haibe:

Is a buba a shirt?
Is a blose a shirt?
Is a singlet a shirt?
Is a coat a shirt?

Image123:
It is general and basic knowledge. thankfully, the dictionary ALSO confirms that..

Image123:
from my english, you should know that yes they are. i have not written in other tongues na.

Image123: see my encarta dictionary na.
It says blouse is woman's SHIRT.
It says singlet is sleeveless SHIRT.

haibe:

kindly show me where the dictionary which you denied using says all upper garments are shirts.

haibe:

sin·glet /ˈsiNGglit/
Noun: 1. A sleeveless garment worn
under or instead of a shirt
2. A single unresolvable line in a
spectrum, not part of a
multiplet

blouse /blous/
Noun: A woman's loose upper garment
resembling a shirt
Verb: Make (a garment) hang in
loose folds

jack·et /ˈjakit/
Noun: An outer garment extending
either to the waist or the hips,
typically having sleeves and a
fastening down the front
Verb: Cover with a jacket


So please how does this definitions imply that all these are shirts?

Image123:
So, the qualification of a shirt is that it has buttons? All upper garments are basically or generally shirts. Like i said, it is fashion that now gives specific differential names. The point is that there are clothing that are unisex and there are some that are not. The shirt is unisex, the belt is unisex, the shoe is unisex. The bra is not, at least not yet. Plaiting of the hair is still not unisex generally. The trouser did not use to be, some few decades ago. i really wonder how difficult that is to comprehend.



Didin't skip the question. i already said that all upper garments are shirts, basically.

Image123:
Kindly learn to read and comprehend carefully. i never denied using a dictionary. You said "don't use the dictionary as an atom of confusion", and i was not referring you to any dictionary as yet. And i said i did not mention dictionary na. i guess you went to check a dictionary, right? And surely, you did go to check. However even before i checked a dictionary, i already knew this as basic common knowledge. It is in fashion that we qualify them.

Candour:
who has yoruba dictionary to help us define buba

Image123:
Kindly give the definition of the shirt too, thanks. BTW, you are leaving my point to focus on dictionary definitions now. No wahala.

haibe:

Which point that buba is a shirt?


shirts
Noun: 1. A garment for the upper body
made of cloth, with a collar,
sleeves, and buttons down the
front
2. A similar garment of
stretchable material with few
or no buttons, typically worn as
casual wear or for sports

Image123:

great and simple.

Candour:

When i mentioned buttons, just wanted to paint the picture so even a toddler can get the difference between a shirt and a robe. I still wonder how you can imagine it in your mind, then write it down that all upper garments are shirts. So a suit is a shirt, a coat is a shirt, a jacket is a shirt, a blouse is a shirt, even a buba is a shirt?

Why do you like standing truth on its head like this? So fashion just recently classified them abi? how can you boldly twist things like this?

Have you been to a bank before? have you seen female bankers wearing shirts? Will those shirts they wear fit on you? So if you agree with shirts being demarcated between the sexes, why not trousers? or you think you can wear the same trousers those female bankers wear?

Hmmm...Image123.....you actually called a buba worn by women from ibadan and other places a shirt?

I must report you to your friends Joagbaje and Gombs today

haibe:

If truely it's a common knowlede that all upper garments are shirts, can you go out saying a lady's buba is a shirt?

Also I don't know what is common about this knowledge because people will hardly agree with you that all upper garments are shirts.

your assumption shouldn't lead to making generalisations on behalf of others

Image123:
that's because you only think of a shirt in terms of what we popular call shirts. At least, my encarta dictionary agrees with me. They are all basically shirts. Whether it is button down or two button or no button, or roundneck, or long sleeve, or short or designer.

Image123:
From the definition of shirts provided by haibe, buba certainly fits that general category.

Image123:
From the definition of shirts provided by haibe, buba certainly fits that general category. i know you are not interested in understanding the point of view i'm giving, but simply up to that you might accuse him of. i'm used to that, no wahala.

The point still remains that shirts have always being unisex, i mentioned somewhere that that has being since like forever. Unlike trousers, which a few decades ago were strictly men's wear. Therefore, according to Deut 22v5, the woman should not wear what belongs to the man.

By your views now, we can safely say that Deut 22v5 is meaningless but subject to what man says. Man can say tomorrow that there is male bra or male plaiting of hair, that is different and not fashionable for the female. That is the point. i'm not even yet into talking about if it is sin or not. My point from the start of the thread is that if we are talking about Deut 22v5 oh, trousers are men's.

haibe:

Where does your encarta dictionary agree that a wear like a lady's buba is a shirt.

please post those words the dictionary used with your source.

haibe:

Never, it doesn't fit into any of them.

1. A buba doesn't have a collar and button, This refers to shirts like TM lewin and co.

2. it is not sowed in a stretchable material or typically used for sport. This refers to t-shirts or what you call polo which is also worn casually .

Candour:

Image, i'm not trying to trap you. Its just the way you and i talk when we discuss. I could accuse you of same you know?

Did you see the definition of Blouse? Don't you think buba fits more with blouse? My bro, i wish you'll drop this line of thought because it's simply ridiculous. How can you say all upper body garments are shirts? You wear a coat and you'll feel comfortable calling it a shirt? C'mon Image

If i'm forced to make a choice on who started wearing shirts, i'll not hesitate to say a man. whom will you choose if told to make a choice? will you say they started at the same time? Shirts didn't become unisex immediately they appeared. You know this, which is why you're trying to stretch the definition to even include buba

I understand where you are going but i'm sure when shirts made their appearance, women were forbidden from touching it. But the situation is different now. It's not about my views. There are a lot of things in the Torah that will entrap you and i today if we have to be judged by Moses. I might not fully understand that verse, but it's better to keep quiet about it than stretch the truth about shirts just to enforce it like you're doing now. There's nothing about trouser in that verse. If trousers is an abomination for ladies because men started wearing it, then so are shirts.

what would you say about the following verses

Deuteronomy 22:11 KJV
Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.

Deuteronomy 22:9 KJV
Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.

Do you obey them?

Image123:
The point i made was that all upper garments are generally and basically shirts. i have given a dictionary that says so, proving that i'm not just imagining things. Wiki is also some general knowledge. Here is what THIS LINK says about blouse being shirt.
[4] Traditionally, the term has been used to refer to a shirt which blouses out.
[1] Today, the word most commonly refers to a woman's shirt
i'm not the only one that defines a blouse technically/basically/generally as a shirt.

They started at the same time. It is modern fashion that makes this basic meaning to be lost on many. Call it garment, robe, clothes, apparel or whatever archaic name. The basic definition of a shirt still matches all upper body clothing. BTW, here is another wiki link It also says that there are different TYPES of shirts. Among the types of shirts it listed are dress shirts, t-shirt, long sleeve shirt, sleeveless shirt, polo shirt, sweatshirt, A-shirt(which is also known as vest or singlet), camisole, tunic, halter top etc. The point is that they are almost inseparable etymologically, you cannot compare that to trousers that even you would agree that it was generally known as male's wear few decades ago globally, and is still being thought as a male's wear in some circles.

Actually it is you that seems to be stretching the truth. from common knowledge, we know that trousers have for long been known as belonging to men, and the aim of the verse seems to be to avoid eroding dissimilarities in dressing. Here is yet another wiki link again. i do not depend on or love giving unnecessary links. i'm just showing you that this things are general knowledge, not things coming out of my imaginations. Some statements from the link below.
trousers have been largely worn by men and not by women until the early 20th century.
In Britain during the Second World War, because of the rationing of clothing, many women took to wearing their husbands' civilian clothes to work
In 1969 Rep. Charlotte Reid (R-Ill.) became the first woman to wear trousers in the U.S. Congress.

Also, here
Western women are often seen wearing trousers, ties, and men's hats. Nevertheless, many cultures around the world still prohibit women from wearing trousers or other traditionally male clothing.

i do not think it right to build a bible verse interpretation on what an individual does. The verse in question is Deut 22v5. Propping up other verses to cancel it or make it seem ridiculous is not the way out. To be short though, i will quote a new testament commentary on a similar verse.
Deu 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.
1Co 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
1Co 9:10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

The new testament does not pick up this OT verses to point out its ridiculousness. It does not even say that they are irrelevant or useless. In fact, it says in this case that they are written for our sakes. If 25v4 is written for our sakes, is there not a probability that 22 might have been written for our sakes too. Why do we not instead ask God for its personal application and interpretation in our life and grace to do His will? Have you considered that passages like 2corinth 6v14 are applications from this same 22v9-11 that you are asking about? i do not think any scripture irrelevant or a tool to cancel out other scriptures that i do not like or understand. i instead ask God for grace and understaanding. And when He gives it, i do not go about condemning or lambasting others that do not have light or understanding or my view point. that's what i can say as regards those verses.

Image123:

There is a microsoft encarta dictionary software on the computer i am using to type. They are not my words.

shirt [shurt]
(plural shirts)
noun
1. clothing for upper body: an item of clothing for the upper part of the body, usually made of a fairly light material and fitted with a collar, sleeves, and buttons down the front

Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

In this definition, all upper clothing qualifies.

[color=#000099]

Nomski0: I love this! Very mature arguement....and kinda funny.

Nomski0: I love this! Very mature arguement....and kinda funny.