MIS in Wikipedia

Departed Member · Post by **Departed Member** » Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:59 pm

Ah! I didn't mean bifurcation! I was referring to ladies wearing skirts with 'male' zip flies, deep pockets and, even, on occasion, Kilts! As for jeans under dresses/skirts - yeeeeeeeeeeeeuk. 'Teeny-boppers'! My wife reckons they've no sense of style whatsoever and are just plain insecure.

ChristopherJ · Post by **ChristopherJ** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:32 am

So guys, keep on bashing Joe and Josephine public with men wearing masculine skirts, and we'll eventually beat it into their little heads and then we will get away with it

Just 'skirts' - I reckon. The perception of whether a skirt is masculine or feminine comes down to a subjective judgement on the part of an individual. That will always vary from person to person.

Men are free to choose to wear skirts. Any sort of skirt - it doesn't matter. It comes down to the taste and style of the individual man.

Whatever flops your mop.

(I wish I had never learned that phrase now!)

Since1982 · Post by **Since1982** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:18 am

Phrase thief!! heheheehe:naughty:

Steve 1 · Post by **Steve 1** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:52 pm

I've added a new section to the article, covering UK laws -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_in_Ski ... ition_-_UK

If someone wants to write up the USA laws, it would be very useful!

ChristopherJ · Post by **ChristopherJ** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 12:45 am

That looks good Steve. Well done.

But I didn't know that I had a secondary erogenous zone!

Tell me where it is!!

Please!

Post by **Bob** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:41 am

The article needs some good pictures. And they need to look different from the pictures for "crossdressing"

Steve 1 · Post by **Steve 1** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:21 am

Yes it does. I was wondering about contacting Menintime - http://www.menintime.de/

They have some very attractive and 'normal'-looking pictures, eg. -
http://www.menintime.de/press/img_all/charivari_01.jpg
http://www.menintime.de/press/img_all/asahi_jake.jpg

For contrast, we might also get a catwalk photo, eg. from Yohji Yamamoto -
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/ ... _paris.jpg

Or Vivienne Westwood's famous "Host's Gown" -
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/ ... s_gown.jpg

Comme des Garcon -
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/ ... fall98.jpg

Unknown designer -
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v645/ ... _vcool.jpg

(They appeal to me anyway - others here might have different tastes!)

Steve 1 · Post by **Steve 1** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:25 am

ChristopherJ wrote:That looks good Steve. Well done.

But I didn't know that I had a secondary erogenous zone!

Tell me where it is!!

Please!

I think it might be up your.... *cough*

Sashi · Post by **Sashi** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:51 am

Steve 1 wrote:I've added a new section to the article, covering UK laws -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_in_Skirts#The_Legal_Position_-_UK

If someone wants to write up the USA laws, it would be very useful!

Nice section, it's pretty informative and pretty sad at the same time. We proclaim how civilized and advanced we are, and yet we still have such backward thinking in this world. It's things like the stuff mentioned in that section that make me ashamed to be associated with the human race.

I do agree, we need a section like that for the USA. It'd be nice to know what precedents have been set both in the workplace and classrooms. I wonder if there have been any legal battles involving male skirt wearing in the school or work place? Maybe I should try and find some on the net...

I'm curious though, when you say classrooms do you mean just up through high school, or all the way through college even? To me it seems like colleges would on average be more open than your traditional public school would be. Not that I have any experience either way, but still...

Steve 1 · Post by **Steve 1** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 3:52 pm

I agree, Sashi. But remember, it is only important to us and people like us - most other people don't notice because they really aren't bothered. And secondly, for many of them, which have all their lives associated trousers and skirts with male and female, it requires a paradigm shift. For manymore, it requires a leap in their thinking. And that is going to include people like teachers, judges, etc - so they are getting it wrong.

But bit by bit, we are as surely as day follows night, infiltrating their minds with our dastardly new ideas. That article itself is a call to arms for every scholboy who reads it and thinks "why not?". And to every man who suddenly sees that they've ben treated unjustly. That article is one small part of everything that is going on.

Eventually, we will get into their heads like a vacuum cleaner getting under a carpet, and it will flip up and over. Then they will all say: "I have always thought this way!" and deny all knowledge of their previous closed-minded opinions. And we will smile knowingly, having got what we wanted!

Ingemar · Post by **Ingemar** » Sat Jan 27, 2007 6:35 pm

Hi!

How should one understand the boxes on top? That the article is about to be taken away as the languagestandard is to low?

Greetings

Ingemar

ChristopherJ · Post by **ChristopherJ** » Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:26 am

I think it might be up your.... *cough*

euuuwwwww! :crazyeyes

Nein danke :shake:

The article needs some good pictures. And they need to look different from the pictures for "crossdressing"

I agree - but it might be a good idea to put some photos of "ordinary" people - as well as any catwalk model stuff that you put in there.

Personally, the catwalk models never do anything for me - I can only rarely identify with them. This is partly because the clothes (skirts) they model are often designer items and not meant for everyday wear - and also because the models themselves often don't look like real people. They never have any bags under their eyes! Bastards!

Steve 1 · Post by **Steve 1** » Sun Jan 28, 2007 2:48 am

Ingmar - no, it is ok. Wikipedia works on the gradual improvement of articles by many people. Most articles begin in a slightly amateurish way, but through dozens of people making changes to them, over time they gradualy adopt a very professional look. The boxes simply mean that anyone who wants to, should take a hammer and chisel to it, and knock it into better shape.

kiltair · Post by **kiltair** » Fri Feb 09, 2007 9:09 am

Hi,

You can take any pictures you like from this page:
http://users.telenet.be/jbruyndonckx/janAlbum.html

They're mine and I grant you permission to put any of them on wikipedia. At least, if you like 'm. let me know if you need a higher resolution version.

Jan

ChristopherJ · Post by **ChristopherJ** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:52 am

I don't know how or why - but a couple of totally hideous photographs have appeared on the MIS Wikki page - both titled: "Skirt designed and modeled by Mark Allyn".

The photos are horrible and the skirts are horrible. Does anyone know how to take them off. They could give MIS a bad name - as no-one would take them seriously!

Put a photo of me up there - I got great legs! :cheer:

http://www.myspace.com/man_in_a_skirt

skirtcafe.org

MIS in Wikipedia

Mop Flopper

The boxes on top.