The subject being discussed here whether a woman’s hair is “erva” woman wearing pants, woman showing more then a “Tefac” (about 4 inches) of skin above the ankle, any amount of skin above the elbow, what is considered “a low cut dress” what color clothing is prohibited, in fact the entire aspect of just what is considered “pritzus” (immodest clothing) including the sound of a woman singing, laughter or hearing her praying are all extrapolated from the notion that states “Bas Melech Panima” which means a princess beauty is her inner behavior, within herself and not be flouted publicly. This notion of Tzinous (modesty) to the best of my knowledge does not appear in any direct Torah directive within the Chumash, (I defy any torah scholar to prove me wrong) but many Jewish known laws which are a part of Jewish culture and conduct do not have a direct clearly described written prohibition in the body of the written Torah such as the laws of what animal is considered kosher or not. The Talmudic Sages utilized 13 established methodology formula, in how to interpret the seemingly repetitions contained in the Torah, the usage of , at times a singular and then a generalization language of the same apparent subject. At times the Talmudic Sages simply state Halacha Lemoshe Misini” or “Mekubel hue beyodanue” meaning this particular rule is a directive from Sinai, and does not require any supporting proof nor is it open to interpretation.. That formula was the division between the Tzadokim and the Perusim, in how to promulgate and attribute such laws as Torah Law. To describe the rules and regulations of modesty as direct Torah law is just not feasible nor is it governed by any specific directive contained in any Mishna, and therefore it is wide open to interpretation. What previous generations established were simply Minhagim, customs which were governed by their particular society norms, and as the Jewish world were disbursed throughout many nations of different cultures and norms, the rules of modesty followed suit. I will give a very brief overview of the great disparity between different ideologies what is acceptable or unacceptable in any given orthodox society, on one extreme is the opinion of certain groups, that a girl over the age of 3 is prohibited from entering the men’s sanctuary, that ideology also demands that over the age of 3 a girls clothing must cover her entirely, that theory has its basis from interpretation the decree issued by Moses after the Midyonite campaign wherein Moses decreed that any female having known an man (in the biblical sense) should be killed, Rasshi explanation of that decree is any girl over the age of 3 is suspect and thus should be put to death to preserve the purity of the Jewish Nation, and on the other side of the spectrum is if your society norms do not impose any dress code what you wear is unimportant since it does not bring any specific attention to you. What we find ourselves in our current situation is the realty of, all extreme viewpoints, all different minhagim, all different ideologies from the entire Jewish world, were combined and melted into a single community that does not have any defined minhag, and thus the disparity is very pronounced which causes unnecessary friction between supposedly orthodox communities. Having said that I personally find entire issue of trying to find a direct decree in the written body of the Torah, if a modern man made article is prohibited as fundemently ludicrous, that this issue is even discussed and debated is totaly unnecessary, we Jews have far more greater issues that should be of great concern to our rabbinical leaders.

The Torah sh'baal peh clearly obligates the covering of hair (at least in public spaces). Whether or not this has been entirely been complied with through the ages, there is no question as to whether that represents an authentic tradition. The issue at hand is not whether the Torah speaks of wigs (of course it does not). Rather, the issue is whether the wearing of these wigs would satisfy the requirement of covering one's hair -- beyond the strict technical sense, of course.

The dead animal look just doesn't cut it for me unless you are hiding in the bushes with your hunting rifle waiting to ambush a deer. A good scarf will do, but be aware that wearing it backwards means you cannot forget the leather pants and your cool motorcycle. Paper bags will also do, just cut out holes to see cause the ground is hard. What is next? Men must wear robes because pants are not tzniis enough. My evil inclination says wear dark shades, that way nobody catches you staring.

The question at hand is to “prove that modern wigs are permissible according to Halacha”. In your response you state unequivocally that “The Torah sh'baal peh clearly obligates the covering of hair (at least in public spaces).. Please direct me to any Mishna (or even a Bryisa ) that imposes that obligation upon a “married” woman thus making it a viable Halacha according to theory of Torah Sh’baal peh. We do not pasken halacha according to the Amoroim as contained in the Gemara. And as far as the concept of “Minhag Yisrael Din” such minhag does not make it a halachic obligation across the entire Jewish world unless it was adopted and incorporated throughout ever Jewish community. You yourself admit that not every community abided by that ideology as you state “Whether or not this has been entirely been complied with through the ages,” either you did not finish your thought or you admit that this requirement does not fall under the halachc version of Minhag Yisrael Din Hue, as you further state “there is no question as to whether that represents an authentic tradition” . I am really interested in being shown the source that makes it a binding Halacha according to the Torah Sh”ball pah. Absent that do not try and impose your traditions upon communities that just do not abide by “your historical traditions” . Recognize that there are many differing customs, you of course have the option of not associating or accepting their version of what they consider a permissible conduct , but do not denigrate them by accusing them of desecrating their version of living the Torah way of life.

instead of ask'g me to bring proof, i challenge them to bring solid textual proof to their "opinion". they shouldn't just hide behind contemporary (political) names

I too would like to know the exact source and so far no one has been able to give me the source that makes it a binding halacha. I believe that making statements about certain things being binding halachot when they are in fact not, borders on Hillul Hashem.