srah blah blah

Spike - November 20, 2003 - 4:27 AM - ℓ

It's the legs.

Equally, what is it with women and tank-top shirts? Arm muscles or what?

Jez - November 20, 2003 - 6:04 AM - ℓ

Yup. Legs.

That reminds me, I must scan the photos from the wedding I went to in Scotland. Pleanty of pictures of my friends wearing kilts there though. I, however, chickened out and wore trousers.

srah - November 20, 2003 - 7:11 AM - ℓ

For the record, srah does not like the tank tops. And does not approve of Jez's skirtlessness. :)

Urs - November 20, 2003 - 7:12 AM - ℓ

I am one cynical feminist....

Ewan McGregor is hot

Hooray!

srah - November 20, 2003 - 7:17 AM - ℓ

Was that your summary of my post? :D

richard - November 20, 2003 - 7:43 AM - ℓ

It's the legs, yes...

but it's also the openness and the fantasy of, shall we say, access.

Jez - November 20, 2003 - 8:06 AM - ℓ

Well, I'm afraid it is unlikely in the extreme that you will ever see me in a kilt. You'll have to come over and force me to go to some Scottish function.

Did you see this news report from a few weeks ago?

EU definition of the kilt skirts disaster

Urs - November 20, 2003 - 8:43 AM - ℓ

srah: Perhaps, but I didn't see it that way

richard: thats what I was going to say except with more malice

I decided that this was what I wanted to say "Men like to put their dicks into things and it is easier to put your dick in someone wearing a skirt than someone wearing pants"

katie - November 20, 2003 - 8:47 AM - ℓ

Eeeeeewaaaaaaaan.... *droooooooooool*

Katie thanks Srah because she (the former) is sure that she (the latter) posted that picture just for her (again, the former).

I don't think I understand the question. Short skirts? Long skirts? Schoolgirl skirts? Elegant skirts? Professional skirts? Slutty skirts?

Short? Because they're pervs. Long? Because it makes them imagine long legs, because they're pervs. Schoolgirl? Because they're pedophiles. Elegant? Because it makes them think they are James Bond, because they're pervs. Professional? Because they like to sexually-harrass in the workplace. Slutty? Because short just isn't good enough for these pervs.

I am, of course, almost exagerating. :D

sheri - November 20, 2003 - 9:04 AM - ℓ

Pretty sure it's what Richard said.

Greg - November 20, 2003 - 11:57 AM - ℓ

Legs

Steven B. Cherry - November 20, 2003 - 2:14 PM - ℓ

What is it with guys and skirts on girls? They make us think of sex. (blank look)

Well they make us think of sex instantly instead of in the usual four seconds.

srah - November 20, 2003 - 2:25 PM - ℓ

I am so naive! I just thought they made me look faaaaaancy.

Geez, now I'm scared to wear skirts out in public! What is this power that I wield?!

srah - November 20, 2003 - 2:36 PM - ℓ

BTW Katie - the picture was for you... but also for me. :) And apparently for Ursula. And for the general good of womankind.

katie - November 20, 2003 - 2:41 PM - ℓ

See, a kilt on a guy... strike that. Most guys, no. But a kilt on Ewan... well, it has the same effect as what Richard describes. It truly is about access.

katie - November 20, 2003 - 2:46 PM - ℓ

I had to go back for another look. I HAD to. *droooooool*

I mean, just LOOK at him. With his knee up like that... And the wind-blown hair doesn't hurt much either.

*swoon*

srah - November 20, 2003 - 2:47 PM - ℓ

And the legs.

srah - November 20, 2003 - 2:57 PM - ℓ

With kilts, it's the confidence that's sexy. You have to be pretty self-assured to go around without pants on and pull it off. If you're just some dweeb in a skirt, that's not cool.

Murph - November 20, 2003 - 3:22 PM - ℓ

Men in skirts? Because kilts are comfortable. And versatile.

Ewan looks like he's wearing the more modern dress (as in dressed-up, not as in female attire) kilt, though, which isn't quite as nice as the full, Braveheart-style kilt. This can be worn with the extra material up over the shoulder (as commonly seen), which yields "pockets", or let down, falling almost to the ground to keep your legs warm, or pulled up over your head as a shawl to keep the rain off. I really know too much about this, don't I?

alfie - November 20, 2003 - 4:15 PM - ℓ

Sigh.

katie - November 21, 2003 - 8:12 AM - ℓ

Mel Gibson in a kilt. SIIIIIIIIGH.

Matthew the Young - November 22, 2003 - 10:26 PM - ℓ

(i see to be entering this thread late, but...)

Its not just the legs, its the bare skin -- just like the appeal of low-rise jeans, halter tops, sleeveless tops, sandals instead of shoes, plunging V-necks, etc. Girls fashions are based upon getting the most sex appeal out of revealing the right amount of skin in the right areas (which for guys is almost anywhere...) Just like mentioned above, guys don't want to imagine something sexy (which would take 4 sec), they want to see it (which is instantaneous) :-)