skirtcafe.org

Last weekend at a thrift store I bought what I thought was a black skirt -- it was on the skirts rack -- but when I got home I found I'd missed the dual legholes and bought a pair of women's shorts. But just for curiosity, I tried them on anyway. I was already wearing some tight-fitting thong underwear and control-top tights, and the shorts were cut close, and it looked kind of freaky but interesting as well.

So at the risk of being somewhat off-topic, has anyone tried wearing a gaff or a woman's shaper under close-fitting women's shorts or pants? Probably with no zipper up front? And if so, does anyone notice that you seem basically flat?

Hi Caultron,
I've said before that I prefer the "flat" silhouette with skirts that merit it.
I've also said that how I achieved it was nobody else's beeswax.
However, I've never used a gaff, too damn pricey.
My preference is Marks and Spencer control briefs, totally comfy and economic too.
As for shorts, I like them "short and "close". Then I tend to wear oversized tees to cover the odd bits.
I think I'll stop at that as we may be straying into "unmentionable" territory.
Steve.

Caultron wrote:Last weekend at a thrift store I bought what I thought was a black skirt -- it was on the skirts rack -- but when I got home I found I'd missed the dual legholes and bought a pair of women's shorts. But just for curiosity, I tried them on anyway. I was already wearing some tight-fitting thong underwear and control-top tights, and the shorts were cut close, and it looked kind of freaky but interesting as well.

So at the risk of being somewhat off-topic, has anyone tried wearing a gaff or a woman's shaper under close-fitting women's shorts or pants? Probably with no zipper up front? And if so, does anyone notice that you seem basically flat?

These (hidden) bifurcated shorts - did they have a skirted front and shorts back ?
That would be called a skort or a scooter.

I too prefer the flat front when wearing skirts.

r.m.anderson wrote:These (hidden) bifurcated shorts - did they have a skirted front and shorts back? That would be called a skort or a scooter.

No, they're actual shorts.

They were on the Woman's Skirts rack. I checked the size, length, and fabric before taking them off the rack, then I just folded them over my arm with the other items I was buying and headed for the checkout.

I guess it's kind of embarrassing, not noticing the difference between a skirt and shorts, but I suppose I'll eventually live it down.

An easy mistake to make, C. Shows you didn't try it on in the shop!

When contemplating wearing anything tight across the front I always 'Go Flat'. I'm not into P.Ws.
When buying anything so short I would suspect it's a skort or similar. I draw the line at about 17 inches drop for a skirt, and then only for private use round our grounds here....gardening attire for fine weather.
As it happens I like short shorts & tights, but not for public display.

Tom.

I'm not sure how much to comment here before I might stray into the verboten. The subject of underclothing is not part of this site, so I will try to stick to the effect.

Mainly, I wanted to say that I have mixed feelings about this topic, and I agree that too much protrusion is unbecoming, especially if details are suggested in the bulge.

However, on behalf of men's rights, we are made as we are made. We don't ask women to obscure the fact that they have breasts, and with the stretch pants, tight jeans, leggings and yoga style pants they wear, we don't really complain about the revelation of a protruding mons pubis, or at least I don't. Even protruding nipples - the braless look - has become more common, though the proverbial "camel-toe" is still a bit gauche. So I don't think it wrong for a man to have a shape that suggests how we are made, as long as we are tasteful in not displaying the gross details.

I found that dance belts do a good job at concealing details without making you look like a "Ken doll". At the risk of breaking the rules here, I will link this page that gives an idea of styles. http://www.discountdance.com/dancewear/ ... elts/page1 If I crossed the line, please say something and I will remove this.

At most I will adjust things carefully, if that doesn't work then the skirts (or shorts) are not for wearing in public. I don't mind a slightly visible outline, but being able to confirm my religion is not OK. Snug is OK, that is what I prefer, but a dance belt kinda defeats the comfort factor of the skirt. I don't usually wear tights or pantihose for the same reason, as it is difficult to find ones that are comfortable, and don't roll down. As always, context is important, I suspect my choice of swimwear would not be the same as most here. It involves illegally importing small birds, or sleeping arrangements for bananas.

partlyscot wrote: Snug is OK, that is what I prefer, but a dance belt kinda defeats the comfort factor of the skirt... I suspect my choice of swimwear would not be the same as most here. It involves illegally importing small birds, or sleeping arrangements for bananas.

Indeed, the thong types are for the gym only...the sooner I get out of them, the better. But the full seat are quite wearable all day, if need be. And as swimwear, sure, same, but with boy-legs or skirted bottom.

Kirbstone wrote:An easy mistake to make, C. Shows you didn't try it on in the shop!

When contemplating wearing anything tight across the front I always 'Go Flat'. I'm not into P.Ws.
When buying anything so short I would suspect it's a skort or similar. I draw the line at about 17 inches drop for a skirt, and then only for private use round our grounds here....gardening attire for fine weather.
As it happens I like short shorts & tights, but not for public display.

Tom.

You're right, I didn't try it on at the shop. All the fitting rooms were busy and I was in a hurry to get going.

Last summer I spotted a guy in a grocery store parking lot wearing short shorts over black lace-pattern tights and thought he looked pretty good. (I suppose that shows how hard-shelled we get, eh?) After that I bought a couple pairs of short shorts myself, but I haven't worn them much because of the bulge and because I have "riding breeches" in my upper thighs. I just ordered some mid-thigh Spanx shapers, though, so we'll see how that works with the PW and the riding breeches.

dillon wrote:

partlyscot wrote: Snug is OK, that is what I prefer, but a dance belt kinda defeats the comfort factor of the skirt... I suspect my choice of swimwear would not be the same as most here. It involves illegally importing small birds, or sleeping arrangements for bananas.

Indeed, the thong types are for the gym only...the sooner I get out of them, the better. But the full seat are quite wearable all day, if need be. And as swimwear, sure, same, but with boy-legs or skirted bottom.

It's not the thong aspect that bothers me, it's the binding. I use cycling shorts, and they are meant to be somewhat binding, because the alternative is much more uncomfortable, but something to be walking around in all day? I can tolerate it, but choose not to, in the same way I can wear pants, (trousers) but choose not to. As far as display is concerned, swimwear is different, in my mind, you are in a place where such is normal. (to me) I would join a naturist group if the opportunity offered. That is what I meant by context, in the general public on a normal street, it is not appropriate to be showing in a blatant way. Ones definition of blatant may differ of course.

dillon wrote:However, on behalf of men's rights, we are made as we are made. We don't ask women to obscure the fact that they have breasts, and with the stretch pants, tight jeans, leggings and yoga style pants they wear, we don't really complain about the revelation of a protruding mons pubis, or at least I don't. Even protruding nipples - the braless look - has become more common, though the proverbial "camel-toe" is still a bit gauche. So I don't think it wrong for a man to have a shape that suggests how we are made, as long as we are tasteful in not displaying the gross details.

Well said.

I could go on into why this double standard applies, but I don't want to be the one responsible for derailing the tread with one of my rants about why the world is the way it is.

But it really just gets back to that same of thing I've said countless times here.... women can do whatever they want. Men... not so much., most of us are conditioned from a very young age to be 200% ashamed of ourselves, and most importantly to CONFORM!

I use a body briefer which gives me a flat, smoother profile, especially when wearing clingy knit skirts.

I suppose I am responding with a warm climate perspective but is seems that more than half of the joys of wearing a skirt would be lost by wearing so much tight fitting stuff under it.

I recently bought what I thought was a skater skirt and when I got home it turned out to be very flared shorts, luckily only $3 and why I didn't bother trying it on.

partlyscot wrote:It involves illegally importing small birds, or sleeping arrangements for bananas.

Our previous Prime Minister was filmed wearing that sort of thing on National TV. I now used that as a guide to what I am comfortable to wear under a mini. Surely at worst a rare glimpse of something under a skirt is OK if the same was seen in full by thousands on TV.