I just dont under stand the logic.

[phathack]

Society seems to frown on this style of dress.


But this is commonly see on the streets today.


I'll prefer the look of the man in the skirt over the kids baggy shorts around their thighs.

[Kirbstone]

Point well made and illustrated. pic. 1 is cool and not in the least feminine....It's interesting to see still that the girls with thick ugly legs wear their hemlines high. Pic. 2 is nothing short of disgusting and one can only wait for this awful fad to pass.

[Since1982]

I'm laughing at the "shorts" the left side fellow in the 2nd picture is wearing. I'd think you might have to get on your knees to access the right side "cargo" pocket, it's so far down the leg from the waist. Um, of course the "waist" is where the thighs should be though... I think they had too many

Of course what the first fellow is wearing wouldn't even be noticed by women anywhere in Malaysia. That kind of menswear is very commonplace in most of western Asia.

[couyalair]

No sign of the fad passing yet around here.
What puzzles me is how the baggy pants stay up.
Really, I wonder why they bother to put the shorts on at all, since the underpants cover what has to be covered.
Martin

[Mindermast]

Must be tough to be young these days! I wonder what the youth has to come up with in future, in order to be different

[rick401r]

Must be tough to be young these days! I wonder what the youth has to come up with in future, in order to be different

Maybe it will be wearing skirts. Then we'll all be the old guys trying to look younger by wearing the current youth fashions.

[Charlie]

Maybe the saggy crotch brigade are subconciously wishing they could wear skirts

Charlie

[Mindermast]

Sorry, but unisex skirts are part of punk outfits and "medieval" skirts part of "gothic" wear. Neither skirt fashion had a significant effect on men's fashion in general so far.

[crfriend]

Sorry, but unisex skirts are part of punk outfits and "medieval" skirts part of "gothic" wear. Neither skirt fashion had a significant effect on men's fashion in general so far.

Might this possibly be because no self-respecting male wants anything to to with "unisex" which, historically, is a code-word for "imitation male"?

What the above comment is intended to reflect is the perception of the thing, not necessarily the facts about it (we'll leave "truth" to the philosophers). Unless somebody can latch onto a design or style, fully embrace it, and make it his own, all he's going to do is go back to jeans and t-shirts. Unfortunately, identifying, modifying, and personifying a look takes work; it takes confidence; and it takes skill -- all of those work against all but the boldest men.

So, I guess I've said it: "Man up! Look beyond jeans, khakis, chinos, and monkey-suits. Decide for yourself, and then strut it proudly. Peacocks do, why do human males have to be so drab? Are we inferior to birds (George Carlin notwithstanding)?"

[Pythos]

A CF a very cogent statement.

I guess I fit that category. I wear leggings in place of jeans for daily life, and wear skirts occasionally.

I respect myself too. LOL.

It is those ones that fall back into wearing jeans all the time that lack the courage. And the baggy pants look just completely bypassed me.

[sapphire]

And then there's the new fashion embraced by the tween age girls around here: pyjamas for everyday wear and to school.

[crfriend]

And then there's the new fashion embraced by the tween age girls around here: pyjamas for everyday wear and to school.

And that's not even mentioning that the current fad also has wording stencilled across the buttocks.

Sapphire and I had "movie night" yesterday evening with our next-door neighbours (we watched Dogma) and their 13 year-old daughter was so attired with the letters "GOODLUCK" across her backside. Now, the dirty old man in me could have taken that either as a challenge or an admonition, but the foreign-policy wonk in me took it as an endorsement (a "bumper-sticker", if you will) of the current president of Nigeria. The parents were mystified that I knew such a thing and the daughter merely reprimanded me and said that the wording would be covered (up?) under most circumstances.

So, here I am with a decent grasp of the political world around me -- even if it be several thousand miles distant -- and utterly without clue when it comes to todays youngsters. At least I was tastefully attired (or so I thought) in a teal shirt, black waistcoat, black calf-length skirt, teal tights, and black shoes. (Hey, it's still winter here, and will be for another two %*(^ing months.)

The adults all enjoyed the movie. Thank the gods we do not have children!

[Raakone]

Those baggy pants? Both the "homey"/"hammer" styles, and the showing one's undergarments? You can thank the California correctional service for that. They didn't always give jumpsuits to their prisoners, sometimes they'd give top and bottom, but they didn't have all sizes, and belts were a big no-no (could be used for choking or whipping). Many gang members on the streets started imitating this to show solidarity with their incarcerated comrades. And because a lot of gangsta rappas took it up, and because it's big in places like L.A. (the "Center of the Universe" to some)....it may have not become universally accepted, but it's at least...a tolerated sub-culture. And I agree, either have the big message on the back of one's undergarments, or the "waistband advertisement" (I've seen pictures of rappers who have their names on their underwear bands..."Da Freshmen" being the worst offender in this category)

The only thing I could think of.....I don't see how it would work for skirts, but for dress-like garments, or "day-shirts", even....if they started issuing those to prisoners in California (make the men wear the "dresses" when they aren't working....might get more of them doing something useful, or...maybe I'm dreaming in HD....actually trying harder NOT to brake the law!)