The Math of Skirting

[crfriend]

It seems like the conversation has dragged Skirttron's original -- and cogent -- post to ground (as in "short to ground"), but it's been good to see some of the inner geek in a few of us come out.

The OP mentioned a couple of really interesting notions, not the least of which was:

Amplitude of desire for femininized style = 1/(openness of skirt wearing)

This has some resonance with me, and might for some others as well. I have found that the more openly I wear skirts the more I integrate the overall look into something that is me instead of something hypothetical or contrary to who I am. As a guy, I do not particularly want to look like a woman. This is not to say that I do not enjoy the look of a skirt on women, for I do; however, the sort of look I put together for myself is not necessarily something that a woman could pull off well. "Vive la difference", I suppose. I suspect the guys that hide in the shadows or who only venture out "in character" may well tend to go "more femme" than those who actually get out and about in their rigs. This is not to say that practising before stepping out is a bad thing; I spent a couple of weeks learning how to deal with some of my looks before taking them out. Tripping over the hem is not a good way to make a good impression.

There's also:

Amplitude of sensation of conspicuousness =1/(length of time spent openly wearing a skirt)

which is dead on the money. The more time one spends out in public in a skirted rig the more natural it becomes, the more confident and comfortable one feels and that letter component just projects into the space around one. It also has the added side-benefit of exposing those around one to a "bloke in a skirt", and that he's the same bloke whether it's "one pipe or two".

[Since1982]

Carl said:the sort of look I put together for myself is not necessarily something that a woman could pull off well.

Agreed, especially the huge bushy beard, classy moustache and 3 foot ponytail look.

[ethelthefrog]

Amplitude of desire for femininized style = 1/(openness of skirt wearing)

This has some resonance with me, and might for some others as well.

Not so with me. Once I'd crossed the skirts are for women, therefore I must be a crossdresser, therefore I need to look girly hump (took about a month) I've been on the lookout for not-particularly-feminine styles from the start. I've resorted to home-construction because of the lack of skirts on general sale and the tiny proportion of those that don't have flowers on.

Incidentally, my good lady declared my latest creation (bottle-green straight A-line knee-length [same cloth as the half-circle]) to be "lovely". Not allowed out in it yet, but hey.

There's also:

Amplitude of sensation of conspicuousness =1/(length of time spent openly wearing a skirt)

which is dead on the money.

I'll take your word for that. I'm planning a skirted pub crawl in London in September (hopefully before it gets cold and rainy), which will be my first major outing in an overt skirt (the kilt is being well received thus far). I will, of course, keep you posted.

[crfriend]

Not so with me. Once I'd crossed the skirts are for women, therefore I must be a crossdresser, therefore I need to look girly hump (took about a month) I've been on the lookout for not-particularly-feminine styles from the start. I've resorted to home-construction because of the lack of skirts on general sale and the tiny proportion of those that don't have flowers on.

It seems that most everybody has missed the fact that in both of the "equations" I quoted the term on right is a reciprocal. So, for

Code: Select all

                                                        1
Amplitude of desire for femininized style = --------------------------
                                            (openness of skirt wearing)

one sees that the two are inversely related. So, as one wears skirted rigs more openly the desire for a feminised style diminishes. At one extreme end, we have zero openness which yields an undefined or infinite (depending on which set of rules you're using) "desire" and at the other end (where the denominator is some very large number) the "desire" approaches zero.

Incidentally, my good lady declared my latest creation (bottle-green straight A-line knee-length [same cloth as the half-circle]) to be "lovely". Not allowed out in it yet, but hey.

That's a win anyway.

[ethelthefrog]

I got the reciprocal, it's just that, with me, the timescale from 1/0 to 1/999999 was very short. I suppose t, in my case, is measured in seconds rather than months or years.

[Edited to add a comma]

[crfriend]

Oh the joy and pitfalls of unitless measurements!