In the never-ending saga for the Church to mold every woman to their every expectation, women were made to feel as if they needed the Church's direction in every aspect of their lives.
No, the admonition to avoid the use of makeup on the face wasn't enough. And the admonition of how and in what manner to cut hair was also not enough. The question arose about "permanents" - and the Church was quick to answer!
Mothers were never taught how to care for their hair, and most women never learned how to appear neat. So, because of their ignorance, they have "resorted", without need, to the use of permanents. Was there ever a moment when a person in the church was not judged about something?
So because permanents could possibly damage hair, the Supreme Court of the Government of God under Admiral Herbert dictated the command that permanents were to be avoided. It had been deemed that it simply isn't hard for a woman to learn the art of using curling pins and water.
Oh, and apparently, some of you are washing your hair too much, and some of you aren't washing your hair enough at all. I guess they threw that in there to let it be known to you that it has been noticed. So pay more attention! Listen to your minister Gods in training! No excuses!
The micromanaging of every detail of a person's life knew no bounds, especially when it came to the details of self-expression in the lives of a member of Armstrong's Millennial Utopian Boot Camp. I'm surprised the grooming of, shall we say, areas that Garner Ted would know too well, was not covered here!
Choice was not permitted in the Church. The standard practice of asking the ministry permission on the simplest things was enabled and developed here. Members were treated as children, not as the adults that they were. The importance of appearance to Herbert Armstrong was paramount.
Fortunately, in the long run, Armstrong's reign would be the one thing that would never become "permanent".
guest writer: SHT
guest writer: SHT
21 comments:
Ha! Was this possibly Lomas influence rarther than Herberts ? Lomas hair was finely couffiered into an inch of its life.
This notice could be misleading to the whole past of WCG regarding women. By mid 1970s women were being encouraged to stop going to hairdressers and send that money into the work. Women were actually cutting their hair themselves.
In all reality.
This would probably been just an ordinary question by women about how to react to "the latest fad." After all, it was a conservative movement. The question would probably been answered by one of the women faculty.
The advice not to damage hair is quite good. Treated like children? Well 1950's women were treated like children. The numbers of spankings of women (to correct//not classed as domestic violence) were quite substantial as the 1950's reports show. Men had to sign for many things women were not allowed to sign for.
Having said that!
I very much doubt if the maria's, antonia's, aelia's. balbina's of the early church would have inquired with peter and paul if wearing a purple veil to cover their hair would be apropriate to wear to synagogue, or if a black nitted one would be better, or if their peplum should be below knee length.
19th century middle class christianity reduced women to cattle. A function of higher income and the aspiration to be like the "non working" nobility.
nck
I was in WCG ('87-'94) in Mississippi, and I remember women in the church, especially the younger ones, were putting perms in their hair and some even wore make-up. I even remember one young lady would even come to church in a very sexy & rather revealing dress. I suppose by the time I came into the church they had become more relaxed in their views.
"I'M GONNA WASH THAT APOSTLE RIGHT OUT OF MY HAIR
AND SEND HIM ON HIS WAY!!!"
Jesus used to disappear in crowds, indistinguishable from normal citizens of the day. Herbie and his lackeys dictated a certain look that made the followers stand out as being weirdos, nerds, and fashion-challenged. If we went along with it, we didn’t even get to be “shabby chique”. It was so bad that as a group we actually made the Amish or Kramer on Seinfeld look hip. Unfortunately, this becomes yet another warped mentality. As an example, I’ve spent my years after leaving the org indulging myself in all of the forbidden fashions of the past rather than being currently GQ or street. It’s been my way of giving Herb “the bird”.
The church should have had sold the families the Flow Bee for giving yourself a haircut. Making money as they dictate hair styles and length.
https://www.flowbee.com
In the early sixties at AC everything was monitored and regulated. We ate our meals in the basement of Mayfair. We had to line up and were not allowed to sit down at a table until a male upperclassman took the head seat at the table. Once we got our meal we were not allowed to eat until the upperclassman said we could begin. Then when finished we had to ask to be excused. Concerning women’s hair and for that matter clothing, Loma was the warden. She watched the girls with an eagle eye. My wife to be was called in to Loma’s office and told her hair do was too worldly because she had worn it “up.” When a girl knelt the hem of her dress had to touch the ground. Pants were only allowed at sporting events. Looking back I now realize many of the male teachers/ministers were obsessed with sex. Rod brought up sex continuously in his classes. Often ministers would ask students both male and female, when counseling for baptism, if they masturbated. Then later would openly discuss what they found out in the man power meeting. It was a sick environment. AC produced the “leaders” who run the ACOGs of today.
Jim-AZ
And once again the church has to stick their nose into members business. It had no scriptural right interfering as they constantly did.
There were people in the church with responsibility and respect in their workplaces since they were managers, accountants, engineers etc. Yet they were treated like little children by the ministers. It's an abomination. When I discovered and experienced this, I secretly became embarrassed and ashamed that I was a member. I still am.
I remember in 1967/68, working in Vancouver head office, my boyfriend/fiance at the time (Big Sandy Ambassador grad) called my pixie haircut cute, but too short.
Meighen
When I began attending the WCG I never realized what control freaks those assholes were until I asked to be baptized. I was "counseled" for 6 months and asked some very impersonal questions and after it was all said and done the piece of shit minister refused to baptize me all because I worked a minimum wage job. If you are still in the Armstrong cults, I urge you to get out while you still can.
No wonder the men thought they had to micromanage their wife and "train" them how to be a wife. OMG
A "nosy-rosy" ministry for sure.
Re: the dining protocol....sounds like West Point, or the other military academies. Wonder if
they didn't do that with seating in class? wouldn't be all surprising what with all that
regimentation.
Imagine Basil Fawlty as an irate COG member who totally lost it with ministry...
Good policy concerning permanents. Those things have
always had a ghastly stench that was unbelievable.
Most of the micromanaged WCG standards are found in the Bible. Permanents are mentioned, the length of clothing, hairstyle, the wearing of suits and ties, etc. All are found in the Bible. Actually none of them are, the WCG made it all up. If HWA had lived in Scotland you would have been wearing kilts. No apostle wore a suit or dress shoes.
I've noticed a few of HWA's teachings have the side effect of cutting costs. So, whether it was his intention or not, by forgoing the perm, one can be a more cheerful giver! Well, one could give more, cheerful or not...
1.44 PM
At least at West Point, it's a requirement that all graduates (both men and women) pass amateur boxing. There's a YouTube video on it. During this training, their attitude is monitored, including the required aggression.
Can you imagine the church teaching such self defence attitudes? No way.
This why all of the offshoots of WWCG are dying. They still focus on the physical, and put the spiritual aside. If I am correct, I believe Jesus had a thing or two to say about that.
I still remember asking a church member about the emphasis on appearances when I first started attending services. He told me that the church belief was that members had to dress in a certain manner or else Christ wouldn't be able to recognise his true followers on his return.
If you had responsibility or respect or a specific skill you were deemed to be exaggerating or lying. Deacons or deaconesses would flatout not believe your job and verbally demote you to others.
Putting brethren in boxes they dont belong to, has always been rife.
Post a Comment