Thursday, April 29, 2010

Leggings Under A Skirt Is Not Tznius?

Perhaps someone can explain this to me.

A friend of Eeees recently received a letter from her kids' school. In short the letter said that it was a violation of tznius rules for a woman to wear leggings under her skirt (even if the skirt is of the proper length).

For the life of me, I can't figure this out. How are leggings any worse than tights? On the contrary, I would think that leggings are better than tights since it is less form-fitting on the exposed lower leg.

Can anyone please explain the logic of this to me?

The Wolf

28 comments:

Chaviva said...

I opened this question (this post, really) to my blog readers. I hope you don't mind!

www.kvetchingeditor.com

G*3 said...

> Can anyone please explain the logic of this to me?

There's your problem. You want it to make sense.

It's not tznius because it's not part of the frum dress code. Full stop.

Holy Hyrax said...

>There's your problem. You want it to make sense.

Snort

LOL

The Hedyot said...

It's really not that hard to follow their logic on this one. It has nothing to do with what's exposed or form fitting, but rather has to do with how attention grabbing the garment is. I'd surmise that leggings is something that they consider to be too eye-catching and therefore less tznius.

Hadassah said...

Nah, this is about leggings being defined as pants. The idea being that this could lead the girls to wearing pants without skirts.

Alternatively, it's the anything in style is not tzniyus theory.

Frayda said...

Funny, I have a different take on this. I think they are worried that girls will be tempted to wear shorter skirts if they are allowed to wear leggings under their skirts.
I know that there are times I will wear leggings to cover up if my skirt is an inch above my knee. I use it as a tznius layer but I can see how it could turn into a way to wear shorter skirts.
My opinion is that if you are covered and not skin tight, you are tznius.

tesyaa said...

The leggings are more tzanua. If a proper skirt accidentally rises higher than it should, due to wind or tripping and falling, there is more coverage than if the young lady is wearing knee socks and nothing else. Leggings are often required by frum schools when the girls go on hikes or tiyulim. This is just another capricious area in which the powers that be demand complete control.

tesyaa said...

On my now defunct blog I had a post in which I claimed that an average pair of pants is more tzanua than many if not most skirts. Not a day goes by when I don't see right wing women wearing skirts that are immodest, unintentionally or not. Despite conceding the fact that there are modest pants available, Rabbi Bleich still states that pants are not normative Orthodox garb and shouldn't be worn. It's wrong for pants to be shunned as irreligious garb, when they are often much more modest than skirts.

Frum Girl Gone South said...

It's all about power. And it doesn't have to make sense. What they say goes, even if it leads the sheep over a precipice.

dvorak613 said...

This year, leggings alone have been all the rage amongst secular young ladies. Perhaps this is the reason?

(I am not saying that this is a good or logical reason, but it is a possible explanation nonetheless).

Garnel Ironheart said...

There are two ways to define tznius, the halachic way and the am haaretz way.
The halachic way doesn't have so much to do with particular styles of clothing as it does with general guidelines. Sleeves and skirts of a certain length, avoidance of certain eye-catching colours, how much to cover the hair, etc.
The am haaretz way is to see something, be attracted to it, decide that it must be not tznius and ban it. Probably some girls at the school were overheard saying something like "Did you see Hot Hanee's leggings? They're so cute!" and this set off alarm bells in the administration offices.

G*3 said...

> Despite conceding the fact that there are modest pants available, Rabbi Bleich still states that pants are not normative Orthodox garb and shouldn't be worn.

Like I said, it’s not part of the dress code, so it’s not tznius.

I used to work in one of the more modern yeshivas, and I noticed that many of the girls wore leggings under their skirts. Depending on the school your friend sends her kids to, leggings might be banned for reasons similar to the prohibition against leather and knitted yarmulkes in the yeshivish world.

Chaviva said...

@Garnel Ironheart I *really* don't think the people who make these decisions would like being referred to as am ha'aretz :) (THINK: Talmud/midrashic literature understanding of who the am ha'aretz were!)

ksil lo yavin said...

chaviva, you obviosuly do not know garnel very well. throwing around insults and belittling those who take a differnet view than he.

par for the course

lovely dude

Mordechai Y. Scher said...

Well, I guess with a stroke of the pen they just invalidated the centuries long practice of Yemenite Jewish women. A number of our friends and neighbors wore embroidered pants under their skirts. It was their custom back in Teiman.

Rich said...

Here in Israel, it is almost the norm that religious girls (not talking about chareidim here**) were shorts, leggings or capris under their skirts. There is no question that it is MORE tzanua than not having them.

There are many times where a long skirt can rise up or where it just doesn't cover well. Just think of the logistics of a girl sitting on a floor with a skirt and getting up. Are you going to tell me that it is not possible that someone will get a glimpse of their legs?

With something under the skirt, this becomes a non-issue.

** Chareidim here where tights all year round beginning at the age of 5 or 6.

Anonymous said...

Join the chumra of the month club and you'll get all the details

Moshe said...

I assume Wolf's comment was meant entirely rhetorically. This edict, like many similar ones, was made solely for political reasons (we are holier than "them", god loves us more than "them", or we can exercise control over our adherents better, etc.). There is no point in trying to find the logic for chumrahs like this one.

The Leader, Garnel Ironheart said...

> I *really* don't think the people who make these decisions would like being referred to as am ha'aretz

Then they shouldn't act like them.

Anonymous said...

There's a solid basis for this!

Legging X 2 (one for each leg) b'gematria is the same as Pritzus.

Yossi Ginzberg

The Leader, Garnel Ironheart said...

KLY, I do not indiscriminately throw insults at people who disagree with me and if you've been following my comments you know that.
I do throw insults at people who clearly don't know much about a subject but feel they can make decisions about it that affect other people based on their limited knowledge.
This is a tremendous case in point. There is no problem with leggings. Someone who clearly doesn't know the halacha of tznius or probably what the real definition of it is has come along and imposed his/her opinion on all these school girls. This isn't a case of differing opinion but of idiocy.

MO Woman said...

Join the chumra of the month club and you'll get all the details

Sorry, I'm already a lifetime permanent member of the Kula of the Month Club.

Jewish Atheist said...

The am haaretz way is to see something, be attracted to it, decide that it must be not tznius and ban it.

I agree with Garnel. I always sensed a lot of projection coming from some of the rabbis who were always railing about tznius in my school.

NJG (signed out) said...

I'd also be very curious to know what the practical difference is between opaque tights,stockings or hose (which as far as I know are still 'allowed' under a skirt) and leggings.

(Obviously, wearing leggings could lead to dancing.)

I think you need to find a new school...

YMLC said...

I dont look at your anti hardi blog, but life in israel linked....leggings attract attention...u cant understand....

Anonymous said...

Some rules today are like "if I never did it and no one in my circle ever did it, it must be 100% wrong no matter what your logic says"

There actually are instances when this type of rule is OK, but this doesn't look like one.

aaron from L.A. said...

Maybe it could lead to mixed dancing............................

noam the preacher said...

Anyone with an open mind in here?
Schools dont want any 'different issues" it doesn't keep the school running as smooth as it could/should.

You all appear bitter. 'Nobody tells me what to do'. Get a life, or just change schools. Im sure there's school out there that loves conconforming parents.