Is It Me?

[alexthebird]

I've had two interesting experiences in the last week or so.

The first one was last week. I don't have any prejudice against trousers, I just like to wear whatever I like to wear whenever I like to wear it. As a rule, my taste in skirts is either long skirts (ankle or calf length) or kilts with tall hose. Last week, I tried a knee-length skirt for the first time. It looked OK at home, but when I saw my reflection in a shop window, my hairy legs below the hem of the skirt looked unsettling. I've worn shorts in public before without thinking twice - why do hairy legs under a skirt look different than hairy legs under shorts? Is it cultural conditioning or is something else going on?

The other incident was tonight. I love brightly colored and highly patterned shirts, but when pairing them with either trousers or skirts, I opt for neutral, monochromatic styles. Well, I found a pair of brightly colored (turquoise, pink, yellow, and green) floral designer (Dolce Gabbana) men's jeans on a discount rack for $23 and grabbed 'em right up. I wore them to a restaurant tonight with a plain white top and I felt far more self-conscious than I ever have wearing a skirt. I'm just not used to flamboyance below the waist.

Do either of these situations resonate with anybody?

[mugman]

I feel that seeing hairy legs with a skirt are all part of the reconditioning process, and an image that has to be allowed to grow in familiarity if men are to confidently wear skirts across the board. Personally I don't believe in shaving the legs to avoid the hairy image as it would, to me, be trying to disguise the presence of male legs under a skirt rather than OK it. It isn't necessary to shave legs when wearing shorts or a kilt, so a skirt shouldn't demand any extra cosmetics...unless that's what you prefer, and you shave your legs to wear shorts anyway.
I think the whole freedom of male skirt wearing is being missed sometimes, and takes on too much of the fussiness of appearance. I never had concerns all the time about how I looked in jeans - it isn't usually the male way to be constantly worried about appearance, obviously within reason, and most people are used to some men having a poorer sense of fashion and how they look. That's life, and some individuals are no doubt much loved for this individualism of character.
I always thought skirt wearing should be just switching from trousers to skirts freely without any other contributing factors. Those of us who naturally have a keen eye on looking good to continue to look good, and those of us who never will not to be too bothered about it?
I wouldn't take too much notice of your hairy legs. If skirt wearing is going to work for more people, then it's something the world is going to have to get used to. But someone has to go first.
I don't know about floral patterns. They certainly aren't my thing at all. But that's only me. I prefer plain and unspectacular.

[Milfmog]

I'm with Mugman on this one. The suggestion that legs below skirts should be hairless is just conditioning; maybe we need to reprogramme the viewers preconceptions? This will only be achieved by getting them used to seeing guys wearing skirts, complete with hairy legs if the guys in question like it that way.

I do not shave my legs and have no expectation of starting anytime soon. I tend to wear kilts (hairy legs expected), long skirts (legs invisible!) or knee / just above knee length skirts that, at first sight, look like a pair of shorts (so seeing hairy "guy legs" below them is unsurprising). I have never had any comments about hairy legs, to be quite honest I don't think anyone ever notices.

I do not wear tights or panty hose with skirts, I simply don't like the feel of them. If I were wearing sheer leg coverings or more formal skirted outfits, shorter than ankle length, I would have to reconsider my position on leg shaving (note: that's reconsider NOT necessarily change).

As for floral or wildly patterned fabrics, they are just not me. I don't tend to wear large areas of bright colours or patterns on any of my clothes. (Not even sports equipment - loud ski suits or wet suits do not find their way into my kits.) I am happy using bright accent colours but somehow I don't feel like me with large areas of bright colour.

Have fun,


Ian.


Edited to improve punctuation and clarity.

[cessna152towser]

I'm with Milfmog on this. Hairy legs with a kilt or knee length denim skirt, no flowers, embroidery or frills for me. I don't have a problem with wearing a skirt, and am proud to show my hairy legs, but would feel very self conscious if I thought the outfit looked fem, for example if my legs needed to be shaved, say, for surgery, I'd probably go back into wearing trousers until the hair grew back again.

[Since1982]

I guess there's something wrong with me. I gave up wearing any kind of pants because they were too confining for my tastes. Trousers, pants, underpants, pantyhose, hose, leggings, are all pants. I quit wearing pants for skirts. I prefer skirts over any pants. BUT, if it flops your mop more power to you.

[Peter v]

It is indeed all in the taste of the wearer. Where some ( most) men don't want to be seen, would rather wear camouflage to blend in with the background, other men enjoy being seen. Hairy legs or not, there is no rule, only the rule for each person individually.

If you want a certain look, you make that, and that may concern hair free legs, just as men shave their chinny chin chins.

Same with colours etc. The thing is, before with only pants, there were in no way nearly as many options possible, for those who wanted more options. For those who only wish to exchange their pants for a skirt, that is the easiest option available. But for all other emn, it only starts there, and seemingly never ends.

[r1g0r]

rant mode activated

peterv's view is quite valid.

some want just the freedom to wear skirts/kilts/etc without ridicule. some see this as just a tip of the iceberg.

to me, skirts are the most comfortable & fun clothing out there. they have more variety in styles and (to me) a MUCH better visual & sensual impact.

now, the visual appeal probably stems in some part to my heterosexuality and age. i watched my teachers & elders ALL wear skirts & dresses, up to and including secondary school. professional women DIDN'T wear pants. period. these were attractive, elegant women with authority & power.

DEAD SEXY!

no wonder i find corporate goth girls, dominatrices, and female lawyers stimulating.

now for the sensual impact.

skirts flow. they flap with the wind. they drape and slide on your skin. (quite unlike pants, which simply move with your leg motion) this is amplified by many other factors, such as nylon slips, hosiery, lack of leg hair, etc.

this means that (for some persons) skirts will always be a potential source of sensual/sexual input. Can’t be helped. Sorry, boo-boo. I get physical stimulation from skirted garments.

Now this doesn’t mean I walk about with an erection whenever I’m skirted, but I greatly enjoy and am constantly aware of the tactile interaction I have with my skirt. I enjoy them MORE if I wear a slip, hose, and shaved legs.

Is this wrong? Does it make me a pervert? I don’t think so. I mean, I AM a pervert, but my wearing a skirt has no bearing on my perversion.

I have found that my enjoyment has led me to wearing ALL sorts of alternatively-gendered clothing (how’s THAT for a new buzz-term). Shoes, hose, bodysuits, leotards all add to my wardrobe fun. They are all sensual garments.

I have played with cosmetics and nail enhancements. These too are fun. I don’t suggest that they are for everybody, but some folks WILL enjoy them

Almost, if not all, of these issues and feelings can also be attributed to women. The difference being that they aren’t accused of anything unusual. They just “enjoy” skirts, or they “like” wearing heels, etc…

This is much of the basis for the dichotomy in clothing “freedom”. Women are ALLOWED to enjoy their clothing, while men are NOT.

Ours is “durable”
Theirs is “fun”

Ours is “comfortable”
Theirs is “sensual”

Ours is “favorite”
Theirs is “new” or “exciting”

See a pattern?
Yeah, me too. And I’m tired of it.

rant mode deactivated

[Ray]

I agree with Mugman et all who suggest that a guy shouldn't have to shave legs to wear a skirt. I don't have to when wearing a kilt or shorts; why should an informal skirt (or manly skirt) be different?

With more fine, or more formal skirts, then the process of tidying oneself up starts up. Of course, this is yet another societal rule, but one step at a time. Long skirts will get round this, as will opaque hosiery (for those who wish to wear such garments).

I do shave my legs, but that's my choice, and I am certainly not going to judge another guy for not following me in my fashion choice. I'm not that hairy anyway, so for me it makes sense. For a hairy bloke, it can't be that sensible.

I also frequently wear hosiery, but again, I'm not going to judge wnother guy for not doing to. Again, choice. On that point though....Skip, there's nothing wrong with you, but equating sheer hosiery with trousers is stretching things a bit, which is also the key difference

R1gor - agree female lawyers in skirts. Sexy indeed!

[Neil]

I've had two interesting experiences in the last week or so.

The first one was last week. I don't have any prejudice against trousers, I just like to wear whatever I like to wear whenever I like to wear it. As a rule, my taste in skirts is either long skirts (ankle or calf length) or kilts with tall hose. Last week, I tried a knee-length skirt for the first time. It looked OK at home, but when I saw my reflection in a shop window, my hairy legs below the hem of the skirt looked unsettling. I've worn shorts in public before without thinking twice - why do hairy legs under a skirt look different than hairy legs under shorts? Is it cultural conditioning or is something else going on?

It's cultural conditioning. All of our clothing options, sanctioned or not, are culturally conditioned, so anything you do that violates that conditioning has the potential to seem unsettling. There is no objective reason for anyone, male or female, to shave or not, to wear shorts as opposed to skirts (or vice versa), to wear pants as opposed to skirts (or vice versa), to wear pants as opposed to shorts (or vice versa), and so on. So if you found it unsettling, that's OK. The question for you is, did you like it, or not? If you liked it, regardless of how unsettling it may have been, then it's good for you and your personal style. If you didn't like it, then maybe that look isn't your personal style. It's strictly a matter of what your personal style is, and what you like.

[Big and Bashful]

rant mode activated

peterv's view is quite valid.

some want just the freedom to wear skirts/kilts/etc without ridicule. some see this as just a tip of the iceberg.

to me, skirts are the most comfortable & fun clothing out there. they have more variety in styles and (to me) a MUCH better visual & sensual impact.

now, the visual appeal probably stems in some part to my heterosexuality and age. i watched my teachers & elders ALL wear skirts & dresses, up to and including secondary school. professional women DIDN'T wear pants. period. these were attractive, elegant women with authority & power.

DEAD SEXY!

no wonder i find corporate goth girls, dominatrices, and female lawyers stimulating.

now for the sensual impact.

skirts flow. they flap with the wind. they drape and slide on your skin. (quite unlike pants, which simply move with your leg motion) this is amplified by many other factors, such as nylon slips, hosiery, lack of leg hair, etc.

this means that (for some persons) skirts will always be a potential source of sensual/sexual input. Can’t be helped. Sorry, boo-boo. I get physical stimulation from skirted garments.

Now this doesn’t mean I walk about with an erection whenever I’m skirted, but I greatly enjoy and am constantly aware of the tactile interaction I have with my skirt. I enjoy them MORE if I wear a slip, hose, and shaved legs.

Is this wrong? Does it make me a pervert? I don’t think so. I mean, I AM a pervert, but my wearing a skirt has no bearing on my perversion.

I have found that my enjoyment has led me to wearing ALL sorts of alternatively-gendered clothing (how’s THAT for a new buzz-term). Shoes, hose, bodysuits, leotards all add to my wardrobe fun. They are all sensual garments.

I have played with cosmetics and nail enhancements. These too are fun. I don’t suggest that they are for everybody, but some folks WILL enjoy them

Almost, if not all, of these issues and feelings can also be attributed to women. The difference being that they aren’t accused of anything unusual. They just “enjoy” skirts, or they “like” wearing heels, etc…

This is much of the basis for the dichotomy in clothing “freedom”. Women are ALLOWED to enjoy their clothing, while men are NOT.

Ours is “durable”
Theirs is “fun”

Ours is “comfortable”
Theirs is “sensual”

Ours is “favorite”
Theirs is “new” or “exciting”

See a pattern?
Yeah, me too. And I’m tired of it.

rant mode deactivated

R1GoR,
Good points and well put, you express why you enjoy skirts and related bits without telling me that I should think the same way. Good on ya!

[jaycee]

Is this wrong? Does it make me a pervert? I don’t think so. I mean, I AM a pervert, but my wearing a skirt has no bearing on my perversion.

I suspect that 95% of adult human beings are perverts...and the other 5% are liars!

[Since1982]

As for floral or wildly patterned fabrics, they are just not me.

There's that cultural patterning again. Just like the lemmings and the cliff. Floral etc. fabrics are like poison to most of the 38% of the men living on the planet(in the "western world"). Let's look at other species and then come back to humans. Name me ONE other species in which the female of the species is more colorful than the male????..ONLY happens in the so called Western world and ONLY with the humans there.In birds/lions/fish/even anacondas the male is the colorful one. In the lion the male has the mane and rests while the female does the child rearing AND hunting. In birds there's no question which are the males...they are the colorful ones. In fish the same applies, Anaconda and other snakes males have brighter color patterns than females and are much like lions in who does what. This goes on throughout the world EXCEPT in America and Europe and parts of the Pacific Rim countries. That means only Australia, most of the rest of the Pacific rim is colorful sarongs/sulus/kikoys/kains for men.

I'm glad to be one of the stand out % of the "western world" that likes colorful fabrics/skirts and other things that the mainstream doesn't care for.

[Milfmog]

As for floral or wildly patterned fabrics, they are just not me.

There's that cultural patterning again.

You're not wrong Skip, but you've had longer than I to outgrow the conditioning you received as a child

To be frank, I quite like being me and social conditioning is part of what has made me who I am. Although I enjoy change, and this is to some degree reflected in my skirt habits, I don't like wholesale, instant change. So I have moved from plain sarongs to single colour kilts, then to patterned sarongs and a camouflage kilt, to longer and shorter skirts and the long, slow change is still continuing. Because each change has been fairly small, I have never felt unable to meet the world with total confidence, moving too far from my current comfortable limits would be likely to unsettle me and that would show.

I'm glad to be one of the stand out % of the "western world" that likes colorful fabrics/skirts and other things that the mainstream doesn't care for.

Good for you Skip. Seriously. One day I may feel happy in brighter colours, but until that day I shall continue to be me in the drab colours that feel right and enable me to meet the world with my head held high, confident that I know who I am.

At the end of the day it is all about having choice and each of us being free to make those choices for ourselves.

Have fun,


Ian.

[Bri]

I think it's your own preference. I wear skirts and shave my legs, well like most women. I also don't shave my legs because of wearing what I wear. I do it because in the sport (I must have said this 20 times by now) that I am and a slightly different version of the sport, I fell a lot and shaving my legs made it easier to mend the injuries. Now I do it because I'm used to it and it feels really nice, so I'm not going to stop which makes me feel good and hurts no one else.

Makeup is another thing that I do because of the physical and aesthetic advantages I saw having it on. Again some women wear very little, like just mascara or mascara and foundation. Some wear everything they've ever purchased; it's just personal taste.

[Departed Member]

I had flowered shirts in the late '60s, early '70s, but when 'fashion freedom' finally died, so did those shirts with it! I don't particularly favour bright colours (although I do have the odd vivid teeshirt or two!), 'cos they 'get in the way' of my primary interests, especially where wildlife watching is concerned. Besides, I'm very definitely NOT a natural 'Peacock', having zero ego. I did get looked 'up & down' tonight by one of the new neighbours, wearing as I was, my last remaining tr*users (the wife's still too 'edgy' about the issue 'in public'). It occurred to me, it would have been the first time the neighbour had seen me in tr*users, though, as she did her double-take! Funny what folk get used to........!