Sunday, November 29, 2009

#101-The Bathroom Door Argument


When discussing biblical principals with secular individuals it often becomes difficult to employ scripture in the conversation as a justification for Apo-Pento principles. Often the creative mind is forced to seek an extra-biblical reference point by which to illustrate our reasoning.

Such tactics have been used in the debate against homosexuality by declaring that those types of relations are not found in nature and henceforth are un-natural.

So when discussing the often hotly debated pants-vs.-skirts topic of apostolic women we find ourselves in a corner, against the ropes, taking blow after blow from the opposing forces of this world who seem to believe that it’s justifiable that women wear sin bottoms (pants).

And just as we’re about to hit the mats, we rise like Mike Tyson in the third round match against Holyfield and theoretically bite the ear off our opponent with the declaration: “If you think that it is permissible for women to wear pants then explain to me why every bathroom door in the world illustrates them with a skirt on!”

Alas! Victory is ours! We thank heavens for the graphic designer who once penned the silhouette of a feminine figure, a-line skirt in tow. For without this wondrous illustration we’d be left in our corner, as a proverbial Mills Lane raises the battered glove of the pro-sin-bottom secularist in triumphant victory above us.

But he shan’t. Not today.

Not until our opponent thinks to beg the question: “But in that same picture you reference the female has not only cut hair, but a shaved head. What of this?”

Let’s just pray our worthy opponent never has this light bulb sparkle above his battered head.

9 comments:

  1. oh the head isn't shaved...her hair is just slicked back and tied into a bun :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am SO busted on this one. lol!

    ReplyDelete
  3. HAHAHA!!! Okaaaaaaaaaaaay I love using this as an illustration!!! But heeeeey...don't go to sea world to demonstrate this cause SOME of those some little ladies are in a BIKINI!!! HAHAHA!!! I was like AW MAN!!! (She still like TOTALLY has the slicked back tied into a bun do though!!! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  4. hahahaha

    Ah yes, the ol' Bathroom signs argument. Terrific, because it shows one can use culture to determine what symbols mean in that culture. One should know that pants weren't even worn by men until the 6th Century. Fact is, the universal bathroom sign (which is not so universal anymore) was developed at a time when women didn't wear anything but dresses. Yes, the first women to wear pants (in our Modern Day, that is) were feminists (not of the "feminists" type you'd think of today). Pants symbolized working and industry, something that was considered masculine at the time. So women entered the workplace. So in fairness, those who use the bathroom sign as an excuse to wrongly misinterpret scripture, should also preach it a sin against God for a woman to work a job (just as a man would). I know, I know... it's a different time and day. My point exactly.

    Most people would never consider dignitaries like Laura Bush to be wearing men's clothing. Likewise, I'd like to see these chest-pounding dresses-only men to wear Laura Bush's slacks (I mean, afterall, they are not women's pants, but men's).

    Furthermore, it's frankly abusive to see women in sub-zero temperatures subjected to dresses, because one's theology lacks pragmatism.

    ReplyDelete
  5. plus her skirt is above the knee as well....

    ReplyDelete
  6. Or...bathroom sign lady had the largest calf:thigh ratio man has ever known.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You are so funny! you should seriously make a post about the size of apostolic women's hair if you have not already!

    When i first got into church my mother asked me if the english service (i go to spanish) had competitions to see who had the biggest hair hhaa
    - AV

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have heard of people arguing that there is a difference between pants made for a man and pants made for a women. The typical apostolic response is "pants are pants". If that is true then all these youth pasture can't tell there emo youth members to stop wearing GIRL PANTS because after all they don't believe in girl pants. "Pants are Pants".

    ReplyDelete
  9. Of course, many of the bathroom signs shared by Timmy convey European dress and not the dress of men in Scotland, Fiji, the Middle East and others throughout the world who have not obeyed God's Western holiness dress standard for centuries. Or the Asian, Persian and some native American women who have worn britches for centuries as well.

    ReplyDelete