from wikipedia:

 

Trousers (or pants in Canada, South Africa and the United States, and sometimes called slacks or breeches �?often pronounced /bɹɪtʃɪz/ �?in more old-fashioned usage) are an item of clothing worn on the lower part of the body, covering both legs separately (rather than with cloth stretching across both as in skirts and dresses). Historically, as for the West, trousers have been the standard lower-body clothing item for males since the 16th century; by the late 20th century, they had become extremely prevalent for females as well. Trousers are worn at the hips or waist, and may be held up by their own fastenings, a belt, or suspenders (braces). Leggings are form-fitting trousers of a clingy material, often knitted cotton and lycra.

History

Nomadic Eurasian horsemen/women such as the Iranian Scythians, along with Achaemenid Persians were among the first to wear trousers, later introduced to modern Europe via either the Hungarians or Ottoman Turks.^{[citation needed]}

In ancient China, trousers were only worn by cavalry. According to tradition, they were first introduced by King Wu of Zhao in 375 BC, who copied the custom from non-Chinese horsemen on his northern border.

Trousers were introduced into Western European culture at several points in history, but gained their current predominance only in the 16th century.

The word itself is of Gaelic origin, from the Middle Irish word "triubhas" (close-fitting shorts).

[edit] Men's trousers

Trousers also trace their ancestry to the individual hose worn by men in the 15th century (which is why trousers are plural and not singular). The hose were easy to make and fastened to a doublet at the top with ties called "points", but as time went by, the two hose were joined, first in the back then across the front, but still leaving a large opening for sanitary functions. Originally, doublets came almost to the knees, effectively covering the private parts, but as fashions changed and doublets became shorter, it became necessary for men to cover their genitals with a codpiece.

By the end of the 16th century, the codpiece had been incorporated into the hose, now usually called breeches, which were roughly knee-length and featured a fly or fall front opening.

During the French Revolution, the male citizens of France adopted a working-class costume including ankle-length trousers or pantaloons in place of the aristocratic knee-breeches. This style was introduced to England in the early 19th century, possibly by Beau Brummell, and supplanted breeches as fashionable street wear by mid-century. Breeches survived into the 1940s as the plus-fours or knickers worn for active sports and by young school-boys. Types of breeches are still worn today by baseball and football players.

Sailors may have played a role in the dissemination of trousers as a fashion around the world. In the 17th and 18th centuries, sailors wore baggy trousers known as galligaskins. Sailors were also the first to wear jeans -- trousers made of denim. These became more popular in the late 19th century in the American West, because of their ruggedness and durability.

[edit] Women's trousers

Although trousers for women did not become fashion items until the later 20th century, women began wearing men's trousers (suitably altered) for outdoor work a hundred years earlier.

The Wigan pit brow girls scandalized Victorian society by wearing trousers for their dangerous work in the coal mines. They wore skirts over their trousers and rolled them up to their waist to keep them out of the way.

Women working the ranches of the 19th century American West also wore trousers for riding, and in the early 20th century aviatrices and other working women often wore trousers. Actresses Marlene Dietrich and Katharine Hepburn were often photographed in trousers from the 1930s and helped make trousers acceptable for women. During World War II, women working in factories and doing other forms of "men's work" on war service wore trousers when the work demanded it, and in the post-war era trousers became acceptable casual wear for gardening, the beach, and other leisure pursuits.

In Britain during the Second World War, because of the rationing of clothing, many women took to wearing their husbands' civilian clothes, including their trousers, to work while their husbands were away in the armed forces. This was partly because they were seen as practical garments of workwear, and partly to allow women to keep their clothing allowance for other uses. As this practice of wearing trousers became more widespread and as the men's clothes wore out, replacements were needed, so that by the summer of 1944 it was reported that sales of women's trousers were five times more than in the previous year.^[1]

In the 1960s, André Courrèges introduced long trousers for women as a fashion item, leading to the era of the pantsuit and designer jeans and the gradual eroding of the prohibitions against girls and women wearing trousers in schools, the workplace, and fine restaurants.

[edit] Society

It is customary in the Western world for men to wear trousers and not skirts or dresses. However, there are exceptions, such as the Scottish kilt and the Greek foustanella, worn on ceremonial occasions, as well as robes or robe-like clothing such as the cassocks, etc. of clergy and academic robes (both rarely worn in daily use today). (See also Men's skirts.)

Based on Deuteronomy 22:5 in the Bible, some groups believe that women should not wear trousers, but only skirts and dresses.

Among certain groups, low-rise, baggy trousers exposing underwear are in fashion, e.g. among skaters and in 1990s hip hop fashion.

Cut-offs are homemade shorts made by cutting the legs off trousers, usually after holes have been worn in fabric around the knees. This extends the useful life of the trousers. The remaining leg fabric may be hemmed or left to fray after being cut.

Removing one's trousers in public is, in the main, considered taboo.

 

Dave,

 

The reality is that the saints of the early Pentcostal movement were wise enough to regard the Word of God as truth, and to discern the spirit of this world from the Spirit which is of God.  It is true that in some instances, in their zeal they went further than was necessary; yet as the saints began to grow in grace and knowledge of Him, and gained greater understanding, they amended issues that went beyond that which was necessary. 

 

In my 35+ years of being saved, I've never heard any sermons or teachings prohibiting red dresses, open toe shoes, neckties, pastel colored shirts, etc. The messages which have brought me to my place in Christ have been about leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, and going on to perfection.  We've been taught not to love the world or the things of the world.  We've been taught to be transformed by the renewing of our minds.  We've been taught to walk even as He walked.  I could go on. 

 

Dave, standards are not legalism.  Those who have the oversight of God's sheep have a responsibility to watch for the souls of all those whom He has placed under their care.  Faithful ministers will feed His sheep and His lambs, laboring faithfully in the word and doctrine to bring the saints into the unity of the faith, unto the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man; they will not permit the saints to be tossed with every wind of doctrine.  They will hold forth the word of life, and guard against the infiltration of the flock by worldly wisdom, worldly standards, worldly mores, etc.

 

If indeed a congregation is only being fed standards and rules in place of the word of God which will help them to grow in grace, then that is indeed a sad situation.  Undernourished sheep will be hard pressed to be transformed into the image of Christ; for law (rules and regulations) can make nothing perfect.  The purpose of the five fold ministry is to perfect the saints, fulfill the work of the ministry, and to edify the body of Christ.  The goal is to present every man perfect in Christ.  Only the gospel and the principles/precepts of the NT epistles can accomplish this through the grace of God!

 

As the saints of God grow in grace, and love Him for who He is (and not just because of what He does), the standards will be followed willingly; not as rules, but motivated by the love and fear of God!  For we know that to love Him is to keep HIs commandments; and His commandments are not grievous to them who love the truth.  But to those who make provision for the flesh to fulfill its lusts, standards of holiness will ever be grievous; for they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

 

I am persuaded that the Lord is calling each of us who names the name of Christ to come on up higher in Him.  The time is out for saints making provision for the flesh, contrary to the scriptures. 

 

11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

Titus 2:11-15 (KJV)

The church which He will soon present unto Himself must be holy, and without blemish.  (cf. Ephesians 5:25-27)  Nothing that defiles shall enter into His rest.  The principles of sanctification, separation from the world, not loving the world, holiness, etc. will never change, no matter who takes issue with them.  The reality is that if the issues often raised by those who oppose standards were indeed spelled out word-for-word, they would yet be trying to find some way to get around them.  Godly standards are not the issue; the unwillingness of many to deny the flesh is the crux of the matter.

Pharaism, legalism (which is the substitution of outward form and fashion for true inward devotion and holiness), and such like, must be avoided at all costs. Nevertheless,  the imposition of standards by those who are genuinely concerned about the well-being of the saints, and that are based on the principles and precepts of scripture, are not legalism.

Until the Lord Comes!

Bishop Waverly Jackson