And that’s only the boys, if Archbishop Welby has his Christmas wish. (Sorry to mention the C word in mid-November, but M & S started it.)
Now I’ve been an observer of church goings-on since a very early age, having starred (is that the word?) in nativity plays as second shepherd, Joseph hisself and sundry farm animals; but never as the Angel because (and here’s the rub) angels were girly beings. Children knew a thing or two about normal in those days. And the clergy knew better than to mess with social norms. So what’s changed? Well, it ain’t the children. It’s the CofE loooking for a place to belong in the modern world. And the result is that it is licensing parents, teachers and legions of do-gooders to interfere with children’s natural instincts.
No doubt there are curates across the country rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of dressing up their choristers in tutus instead of their traditional outfits; and many more dusting off their own for old times’ sake. So I hope that when you make your annual visit to your country church next month you will voice your disapproval of the Welby Doctrine. His campaign to fill his pews with minorities is no doubt well-based in scripture but it’s unfair to children, who are supposed to be welcomed in their innocence, not to be prey to misfits.
21 thoughts on “Frocks”
The Catholic Church and the Church of England are both suffering from a lack of leadership at the top. I suspect that the next Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury will be rather more conservative — perhaps even from Africa.
I wonder whether the church has ever lifted its ban on women wearing male attire? One of the ‘heinous’ crimes that helped take Jeanne d’Arc to the flames…
Well, I suppose if it has – then it should play fair and not penalise those males who want to wear female attire –
especially a tiara, which as far as I can ascertain was originally a Persian head dress for men…
To be perfectly honest, I see no reason why any child should not wear whatever he or she wants to wear. As far as I’m concerned the problem lies with adults who read far too much into children’s natural and inquisitive behaviour.
I had one daughter who disliked dresses and chose to wear trousers and another who refused to wear trousers and chose to wear dresses. I read nothing more into that other than they felt comfortable in their own choices…
I do really wish the world would stop reading sexual attitudes into just about everything – especially into children’s childish behaviour…
Society set out to avoid stereotyping children by giving dolls only to girls and train sets only to boys. And now, because we have finally achieved that goal – we are using a child’s choices to stereotype him / her as a prospective trans-gender.
No! No! No! Children simply make simple choices.
I quite agree Boa.
What’s it got to do with the bloody peddlers of nonsense anyway?
Cuprum, the CofE’s media releases are largely ignored. Only this kind of controversial opinion gets reported, the more pernicious the more likely to be read. To be fair though, it was always Christian policy to shock or mystify – from the virgin birth to transubstantiation.
Hear, hear Boadicea! Society was finally making some progress in personal freedom. Not all men need to be macho, not all women need to be sweet and yielding. If girls want to wear trousers and play with toy lorries, so be it. If boys want to wear a tiara, so be it. Most grow out of it, anyway. It seems as if society has gone well too far in the other direction again. Transgenderism has become a fad — a very dangerous one that makes a mockery of actual trans-people and society as a whole.
Janus: Much of Christian theology is rooted in paganism. It makes little sense if taken literally. The problem, I think, is that for far too long people have done just that — take things literally and without understanding the context of the time when it was written.
Yes, CT and as eny fule knoe, the Earth is akshully flat.
I suppose that’s the inevitable consequence of Dianne Abbott walking on it for several decades.
Naughty! What an image! 😷
Janus – bless our Yankee chums – the first flat earth international conference is currently ‘filling’ a hotel in Raleigh, South Carolina. Oh the stupidity of human-kind…… muppets!
Cuprum, the Beeb offers this report:
“flat earth international conference”. “Oh the stupidity of human-kind…… muppets!”
Yup, that and, “all men are created equal”!
What most adherents to that creed tend to forget, atheists included, is the next phrase: “that they are endowed by their Creator”. Of course, we all know that their is no Creator, and that mankind evolved and continues to evolve, according to Darwin’s theory. It is therefore, self-evident that every human is unique and thus cannot be equal. Any equality bestowed on mankind stems from man made legislation and from the mouths of self-serving politicians who perform like organ-grinders’ monkeys in their efforts to attract votes from a deluded electorate. But as Mr Bumble so eloquently put it, ‘the law is a ass.”, and I would add, society even more so.
I contend that the Jeffersonian tenet, is as misguided and as fallacious as any emerging from sects such as the Flat Earth Society, most of whose members very probably have their tongues positioned firmly in their cheeks. The sooner Western society acknowledges just how different people are, at the moment of their creation, or conception, if you prefer, not least with respect to their abilities, wants and needs, the sooner we can start to address many of the worlds problems that relate to multicultural globalisation.
Until then, we are going to have live with a one-size-fits-all approach, especially when it comes to tutus.
And I have not even mentioned women!
Sipu: You must consider the historical context. Jefferson wrote that at a time when in most of the world all those who weren’t part of a narrow elite class were essentially expendable. Life was cheap. Remember that this was a time when in much of the world members of aristocracies could simply take advantage of anyone who ranked beneath them safe in the knowledge that they would never face censure or sanction. For example, the prisoners of the Bastille who could languish till death simply because a noblewoman was in a bad mood one day and she didn’t like someone’s hair. If a commoner in Japan gazed at the emperor, he’d be put to death. There was little or no redress for even the most legitimate of grievances. The present view — held by far too many — that all opinions and positions are equal is nearly as absurd and simply doesn’t exist in any practical sense. Someone with a university degree in feminist studies is unlikely to contribute nearly as much to society as a farmer, much less a surgeon or engineer.
I forwarded that video to a Chinese. He nearly wet himself laughing and said “no wonder why Africa is so backwards”.
Sipu, you should explain how we should treat ‘less equal’ people differently, in order to solve the world’s problems. As far as I know, democracies usually regard everyone as equal under the law, with equal rights; without any implication that we are all equal in Darwinian development.
Morning Janus. A touch ironic that we should be discussing democracies on the day that a coup has taken place here in Zimbabwe. South Africa allegedly has a democracy, but like our own cherished nation, there are built in inequalities. Races are not treated the same, by law. Just look up Black Economic Empowerment and Indigenisation laws in SA and Zimbabwe respectively. Yet the Western world wets itself in its praise for the SA constitution. But so too are inequalities built into virtually every western democracy. Men and women are not treated equally. You only have to look at the divorce and rape laws to get an inkling of that. Nor are children treated equally; they cannot vote, nor are they subject to the same criminal procedures as adults. So called affirmative action laws exist in most countries in one form or other. The legal system protects those who have access to the best lawyers. I am sure I could go on. So please don’t try to maintain that all people are treated equally under a democracy. It is a myth.
How would I treat ‘inherently less equal’ people? By acknowledging that they are less equal and not allowing equal access. No women on submarines, is an obvious example. If people want equality they have to prove they have it. Promotion based on ability. Civil rights based on civil contribution. Integration based on mutual choice not social engineering. That video I posted, is real and by no means an isolated incident of sub Saharan thinking. Pay heed.
You may think my views are fascist, that being the preferred choice of adjective, but this belief in equal rights based on the premise that all people are equal, will lead to a devastating collapse of western society and the rise of some form primitive caliphate.
Sipu, you misquote me. I said that in democracies people are usually equal under the law.
‘If people want equality they have to prove they have it. Promotion based on ability. Civil rights based on civil contribution.’ Are you proposing white males should make the rules to the detriment of others? Sounds like good old apartheid and then some.
AND NOW the clergy are whingeing about Advent being hijacked by consumerism! As if it’s just started! here’s an idea: why don’t the godsquad stop complaining about the behaviour of non-believers and take a hard look at their own. Start with hypocrisy and the real meaning of the church.
You may think my views are fascist, that being the preferred choice of adjective, but this belief in equal rights based on the premise that all people are equal, will lead to a devastating collapse of western society and the rise of some form primitive caliphate….”
Sipu,. Absolutely right. The notion that all people are equal is completely stupid and if pursued will as you say lead to the collapse of Western society.
Hard nosed empiricism and pragmatism is the only way forward, this doesn’t mean that you have to treat everyone like s**t, in fact to the contrary.
Unfortunately our institutions have become fatally contaminated with the PC virus to the extent that reform is well nigh impossible.
Janus, the church is well nigh irrelevant. I bet more people attend the Mosques regularly than go to church and thus starts the beginning of the end.
Jazz: For decades regular attendance at Catholic services has been greater than regular attendance at Anglican. Church attendance seems to have stabilised in recent years. Secularism is the fastest growing trend in the UK, however. Regular mosque attendance is below 50pc.
Church Attendance in Britain https://faithsurvey.co.uk/uk-christianity.html
Brierley Consultancy have also published statistics for church attendance (as opposed to membership) for the period 1980-2015. Key findings are:
Church attendance has declined from 6,484,300 to 3,081,500 (equivalent to a decline from 11.8% to 5.0% of the population).
England has the lowest percentage of the population attending church in 2015 (4.7%), just below Wales at 4.8%. In Scotland, the equivalent figure is 8.9%
Jazz: Regular attendance at mosques is under 1 million. A greater problem, I think, is that people are just not willing to stand behind their culture or values. Relativism has gone far past the “live and let live” point. When a series of Archbishops of Canterbury, for example, deviate from scripture to a breathtaking extreme they bleed parishioners. For years the Catholics have done well poaching the faithful due to their strict adherence to theology. With the current idiot pope trying to out-Rowan Williams Rowan Williams serious questions are being raised — including from the church itself.