skirtcafe.org

http://www.break.com/usercontent/2009/1 ... de-1502342

Very funny, just wished this existed in real-life....

R

Renesm1 It would be good wouldn't it

I worked in an office over 2 warmish summers and the male dress code was never relaxed to allow shorts or ties to be discarded; yet our female colleagues dress code enabled them to dress for the weather. No one challenged the dress code and being a government body there was a large equality and diversity department so challenges would not have been dismissed out of hand. I went back to industry after 18 months!!

I love it! Or at least the start of it.

It starts out by totally hitting the nail on the head, pointing out the comfort of a skirt, but unfortunately then destroys the message by showing men wearing bras, as if that is a logical extension of skirt-wearing.

So, overall rating is neutral.

You just gotta love the British sense of humor
It was very good but I do agree, the last few seconds
were a bit much on the extreme.

Still - - - Quite to the point, and funny too

Uncle Al

Uncle Al wrote:You just gotta love the British sense of humor

It was very good but I do agree, the last few seconds
were a bit much on the extreme.

It was the progression of the level of absurdity that drove the humour in the clip, and I happily admit to laughing my backside off over it -- especially with the way the portrayed butt of the joke gradually realised he was way out of his depth. With a not-too-extreme use of imagination one could hear the gears grinding in his brain

Did it do anything to promote the notion of skirts for guys? Maybe initially. Was it intended to do so? Probably not. Was it overtly negative about guys in skirts? I don't think so, I think it was more of a play on what happens to a rigid mind when the world around it spirals out of control.

I suppose it could have been an Al Huckham, Inc. production, but somehow I rather doubt that -- it was way too subtle.

I'm not sure precisely why, but I feel the need to cue up Monty Python's Lumberjack Song....

I'd love to comment but it takes 30-40 minutes to view a video.

Sapphire:

30-40 minutes to view a video. ? ? ?
Are you on a dial up modem OR are you eyeballing what the guys are wearing viewing it in s-l-o-w motion ?

That last few seconds (bra & panty) distort the theme unless it is something due to British humor and I am missing it.

"Are-we-there-yet? - The-skirted-revolution"
rm

Hard to eyeball something you can not see............................ I can't see it at all. It just times out and mine says it's connected to broadband, so not dial up...

Just because we don't all have the same connection or software is not a reason to bad mouth us...

Tom

Tom:

Comment made as a joke or light humor!

If Sapphire is/was offended will offer apology to her!

Yes not everyone is connected to the internet with the faster-fastest modems/equipment.

You are misinterpreting or reading more into my comment than what was intended.

"Are-we-there-yet? - The-skirted-revolution"
rm

We Brits can handle satire, slapstick and irony in our humour!!

When you live in these sceptered, overcrowded, isles; run by the world collective of incompetents and driven by the department of making stupid ideas reality ...... you need it

r.m.anderson wrote:Sapphire:
[...]
Are you on a dial up modem OR are you eyeballing what the guys are wearing viewing it in s-l-o-w motion ?

It's the former. I have specific demands for a static IP address, and I've had the same one for hte past 14 years; changing it, or going with a consumer-grade dynamic, would cause a major hassle. True enough, it's a pain as pretty much everything demands broadband; there may be a technical workaround, but it'll mean an additional hundred+ bucks a year in broadband charges.

renesm1 wrote:http://www.break.com/usercontent/2009/1 ... de-1502342

Very funny, just wished this existed in real-life....

R

TBF! thanks R!

R. M.

Not really reading more than you wrote, just bringing up the issue that not all can see what you guys are talking about and maybe not our fault. Frustrating at times... But usually, we can get an idea about the subject by seeing the comments while the lucky or rich discuss what they have seen.

It's also an issue why many lurkers do not get in on every conversation as we've been reminded about at times.

Short story, I took it as intended, but thought it a good opening to place a comment. Sorry about that...

Tom

sapphire wrote:I'd love to comment but it takes 30-40 minutes to view a video.

My boss lives/works in rural New England (New Hampshire to be precise) and she has to rely on an expensive satellite link for broadband, so it doesn't come as a surprise that people in the region sadly have to rely on dial-up.

And there is us in the UK complaining about only 2Mpbs broadband!!!!!

R

P.S. I hope it was worth the wait when you finally saw the clip!

crfriend wrote:

r.m.anderson wrote:Sapphire:
[...]
Are you on a dial up modem OR are you eyeballing what the guys are wearing viewing it in s-l-o-w motion ?

It's the former. I have specific demands for a static IP address, and I've had the same one for hte past 14 years; changing it, or going with a consumer-grade dynamic, would cause a major hassle. True enough, it's a pain as pretty much everything demands broadband; there may be a technical workaround, but it'll mean an additional hundred+ bucks a year in broadband charges.

Looks like there is not enough competition where you are to make the telephone company drop their prices! Seems such a shame to miss out on broadband. How much more was it to have the broadband option? Would it entail having to dig up several miles of land to lay a cable? In the UK, I've heard stories of customers in rural parts being charges thousands of pounds to run a new cable for broadband. It is truly outrageous the amounts of money some companies think they can charge if the think they can get away with it!

R