8

Possible Duplicate:
What are the sources for women to wear/ not wear pants?

Why cant women wear baggy pants when now-a-days women who are "tznius" wear tight skirts or skirts above the knees who keep having to pull them down? Isnt it less revealing and modest to wear baggy pants than to wear even tight skirts that may cover the knees?

Community
  • 1
Lauren
  • 81
  • 1
  • 3
    I think this is basically a good question. However, the premise that women with tight skirts and skirts above the knees are "tznius" is false (as I think you realize, from your use of quotation marks). I don't think the question depends on the fact that many skirts are insufficiently modest, or that may otherwise religious women are insufficiently careful about wearing such problematic skirts. – LazerA Dec 13 '12 at 11:56
  • One factor that may play a role in this issue is the halacha of "beged ish" (the prohibition against wearing garments associated with the opposite gender). I believe there is a basic assumption in many sources that pants are specifically male garments. However, I believe many cultures have forms of split skirts that are traditionally associated specifically with women, which ought to avoid this problem. – LazerA Dec 13 '12 at 12:09
  • 3
    Pants depends on whom you ask; see my answer to this related question – yitznewton Dec 13 '12 at 14:05
  • 1
    @LazerA I think you'll find it difficult to defend the beged ish angle nowadays aside from within the confines of certain insular communities. I think pretty much everyone agrees that what constitutes beged ish (or beged isha) is dependent on the time and place (for example see YD 182:5). – Double AA Dec 13 '12 at 14:45
  • 3
    Lauren, welcome to Mi Yodeya! If you could [edit] into your question how you know women can't wear baggy pants it would greatly improve its value. Otherwise I think this question is asking "Can women wear baggy pants" which makes it a duplicate of the linked question. – Double AA Dec 13 '12 at 14:47
  • 1
    I'd classify this as a dupe to this question, although the title suggests it is not. I think the underlying question is the same, though. – Seth J Dec 13 '12 at 15:05
  • 1
    @SethJ That one's "what," while this one's "why." – Isaac Moses Dec 13 '12 at 15:09
  • 1
    @IsaacMoses, while I agree that the questions are worded that way, I think they are ultimately asking the same thing. That one suggests an assumption that there must be some source to satisfy the "why", and this one just asks "why" without specifying a request for a source. Ultimately, any satisfactory answer for either question will answer both, because any decent logic-based answer that isn't someone's ideological diatribe in favor of, or opposed to women wearing pants, will cite a source by a respected authority and draw a logical conclusion based on that text. – Seth J Dec 13 '12 at 15:15
  • @IsaacMoses I agree that the answers will be about the same. I think we can use http://meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/q/1299/759 effectively to dupe it. – Double AA Dec 13 '12 at 15:19
  • 1
    Lauren, if this question's closed (and I think it ought to be, at least as currently written), and the other question doesn't address your concerns, then try to formulate what you really mean to ask and try again. Welcome to the site. I hope you stick around and enjoy it. Please consider registering your account, which will give you access to more of the site's features. – msh210 Dec 13 '12 at 15:43
  • Per the discussion in the comments, I'm closing this as a duplicate. Lauren, if your question isn't addressed by the other, please edit to clarify the difference and ping me (@MonicaCellio) in a comment to reopen. And, of course, please bring other questions here too. I look forward to your participation in Mi Yodeya. – Monica Cellio Dec 31 '12 at 00:10

0 Answers0