U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-13-2012, 07:14 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 43,116,816 times
Reputation: 11862

Advertisements

Since about the 1920s, women's hemlines have been rising, yet trousers have always been the most formal acceptable attire for men for the past few centuries...is it just seen as ungentlemanly, hairier legs don't look as sightly? Is it because they are not viewed as sex objects? It's more the disparity which seems interesting. In Rome it seemed the opposite. Men wore shorter 'skirts', while women seemed to wear maxi-dresses lol.

Wearing short shorts is considered gay now haha.

Is it because women don't care about legs, as I alluded to in a previous thread? I also mentioned how a sexy shot of a male often was of him shirtless, whereas a woman was often in a bikini etc.

I guess if men do start bearing their legs a bit more maybe they'll start shaving to, which kinda led to shorter skirts for women.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-13-2012, 08:23 PM
 
Location: California Mountains
1,448 posts, read 2,493,432 times
Reputation: 2331
Saw about a dozen men in skirts in Seattle. Unlike Scottish men who are comfortable in their skin and carry themselves proudly in their kilts, the American men I saw do not have what it takes to do the same in skirts, half of them looked frumpy and the other half looked consciously defiant. In addition, the material, the cut, the colours, and the fit of those men skirts I saw were clearly inferior to my own skirts. I wouldn't wear them for love nor money, does not matter which gender I happen to be.

Last edited by Ol' Wanderer; 01-13-2012 at 08:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2012, 08:28 PM
 
Location: Middle America
35,817 posts, read 39,334,463 times
Reputation: 48613
I definitely don't care about guys' legs. I don't care if they cover them up or not, but it's not like they draw my eye, either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2012, 08:43 PM
 
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,683 posts, read 43,116,816 times
Reputation: 11862
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa View Post
I definitely don't care about guys' legs. I don't care if they cover them up or not, but it's not like they draw my eye, either.
I've always been attracted to nice legs on a woman. Maybe that's why I like the body shape of taller women. Stick thin, too fat, or tree trunkish isn't attractive. That's where the phrase 'shapely legs' comes from lol. I'd also like to have nice legs and for women to appreciate them myself, but alas, I have bow legs and some women don't seem to care anyway so I guess it's nothing to worry about!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2012, 09:01 PM
 
11,672 posts, read 13,870,759 times
Reputation: 19019
I don't think I've ever cared about a man's legs. Just doesn't do anything for me and I actually prefer men in jeans, not shorts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2012, 03:23 PM
 
1,792 posts, read 4,573,153 times
Reputation: 1522
Why don't more men wear shorts? Probably because many don't have attractive legs and are embarrassed to display them. This is sad because when the weather's hot wearing shorts is much cooler. I do enjoy seeing men with nice legs wear shorts if they are the right length and fit for the individual.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2012, 03:28 PM
 
31,984 posts, read 17,262,972 times
Reputation: 34701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
Since about the 1920s, women's hemlines have been rising, yet trousers have always been the most formal acceptable attire for men for the past few centuries...is it just seen as ungentlemanly, hairier legs don't look as sightly? Is it because they are not viewed as sex objects? It's more the disparity which seems interesting. In Rome it seemed the opposite. Men wore shorter 'skirts', while women seemed to wear maxi-dresses lol.

Wearing short shorts is considered gay now haha.

Is it because women don't care about legs, as I alluded to in a previous thread? I also mentioned how a sexy shot of a male often was of him shirtless, whereas a woman was often in a bikini etc.

I guess if men do start bearing their legs a bit more maybe they'll start shaving to, which kinda led to shorter skirts for women.
I thought men from Australia wear shorts all the time! In certain regions, of course. Is that just a movie thing?

I wear them from March to October, and I could care less what people think. I can't stand to wear long pants, except to places like church or whatever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2012, 04:09 PM
 
Location: Atlanta & NYC
6,621 posts, read 11,170,823 times
Reputation: 6590
I'm an 18 year old male and I think that guys who wear shorts above or at the knees look a little non-masculine. I don't even like wearing shorts to begin with. Plus, why would anyone want to see hairy legs? Women's legs are smooth and, well, beautiful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2012, 04:52 PM
 
13,817 posts, read 12,600,955 times
Reputation: 6460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20 View Post
Since about the 1920s, women's hemlines have been rising, yet trousers have always been the most formal acceptable attire for men for the past few centuries...is it just seen as ungentlemanly, hairier legs don't look as sightly? Is it because they are not viewed as sex objects? It's more the disparity which seems interesting. In Rome it seemed the opposite. Men wore shorter 'skirts', while women seemed to wear maxi-dresses lol.

Wearing short shorts is considered gay now haha.

Is it because women don't care about legs, as I alluded to in a previous thread? I also mentioned how a sexy shot of a male often was of him shirtless, whereas a woman was often in a bikini etc.

I guess if men do start bearing their legs a bit more maybe they'll start shaving to, which kinda led to shorter skirts for women.
Check out European clothing in 1700-1800ies
Men used to show off their legs much more, when women were covering theirs)))

http://www.cmhg.gc.ca/cmh/book_image...27_ss01_03.jpg

Clothing 1770 - 1800

and those stirrup pants on hussars - oh my...





( it's all good, but I suspect men figured out with time that this kind of clothing might look too unforgiving, and gave it a go for women)))
The rest is history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2012, 06:43 AM
 
Location: US
5,145 posts, read 10,421,193 times
Reputation: 5326
Egh...man knees are ugly unless the guy is really thick and muscular. Girls have better legs!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top