Jump to content
JWTalk - Jehovah's Witnesses Online Community

Watchtower January 2017


We lock topics that are over 365 days old, and the last reply made in this topic was 1970 days ago. If you want to discuss this subject, we prefer that you start a new topic.

Recommended Posts

I honestly don't mind the socks at all.  What I don't like is that the trousers are short enough to see the socks while standing straight.

 

And, of course, they're too tight.  I don't know how the guys find them comfortable at all!  My son is slim (but muscular).  He cannot STAND tight pants; he'd never wear a suit that looks like that.  But there is a brother in my Hall who does. :(  It's just about his only suit, but I know he can afford better; it looks just like the brother on the right above.  I'd LOVE to take a few brothers shopping...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSz0JwC_sjBI9a_dij2obc

 

Charlotte asked for a picture.  My suit was like the one on the left in the background.  As Richard said, it came with a white belt.  You can see the belts in the lower left (reversible white or black).  Ahh....the 70's.  We had one brother still wearing his to the midweek meeting up to about 10-15 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Chaser said:

Yep, not my style. Feels Country western and spring clashed together. Hopefully this does not come back into style today.

Note the "bell-bottoms" on the trouser legs.  This dress style was popular in Disco as well.  If you remember John Travolta in "Staying Alive" it was this type of suit with a vest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thesauron said:

It's like the beard discussion. Maybe one day dressing like this might work, but these days - no. Is a suit and hair more important than following the directions of the slave?

Many of us who lived through this era, hope it does not come back (especially since I weigh a lot more today).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, jwhess said:

Big sideburns or mutton-chop whiskers and bushy hair.

I was talking about the clothes, now all that you mentioned I really don't like at all. Lol.

2 hours ago, jwhess said:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSz0JwC_sjBI9a_dij2obc

 

Charlotte asked for a picture.  My suit was like the one on the left in the background.  As Richard said, it came with a white belt.  You can see the belts in the lower left (reversible white or black).  Ahh....the 70's.  We had one brother still wearing his to the midweek meeting up to about 10-15 years ago.

So no ties?

 

Did you all wear those shirts too? Lol.

I'm late, I see you mentioned a tie in your post.

 

I wonder how that looked those printed shirts with a tie, I bet it was a busy looking site.

Edited by loving life
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thesauron said:

It's like the beard discussion. Maybe one day dressing like this might work, but these days - no. Is a suit and hair more important than following the directions of the slave?

well the thing is our standards should really not be lowered over time.

 

Beards and immodest clothing are two different things. Fun fact of the day: A lot of those tight suits were designed in fact by homosexual designers .. probably for a reason.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, thegreenjudy said:

well the thing is our standards should really not be lowered over time.

 

Unless cultures change.

 

For example, there are areas in the world where we do not where a suit and tie in the ministry, because people in suits are looked upon with suspicion. I have a couple calls who routinely mention that we look like IRS agents or Lawyers, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Dismal_Bliss said:

 

Unless cultures change.

 

For example, there are areas in the world where we do not where a suit and tie in the ministry, because people in suits are looked upon with suspicion. I have a couple calls who routinely mention that we look like IRS agents or Lawyers, lol.

Culture is not above Jehovahs standards. Not wearing a suit is also different to wearing immodest clothing. If wearing mini skirts was a cultural standard anywhere it wouldnt be appropriate either.

 

Here is an example: African brotgers and sisters from some tribal backgrounds had to adjust despite the fact that culturally it was ok for women to walk around topless and men to wear next to nothing.

 

If the cultural difference falls into Jehovahs standard of modesty (ie not wearing a suit or having a beard) there are no issues. But when they disagree with those standards we cannot use culture as an excuse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new Watchtower pictures show the brothers wearing suits but they are inappropriate because of sexual connotations.  The leisure suit was inappropriate because it showed a lack of respect for the occasion.  Inappropriate for different reasons but still inappropriate.  Both were culture shifts by a portion of the population at the time and we must be on guard against trends that lack good judgement or are offensive.  A CO once told me (he might have been quoting an old  Watchtower article) "never be the first to join a fad nor the last to leave one."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, jwhess said:

The new Watchtower pictures show the brothers wearing suits but they are inappropriate because of sexual connotations.  The leisure suit was inappropriate because it showed a lack of respect for the occasion.  Inappropriate for different reasons but still inappropriate.  Both were culture shifts by a portion of the population at the time and we must be on guard against trends that lack good judgement or are offensive.  A CO once told me (he might have been quoting an old  Watchtower article) "never be the first to join a fad nor the last to leave one."

I remember being told that as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

About JWTalk.net - Jehovah's Witnesses Online Community

Since 2006, JWTalk has proved to be a well-moderated online community for real Jehovah's Witnesses on the web. However, our community is not an official website of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is not endorsed, sponsored, or maintained by any legal entity used by Jehovah's Witnesses. We are a pro-JW community maintained by brothers and sisters around the world. We expect all community members to be active publishers in their congregations, therefore, please do not apply for membership if you are not currently one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

JWTalk 22.1.2 (changelog)