skirtcafe.org

JohnH wrote:There are any number of well endowed women that Carl might say look unbalanced with a short skirt and heels.

Ah, yes, the "Barbie proportion" problem. I think it worth noting that most "well endowed" women display said asset in the dorsal/ventral line; men tend to be "large up top" in the lateral dimension with shoulders that are noticeably wider than those of the typical female form for any given height, and there's also the (typically desireable) male feature of a "barrel chest" that the ladies just don't usually have.

I suspect we're comparing apples to oranges here. Quite honestly, I feel that I would make for one appalling "woman"; I am simply built wrong for the task, and to try to shoehorn myself into that mould for the sake of looking better in a skirt or dress would do nothing but make me look absurd. It is for this reason that I strive to detach the notion of "femininity" from the garment in question and try to make it "work" on my particular frame. Everybody else's mileage will, of necessity, vary. This does not mean that one should not experiment to find what looks good on one's self.

Yes, everybody's different.

The smaller dresses my ex-wife left me fit me just fine, including the shoulders. Those dresses require no alterations to fit me. I happen to fit into a one-piece dress much better than my wife, which is OK given that she does not wear skirts, let alone dresses.

John

I think Stu has adjusted his pectorals to suit his choice of dress, while I tend to the other way round.

My pectorals need no adjustments for ordinary off-the-shelf dresses. The chest area is a little loose but it's acceptable. After all a lot of women, particularly Asian, are not well endowed at all.

John

JohnH wrote:My pectorals need no adjustments for ordinary off-the-shelf dresses. The chest area is a little loose but it's acceptable. After all a lot of women, particularly Asian, are not well endowed at all.

John

Please put up a photo of yourself in one of the dresses. There seems to be a reticence on the site to do such.
Jack.

Jack Williams wrote:Please put up a photo of yourself in one of the dresses. There seems to be a reticence on the site to do such.

See John's thread in "Pics and Looks"; he's got no problems at all showing his dresses.

Something that is kind of off-topic is how there are more women that are getting college degrees than men and are taking over the reigns of power - here is the URL:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/11/r ... f=obinsite

Taken to its conclusion men simply might not fit into the workplace and get ahead as traditional men as one can imagine. So we might see more of the likes of Stu Rasmussen around and men that have transitioned into women.

I think my biggest area of contention is the chest work. But aside from that this guy is an inspiration for anyone that wants to buck the trend.

I thought it was ludicrous how those people freaked out about his attire at one meeting. I do question if they would have acted the same toward a woman dressed similarly.

Now, I myself would love to do as he does, just with some differences. He does look very feminine. I would just opt for androgynous, (no breasts, or tucking), and so on.

We need more like this fellow though, and I hope he becomes a trail blazer.

AND no my confidence in our current president would not be shaken if he showed up in an outfit similar to what Palin wore to the debates. My confidence is shaken in other ways

Pythos wrote: AND no my confidence in our current president would not be shaken if he showed up in an outfit similar to what Palin wore to the debates. My confidence is shaken in other ways

I have to agree with this sentiment. Although politicians would get more respect anyway if they said and acted upon what they believe in, rather than what they believe will get them more votes. If they actually did this, no one would give a monkey's what they looked like or what clothes they wore.

Leave out the part about "transitioning into women". I believe that should say "transitioning as women have done to remain modern & relevant". The entire notion that men think they are restricted to pants although pants are no longer a gender exclusive garment seems to emphasize that men are simply unable to transition from life as it was many decades ago. Women have adapted to the 21st Century much better than men have in my opinion. Women have become competitive in virtually any career position such as physicians, attorneys, scientists, engineers, astronauts, etc. The time is certainly here that men realize that the "horse and buggy" era has passed. We as men need new thoughts coupled with new actions to make us compatible with a new age. A sign of that transition may well be seeing us in dresses and skirts.

The only issue is, there are too few men that actually pay attention to the style inequities. Those small numbers are also composed of M to F crossdressers, that only do the CDing in order to wear what they like. Others live in a closet of shame.

Stu here is awesome, and I see he is still mayor, that speaks volumes.

Unfortunately women need to step up to the plate and NOT turn down a guy because of what he wears. My GG one time said she wanted "masculine" men, and that I wear leggings too often. She was associating "masculine" with pants wearing. This is the kind of ignornace we need to combat. Until that time she had never worn leggings, and I gave her a pair. She no longer thinks ill of me for liking them so much, and has adopted elements of my style into hers.

But women need to give a little ground, dump these enforced images of masculinity, and let us males into the 21st century.

In my opinion.

Stu and more importantly his girlfriend are trail blazers.

Behind every great man, is a great woman, as the saying goes.