HALACHA-----tznius/ pants
shana Posted - 14 December 2000 2:16
Is it halachicly wrong to wear pants now in days, because pants are no longer considered "beged ish"? and is it better to wear pants, or a skirt that does not cover the knees?
MODERATOR Posted - 14 December 2000 2:32
Pants are still prohibited nowadays. Even if there is no prohibition of beged ish, it is still a violation of Tznius. Also, there are poskim, such as Minchas Yitzchok, who rule that pants are still beged ish today, because once a garment is designed for one gender it can't change.
I am assuming that the reasoning behind such a psak is that since pants are not tzniusdik for a woman, they can never be considered a legitimate female garment.
But even though many poskim do not consider it beged ish today, the tznius issue still applies.
ker Posted - 14 December 2000 20:15
I have a question how come if pants aren’t ok then a lot of religious ppl wear them and how come then at summer camps you’re allowed to wear them?
MODERATOR Posted - 14 December 2000 20:22
How come if Loshon Horah is wrong a lot of religious people do it anyway? People have a Yetzer Horah which causes them to sin, even if they are religious.
Re camp: If there are no men around they would be relying on the poskim who hold pants is not beged ish. If men can see them then it is wrong to allow it.
Renée Posted - 15 December 2000 13:08
Shana...as per your second question:
While neither pants nor miniskirts are permissible to wear in the case of a woman who refuses to wear long skirts it is better that she wear pants than that she wear a short skirt.
I don't remember the source on this sorry. I learned it on the torah forum from torah.org. It's somewhere down there in the archives. :)
MODERATOR Posted - 15 December 2000 13:12
That's not necessarily true. The lesser of the two evils between a short skirt and pants depends on how short the skirt is and how baggy the pants; it is a judgment call. But it's like asking which is worse - falling off a roof or getting hit by a truck. Depends how high a roof is and how big a truck.
ker Posted - 15 December 2000 13:32
I was talking when there are men around
MODERATOR Posted - 15 December 2000 13:33
Then it is prohibited.
cybergirl Posted - 29 January 2001 23:26
I know that you say that pants aren't tznisdik. But what is the bottom line halacha? Can you wear pants or not? And what if they are baggy?
MODERATOR Posted - 05 February 2001 2:55
No, you can't. Because it's not Tzniusdik therefore it is prohibited. There are also those who say that pants are still considered Beged Ish because they originated as a man's Beged.
Doctor Posted - 29 November 2001 15:00
Why would baggy pants not be "tzniusdik"?
MODERATOR Posted - 29 November 2001 16:17
Because any split between women's legs in a garment is considered not Tzniusdik. In the olden days women used to ride horses side-saddle for this reason.
alien Posted - 04 December 2001 19:14
But my teacher said that a rabbi in
MODERATOR Posted - 04 December 2001 20:35
Dunno who the rabbi is or what the heter is. Can you tell me?
Captain Posted - 05 December 2001 15:56
How come women are allowed to wear a blouse then?! It is the female version of a shirt!
They should be allowed to wear slacks which is more tzinusdik than skirts since one can see her legs when she sits down and with slacks you can't!?
MODERATOR Posted - 05 December 2001 16:26
No. Blouses were always what women wore, from when men wore shirts. Pants for women only began long after it was an established male garment.
Besides that, it would seem to me based on the Poskim that the only time an established male garment would not be able to become a female one is if there was an objective reason why men and not women wore it. In other words, the reason why women didn’t wear pants is because it was not Tzniusdik, therefore pants are intrinsically a garment appropriate for men and not women.
Therefore, even if women end up making their own pants, it would still remain a male garment, that is, a garment appropriate for a male and not a female. But in the case of a shirt, it is intrinsically as appropriate for a woman as a man, and therefore, if it would become the custom for women to wear their own version of it (a blouse) it would not be considered a male garment.
alien Posted - 12 December 2001 15:47
She didn't say. But is it halachicly wrong to wear very baggy pants or just minhag hamakom.
MODERATOR Posted - 13 December 2001 17:48
Halachicly wrong according to the vast majority of poskim.
No comments:
Post a Comment