very short shorts

Discussion of fashion elements and looks that are traditionally considered somewhat "femme" but are presented in a masculine context. This is NOT about transvestism or crossdressing.
User avatar
Mouse
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1871
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:04 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: very short shorts

Post by Mouse »

If you get to the stage of the inseam being 0, do you not just get a very short skirt?
Daily, a happy man in a skirt...
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4858
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: very short shorts

Post by STEVIE »

Mouse wrote: Tue Oct 21, 2025 4:58 pm If you get to the stage of the inseam being 0, do you not just get a very short skirt?
Nope Mouse that's underwear, such as some girls seem to think are shorts these days.
Max inseam I'll wear is 2", my motto, if you've got it, flaunt it!
Steve.
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3631
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: very short shorts

Post by denimini »

Mouse is correct. Zero inseam makes it a skirt.
My name is Anthony, please accept me for the person that I am.
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4858
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: very short shorts

Post by STEVIE »

denimini wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:37 am Mouse is correct. Zero inseam makes it a skirt.
I beg to differ.
The in seam measurement is the distance from the crotch to the bottom of the shorts or pants/trousers.
Even at 0 there is still a crotch so there is bifurcation. By that token how can it possibly be a skirt?
I got to say that my original comment was meant light heartedly.
Steve.
User avatar
Mouse
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1871
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:04 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: very short shorts

Post by Mouse »

STEVIE wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 10:09 am
denimini wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:37 am Mouse is correct. Zero inseam makes it a skirt.
I beg to differ.
The in seam measurement is the distance from the crotch to the bottom of the shorts or pants/trousers.
Even at 0 there is still a crotch so there is bifurcation. By that token how can it possibly be a skirt?
I got to say that my original comment was meant light heartedly.
Steve.
I think you have to define what a zero length seam is. If it is nothing, then there is no crotch and therefore no bifurcation in the garment, therefore the garment is a skirt. I rest my case. :) :) :) :) :thewave:
Daily, a happy man in a skirt...
User avatar
crfriend
Master Barista
Posts: 15285
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
Location: New England (U.S.)
Contact:

Re: very short shorts

Post by crfriend »

Mouse wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:01 pmI think you have to define what a zero length seam is. If it is nothing, then there is no crotch and therefore no bifurcation in the garment, therefore the garment is a skirt. I rest my case. :) :) :) :) :thewave:
Methinks we're getting dangerously close to contemplating an infinitesimal here, and the human mind does not process either the vastness of infinity or the minuteness of infinitely small very well. This has caused innumerable arguments over the course of history.

In other words, "I'm not going to get dragged into this fray!" :twisted:
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
STEVIE
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 4858
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 11:01 pm
Location: North East Scotland.

Re: very short shorts

Post by STEVIE »

STEVIE wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 10:09 am The in seam measurement is the distance from the crotch to the bottom of the shorts or pants/trousers.
Ah but my learned friend, we have the accepted definition as stated above.
The key word is "crotch", not the measurement.
I present this as corroboratory evidence
evidence.jpg
Safe to say there is no inseam, a defined crotch and clearly labelled as shorts.
That concludes my rebuttal.
Steve
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
denimini
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 3631
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:50 am
Location: Outback Australia

Re: very short shorts

Post by denimini »

I am happy to agree to disagree. I would suggest it is like contemplating one's navel except that is over 150mm away.
My name is Anthony, please accept me for the person that I am.
User avatar
Uncle Al
Moderator
Posts: 4353
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 10:07 pm
Location: Duncanville, TX USA

Re: very short shorts

Post by Uncle Al »

STEVIE wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 10:53 pm Safe to say there is no inseam, a defined crotch and clearly labelled as shorts.
That concludes my rebuttal.
Steve
IMHO, by the example in the picture, it's a very small rebuttal ;)
(I think I've seen larger band aids than this.)
:hide:

Uncle Al
:mrgreen: :ugeek: :mrgreen:
Kilted Organist/Musician
Grand Musician of the Grand Lodge, I.O.O.F. of Texas 2008-2025
When asked 'Why the Kilt?'
I respond-The why is F.T.H.O.I. (For The H--- Of It)
User avatar
Mouse
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1871
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:04 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: very short shorts

Post by Mouse »

So in the picture, the inseam from crotch to end of leg is at least an inch, depending on the fraying and where you measure to, and the same for the other side. Even a G string will have a technical in seam of a few mm. A skirt has zero inseam, since there is only one pipe.
Daily, a happy man in a skirt...
User avatar
phathack
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:41 pm
Location: DFW Texas, USA

Re: very short shorts

Post by phathack »

Seems to me a brief would be a no inseam garment.
But is that still Shorts? :wink:
Woman have Fashion, Men have a Uniform.
A skirt wearer since 2004 and a full time skirt wearer since 2020.
Post Reply