PDA

View Full Version : Is wearing a tie sinful?


The Gregorian
1st June 2008, 04:31 PM
So I never really liked wearing a tie... and I never really saw the point in it... it's just something "you did." So I've asked around and no one really knows WHY "wearing a tie is proper" ... they just do it.

Being a JW, I'm used to this being an unacceptable reason. Most people "just celebrate christmas" without realizing it's pagan roots. So I did some reading:

Turns out neckties have some rather worldly roots, to say the least.

Here's the basics Necklaces have been used throughout history, but the first cloth necklaces originated in rome, when the Chinese terracotta armies were unearthed. These statues that were supposed to eternally Guard the Emporer in the afterlife. But Roman society was smart enough not to put metal things around there necks with which to be choked... so they made little cloth neck-pieces so they could look cool.

This didn't really catch on too much until the 1600's in france, when a group of mercenaries wearing cloth necklaces as part of their uniform found out that the people of paris seemed abnormally aroused by the neck ornaments. They took more pride in their cravats, which drew attention to them, making them more successful in seducing young Parisians.

The wealthy and powerful took note of this advantage and adopted it in their own style of dress, using cravats to flaunt their wealth and prestige (because at the time they were quite intricate and lacy). More people started wearing similar, more simplified versions, and the neck-tie never went away since.

... so it has roots in false religion, was a widely used piece of military uniforms, then used to seduce people by flaunting one's own political and financial might.

Yet... most religions... even the JW's still encourage this piece to be worn.

Of course, the above is a cheap summary of the histories of neck-ties, so it may be a little off... but it remains that there's no GOOD reason to wear a tie, and it has just as many negative roots as so many holidays we don't celebrate. Even today, suits and ties are worn to indicate our means, and therefore, if nothing else, isn't modest.

So what do you guys think? Would it be wise to err on the side of caution and stop wearing ties?

The Gregorian
1st June 2008, 04:35 PM
Plus... in modern times, ties are shown to be dangerous... Which is why the Romans didn't want them to begin with... ties can get caught in machinery, or used against you if a person were to become hostile. They tend to at least mildly restrict circulation to the head which has been shown to at least slightly increase blood pressure, among other side effects.

2ducklow
16th June 2008, 12:03 PM
Ties are dangerous if you're doing any kind of rapid motion. I figure they are ok if you're sittin at a desk all day doin very little physical. not much danger of getting in a brawl there anyway.

The Gregorian
16th June 2008, 01:30 PM
Any physical motion, or working near moving parts. Imagine if you're working on a lathe or an engine or a grinder and your tie got stuck. That'd get REAL ugly REAL quick. Even something as simple as the little rollers in a coil binder could get at least a little ugly. And if you're not moving around, you tend not to have the best of circulation. A tie would further decrease your circulation leading to all sorts of problems.

Unlikely, and usually minor ones... but still, there are many -potential- negative aspects to wearing a tie, and no really "good" reasons.

My main objection (why I haven't worn a tie to church in years), is because it began as part of a military uniform, then was imitated by aristocrats to flaunt their wealth and prestige and power and greed in hopes of attracting the sort of women who would give them what they wanted because they were rich and prestigious.

I think, wearing a tie is much more objectionable than celebrating certain holidays like the 4th of july. (which there's nothing really WRONG in celebrating, it's just not considered something a JW is really "supposed" to do, because it's just a commemoration of another worldly government forming. And JWs are supposed to have undivided loyalty to God. We're to respect and obey our government, and "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" but our loyalty is to God and God alone.)

2ducklow
16th June 2008, 04:32 PM
Any physical motion, or working near moving parts. Imagine if you're working on a lathe or an engine or a grinder and your tie got stuck. That'd get REAL ugly REAL quick. Even something as simple as the little rollers in a coil binder could get at least a little ugly. And if you're not moving around, you tend not to have the best of circulation. A tie would further decrease your circulation leading to all sorts of problems.

Unlikely, and usually minor ones... but still, there are many -potential- negative aspects to wearing a tie, and no really "good" reasons.

My main objection (why I haven't worn a tie to church in years), is because it began as part of a military uniform, then was imitated by aristocrats to flaunt their wealth and prestige and power and greed in hopes of attracting the sort of women who would give them what they wanted because they were rich and prestigious.

I think, wearing a tie is much more objectionable than celebrating certain holidays like the 4th of july. (which there's nothing really WRONG in celebrating, it's just not considered something a JW is really "supposed" to do, because it's just a commemoration of another worldly government forming. And JWs are supposed to have undivided loyalty to God. We're to respect and obey our government, and "give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" but our loyalty is to God and God alone.) I knew a girl once who had like 4 or 5 ear piercings on each ear, and her boyfriend got mad at her one day and ripped all her ear rings out. she had these ugly gaps on her ear lobes. I don't wear earrings, but I go through the woods a lot, and i can just imagine a tree limb getting stuck in my ear ring and rippin out a hunk of flesh. yuck.

but that's not the reason I don't wear earrings. I'm 59 and my generation considers earrings for girls only. as do I. sorry all you young fellas, but ear rings are for girls only in my book.

The Gregorian
16th June 2008, 06:07 PM
heh... I'm a bit on the younger side... and... well... put it this way, I've had a number of people ask me to pierce a number of my parts. And I said no to all.

I tend to do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLmI0-zUacI

So... anything I pierce would get ripped out... swiftly.

(no, that video wasn't supposed to be serious. Yes... we have the nerdiest hobby possible... I'm the one that wears the skirt sometimes.)

hospitalera
1st July 2008, 09:34 AM
I don't get the "sin" bit... Wearing a tie, earrings etc can be plain stupid in some situations for health and safety reasons, but why and how could it be a sin? SY

The Gregorian
1st July 2008, 02:06 PM
"Sin" may be a bit harsher of a word than necessary, but the reason JWs don't celebrate... say... the 4th of July... is because the holiday is a celebration of a worldly government's formation. Nothing -wrong- with it like Christmas with it's pegan roots... but it's still celebrating a government run by sinful men. Same with thanksgiving and all that... not so much a "sin" ... but celebrating government holidays is consider taking part in "the world" and is looked down upon.

Likewise, wearing a tie comes from a few militaries, and was adopted by greedy, lustful people, then emulated by people who wanted to be like the greedy/lustful people. It's meaning is insignificant now... but it has no positive origins, at least SOME negative origins, they're not functional, and tend to be uncomfortable.

So... IMO, it's just as wrong to wear a tie as it is to celebrate the 4th of july... neither are "unforgivable" ... but the point is that people shouldn't be looked down to for "not" wearing the tie.

OldShepherd
23rd September 2008, 05:08 PM
Likewise, wearing a tie comes from a few militaries, and was adopted by greedy, lustful people, then emulated by people who wanted to be like the greedy/lustful people. It's meaning is insignificant now... but it has no positive origins, at least SOME negative origins, they're not functional, and tend to be uncomfortable. [ . . . ]

Evidence? Substantiation? Documentation?