These outfits on the female are very on point for young people in their teens and early twenties and some are even suited to older women. We do not promote the hight heels and endevour to post more Davidian friendly shoe wear in the future. The outfits are not clinging to the young lady’s figure and are very tastful and attractive. It’s a guide to how our young Davidians sisters should dress if they do not already have someone to guide them in this area. Of course in a church setting or study group the head is going to be covered.
It seems in Davidia that we often associate modest dress reform largely to females. Maybe it is because females have so much more areas to go wrong than men do, or do they? How can a man go wrong in dressing? It’s just a shirt, a pants, that’s it. Well, men are also required to follow a dress code along with that pants and shirt. These days it is not simply a question of, can calf length pant be worn outside of church, or are short-sleeved shirts allowed anywhere? Satan has caught up on the lag in menswear immodesty. You can find men fully suited and tied on the hottest summer days in the church, while the women walk around with sleeveless dresses complaining about the heat. So men are often outside of the radar when we bring up the issue of dress reform with the church. In the last few years satan has found a way to allow men to keep their suits on, but to modify it in such a way where they too, are displeasing God.
“The lines are really starting to get blurred now between menswear and womenswear. There’s been a real feminisation of …” I started, before being cut off.
“Gender is for the most part a societal construct,” interjected my son (he’s at uni).
“There is no reason to have a men’s section and a women’s section anyway. Look at trainers for example. My friends and I all wear pink, orange fluoro, floral, whatever. The stores don’t even bother to separate them anymore.”
This has become more than apparent at the ready-to-wear shows, which have traditionally staged separate women’s and men’s collections at different times of the year.
Over time, menswear started to make a small appearance in the women’s show, at houses like Burberry, while women’s would pop up at the men’s, in the case of Prada.
Top fashion houses have always pushed the envelope with new alternatives for men, including skirts, but in the past, most men have been largely reluctant to break very new ground, tending to stick to the traditional, or adopting a change in silhouette (such as the leaner, more narrow suiting shapes that are currently popular).
Most of the crazier looks were mainly for the catwalk, with the more conservative alternatives waiting for the customer in store.
But when Gucci’s genius creative director Alessandro Michele began to send out the most beautiful, feminine (if I may use my tired societal construct for one moment) romantic menswear on male models, you could see it was a game-changer on many levels — the show system itself for a start.”
But before we go any further though, here are some fine examples of menswear. This perspective can serve as a backdrop on how much menswear have departed from the accepted model.
There is a type of menswear style that is more subtle creeping into the way men dress recently. We are going to go into this at length because it is so subtle, our youth are getting ensnared in it and few people are noticing, or if they do, are so perplexed by it, they shake their heads and say: I guess that’s young people today. The dress style we are reffereing to is the metrosexual style. Therefore the youths must have a deep and firm grasp of the origins of these styles so they are not drawn by its seduction. Be prepared to go in deep.
At first it was a type of male dressing that had to do with affluence more than anything else. Men wore loose trousers and expensive sweaters over Van Heusen shirts and appeared very sheik and GQ then. But within the last twenty years the trend have been increasingly associated with the gay lifestyle. Here is something to read about it concerning its ever evolving history.
“One thing to keep in mind: the term hetrosexual male is a term quite acceptable to the average man. It is the term used to describe a non-homosexual male, or a man who is attracted to the opposite sex. And it is from this term that we have had several evolving terms in the last twenty-five years.”
1. Metrosexual: The First Great Public Departure From The Traditional Term: Hetrosexual male
“Metrosexual is a portmanteau of metropolitan and heterosexual, coined in 1994 (by Mark Simpson) describing a man[especially one living in an urban, post-industrial, capitalist culture] who is especially meticulous about his grooming and appearance, typically spending a significant amount of time and money on shopping as part of this.”
NB: It must be noted that Mark Simpson is said to be a gay man, and one among the great influences defining how men should look at themselves, and over the decades continues to invent and direct the way men dress and even act.
So how has this description of the metrosexual male changed over the years. Not that the above description would be suitable for any christian man, but back then he could have easily adopted that style and hardly be detected as odd or unmanly. Let’s see how much in the atmosphere of the 21st century the description of the metrosexual male have changed.
“While the term suggests that a metrosexual is heterosexual, it can also refer to gay or bisexual men.The typical metrosexual is a young man with money to spend, (or pretending to) living in or within easy reach of a metropolis – because that’s where all the best shops, clubs, gyms and hairdressers are. He might be officially gay, straight or bisexual, but this is utterly immaterial because he has clearly taken himself as his own love object and pleasure as his sexual preference.”
We see here how the social commentator and trendsetter, Mark, is directing the male about who he is. He dictates his dress, and all his other activities which makes him eligible for the enviable title, metrosexual. And he further bundles the three personas he describes, gay, straight, and bisexual, so that they now have much in comman.They share the same hairdresser, the same restaurants, the same gyms, etc, etc. With these facts in the psyche, how can you even think of condemning a man sexual choices when he looks exactly like you and enjoy the exact same social life as you do. This is evidenced by the first reference above where the young man scolds his mother when she ventures to suggest there is a difference between the sexes. “Gender is for the most part a societal construct,” is right out of her son’s professor’s mouth. They made sure to let you know he is a university student. This point should make us think about the children we may know or may have away at school. Though the older men in Davidia are not suceptible to this conditioning, our young people are. And we will see just how much as we go along.
Back to the previous quote from Mark Simpson the writer. He is telling the heterosexual turned metrosexual, that it is immaterial to worry about another man’s sexuality. He further tells the straight man he can be his own love object, pushing him further into thoughts of homosexuality. It is from this historical backdrop the dressing below was born.
So the point here is, this new man described as a narcissist, that is, one who worships himself, not God, pushing him further away from shame and accountability. He has to see himself easily fading in and out the shadows of the gay, straight, or bisexual portals, with no clear-cut line defining his sexual identity. He is regarded as sensitive and open to whatever pops up. He is progressive minded and non-judgmental about differing lifestyles, and that idea, we know, is particularly favourable to homosexuality. Now can you guess who is fostering this breakdown of values and well-crafted rebellion against the Creator?
Says Simpson: “Gay men provided the early prototype for metrosexuality. Decidedly single, definitely urban, dreadfully uncertain of their identity (hence the emphasis on pride and the susceptibility to the latest label) and socially emasculated, gay men pioneered the business of accessorising—and combining—masculinity and desirability.”
As mentioned, through the decades, 1992 to the present, Mark and others influenced by him, have created two more over the top defintions of the new man, as if metrosexual isn’t bad enough: ubersexual and spornosexual. So let us look at where, through fashion, the enemy is trying to take our young people.
“Science of The Times described Mark Simpson as ‘the world’s most perceptive writer about masculinity‘.
He “…showed how gay and straight culture were converging a decade before this became a common theme,…”
“GQ Russia placed him in their ‘Top Ten Things That Changed Men’s Lives'”
Metrosexual was described as one “…of the most important words of the last thirty years…”
“..a man who exhibits traditional masculine qualities as well as the caring nature of the New Man” “Move over metrosexual, it’s time to usher in the ubersexual! In 2003, the ideal man was someone in touch with his feminine side. In 2005, the ideal man is all about ruggedness, confidence, masculinity and having an unselfish passion for causes and principles. This is the year of the ubersexual.”
Now they inject “passion for causes” attaching it to the hetrosexual-turn-metrosexual-turned-ubersexual. And which cause you think that passion would be directed to? They are telling the hetrosexual, you can still appear rugged, confident, masculine, just support our cause. What cause? Your brother’s cause, because: “…While the term suggests that a metrosexual is heterosexual, it can also refer to gay or bisexual men. ” and you now a metrosexual turned ubersexual by the way you dress owes him because: “...gay men pioneered the business of
accessorising—and combining—masculinity and desirability.“
The worldly men here and the pastor above looks the same.
Not that a young man has to consciously voice this brotherhood, but my precept if one finds onself dressing exactly as a group of people one is likely to feel a certain affinity to that group. This is why unlike say twenty years ago, hetrosexual men are not uncomfortable defending and befriending homosexual men as a matter of political correactness, open-mindedness, and sophistication. The point neccessarily is not to make you into a homosexual as it is to render you fully tolerant to that lifelstyle; for even a raging homosexual knows society must have suppliers of more boys.
3. Spornosexual: 2014
The term spornosexual was (again) coined by cultural commentator Mark Simpson, who described this update of the ubersexual as as a type of man who also enjoys sports, porn and is a metrosexual.
In 2014, spornosexuals were described as having the “sexed-up the male body and turbo-charged the male desire to be hot.…this new generation of spornosexuals have combined this with wanting to have the ultimate masculine body and show it off online.” Do we see our young men posing online in metrosexual outfits, every time a new picture, without the slightest idea they have been seduced into this frame of mind?
Within a twenty-five year period,Mark Simmons and his coherts were able to emasculate entire generations of men. In 1994 He told them they were metrosexuals: Men who can use feminine products and dress up dandy. In 2005 feeling they were ready, men were told they could be still masculine but now support our cause. And in 2014, he reached further and pulled in the gym guys and the armchair sports jocks. The good old hetrosexuals turned metrosexuals turned ubersexuals, are finally told they are now sponosexuals. But one cannot think it is going to end there.
So unsuspecting young hetrosexual men of the world, those unaware of the spirit behind their dress, and the careful crafting of twenty-five years put into it, choose to dress like those in the images above. Still appearing a bit masculine, still loving his sports, still pumping iron at the gym, still maybe having a wife, but will now defend the homosexual cause with passion, because he’s been conditioned to do so. He is now a representative.
For Israel’s young brethren, it is important to understand something of the history of this type of dressing, and see the demonic forces visiting it, and not fall in it’s seductive grasp. What portion do we have with this spirit?
The suit may be multi-colored, or a bright color unusually male, pants are always short enough that the sock is seen without bending the knees. The pants grab the thighs and hip. The jacket is always short enough to noticeably expose the somewhat bulging crotch area even when the jacket is buttoned down. Many of our youthful Seventh-Day Adventist pastors have adopted this dress style, as well as many in the congregation. With or without realizing it, it is a kind of welcoming signal to those actively engaged in the homosexual lifestyle.
So as mentioned before, since 1994, almost two and a half decades ago, we’ve had the very same commentator/trendsetters creating new terms and reinventing the image of how men should view themselves. They are walking further and further away from the term hetrosexuality. Like sheep men are led to follow, not even having noticed the place where they once were and how far they’ve come. The trendsetter does all this under the benign guise of entertainment and fashion.
This article is meant to give a comprehensive understanding, and leave a lasting impression on young men, about the influence behind the choices they make in dressing. Our young men having no clue of the history of today’s fashion and how it came to bear, are quite often attracted to it, and therefore destined to fall in its trap. This type of dressing is rampant among our Seventh-Day-Adventist youths today. The mohawk hairstyles, above ankle length tight pants cut, and the hugging jackets, tells the story. But we as Davidians must be guarded against this type of dress also, and most importantly because it has already infilterated our camps.
Our young men in order to be sealed, must have a firm grasp on their identity. They are priest of God and their families. They must be strong and settled in their identity inside and out, and not tossed about by media and fashion which is clearly meant to blur the lines of what a man is. 1 Corinthians 6:9 “Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor … shall inherit the kingdom of God.”
These days to attempt to define what a man is brings out a lot of hostility in those who are bent on corrupting the roles of the sexes. In some circles, you dare not define what a man is. People emphatically claims there is no difference between men and women, or feminine and masculine behaviour. But for us to believe that we have to believe that we are interchangeable, men and women. We know that God made us with different and peculiar functions, men and women. 1 Peter 3:7 “Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.”
Furthermore, to accept that men and women are interchangeable, you enter upon dangerous grounds and by extension would believe there is nothing wrong in choosing a partner, be they male or female. Something that the bible clearly states is an abomination in the sight of God.
Therefore to dress in the fashions that this mindset created is to represent an emasculated or effiminate male ideology, unconsciously though it might be. But inescapably, with every ideology a spirit is attended. And if it is not the spirit of God, theerfore the individual is walking around promoting to the world, the spirit of Satan, which is exactly what the enemy intended and have achieved. The individual becomes a walking billboard for the Devil’s cause.
These trends have taken a strong hold in some of the third world countries that look to America and its celebrities for their direction in fashion. But more than that, we see our young Seventh-Say-Adventist youths from the developing world posing in these styles on social media because they are misdirected; because the church is unwilling and unable to condemn the fashions of the world. I hope this piece becomes an eye opener to our young people and they choose to represent a living Saviour instead of our Savour’s enemy.
After all that’s been said, some may still scoff at the idea of a dress code for men. When it comes to Christianity they argue, isn’t it all about the heart? Rend your heart and not your garment, they say. That text been taken completely out-of-order. But the more direct answer is, that God has always had a dress code for his commandment keeping people. God has always taken time to describe the clothes the angels wore, what his chosen men wore, what His priesthood wore. It is even described what He Himself wore before the Judgment throne. Yes, God appreciates adornment and style, just as long as it subscribes to His specificity
.God appreciates careful thought being put into our outward appearance, taste and refinment, but it must be kept to His standards. Why would we think in the last hours of earth’s closing scenes, with the last representatives of His kingdom whom he has commissioned to take the everlasting gospel to the world, God would not want them to represent His character in what they wear? Think again. Our outward dressing must reflect the inward condition. It has always been that way and would never end. We live in the christian period and have been stripped of all the frills of outward adornment to signify the condition of our minds. If Christ should return can you imagine Him dressed as one of those metrosexuals in the examples above?
1 Timothy 2:9 “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;..”
No gold no pearls nor costly array shows God is aware of our desire to embellish.
In every instance where garment or clothing is mentioned in the bible it is part of the story. Let us look at some of the text concerning what we wear before God.
Genesis 37:3 reads, “Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he was the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of many colours.” This coat set Joseph apart just as how He was set apart by God.
Angels veil their faces… Is 6:2
Zech 3:4 And he answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.”
Every occasion is reflected by the clothing worn. Rev 4: “Surrounding the throne were twenty-four other thrones, and seated on them were twenty-four elders. They were dressed in white and had crowns of gold on their heads.”
Luke 15:21 22 “But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet.
Daniel 7:9 ““As I looked, thrones were placed, and the Ancient of Days took his seat; his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames; its wheels were burning fire.”
Looking at the attention given in the construction of the priest clothing it would seem that God was overly concerned with the outward appearance. And He was. The clothing represented the strictness and sacredness of the office. And only those of pure consciences and a circumspect life could officiate.
4 And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.
5 And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen.
6 And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work.” It goes on to verse fourteen.
Even for the slaughter of Ezekiel 9, we are given a description of the clothing one man wears: “…and one man among them was clothed with linen, with a writer’s inkhorn by his side.” .
God is not asking us to wear ceremonial garments today. It does not reflect the work we are doing. We are called to be humble and reflect the humble life of Christ. The glory of exaggerated outward appearances some of us now seek gets in the way of complete surrender. We must place all on the altar of sacrifice and throw our whole selves into His work. , He said He would bestow upon us the outer adornment and surpassing glory when He returns. The same glory He has. So let us renounce the gold and pearls and costly array and seek after righteousness, and let our appearance be of shamefacedness and sobriety.
NOTE: “Rend your heart and not your garment.” derives from an old Jewish custom where the individual ripped his garment in times of great distress, sorrow, anger, or some other strong emotion. Reuben ripped his garments over the sale of Joseph’ Jacob ripped his garments when he heard of his missing son; Josiah ripped his garment over Israel’s sin. In Joel 2:22, when the people are told to rend their heart and not their garment, it is not speaking against modesty and proper deportment in dress, on the contrary, it is a figurative use of the word garment to expose hypocrisy, meaning, rending the garment is only an outward show without a corresponding change of heart.