In an ideal world that might be the case, but I'm also bearing in mind the stiflingly conformant world of the young male mind -- and the level of peer bullying that goes on which is tacitly condoned by the surrounding adults. No boy is going to risk getting labelled that way if he can avoid it, and he'll go to great lengths to avoid it. Hence, the ruling is essentially meaningless insofar as getting skirts accepted as normal male attire because the rule-makers know that no boy that's within two standard-deviations of "normal" is going to avail himself of it because of the reception he'll get from his peers. It's something that's designed to look good on paper when reported in the press, but has no effect in reality at best, and a negative effect at worst.Mark as in Mark wrote:As for as "nixes the thing as anything meaningful" only if you do not want to be labeled in the LGBT group when you wear a skirt. I certainly don't want to be, but most strangers automatically do that anyway. I'm not saying this is a perfect solution, and in time, but the overall public opinion will be to accept a man in a skirt.
By forcing the trans-* label onto boys who dare to think differently when it comes to clothing is tantamount to suppressing that thought -- all in the name of "progress" and "sensitivity". Very creative on the part of the "adults".
I have had most of the hair on my legs removed so I always have smooth legs, and I like to get as much sun on them as well. In the winter, it's thicker warmer and most often darker hose.
) are worse in that regard than those who are graceful. A slight bit of "concealer" goes a long way.
In this hot weather, we may see more guys wearing skirts (especially since the famous protests of skirted schoolboys and bus drivers) as shorts can still be uncomfortable with a binding crotch. Guys just have to learn how to sit like Prince Charles if they are sat opposite someone on a train, for instance 
