if you don’t use logic, what then do you use? you just decide a halacha without even thinking about it? im sure that that would be much better, then trying to understand it.
the Poskim use the logic of Daas Torah to decide the Halachah. not relative Am HaAretzim like you and me. what do i use? i ask the Poskim
Logic just means clear thinking
everyone thinks they think clearly, when in fact they do not. thats why we rely on those with aas Torah
No talmid chochom would be publicly proclaiming “I am a talmid chocham.”
if you think you are a talmid chacham i dont think you really are. you might have a lot of knowledge but does that make you know how to pasken halacha? i never heard a gadol say he’s a talmid chochom- unless ur Joe
I know someone who married someone who liked to Ski, and there was no saying no to this, Her father was a rav and they come from a long line of well known Rabbanim . When the first ski trip came up. her father told her to wear Pink pants with flowers. Something so feminine that it obvious it was begged Eisha and no man would wear.
I have to applaud Mr. 80 here. The Poskim discuss the issue, look at the relevent Teshuvos.
As per the OP, The Gemorah Keddushin applies:
?? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???? ???????? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ?? ????
You are not interested in Halacha, but want to rile things up.
Ask your LOR, and Mods close the thread.
Mr Gruberfield: “according to that reason, women would need to wear some kind of wire frame to push their shirts away from their body so that the shirt doesn’t ‘outline’ it.
Also their sleaves would need to billow out several inches, so as not to accentuate their arms. “
Not so. The halochos of covering the upper and lower part of the body are different. Upper part must be covered, but outline need not be hidden.
Oomis: I think culottes are forbidden because of poretz geder – they are too similar to pants.
Mr Guberfield: The outline of arms is not as problematic from a tznius point of view as the legs. As for the upper part, if the outline is not hidden sufficiently then this is indeed a tznius issue. As it stands, plenty of ladies top garments do hide the outline.
It’s to do with what is liable to attract undue attention and cause improper thoughts rather than logic.
I think Oomis raises a good question regarding culottes, I can only surmise that the issue there is one of a slippery slope leading to less and less culotte type pants.
Mod-80 go easy, Mr Guberfield is surely allowed to raise a valid logical point as long as ultimately he defers to whatever is paskened and he has not given any indication that he wouldn’t. He was just trying to understand. If you feel I am wrong to defend him, please post back.
i dont wish to carry on this conversation further
thank you for your responses
now i get it
after quark2 was blocked he came back as mr.guberfield
quark2 was unblocked after about an hour
i think its time to reconsider
this also supports my feeling, shared by gavra, that this was nothing but an anti-frum troll post.
80: Quark2 is really a talmid chacham, check out his recent posts on the Tzizus thread. I don’t think he’s Mr Guberfield.
the reason why the whole thing is a question is because women dont really understand why they are wearing skirts and are wearing skirts that are worst than pants so on those women yeah its a question- why are you wearing skirts in the first place?
I have a related question. Given that the issue with pants is pissuk raglayim, not lo silbash (which is a fairly obvious point in our day) how did it apply in times and places where it was normal for women to wear pants? Were they assur then because of pissuk raglayim or was it muttar because it was the standard and wouldn’t draw attention?
This reminds me of a funny story.
I was on a date, and we stopped at a outdoors store to browse. My date remembered she wanted to buy snow pants, so we shopped for snow pants. Then, she went to try them on. By me by, she wanted an opinion, so I went and found some other lady to give an opinion.
Now, why in blazes did I not just give my own opinion?
They were snow pants, big and poofy- no tznius problem I assume.
As far as beged ish, what’s the difference if I see it or not?
(Aside: this was a great date. There had been a blizzard the day before, so I went to an REI, rented cross country skis, and took them to a forest preserve.)
skirts show the legs, how are they more tznius?
this probably has more to do with minhag and tradition
it looks like a couple of people who posted here disagree about the upper portion of the body, if it is different from the legs binogeah outlining
80 i think that you might be over reacting. It is just an honest question trying to get to the bottom of this minhag. not everyone who disagrees with you is anti frum, you know. you can be dan lechaf zchus.
maybe i *am* overeacting somewhat
but i dont think so
almost every post of this poster, in both of his incarnations, is anti-frum
80% are deleted. YOU dont see those posts. thats my job, to make sure you dont.
i dont see a reason to dan l kaf zchus in this case just because he ended this particular post with an innocent question
and since quark has been here he has used one and only one ipaddress. no one else has ever used it. within an hour of quark being blocked mr whatever began posting from his ipaddress
Mod- I also think you’re being harsh. You’re allowed to question psak (though you still must follow it), and so far I haven’t heard a good answer to the question (and it’s one that’s been bothering me for a long time).
It seems the shape of the legs argument only applies to tight pants, but loose pants (and I think they are beginning to lose their status as beged ish) should be just as tzniyus as pants.
I heard people give the slippery slope argument (loose pants lead to tight pants), but according to that logic, women shouldn’t wear skirts because it may lead to tight or short skirts, they shouldn’t wear shirts because it mau lead to short sleeves or worse, maybe they shouldn’t leave the house at all! It’s all a slippery slope!
not everyone who disagrees with you is anti frum, you know
and that wasnt very nice. how about being dan l kaf zchus yourself. just maybe i have good reason for what i do. just maybe you dont have the whole picture.
- The topic ‘Skirts and Judaism’ is closed to new replies.