Earrings on Men

[Stephen]

I forget, what was the Gay ear? If a man wore a ring in what ear?

I seem to remember a saying, something like "Left is right, right is wrong" to help people remember. The right ear?

Around here, it's "de rigueur" for a homosexual to wear an earring - if any - in the right ear only. Straight men, if they wear an earring (or two) wear them in the left ear only or in both ears. However, contra the whole concept, there's Deuteronomy 22:5 to consider. Of course, women don't usually wear only one earring... Want to make a lady panic? Tell her she's got only one earring on... Especially if that one is a real pearl... (It's happened to me.)

I personally don't like to see earrings on men and I wouldn't find a man attractive who wore one - or two. But then, what do I know? And I've been married, practically, since they all disembarked at Ararat anyway...

Margaret

My wife would agree with you. I do not like them either and if I wore one, my wife would probably remove it with some force,

 

[Amazing Grace]

I forget, what was the Gay ear? If a man wore a ring in what ear?

I seem to remember a saying, something like "Left is right, right is wrong" to help people remember. The right ear?

Sorry, I did not see your response to Amazing Grace. If you are going to wear an earring, never wear it in the right ear.

Well i ahve holes in both, so does that make me a metrosexual or something? Or just stupid!!!!

 

[Archlute]

Which culture is that?

The culture which prevailed before relatively recent times when it then became marginally acceptable for men to wear women's jewelry in public.

Really? That's "our" culture?

I don't buy it. Actually, I have a tough time buying any sort of argument that claims that we live in some sort of singular culture. The fact is, culture is splintered along all sorts of lines -- generational, geographic, racial, gender, political, affinity, and the list can go on and on. Now, of course, Christ reigns over all cultures, and scriptural commands and mandates apply to all cultures at all times, but . . . I have a really tough time believing that whether or not a man "should" wear earrings if he wishes is one of them.

Also, the idea that earrings are necessarily "women's jewelry" doesn't make much sense to me. It's like saying denim jeans are necessarily "men's pants". There are certainly some earrings that are designed for women, but there are others designed for men.

Really? Show me a consensus or practice among any major social class or ethnic group in America before the post-WWII era that would have accepted men's earrings.

I think you are reading too much cheap revisionist history of the kind they push in modern university studies now that loves to revel in a the supposed diversity and pluriformity of culture/sexual orientation/etc in reconstructing historic circumstances and events. I remember taking a class on 19th century Western America whose main thesis was that prostitutes (that class of women who are "woefully under appreciated and under represented in our history books") were nearly the sole reason that the "West was Won". Just because one may have been born or raised in a modern American city where the culture has fragmented, and in many cases degenerated, does not mean that things have always been that way for large portions of the population, revisionist history aside.

If you want to talk about "your" culture, could you really say that your forebears going multiple generations back would have accepted the wearing of what was commonly understood to be women's jewelry by the men of their day? I really doubt you could substantiate that.

To be honest, I would most likely not give a positive vote at presbytery for a potential minister or ruling elder who wore earrings, because I believe that such dress represents a personal vanity, and a lack of sober-mindedness and respectability which is required by the Apostle Paul in emplacing elders among the congregation. Feel free to disagree, but these things are important in the representation of the church to the world, according to apostolic command, and no amount of post modern/emergent church/cultural relativism will change that.

 

[Archlute]

Which culture is that?

The culture which prevailed before relatively recent times when it then became marginally acceptable for men to wear women's jewelry in public.

Take a look at some Renaissance era paintings and tell us if you still think earrings on men is a relatively recent phenomenon.

I don't wear earrings, but don't think there's anything good or bad about men wearing them...

In my days as an art student and a music major I have viewed plenty of Renaissance and Baroque era paintings and have not noticed the practice. However, I was speaking of American times where at least some influence of Christian/Puritan ideals were still influential. Which brings us to a broader discussion of cultural normativity in morality. Do we set our moral standards by cultural consensus, as seems to be argued here, or do we look for deeper principles that transcend the culture, such as those found in the various applications of the Decalogue in the Larger Catechism, inference from apostolic injunctions, and the careful writings of Puritan casuistry? We are still known here as the "Puritan Board", correct?

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

 

[Southern Presbyterian]

I rather like getting older and looking and acting my age.

Say it isn't so!

Where's the fun in that?

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

No, just the greatest English writer of all time...

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

Which brings us to a broader discussion of cultural normativity in morality. Do we set our moral standards by cultural consensus, as seems to be argued here, or do we look for deeper principles that transcend the culture, such as those found in the various applications of the Decalogue in the Larger Catechism, inference from apostolic injunctions, and the careful writings of Puritan casuistry? We are still known here as the "Puritan Board", correct?

Fair enough. So point to me where these indicate it is wrong for a man to wear an earring.

 

[Presbyterian Deacon]

having an earing violates no biblical standards...let's all get'em

No thanks!

Others may. I WILL NOT!

I got enough holes in my head!

 

[Southern Presbyterian]

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

No, just the greatest English writer of all time...

Are you sure this pic is not photoshopped?

 

[Presbyterian Deacon]

I forget, what was the Gay ear? If a man wore a ring in what ear?

I seem to remember a saying, something like "Left is right, right is wrong" to help people remember. The right ear?

Sorry, I did not see your response to Amazing Grace. If you are going to wear an earring, never wear it in the right ear.

I thought it was, if you're going to wear an earring, make sure you're a female.

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

Are you sure this pic is not photoshopped?

Yep, unless the National Portrait Gallery photoshops their paintings...

NPG 1; William Shakespeare

 

[Davidius]

Which brings us to a broader discussion of cultural normativity in morality. Do we set our moral standards by cultural consensus, as seems to be argued here, or do we look for deeper principles that transcend the culture, such as those found in the various applications of the Decalogue in the Larger Catechism, inference from apostolic injunctions, and the careful writings of Puritan casuistry? We are still known here as the "Puritan Board", correct?

Fair enough. So point to me where these indicate it is wrong for a man to wear an earring.

I, too, agree that we should look for deeper principles that transcend culture, but I don't see how we can deduce from the Decalogue that men shouldn't wear earrings. I used to wear them but stopped because of personal aesthetic preference. This obviously cannot, however, equate to a general proscription, but I'm open to being shown otherwise.

 

[ericfromcowtown]

I remember my brother coming home one day, at 14 or 15, with an earring in one ear. My dad ignored my brother, turned to me and said "you know Eric there are two types of men who wear earrings, pirates and homosexuals, and you don't see too many pirates around any more." My brother turned on his heals and walked out of the room. We never did see that earring again.

In all seriousness though, earrings aren't my thing, but since there is nothing unbiblical about them their use should be a matter of personal taste and liberty.

 

[Davidius]

I remember my brother coming home one day, at 14 or 15, with an earring in one ear. My dad ignored my brother, turned to me and said "you know Eric there are two types of men who wear earrings, pirates and homosexuals, and you don't see too many pirates around any more." My brother turned on his heals and walked out of the room. We never did see that earring again.

 

[raekwon]

The culture which prevailed before relatively recent times when it then became marginally acceptable for men to wear women's jewelry in public.

Really? That's "our" culture?

I don't buy it. Actually, I have a tough time buying any sort of argument that claims that we live in some sort of singular culture. The fact is, culture is splintered along all sorts of lines -- generational, geographic, racial, gender, political, affinity, and the list can go on and on. Now, of course, Christ reigns over all cultures, and scriptural commands and mandates apply to all cultures at all times, but . . . I have a really tough time believing that whether or not a man "should" wear earrings if he wishes is one of them.

Also, the idea that earrings are necessarily "women's jewelry" doesn't make much sense to me. It's like saying denim jeans are necessarily "men's pants". There are certainly some earrings that are designed for women, but there are others designed for men.

Really? Show me a consensus or practice among any major social class or ethnic group in America before the post-WWII era that would have accepted men's earrings.

I think you are reading too much cheap revisionist history of the kind they push in modern university studies now that loves to revel in a the supposed diversity and pluriformity of culture/sexual orientation/etc in reconstructing historic circumstances and events. I remember taking a class on 19th century Western America whose main thesis was that prostitutes (that class of women who are "woefully under appreciated and under represented in our history books") were nearly the sole reason that the "West was Won". Just because one may have been born or raised in a modern American city where the culture has fragmented, and in many cases degenerated, does not mean that things have always been that way for large portions of the population, revisionist history aside.

If you want to talk about "your" culture, could you really say that your forebears going multiple generations back would have accepted the wearing of what was commonly understood to be women's jewelry by the men of their day? I really doubt you could substantiate that.

To be honest, I would most likely not give a positive vote at presbytery for a potential minister or ruling elder who wore earrings, because I believe that such dress represents a personal vanity, and a lack of sober-mindedness and respectability which is required by the Apostle Paul in emplacing elders among the congregation. Feel free to disagree, but these things are important in the representation of the church to the world, according to apostolic command, and no amount of post modern/emergent church/cultural relativism will change that.

Wow. I guess it's a good thing that God knew who and who not to put on the examining commission when He called me to the office of Elder! I find it interesting that, substituting a few words in that last paragraph, you've used a very similar argument to those who'd say that they'd never vote for an elder who used alcohol. VERY similar. But I don't know; maybe you feel the same way about alcohol.

Anyway, it's pretty obvious that we're going to disagree fundamentally on a few things, but I just want to make sure we're actually addressing what the other is saying instead of "arguing around" eachother. You've been a Christian for almost as long as I've been alive, so I definitely appreciate your wisdom and education. Still, it seems to me that we're talking about different things when we talk about "culture". For instance, I'm having a tough time understanding where the pre-WWII era even figures in this discussion. Sure, it's interesting from an historical perspective, but we're talking about the propriety of earrings on men in 2008, in "our culture". All I'm saying is that the minute one says "our culture" in a discussion like this, anything after that point is useless without an agreed-upon definition of what "our culture" is. For instance, there's a huge difference in the culture that my church largely ministers to (urban, younger, bohemian, artistic, highly educated) and the culture that our sister PCA church fifteen miles away ministers to (suburban, older, more "working class", but also educated). We have a common bond in Christ and in the reformed faith, but the cultures of our churches are not the same. I'm not about to tell their elders that their khakis and polos or suits and ties are inappropriate (unless in jest). Neither should they tell ours that our jeans, goatees, Converse sneakers, or earrings are.

[I'm honestly a bit baffled that this is being argued as an issue of "morality" (unless, of course, we're going the "everything is an issue of morality" route).]

 

[Southern Presbyterian]

I remember my brother coming home one day, at 14 or 15, with an earring in one ear. My dad ignored my brother, turned to me and said "you know Eric there are two types of men who wear earrings, pirates and homosexuals, and you don't see too many pirates around any more." My brother turned on his heals and walked out of the room. We never did see that earring again.

My cousin showed up at Sunday dinner one time with an earring. My grandfather said, "Let me get a closer look at that earring, Greg." My cousin leaned in for Papaw to get a better look. My grandfather grabbed the earring and yanked it out of his ear and said, "No grandson of mine will wear women's jewelry." Greg has never worn one since, and no other male in our family ever showed up with one until after my grandfather passed away.

 

[Zenas]

The culture which prevailed before relatively recent times when it then became marginally acceptable for men to wear women's jewelry in public.

As opposed to the one where it was acceptable to wear women's jewlry in private?

 

[Theogenes]

The only men that should be wearing ear rings are PIRATES.....arrrrrrrrrr!

 

[Amazing Grace]

The culture which prevailed before relatively recent times when it then became marginally acceptable for men to wear women's jewelry in public.

Take a look at some Renaissance era paintings and tell us if you still think earrings on men is a relatively recent phenomenon.

I don't wear earrings, but don't think there's anything good or bad about men wearing them...

In my days as an art student and a music major I have viewed plenty of Renaissance and Baroque era paintings and have not noticed the practice. However, I was speaking of American times where at least some influence of Christian/Puritan ideals were still influential. Which brings us to a broader discussion of cultural normativity in morality. Do we set our moral standards by cultural consensus, as seems to be argued here, or do we look for deeper principles that transcend the culture, such as those found in the various applications of the Decalogue in the Larger Catechism, inference from apostolic injunctions, and the careful writings of Puritan casuistry? We are still known here as the "Puritan Board", correct?

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

Adam, does this suffice?

Ex 32:2-4

Aaron answered them, "Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me." So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool.


Ezekiel 16:12-AV And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.

And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hand, and all their earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.

And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto the LORD.


We have therefore brought an oblation for the LORD, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the LORD.

 

[Pilgrim's Progeny]

Earing is a fake!

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

No, just the greatest English writer of all time...

Are you sure this pic is not photoshopped?

The earing was added later, look
here

Studies indicate that the beard and hair in the portrait were lengthened by later painters and the earring was not part of the original painting.

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

The earing was added later, look
here

Studies indicate that the beard and hair in the portrait were lengthened by later painters and the earring was not part of the original painting.

You forgot to quote this section as well...

"In 2006, Tarnya Cooper of the National Portrait Gallery completed a three-and-a-half-year study of the purported Shakespeare portraits and concluded that the Chandos portrait was the most likely to be a representation of Shakespeare. Cooper points to the earring and the loose shirt-ties of the sitter, which were emblematic of a poet."

 

[Pilgrim's Progeny]

Take a look at some Renaissance era paintings and tell us if you still think earrings on men is a relatively recent phenomenon.

I don't wear earrings, but don't think there's anything good or bad about men wearing them...

In my days as an art student and a music major I have viewed plenty of Renaissance and Baroque era paintings and have not noticed the practice. However, I was speaking of American times where at least some influence of Christian/Puritan ideals were still influential. Which brings us to a broader discussion of cultural normativity in morality. Do we set our moral standards by cultural consensus, as seems to be argued here, or do we look for deeper principles that transcend the culture, such as those found in the various applications of the Decalogue in the Larger Catechism, inference from apostolic injunctions, and the careful writings of Puritan casuistry? We are still known here as the "Puritan Board", correct?

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

Adam, does this suffice?

Ex 32:2-4

Aaron answered them, "Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me." So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool.


Ezekiel 16:12-AV And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.

And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hand, and all their earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.

And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto the LORD.


We have therefore brought an oblation for the LORD, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the LORD.

Ex 32:2-4 In this text the Israelites had just departed from Egypt, the mosaic law had not been given. Plus, I would not base a practice after the pattern of an idolustrous and stiff necked people.

Ezekiel 16:12 It would be a stretch to use this as a proof text for piercings for men given the overall context given.

Make your case from Ex. 21:6 and Deut. 15:17, I have seen those who have pieced their ears as a mark of being wholly givin to Christ's service.

 

[Pilgrim's Progeny]

The earing was added later, look
here

Studies indicate that the beard and hair in the portrait were lengthened by later painters and the earring was not part of the original painting.

You forgot to quote this section as well...

"In 2006, Tarnya Cooper of the National Portrait Gallery completed a three-and-a-half-year study of the purported Shakespeare portraits and concluded that the Chandos portrait was the most likely to be a representation of Shakespeare. Cooper points to the earring and the loose shirt-ties of the sitter, which were emblematic of a poet."

You forgot to quote this section as well,

However, she acknowledges that the painting's authenticity cannot be proven.[3]

 

[DMcFadden]

Doesn't that just mean that the authenticity of the painting as being the Bard cannot be proven but the dress and earring seem characteristic of a poet of that era? And, if so, isn't that the point?

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

Doesn't that just mean that the authenticity of the painting as being the Bard cannot be proven but the dress and earring seem characteristic of a poet of that era? And, if so, isn't that the point?

Exactly.

 

[Pilgrim's Progeny]

I found this thread helpful, it also answers the question If he still holds the same view.

I personally do not care what people think of my style, so I am not overly critical of others. I try to be modest and orderly in my dress and try to ask the same of others. I try to focus on my own logs, most of the time. Yet, I still find myself picking at the specks of others before I deal with my logs, all too often.

I must admit that outward appearance does play a role in how I judge one's character upon first acquaintance. You can tell a lot about a person by how they style their self. Most stereotypes are the rule, and exceptions do come along from time to time, but not often.

 

[Amazing Grace]

In my days as an art student and a music major I have viewed plenty of Renaissance and Baroque era paintings and have not noticed the practice. However, I was speaking of American times where at least some influence of Christian/Puritan ideals were still influential. Which brings us to a broader discussion of cultural normativity in morality. Do we set our moral standards by cultural consensus, as seems to be argued here, or do we look for deeper principles that transcend the culture, such as those found in the various applications of the Decalogue in the Larger Catechism, inference from apostolic injunctions, and the careful writings of Puritan casuistry? We are still known here as the "Puritan Board", correct?

P.S. Were you looking at paintings of Ishmaelites?

Adam, does this suffice?

Ex 32:2-4

Aaron answered them, "Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me." So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool.


Ezekiel 16:12-AV And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.

And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hand, and all their earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.

And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto the LORD.


We have therefore brought an oblation for the LORD, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the LORD.

Ex 32:2-4 In this text the Israelites had just departed from Egypt, the mosaic law had not been given. Plus, I would not base a practice after the pattern of an idolustrous and stiff necked people.

Ezekiel 16:12 It would be a stretch to use this as a proof text for piercings for men given the overall context given.

Make your case from Ex. 21:6 and Deut. 15:17, I have seen those who have pieced their ears as a mark of being wholly givin to Christ's service.

Its not up to me or anyone to dissect the verses provided to be dogmatic on the issue. Men had piercings and was not determined unlawful. Therefore it is not a stretch to denounce them as sinful or immoral by any means. The stiff neckedness idolatry is not at all connected to jewelry or dress. Perhaps ill have to have my wife take back all of her pants!!!

 

[Pilgrim's Progeny]

Adam, does this suffice?

Ex 32:2-4

Aaron answered them, "Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me." So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool.


Ezekiel 16:12-AV And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.

And they gave unto Jacob all the strange gods which were in their hand, and all their earrings which were in their ears; and Jacob hid them under the oak which was by Shechem.

And they came, both men and women, as many as were willing hearted, and brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold: and every man that offered offered an offering of gold unto the LORD.


We have therefore brought an oblation for the LORD, what every man hath gotten, of jewels of gold, chains, and bracelets, rings, earrings, and tablets, to make an atonement for our souls before the LORD.

Ex 32:2-4 In this text the Israelites had just departed from Egypt, the mosaic law had not been given. Plus, I would not base a practice after the pattern of an idolustrous and stiff necked people.

Ezekiel 16:12 It would be a stretch to use this as a proof text for piercings for men given the overall context given.

Make your case from Ex. 21:6 and Deut. 15:17, I have seen those who have pieced their ears as a mark of being wholly givin to Christ's service.

Its not up to me or anyone to dissect the verses provided to be dogmatic on the issue. Men had piercings and was not determined unlawful. Therefore it is not a stretch to denounce them as sinful or immoral by any means. The stiff neckedness idolatry is not at all connected to jewelry or dress. Perhaps ill have to have my wife take back all of her pants!!!

I think you meant, is it not, right?

What I am trying to say is the same as you, I think. It is a stretch to make a dogmatic case for either side based on the texts given. There are better texts to make one's case with in my opinion.

 

[Amazing Grace]

Ex 32:2-4 In this text the Israelites had just departed from Egypt, the mosaic law had not been given. Plus, I would not base a practice after the pattern of an idolustrous and stiff necked people.

Ezekiel 16:12 It would be a stretch to use this as a proof text for piercings for men given the overall context given.

Make your case from Ex. 21:6 and Deut. 15:17, I have seen those who have pieced their ears as a mark of being wholly givin to Christ's service.

Its not up to me or anyone to dissect the verses provided to be dogmatic on the issue. Men had piercings and was not determined unlawful. Therefore it is not a stretch to denounce them as sinful or immoral by any means. The stiff neckedness idolatry is not at all connected to jewelry or dress. Perhaps ill have to have my wife take back all of her pants!!!

I think you meant, is it not, right?

What I am trying to say is the same as you, I think. It is a stretch to make a dogmatic case for either side based on the texts given. There are better texts to make one's case with in my opinion.

I forget what I am trying to say!!!

My only point is that there is biblical record of men piercing their ears. Oh, and maybe another small point, if anyone is saying it is immoral and sinful, then telling them they are wrong!!!

 

[Reepicheep]

Earrings are fine, but it's the "soul patch" that is truly Puritan...try to count all the soul patches in the great portrait of the divines! Richard Baxter had a sweet soul patch for sure.