Is It Me?

[Peter v]

Perhaps we are forgetting that men generally had worn only functional "work" clothes, perhaps with the exception of suits. Whereas women have all soorts of clothing that is mostly not functional but very much fun to wear and attractive to be seen in. When men start to wear skirts, in differing types, men are treading on virgin soil, making contact with something very new, clothing that is for a change perhaps not pure functional, but also delicate, coloured, in short practically everything that men's wear is possibly not. That is where the "look" of hairy legs may be surprisingly unsettling for some, with any skirt other than the most "functional" skirt. Safety boots may look in place with denim pants, but certainly not with a suit. Same for manliness in all it's glory (hairy legs) and for finer clothing, being finer skirts and perhaps other items of finer clothing, for that, hairy legs are usually not the choice. The look of a finer skirt is just totally different to men in shorts, and again it is ultimately up to the individual to choose his own look, whatever on-seeers find of it. For any tough and rugged look, or "manly" look, if you do have hair, it should be no problem, as it is just you, no need to do anything about it.

I think It is that some have not studied how and why women dress as they do in respect to how men dress.

I had once said that men are dressed as if they were soldiers ready to fight at a moment's notice, tough and rugged, and women were the dainty butterflies in the field. Getting attention, and being very fragile. Their clothing is often delicate, vulnerable, but very pleasant to see, fun to wear and of course it generally attracts attention to their bodys which are also most often more openly dressed than that of most men, in the case of skirts, the legs are obviously very evident. And don't be mistaken, many men enjoy being smoothe, or "practically hairless", that being a "clean" look. (not in the sense of having washed yourself)

Once you have a better understanding of those differences, that may help to understand why things like shoe size, hairy legs are for many men an issue now that they have started wearing skirts.

It may also be the fact that so many men find the essence of in general women's clothing, the "way of dressing" of women an enjoyable outcome, that proves that men have been wanting to also indulge in other / new ways of dressing, of expressing theirselves, but could only do so when they had embraced the fashion freedom which is the spil around which skirt wearing, the break with pants convention spins.

Of course for those men who ONLY have exchanged their pants for a tough and rugged skirt, those men are unaffected.

And NO I am NOT advising any man to dress anything other than manly, but also not withholding any man who wishes to dress anything other than that, as as long as the man in question does nothing in his manners or with deliberate facial details to suggest that he is in fact a woman, he is then in all forms of clothing still a man, and if wearing a skirt, therefore a skirted man. Some men may then be named "femininely dressed men", but they are still being men, just as women dress manly, are still unquestionably women. That "femininely dressed man" term is of course new, but so is skirt wearing. We are the ones to present that to any public interested. Again, I do not limit my thinking or talk about men in skirts only to the very manly men, but include all men in the spectrum. Which does not mean that this forum therefore is anything but a men in skirts forum.

[Bri]

though, as she did her double-take! Funny what folk get used to........!

Isn't that so true, I wore makeup and I don't think anyone really noticed it. Plus now I think people get the idea that I wear it frequently. I've never had anyone do a double take before because of it, or I didn't notice.

Her (Kori's) whole reasoning behind not wanting me to do any of this stuff is that she says "it's not socially acceptable", which usually means "my daddy doesn't want you to do it", or "in my small, small world, people don't do it."

It's also a way double standard if someone can wear makeup because they want to wear it vs. needing to wear it. I'm sure, the need would be if they have a very visible birthmark or something that's aesthetically very pervasive, but just to look better. Well, sorry for wanting to look better for myself and others. Lol!! Sounds like some personal issues with her.

[Skirt Chaser]

I had once said that men are dressed as if they were soldiers ready to fight at a moment's notice, tough and rugged, and women were the dainty butterflies in the field. Getting attention, and being very fragile. Their clothing is often delicate, vulnerable, but very pleasant to see, fun to wear and of course it generally attracts attention to their bodys which are also most often more openly dressed than that of most men, in the case of skirts, the legs are obviously very evident.

Peter, your summary also gets to the heart of why women's styles have grown over time, women want to have functional clothing too and without needing staff on hand to dress us or care for the garments if we go past recent history. We do live in good times, women of status are not expected to be in corsets and yet corsets are still made for pleasure including sizes and designs for men so progress does happen. Still, part of the goal of most clothing for women is to make them attractive, something society is ambivalent about for men when their value is traditionally based on assets and status instead. Sure men have always been able to be "sharply" dressed but being considered attractive based on their body is not often considered in that.

[crfriend]

[Peter's] summary [...] gets to the heart of why women's styles have grown over time, women want to have functional clothing too and without needing staff on hand to dress us or care for the garments if we go past recent history.

Interestingly, for 99% of the things I'm called upon to do in my daily job description I could quite well get along with "frilly frocks"; it's the 15% that I "just get on with" that are a nuisance in anything other than purely "functional" attire. Whilst skirts are positively wonderful attire for sitting behind a desk and brewing code in, they're not quite so good for when one is scrabbling around on the deck fastening hardware into racks and pulling cabling. (Been there, done both; lying on the floor in a 2-foot-wide space between racks trying to install stuff into the bottom of another rack whilst wearing a skirt is less than optimal.)

Still, part of the goal of most clothing for women is to make them attractive, something society is ambivalent about for men when their value is traditionally based on assets and status instead. Sure men have always been able to be "sharply" dressed but being considered attractive based on their body is not often considered in that.

Interestingly, and this is rather new to the game, but I'm finding it fun trying to be "attractive"; I've been fiddling with my hair (see another post in that regard), and just generally trying to "kick it up a notch". It doesn't detract anything from what I am -- I can still roll around in the mud with the best -- but it's providing a bit of "fun" to things. It's also fun from a social perspective: I've gotten more dour looks in the past week for wearing a bow in my hair than I have in the past five years of wearing skirts!

[JeffB1959]

Speaking as someone who's never needed to shave my legs, I prefer how naturally smooth mine look in a skirt. I think that if I did grow hair on my legs, I'd shave, otherwise, I'd never even bother going out in shorts, never mind a skirt. But that's just my particular mindset. Flowered shirts? Not my bag, I prefer solid colors which I think suit me best, but hey, to each their own.

[Ray]

Jeff, you've found a style that really suits you. Bold as brass, cool as anything, and at a level that you seem happy with. Shame you can't play with your footwear in the way that you used to at work! I agree - solid colours suit you. Got to say, though; Carl suits more wild stuff (got to see this bow thing; can't really see you doing that! )

Cheers

Ray

[sapphire]

Regarding Carl's bow: think about Thomas Jefferson or George Washington.

[Kilted_John]

Similar to how I wear my hair as shown in the attached pic, just lower, most likely.

-J

[crfriend]

Similar to how I wear my hair as shown in the attached pic, just lower, most likely.

Precisely.

To wit, and please forgive the low quality; they were shot with a very old web-cam:

[Pythos]

There are some skirts syles that look ok with hairy legs.

But before I go further lets examine this notion that to shaved legs are feminine.

How so? Yes for a long time it was mostly women that shaved their legs. Yes it was also mostly women that had their legs on display to the general public in nearly all occasions, usually with a thin nylon covering.

But connecting the act of shaving legs with being a woman is just as silly as saying driving a car is strictly a man's thing.

Major sports stars, heavy hitting line backers, baseball players, swimmers, cylists, mostly shave their legs. They do it because the skin heals much faster without hair than it does with hair. (I know of this cause I have had several scrapes and gashes from wrecks where the lycra I was wearing was scuffed or lightly damaged but the skin beneath was in bad shape. The cuts healed much faster than they did with hairy legs.

I have shaved my legs since my swimming days in high school where we were required to do such in order to gain more speed, it worked. When my hair grew back on my legs, it itched like hell. I went several months with the hairs back on, and ended up scratching gouges into my legs. So I shaved again, and have had done so since. When I put my first pair of leggings on I thought they were the sleekest and most comfy item of clothing I had ever worn, I have not really experienced them with hairy legs, same goes for hose and skirts.

Now, on to my point about skirts. It is social conditioning. The slim solid skirts I wear I think would look absolutely horrible with hairy legs, not to mention itch like hell. The skirts feel much nicer sliding along shaved, and hosed legs. Someone here stated that pants just moved with you, I wouldn't say so. Pants more drag along the leg, and at times jam along the leg or stick and don't move at all and just pull the skin. Now, leggings move with you, and provide next to no resistance to movement.

Understand this is coming from someone that finds men walking about in shorts with hairy legs to be not so great looking, there is nothing masculine about it, nor is there anything feminine about shaved legs, its just one sex is allowed to do it by society with no questions, and the other is questioned by some members of society.

Kilts or kilt like skirts look good either way.

[AMM]

... that men are dressed as if they were soldiers ready to fight at a moment's notice, tough and rugged, and women were the dainty butterflies in the field. ...

I would put it differently: in Western society, both men's and women's status depends upon how "successful" they are, or at least appear. The difference is that, for men, "success" is defined in terms of how rich and/or powerful they are, while for women, "success" has traditionally been defined in terms of how rich and powerful the men they are attached to are -- that is, how desirable they are presumed to be to men. So women's clothing has tended to be more like product packaging -- intended to show the "merchandise" off to best advantage, sort of like a fancy dessert in the window of an upscale bakery. Whether the clothing is practical or comfortable is secondary.

In fact, "impractical" clothing has an advantage: it means that the woman is wealthy enough (or, more to the point, her father or husband is) that she doesn't have to do anything except lie around and be decorative. Maybe they can even afford servants to dress her (anybody remember the opening scenes of Dangerous Liaisons?) "Dainty butterflies" seems awfully close to the story of "the Princess and the Pea."

(In this context, it makes sense that some women are offended at the suggestion that they should dress "prettier" or in a more "feminine" way -- if you've spent your life fighting to be valued for your own abilities and accomplishments rather than what kind of man you can catch, such a suggestion sounds an awful lot like "why don't you focus your energies on snagging a nice man instead?")

... part of the goal of most clothing for women is to make them attractive, something society is ambivalent about for men when their value is traditionally based on assets and status instead. Sure men have always been able to be "sharply" dressed but being considered attractive based on their body is not often considered in that.

Traditionally, men have been trained to value their accomplishments and to de-value being desired and desirable, while women have been trained to do the opposite. In my lifetime, women have begun to learn to value their accomplishments as much as their desirability. Maybe it's time for men (at least some of us) to start valuing our desirability.

And you know what? Dressing to be desired, or to at least feel like you're showing you want to be desired, is fun. A little scary and out of my comfort zone. And who knows? Maybe some nice lady will want to make a pass at me [*]

[*] Oh well, a guy can dream, can't he?

[Since1982]

One small difference between wearing skirts or trousers to me anyway. When I fished or hunted or wandered around outside wearing trousers I never cared if I got dirty or scraped against something that might make a mark on my trousers, whereas, wearing a skirt, I always worry about getting one tiny spot on it or me getting sweaty or overly active. I definitely enjoy wearing skirts more than I ever did with trousers. Now, in a skirt, I worry about how I look, I never worried about that before. I think that's a plus.

[Peter v]

Regarding Carl's bow: think about Thomas Jefferson or George Washington.

That may be true, but does it matter what you have in your hair? Long hair often requires hair bands / bows to keep it together.

Man, I wish I still had a full head of hair, and then shoulder length or longer! Have had short / very short hair for "practical" reasons nearly all my life, Particularly as I rode motorcycles, and having short hair is very efficient with a helmet on, and I had worked behind lathes, milling machines, etc, and later on in a fabrication hall. Short hair is practical, easy and inexpensive to maintain, but not having that great feeling and that fun element that long hair must have. It looks great too.

I would not know any reason that any hair restrainers would be any problem. Just another chance to dress up, in both style and colour / pattern, something that men with short hair would never do / be able to do. Enjoy the extra dimension that longe hair brings with it. And hair bands etc have NOTHING at all to do with wanting to look as a woman....

Enjoy long hair while it lasts.

[Skirt Chaser]

Carl, you are just wearing your bow tie backwards. (I have read in a hair history book that bow ties as a fashion came about as an imitation of the hair pouches. They were tied on to pretend men without ponytails had them after all as part of an officer's uniform about the time of the American Revolutionary War.) The world has a fair share of scowly men that are bothered by what other men are up to. Good thing you have opinions of your own and another voice at home that knows what looks handsome.

And you know what? Dressing to be desired, or to at least feel like you're showing you want to be desired, is fun. A little scary and out of my comfort zone. And who knows? Maybe some nice lady will want to make a pass at me [*]

[*] Oh well, a guy can dream, can't he?

It happens regularly at my house. Quiet Man has learned that lesson firsthand, all too well sometimes when he doesn't want to be chased, but it does a body good to be told they are physically attractive. I admire his muscles so in some ways that isn't new for men as an area of accepted compliments. Of course wearing a skirt to reveal them is in our culture. I did remark repeatedly on how good he looked in a skirt. He'd tried on one I hadn't seen on him before and was busy preparing for a camping trip. Well an above the knee skirt with a split up each side is going to get noticed especially when he kept going up the stairs within my sight. It just revealed his strong thigh muscles so well and I told him I'd be happy to see him in that around the house anytime.

People categorize men as the visually turned on ones but I beg to differ. What I have found is that I didn't pay attention to bodies before I sure do admire his now and other than here don't notice the physiques of other men. Perhaps women (massively generalizing from my own experience so can be way off here) when emotionally invested in the man become more visually attuned. Also it could be that skirts can emphasize the body so could be a result of that because I will say I notice legs here (and on bicyclers in shiny leggings. Hope you don't mind I'm admiring you guys! I promise I don't wolf whistle while viewing the site.

[crfriend]

Carl, you are just wearing your bow tie backwards.

That makes for an interesting segue into the notion of "handedness". The gadget [0] in question is asymmetrical; it can either point "upwards" or "downwards" depending on how it's fastened. Fastened "right-handed", it "points" downwards; if "left-handed" it swoops upwards. Sapphire is a strong "righty"; I'm ambi. Sapphire wears it "up; I wear it "down". Does that still mean I wear it backwards?

[0] This one hasn't yet caused as much angst as another historical "gadget" did. Time will tell.