# Am I just and ass? Yoga pants and other things...



## Depth.Inside

So like any other marriage, ours has issues. We work through them and keep going. 

My wife is a flirt. She is the smoking hot mom next door, by standard so she can get attention pretty easily. This wouldn't bother me if she made me feel confident that I was everything but she truly rarely desires me or takes the time to make me feel 100% hers. However, she does manage to flirt with every guy she meets. She runs her hand down their arm, smiles, etc. When I call her on it she claims it's onnocent... bs.

Now on to the point and maybe I'm just an ass... not sure but I frigging HATE when she wears a certain yoga pants outfit. I was out of state working for a few days and she met me at the door wearing it. Honestly, my blood boiled. She is voluptuous and yoga pants and an exercise shirt her breast spill out of are not what I consider daily wear. I don't want her to dress like a nun. I buy her nice, attractive clothing. This just seems a bit much to me. Keep in mind she even wears a thong to avoid panty lines... yet she never wears a thong for me. Even when we go out on a date.

I didn't tell her my pure hatred for the inappropriate outfit but I did ask her to only wear it when we are together so I could enjoy it. She got what I was asking. It did no good. Yesterday, while we were together she wore old black capri with paint on the hem and anot old tshirt. Today she was running errands and put that dang outfit on. Before anyone suggest that it's for me, I won't see her until an hour before bed tonight because she has things to do with our kids.... she is wearing the outfit to a function for our kids.. I'm pissed. I'm not closed minded but wearing something like this to get attention from other men when you do not instill confidence in your own husband burns me to no avail. 

She has the large hips with a round rear, full c to small d spilling out the top. She has even told me this outfit makes her feel sexy which makes me even madder. I'm not a control freak but at what point can I step up and ask her to act like a married woman? I have very little reason to worry she would cheat but fishing for attention with this outfit really gets to me when half the time I do good to get noticed by her when sitting in the same room.

Honest opinion, amid I just an off base ass?
_Posted via Mobile Device_
_Posted via Mobile Device_
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest

No, you're not an ass, but the first guy that asks for pictures might be.:scratchhead:

The whole yoga pants thing is a trap. If you don't like it, you're saying its slvtware. If you do like it, you're objectifying. They should be worn with an understanding. "Wear this, but don't complain about the staring".

A married woman should not dress that way if you object. A mother should not dress that way to functions involving kids, classmates.


----------



## Depth.Inside

Btw, sorry about the errors. I'm typing on a cell phone and too pissed to care.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## gouge_away

Yea, something is off, bro. I don't mind my women to dress sexy, but if they are only doing it for the attention of other men, and don't seem to care how uncomfortable it makes me that they flirt. I don't know, that seems kinda sleazy, I would really watch your woman, she might not be the cheater type, but that doesn't mean some guy won't force himself on her, especially if she initiated the touch.

If I were you, I would start dressing like a farmer, and tell her it makes you feel good, if she wants to tone her dress down, you might think of ditching the overalls.


----------



## SecondTime'Round

If she's able to pull off sexy, she should be dressing like that at home and when she goes out (if she chooses to). It's not fair for you to expect her to dress frumpy when she goes out, but sexy for you, but it's also not at ALL fair for her to dress frumpy for you and only sexy when she goes out. (As long as you communicate this to her. I've certainly been guilty of just wanting to be comfortable at home and not caring what I look like).


----------



## Marduk

Don't focus on her clothes.

Focus on what has her attention. If it's not on you, who is it on?

Oh, ya. The other guys. That, plus the clothes...

The question you need to answer is why does she seek other men's attention? Ego-validation (worried she doesn't still 'have it' maybe), as a brick upside your head (you're not giving her attention, maybe), or because she's seeking to have an affair(s)?

That's the question you need to answer.

How you answer it is to stop fixating on the what (clothes) and start answering why.

I would shut the hell up about it and watch her very, very carefully. Her actions will betray her intent.


----------



## Depth.Inside

I can honestly say it not lack of attention from me. She always seeks the validation of others and always has. She is the classic over achiever that is soon concerned with others perception. Down to the wire, she wouldn't cheat but she damn sure wants to feel sexy because of others.


----------



## ConanHub

She is stupid and immature at best and a likely candidate for cheating at worst. No, you are not being an ass and your wife is an embarrassment. Your children will start to be uncomfortable with her for this upon reaching a certain age.

One option is to feed her what she is serving and see how she likes it.

Get dressed sharp, well groomed, cologne, the works and start being pleasant with the ladies, talking to all of them about their children and what is happening in their lives. Spend all your time looking great away from your wife. When you are with her, be a slob.

How is your sex life? Any changes?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## happy as a clam

gouge_away said:


> If I were you, I would start dressing like a farmer, and tell her it makes you feel good, if she wants to tone her dress down, you might think of ditching the overalls.


:rofl:

THIS made me laugh!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Depth.Inside said:


> I can honestly say it not lack of attention from me. She always seeks the validation of others and always has. She is the classic over achiever that is soon concerned with others perception. Down to the wire, she wouldn't cheat but she damn sure wants to feel sexy because of others.


Then you have a runner on your hands.

The biggest thing tho, is to never let on that you're insecure. That will drive her _away_ from you and _towards_ other guys... especially if it's "totally innocent."

God, have I heard that too many times.

Shut your mouth. Smile and nod. Check her phone to see who's she's chatting with. What does she spend her time doing while you're not around? Figure that out.

And mirror her behaviour. Dress sharp. Be fit. Be just a little overly attentive to other women.

If she gets mad... that's one conversation.

If she doesn't... that's another conversation.


----------



## Depth.Inside

Our sex life like our marriage, is confusing at best. 

And the reason I don't think she will cheat, she is petrified of change. Seriously, almost clinical. Its all 100% validation. I can tell her she looks good and she ignores me. Someone else tells her and she listens...

If I didn't have our kids to worry about sometimes I think I would be better of cutting the strings after 20+ years. I'm tired of things never being simple.


----------



## ConanHub

Depth.Inside said:


> Our sex life like our marriage, is confusing at best.
> 
> And the reason I don't think she will cheat, she is petrified of change. Seriously, almost clinical. Its all 100% validation. I can tell her she looks good and she ignores me. Someone else tells her and she listens...
> 
> If I didn't have our kids to worry about sometimes I think I would be better of cutting the strings after 20+ years. I'm tired of things never being simple.


Don't be paranoid but don't be so sure either. I have seen the most unlikely candidates cheat under far better circumstances than your wife is currently in.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Middle of Everything

Forest said:


> No, you're not an ass, but the first guy that asks for pictures might be.:scratchhead:
> 
> The whole yoga pants thing is a trap. If you don't like it, you're saying its slvtware. If you do like it, you're objectifying. They should be worn with an understanding. "Wear this, but don't complain about the staring".
> 
> A married woman should not dress that way if you object. A mother should not dress that way to functions involving kids, classmates.


Ill say it I think yoga pants are slvtware. Yeah some women can pull them off and some cant. And if I was a single guy and was only concerned with seeing as much of a woman's a$$ while still clothed, I would think yoga pants are the greatest thing sinced sliced bread.

But she is married. And a mom. And just because you CAN wear something and pull it off doesnt mean you should. Wear super clevage to a professional job if you want to. Then wonder why you are being objectified? Duh.

If she would be honest she is wearing them to get attention. Which to a degree is fine. But after awhile develop some self confidence and realize you are still hot. Otherwise she is just trolling for Mr McHotty to have an affair with.


----------



## lifeistooshort

I find the touching other men and running her hand down their arms to be trashy and huge boundary violations, especially since some of these men must be married. Other womens husbands are not there to make her feel good about herself. 

Id tell her that you understand she likes to feel sexy but soliciting attention from other womens husbands is inappropriate and trashy. Then you don't come off as insecure and frankly it's a true statement. 

Tell her she can play stupid but other women think she's trash. They very likely do.

I know someone like this that my hb used to work with. She got divorced and started fawning over the men while ignoring the wives. She'll hug my hb right in front of me and then ignore me. It's so trashy it's pathetic, and frankly the only reason I've let it go is because we don't see her much, he doesn't work with her anymore, I have no reason to think he talks to her, and he just looks plain uncomfortable when she tries to hug him. He's not confrontational but he knows it's trashy and pathetic. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Fozzy

In my town yoga pants and exercise clothing are pretty much the official "mom" uniform. Lots of SAHM's, and they all seem to compete with each other as to who can be seen in the tightest clothes. And yeah, they pick up their kids at school that way too.

Meanwhile at the gym--same clothes, same hair, same perfect makeup----zero perspiration.


----------



## Constable Odo

What other narcissistic personality traits does your wife have above exhibitionism?


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Depth.Inside said:


> Its all 100% validation. I can tell her she looks good and she ignores me. Someone else tells her and she listens...


You need to read what you wrote here and think about it. You also need to learn the art of the backhanded compliment. Telling her she looks good for the 10,000th time isn't going to help her. It's just going to reinforce that she thinks she's out of your league. Damn I can't even believe I'm writing this....but you need to fix the dynamic so that she seeks YOUR validation. This is easy to do, and you don't do it with endless compliments.


----------



## Depth.Inside

Her overachieving is by far the worst. He has to be involved in everything and everyone has to think she is fantastic for the work she does. She will literally kill herself to make sure others are impressed with her effort.

That is why I am 99 percent sure it is all about validation including the clothing when she dresses like this. At other times she dresses frumpy. However when she needs to lift it up this is what she puts on. She treats me the same way. Most of the time other than just general general conversation she doesn't even notice I'm in the same room. However when she needs attention she comes and stands in front of me half naked. She knows I'm going to look. If I make sexual advances I'm turn down the majority of the time. It's all about ego


----------



## Depth.Inside

Over the years I've dialed back the over the top attention and tried to put more focus on me and what I wanted. It actually just turned into big fights. For instance I didn't even mention the outfit she is wearing today but she knows I have a problem with it. Now she is acting like I'm in a bad mood when in truth I treated her no differently.

I have also gotten to the point my life where I get as much attention from the opposite sex as she does. She is aware of this and it actually just makes her mad. At the same time being a human I'm thinking of so many other ladies are interested me then why the hell do I have so many issues with my own wife.

Not complimenting her on a regular basis or just with the drawing from those types of situations backfires greatly. She acts like I'm cranky and unhappy and it starts to overcompensate with apologies and things of that nature. I truly think we need counseling I talk to her about it once before and she did not react well. That actually wasn't too long ago. A few days later she began to ask me why I was even with her anymore if I've been so happy our entire relationship. Instead of working on any problems we may have she immediately gets defensive it's just her personality. Frankly I'm extremely tired of it. She overcompensates even on things like that. Instead of simply trying to make adjustments where we mesh better she will go over the top and not say anything pretending like she's worried she will offend me. When that happens I literally cannot say anything without her going over the top and acting like it's a big deal


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Depth.Inside said:


> Over the years I've dialed back the over the top attention and tried to put more focus on me and what I wanted. It actually just turned into big fights. For instance I didn't even mention the outfit she is wearing today but she knows I have a problem with it. Now she is acting like I'm in a bad mood when in truth I treated her no differently.
> 
> I have also gotten to the point my life where I get as much attention from the opposite sex as she does. She is aware of this and it actually just makes her mad. At the same time being a human I'm thinking of so many other ladies are interested me then why the hell do I have so many issues with my own wife.
> 
> Not complimenting her on a regular basis or just with the drawing from those types of situations backfires greatly. She acts like I'm cranky and unhappy and it starts to overcompensate with apologies and things of that nature. I truly think we need counseling I talk to her about it once before and she did not react well. That actually wasn't too long ago. A few days later she began to ask me why I was even with her anymore if I've been so happy our entire relationship. Instead of working on any problems we may have she immediately gets defensive it's just her personality. Frankly I'm extremely tired of it. She overcompensates even on things like that. Instead of simply trying to make adjustments where we mesh better she will go over the top and not say anything pretending like she's worried she will offend me. When that happens I literally cannot say anything without her going over the top and acting like it's a big deal


I didn't say to not compliment her. Try this: Wow hun, you look great in that outfit....for someone who has had two kids! (said with genuine enthusiasm).


----------



## Fitnessfan

Where I live, pretty much all the stay at home mom's wear yoga pants all the time. I don't see the big deal. She's a grown women and she probably is a bit insecure about growing old and wants to still feel a bit that she has it. Women just want to feel like...well still like women: sexy, attractive, pretty. Doesn't mean she wants to cheat or anything else. If she isn't someone that would cheat (per you), I don't see what the big deal is. Let her wear what she wants. Let her be herself and be proud of her. Why does everyone have to hide their curves? 

The touching other men is a different story, however. I don't think that's appropriate and would ask for that to stop.


----------



## gouge_away

Does she need to be the center of attention?
Does her behavior affect her relationship with female friends (are they afraid to have her around their husbands and boyfriends)

Maybe you are dealing with HPD... But given her age, idk, highly unlikely.


----------



## Lila

Fitnessfan said:


> Where I live, pretty much all the stay at home mom's wear yoga pants all the time. I don't see the big deal.


LOL, I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees this every day. 

During the warmer months, the carpool moms at my son's school are sporting their yoga pants and gym tops by 7:30 am M - F. It's either that or their itty bitty tennis skirts. During the cooler months, they are all about the compression pants with matching hoodies. 

@Depth.Inside, the issue I see with your wife is that she won't dress up to get your attention. That to me is very strange. 

Honestly, I think your compliments may have lost their value from overuse, if you catch my drift. Maybe try pulling back a bit. Only compliment her when she looks great...just for you.


----------



## Forest

Depth.Inside said:


> Our sex life like our marriage, is confusing at best.
> 
> And the reason I don't think she will cheat, she is petrified of change. Seriously, almost clinical. Its all 100% validation. I can tell her she looks good and she ignores me. Someone else tells her and she listens...
> 
> If I didn't have our kids to worry about sometimes I think I would be better of cutting the strings after 20+ years. I'm tired of things never being simple.


If you do even the scantest amount of research, or read the Coping With Infidelity forum you'll quickly realize that a woman who is addicted to attention and compliments will trade sex to get them.


----------



## Forest

intheory said:


> Yoga pants should be for yoga (or exercise) class. They aren't streetwear. Fwiw.


What are you? Reasonably mature; responsible; or just intelligent?


----------



## Wolf1974

Depth.Inside said:


> So like any other marriage, ours has issues. We work through them and keep going.
> 
> *My wife is a flirt. * She is the smoking hot mom next door, by standard so she can get attention pretty easily. This wouldn't bother me if she made me feel confident that I was everything but she truly rarely desires me or takes the time to make me feel 100% hers. However, she does manage to flirt with every guy she meets. She runs her hand down their arm, smiles, etc. When I call her on it she claims it's onnocent... bs.
> 
> Now on to the point and maybe I'm just an ass... not sure but I frigging HATE when she wears a certain yoga pants outfit. I was out of state working for a few days and she met me at the door wearing it. Honestly, my blood boiled. She is voluptuous and yoga pants and an exercise shirt her breast spill out of are not what I consider daily wear. I don't want her to dress like a nun. I buy her nice, attractive clothing. This just seems a bit much to me. Keep in mind she even wears a thong to avoid panty lines... yet she never wears a thong for me. Even when we go out on a date.
> 
> I didn't tell her my pure hatred for the inappropriate outfit but I did ask her to only wear it when we are together so I could enjoy it. She got what I was asking. It did no good. Yesterday, while we were together she wore old black capri with paint on the hem and anot old tshirt. Today she was running errands and put that dang outfit on. Before anyone suggest that it's for me, I won't see her until an hour before bed tonight because she has things to do with our kids.... she is wearing the outfit to a function for our kids.. I'm pissed. I'm not closed minded but wearing something like this to get attention from other men when you do not instill confidence in your own husband burns me to no avail.
> 
> She has the large hips with a round rear, full c to small d spilling out the top. She has even told me this outfit makes her feel sexy which makes me even madder. I'm not a control freak but at what point can I step up and ask her to act like a married woman? I have very little reason to worry she would cheat but fishing for attention with this outfit really gets to me when half the time I do good to get noticed by her when sitting in the same room.
> 
> Honest opinion, amid I just an off base ass?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_
> _Posted via Mobile Device_
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


If she is a flirt then really that's on her that you feel insecure. Don't blame you at all. My x wife was this way. Would flirt, and show off, tell me about guys hitting on her then when that upset me I was angry and controlling. It's a game and of course she cheated so I was right all along about her. Jealously is a weird thing. Some of if is maybe needed in a relationship but when one person deliberately does something to hurt and undermine the other it's abuse pure and simple. Not sure how you can deal with this now that you are married. Being single it's easier for me, if my gf does something I don't approve of I would say something immediately but that is never her way.

I feel for you, you are certainly not an ass and in an no win situation


----------



## Heatherknows

marduk said:


> Don't focus on her clothes.
> 
> Focus on what has her attention. If it's not on you, who is it on?
> 
> Oh, ya. The other guys. That, plus the clothes...
> 
> The question you need to answer is why does she seek other men's attention? Ego-validation (worried she doesn't still 'have it' maybe), as a brick upside your head (you're not giving her attention, maybe), or because she's seeking to have an affair(s)?
> 
> That's the question you need to answer.
> 
> How you answer it is to stop fixating on the what (clothes) and start answering why.
> 
> I would shut the hell up about it and watch her very, very carefully. Her actions will betray her intent.


Marduk is right on the money. Your wife seems to want a lot of attention from other men. That's saying a need isn't being met. If you can talk about it to her without being mean you might be surprised at her answers.


----------



## Heatherknows

Lila said:


> LOL, I'm glad I'm not the only one that sees this every day.
> 
> During the warmer months, the carpool moms at my son's school are sporting their yoga pants and gym tops by 7:30 am M - F. It's either that or their itty bitty tennis skirts. During the cooler months, they are all about the compression pants with matching hoodies.
> 
> @Depth.Inside, the issue I see with your wife is that she won't dress up to get your attention. That to me is very strange.
> 
> Honestly, I think your compliments may have lost their value from overuse, if you catch my drift. Maybe try pulling back a bit. Only compliment her when she looks great...just for you.


I wear yoga pants too, they feel like fitted sweatpants and are very comfortable. I don't think this is about the yoga pants which IMHO aren't that sexy.

I think it's about his wife seeking attention from other men.


----------



## gouge_away

Heatherknows said:


> I wear yoga pants too, they feel like fitted sweatpants and are very comfortable. I don't think this is about the yoga pants which IMHO aren't that sexy.
> 
> I think it's about his wife seeking attention from other men.


Whaaaaa planet are you from?
Yoga pants are THE SEXY!


----------



## happy as a clam

The yoga pants are not the problem. Her ATTITUDE about the yoga pants is. She wiggles her butt around and wears low cut tops in public -- inappropriate.

I am 50-years-old, am extremely in shape, and I wear yoga pants frequently in public. But I also have an appropriate matching jacket, a pair of athletic shoes, and usually a ball cap (especially if I've just worked out) and it's a very sporty look, not a prostitute with my bazoombas hanging out.

Her attitude and her narcissism is what's fueling your rage. Counseling is definitely in order. Or divorce. Quite frankly after your latest post, you sound miserable.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tom67

Something to read OP
https://7chan.org/lit/src/Robert_Glover_-_No_More_Mr_Nice_Guy.pdf
It's a good read.


----------



## norajane

I wear yoga pants all the time. But I don't flirt with other men and run my hands along their arms. This isn't about yoga pants, but about your wife's need for validation from other men, which you say she's always needed.

I don't know how a person who has always needed that kind of external validation can change to not needing that anymore. Self-confidence and self-esteem seem to be required, plus not giving a damn what other people think, but that sort of attitude will be hard to come by in a person who has ALWAYS needed external validation.

Did this bother you when you met? When you married? Why is it more of an issue for you today than it was 20 years ago?


----------



## LonelyinLove

Where I was raised, touching when talking was normal. So I do it too.

I have large high on my chest boobs, so almost every shirt I wear except turtlenecks shows them off.

I have zero intention of changing my wardrobe to cover them up....if I did I could just wear a burka or a black nothing like my amish neighbors and be done with it.

I cannot believe the amount of men that want to conceal the beauty of the women they married. Life is short, aging is a cruel thief. Flaunt it while you still got it I say...


----------



## Marduk

LonelyinLove said:


> Where I was raised, touching when talking was normal. So I do it too.
> 
> I have large high on my chest boobs, so almost every shirt I wear except turtlenecks shows them off.
> 
> I have zero intention of changing my wardrobe to cover them up....if I did I could just wear a burka or a black nothing like my amish neighbors and be done with it.
> 
> I cannot believe the amount of men that want to conceal the beauty of the women they married. Life is short, aging is a cruel thief. Flaunt it while you still got it I say...


I could be wrong, but I don't think the problem is that his wife dresses sexy.

I like it when my wife dresses sexy, for example.

I think the problem is a combo of dressing sexy + being touchy with other guys + being overly interested in other guy's attention +

... not dressing sexy when it's just your husband around.

I suspect if she did more of the latter, and turned down the volume on touching other guys and being overly interested in them, the whole dressing problem would be less of an issue.

But maybe that's just me.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

LonelyinLove said:


> Where I was raised, touching when talking was normal. So I do it too.
> 
> 
> 
> I have large high on my chest boobs, so almost every shirt I wear except turtlenecks shows them off.
> 
> 
> 
> I have zero intention of changing my wardrobe to cover them up....if I did I could just wear a burka or a black nothing like my amish neighbors and be done with it.
> 
> 
> 
> I cannot believe the amount of men that want to conceal the beauty of the women they married. Life is short, aging is a cruel thief. Flaunt it while you still got it I say...



So do you touch other men AND refuse to touch your husband? OPs wife's behavior needs to be looked at in context.


----------



## Anon Pink

marduk said:


> Don't focus on her clothes.
> 
> Focus on what has her attention. If it's not on you, who is it on?
> 
> Oh, ya. The other guys. That, plus the clothes...
> 
> The question you need to answer is why does she seek other men's attention? Ego-validation (worried she doesn't still 'have it' maybe), as a brick upside your head (you're not giving her attention, maybe), or because she's seeking to have an affair(s)?
> 
> That's the question you need to answer.
> 
> How you answer it is to stop fixating on the what (clothes) and start answering why.
> 
> I would shut the hell up about it and watch her very, very carefully. Her actions will betray her intent.



I agree with this. I think the most important thing for to do is to shut the hell up about what she is wearing! 





Fozzy said:


> In my town yoga pants and exercise clothing are pretty much the official "mom" uniform. Lots of SAHM's, and they all seem to compete with each other as to who can be seen in the tightest clothes. And yeah, they pick up their kids at school that way too.
> 
> Meanwhile at the gym--same clothes, same hair, same perfect makeup----zero perspiration.



And this!

As I read your OP I was wondering if many of the other Mom's she encounters also dress like this. Women compete with other women a LOT! A lot more than they admit and a whole lot more than men realize.

I wear yoga pants almost daily during the colder months. Most women around here also wear yoga pants. I hate thongs so I just go commando.  

I've never ever heard yoga pants being labeled slvtwear! If that's your opinion, than it is YOUR attitude that is turning her away from you.

I would be very turned off if my H was threatened by my attire or felt slighted. 

But then again, I wear my sexiest stuff when he is with me, except yoga pants because they're not very dressy.

Yoga pants = slvtwear ?
Ridiculous!


----------



## LonelyinLove

marduk said:


> I could be wrong, but I don't think the problem is that his wife dresses sexy.
> 
> I like it when my wife dresses sexy, for example.
> 
> I think the problem is a combo of dressing sexy + being touchy with other guys + being overly interested in other guy's attention +
> 
> ... not dressing sexy when it's just your husband around.
> 
> I suspect if she did more of the latter, and turned down the volume on touching other guys and being overly interested in them, the whole dressing problem would be less of an issue.
> 
> But maybe that's just me.


I dress in the old stuff around the house...I am cleaning and gardening etc...I don't want to ruin the good stuff.

Hubs dresses in older stuff too for working around the home and garden but he kicks it up several notches when he goes out the door.

As for flirting, my H has a flirty personality, always has. Even elderly women love him. I touch and hug friends and co-workers when I haven't seen them for a while. I'm from the south, we tend to touch more than the Yankees from the cold north. :wink2:

At the end of the day, we go home together....


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Again the problem isn't slvtwear for other men, it's slobwear for him.


----------



## VermisciousKnid

Heatherknows said:


> I wear yoga pants too, they feel like fitted sweatpants and are very comfortable. *I don't think this is about the yoga pants which IMHO aren't that sexy.*
> 
> I think it's about his wife seeking attention from other men.


Yoga pants are the closest thing to being nekkid. It might not be sexy to *you* but you can't say they aren't the most revealing thing you can wear which makes them very visually appealing to men. 

As far as being slvt wear, it's a matter of context. They're inappropriate attire in some situations.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

So she likes to look as hot as possible and be desired and perfect at all cost. Which means she's VERY insecure. Which is why she gets very upset when the tables are turned and YOU get attention. I honestly think if you want to save this marriage it isn't about the wardrobe, it's about her insecurity causing her to act inappropriately. Not just flirting with others, but ignoring you, then teasing you with nudity or sexiness yet not actually having sex with you. She is using her only power - her looks/body. Maybe she also feels powerless. Do you earn all of the money? Do you control everything at home - purchases, bills, cars, etc.? 

You need to equalize the dynamics and develop better communication. See a good marriage counselor. She might benefit from an IC. What about doing things as a family that develop one's INSIDE? Volunteer work - not the PTA, the soup kitchen, battered women's shelter, homeless shelter, adopt a highway - things that make her feel good about WHO she is, not just what she looks like.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

And as an aside - this post reminded me of that (paraphrased) saying: "Doesn't matter how hot she is - somewhere there's a guy sick of her crap".


----------



## Marduk

I don't think yoga pants & tops are ****wear by definition.

But I would say some are. I've gone to a hot yoga class and had some women essentially make it like watching cinemax at 12:30AM -- not quite porn, but real real close.

Other times it's just soccer moms in your standard lulu gear.

But I will say that yoga pants are super sexy. Whoever got women to wear those things can retire now as far as I'm concerned. They did their bit for mankind.


----------



## Constable Odo

Too much camel toe with yoga pants.


----------



## samyeagar

Regardless of how one personally feels and thinks about yoga pants, to deny that they are considered sexy as hell by a large portion of men and women is simply delusional.


----------



## Yeswecan

I suggest getting a few Speedo. Dump the cargo pants and jeans. Wear the Speedo out. Display your package. See how that flies.


----------



## Always Learning

Anon Pink said:


> I agree with this. I think the most important thing for to do is to shut the hell up about what she is wearing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this!
> 
> As I read your OP I was wondering if many of the other Mom's she encounters also dress like this. Women compete with other women a LOT! A lot more than they admit and a whole lot more than men realize.
> 
> I wear yoga pants almost daily during the colder months. Most women around here also wear yoga pants. I hate thongs so I just go commando.
> 
> I've never ever heard yoga pants being labeled slvtwear! If that's your opinion, than it is YOUR attitude that is turning her away from you.
> 
> I would be very turned off if my H was threatened by my attire or felt slighted.
> 
> But then again, I wear my sexiest stuff when he is with me, except yoga pants because they're not very dressy.
> 
> Yoga pants = slvtwear ?
> Ridiculous!


Ok AnonPink lets see, Commando in yoga pants and never wear a bra. You are about as close to being naked in public as you can get without being arrested. You have a very lucky husband and a jealous TAM person! LOL.


----------



## EllisRedding

The easiest way to get back at her ... start wearing yoga pants yourself, give her a taste of her own medicine :wink2:










As some other posters have noted, I find it very disturbing she likes to run her hands up and down another guy's arm. I am sorry, that is not friendly behavior, that is "Hey, grab my hand and let's go to my bedroom for some naked Twister, do you have a friend" ...


----------



## WasDecimated

My W started buying and wearing tight and low-cut revealing clothing at about year 13 of our marriage. At first, I was fine with it. She looked hot! Then she started placing herself in situations where she was attracting the attention of other guys like going out drinking and partying with her girlfriends friends more and more often. She also started posting lots of pictures of herself on Facebook. It had escalated to become a point of contention between us. I would express my concern and she would say I was being irrational and controlling. 

I soon discovered that she was cheating on me. Now she’s my XWW.

The end


----------



## Heatherknows

samyeagar said:


> Regardless of how one personally feels and thinks about yoga pants, to deny that they are considered sexy as hell by a large portion of men and women is simply delusional.


IDK. I'm so use to wearing them and seeing other women wearing them that it just doesn't register to me as sexy anymore. If I look sexy in them that's great.


----------



## Heatherknows

EllisRedding said:


> The easiest way to get back at her ... start wearing yoga pants yourself, give her a taste of her own medicine :wink2:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9ac.jpg[/img]


...OK...maybe now I'm not going to wear my yoga pants anymore. :surprise:


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> Regardless of how one personally feels and thinks about yoga pants, to deny that they are considered sexy as hell by a large portion of men and women is simply delusional.



No one has denied that yoga pants might be considered to be sexy by some. Jeans are considered sexy, tennis skirts are considered sexy...wearing these items does NOT make the wearer an attention wh0re. Wouldn't you agree that there area few layers between "sexy as hell" and "slvtwear"?

OP if you want your wife to dress sexy for you, ask her to wear a specific thing that you find sexy. Never just ask, dress sexy for me. Ask her to wear those yoga pants and the low cut top that you've told her looks sexy as hell on her.

And I'm confused, does she run her hands up and down the arms of other men she's talking to or herself? 
@Always Learning, since I am typically dressed the way I am right now, it rarely occurs to me that I am anything other than comfortable.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> No one has denied that yoga pants might be considered to be sexy by some. Jeans are considered sexy, tennis skirts are considered sexy...wearing these items does NOT make the wearer an attention wh0re. *Wouldn't you agree that there area few layers between "sexy as hell" and "slvtwear"*?
> 
> OP if you want your wife to dress sexy for you, ask her to wear a specific thing that you find sexy. Never just ask, dress sexy for me. Ask her to wear those yoga pants and the low cut top that you've told her looks sexy as hell on her.
> 
> And I'm confused, does she run her hands up and down the arms of other men she's talking to or herself?
> 
> @Always Learning, since I am typically dressed the way I am right now, it rarely occurs to me that I am anything other than comfortable.


Of course there is a difference, and I don't think yoga pants, or leggings are slvtwear. 

All too often though, because the wearer is not wearing something for the specific intent of seeking attention, they are just wanting to be comfortable, they tend to disregard the fact that regardless of motivation, things like yoga pants and leggings are very revealing and do tend to accentuate and draw attention to the things that are widely considered sexually attractive. The fact that the wearer doesn't feel particularly sexy, and just wants to be comfortable doesn't change the fact that they are indeed comfortably sexy.


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> Of course there is a difference, and I don't think yoga pants, or leggings are slvtwear.
> 
> All too often though, because the wearer is not wearing something for the specific intent of seeking attention, they are just wanting to be comfortable, they tend to disregard the fact that regardless of motivation, things like yoga pants and leggings are very revealing and do tend to accentuate and draw attention to the things that are widely considered sexually attractive. The fact that the wearer doesn't feel particularly sexy, and just wants to be comfortable doesn't change the fact that they are indeed comfortably sexy.


Which is the point I was making. The OP, and several other men on this thread, act as if wearing yoga pants is some devious bid for an affair partner, someone even posted that yoga pants were slvtwear! 

I'm just trying to give the OP perspective. Just because he finds his wife to be sexy as hell in yoga pants doesn't mean that when she wears them she is intentionally seeking validation from other men.


----------



## Marduk

Anon Pink said:


> Which is the point I was making. The OP, and several other men on this thread, act as if wearing yoga pants is some devious bid for an affair partner, someone even posted that yoga pants were slvtwear!
> 
> I'm just trying to give the OP perspective. Just because he finds his wife to be sexy as hell in yoga pants doesn't mean that when she wears them she is intentionally seeking validation from other men.


That perception is misaligned with everything else he said.
-flirtatious behaviour with other guys (sorry, being all touchy-feely and seeking attention from random guys is out there)
-admitting that she wears these things "to feel sexy"
- and yet, specifically, refusing to wear such things with him, only without him.

The problem ain't the yoga pants.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> Which is the point I was making. The OP, and several other men on this thread, act as if wearing yoga pants is some devious bid for an affair partner, someone even posted that yoga pants were slvtwear!
> 
> I'm just trying to give the OP perspective. Just because he finds his wife to be sexy as hell in yoga pants doesn't mean that when she wears them she is intentionally seeking validation from other men.


I don't have the intention of being sexy, therefore no one can find me sexy...

One of the problems though is when something is so obviously revealing, and widely regarded as sexy, and one tries to deny that it is, it really comes off as disingenuous, and less than honest.


----------



## NobodySpecial

I had NO idea that some people thought of yoga pants as sexy. DH thinks of them as bag lady wear.


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> I had NO idea that some people thought of yoga pants as sexy. DH thinks of them as bag lady wear.


For sure some people don't find certain things sexy, though there is the possibility he is keeping his real opinion to himself so as to not risk shaking a good thing.

If he truly does not find them at all alluring, I suspect he is in the minority as yoga pants and leggings are about as close to naked as one can get without actually being naked. They are not much different than body paint, and are essentially real life airbrushing...


----------



## Marduk

NobodySpecial said:


> I had NO idea that some people thought of yoga pants as sexy. DH thinks of them as bag lady wear.


Lulu lemon did not build an empire making fit women look like they are bag ladies.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> I don't have the intention of being sexy, *therefore no one can find me sexy...*
> 
> One of the problems though is when something is so obviously revealing, and widely regarded as sexy, and one tries to deny that it is, it really comes off as disingenuous, and less than honest.


Since when have you been able to read minds? We're not talking about a leather cat suit we're talking about spandex pants that stretch and move with the wearer, that are designed for physical exercise. 

Again, who has denied that yoga pants are considered sexy by some people?.... Anyone?.... Beuhler.... By your logic a woman wearing flip flops is trying to attract the attention of men with a foot fetish. Some women don't actually look sexy in yoga pants and some women make a burlap sac look sexy. It's all in the eyes of the beholder.
@marduk, could be. Could also be that because OP is not getting laid he perceives his wife to be excluding him from the sexy. 

Let's be realistic here. Would OP have married a woman who was an attention wh0re and determined flirt, or is it possible that she has always been extroverted and has always garnered attention just because she is hot but now that he's not getting laid it's a problem.

Marduk I think you and I are on the same page essentially. It's really not about what she wears or who she talks to, it's that she isn't making her husband feel loved. OP needs to focus on THAT and not focus on what she wears.


----------



## happy as a clam

Anon Pink said:


> I wear yoga pants almost daily during the colder months. Most women around here also wear yoga pants. I hate thongs *so I just go commando. *


:smthumbup:

Who the h*ll wears thongs with yoga pants??? It's "au natural" all the way, baby.



Anon Pink said:


> *I've never ever heard yoga pants being labeled slvtwear!* If that's your opinion, than it is YOUR attitude that is turning her away from you.


:iagree:

Yoga pants are modest compared to much of the other sl*tware fashions that are out there.

OP, you are SEETHING resentment for your wife, and it has NOTHING to do with yoga pants. It has every thing to do with her SL*TTY behavior.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> Since when have you been able to read minds? We're not talking about a leather cat suit we're talking about spandex pants that stretch and move with the wearer, that are designed for physical exercise.
> 
> Again, who has denied that yoga pants are considered sexy by some people?.... Anyone?.... Beuhler.... *By your logic a woman wearing flip flops is trying to attract the attention of men with a foot fetish*. Some women don't actually look sexy in yoga pants and some women make a burlap sac look sexy. It's all in the eyes of the beholder.
> 
> @marduk, could be. Could also be that because OP is not getting laid he perceives his wife to be excluding him from the sexy.
> 
> Let's be realistic here. Would OP have married a woman who was an attention wh0re and determined flirt, or is it possible that she has always been extroverted and has always garnered attention just because she is hot but now that he's not getting laid it's a problem.
> 
> Marduk I think you and I are on the same page essentially. It's really not about what she wears or who she talks to, it's that she isn't making her husband feel loved. OP needs to focus on THAT and not focus on what she wears.


You are assigning motivation, when I explicitly said that motivation does not matter. What I was addressing was the mindset of...I'm not dressing to be sexy, so I can't understand how anyone else could find me sexy. The motivation of the wearer is mutually exclusive of what the viewer sees. That's all.

In this particular case, count me in with those who feel that the attire is not any where near what the real issue is...it's the behavior and motivation that should be of concern.


----------



## Mostlycontent

lifeistooshort said:


> *I find the touching other men and running her hand down their arms to be trashy and huge boundary violations, especially since some of these men must be married. *Other womens husbands are not there to make her feel good about herself.
> 
> Id tell her that you understand she likes to feel sexy but soliciting attention from other womens husbands is inappropriate and trashy. Then you don't come off as insecure and frankly it's a true statement.
> 
> Tell her she can play stupid but other women think she's trash. They very likely do.
> 
> I know someone like this that my hb used to work with. She got divorced and started fawning over the men while ignoring the wives. She'll hug my hb right in front of me and then ignore me. It's so trashy it's pathetic, and frankly the only reason I've let it go is because we don't see her much, he doesn't work with her anymore, I have no reason to think he talks to her, and he just looks plain uncomfortable when she tries to hug him. He's not confrontational but he knows it's trashy and pathetic.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



This is so right on the money. No spouse is ever to put their hands on another person of the opposite sex. That's a huge boundary of mine and should be for any married person. 

I really don't mind much as I'm not an overly jealous sort but the wife putting her hands on someone else, like their arm, is way out of bounds IMO. 

If I'm OP, I'd tell her that this is off limits and if done again will be met with harsh consequences.


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> You are assigning motivation, when I explicitly said that motivation does not matter. What I was addressing was the mindset of...I'm not dressing to be sexy, so I can't understand how anyone else could find me sexy. The motivation of the wearer is mutually exclusive of what the viewer sees. That's all.
> 
> In this particular case, count me in with those who feel that the attire is not any where near what the real issue is...it's the behavior and motivation that should be of concern.



Sam, I'm sorry but I am totally confused now. I first quoted you because you made it sound like if something was considered sexy the wearer should be mindful of that sexiness and tone it down as a result. If that wasn't what you were saying I apologize.

I'm not assigning motivation to anyone. In fact, I'm suggesting people stop assigning motivation to OP's wife for wearing yoga pants. 

I'm going to read more of OP's posts because in this thread he is coming off as an easily threatened husband, and baby that ain't sexy.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

...


----------



## gouge_away

WorkingOnMe said:


> Bag lady wear really?


I'd bag that...

OP...
Is their any one instance where you think things crossed the line?

I can imagine seeing your wife give and receive attention from another man in front of you, only to, then later refuse you at home would trigger most men.


----------



## Marduk

The only thing I'd change with that AP is to say that the wearing of said yoga pants exists in a larger context. 

Where I'm at is trying to get less fixated on yoga pants (which is hard for me) and try to get at her intention. 

It could be that she knows it pisses him off and she's doing it on purpose, for example. Which may mean "pay more attention to me."

Or it could mean she has her sights set on another guy, who checks her out when she's wearing them. Which means it's mate guarding time. 

Or it could mean that she just wants rando male attention, which means she may be narcissistic or have low self esteem. 

Or it could just be that nothing's going on and she likes to wear yoga pants out.

In which case he should be out with her more often, because she's bored.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon Pink

@Depth.Inside,

I just read all of you other posts in your other threads. You've got 20 years of seething resentment because your wife marginalized and invalidated you. And now, even when she gives you what you need, it makes you angry because of all those years when she didn't.

I feel for you, BTDT. However, in my case, my husband did hear me, did allow me to get the angry resentment and hurt out while at the same time he stopped doing hurtful neglectful things giving me the opportunity try to heal. It's hard to heal that resentment when it's not fully recognized and also when the behavior that caused it still crops up.

This isn't about yoga pants or who she talks to or how she talks, this is about you not getting rid of that resentment. 

Get thee to therapy ASAP.


----------



## Heatherknows

marduk said:


> The only thing I'd change with that AP is to say that the wearing of said yoga pants exists in a larger context.
> 
> Where I'm at is trying to get less fixated on yoga pants (which is hard for me) and try to get at her intention.
> 
> It could be that she knows it pisses him off and she's doing it on purpose, for example. Which may mean "pay more attention to me."
> 
> Or it could mean she has her sights set on another guy, who checks her out when she's wearing them. Which means it's mate guarding time.
> 
> Or it could mean that she just wants rando male attention, which means she may be narcissistic or have low self esteem.
> 
> Or it could just be that nothing's going on and she likes to wear yoga pants out.
> 
> In which case he should be out with her more often, because she's bored.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


As a side note this thread is a great ad for yoga pants. I have a ton of them and never realized that I had such a sexy wardrobe. Woohoo!


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> Sam, I'm sorry but I am totally confused now. I first quoted you because you made it sound like if something was considered sexy the wearer should be mindful of that sexiness and tone it down as a result. If that wasn't what you were saying I apologize.
> 
> I'm not assigning motivation to anyone. In fact, I'm suggesting people stop assigning motivation to OP's wife for wearing yoga pants.
> 
> I'm going to read more of OP's posts because in this thread he is coming off as an easily threatened husband, and baby that ain't sexy.


If someone wears something for reasons other than it being sexy and it is considered sexy by many people of the opposite gender, the wearer is under no obligation to not wear it.

However, the wearer is naïve if they don't acknowledge that many of the opposite gender think it's sexy and shouldn't be surprised that members of the opposite gender think so.

I don't know how a woman could wear form fitting thin pants (especially commando) and be surprised that men find them sexy. 

That's NOT saying that she shouldn't wear them or that she's a slvt.


----------



## Fozzy

Anon Pink said:


> @Depth.Inside,
> 
> I just read all of you other posts in your other threads. You've got 20 years of seething resentment because your wife marginalized and invalidated you. And now, even when she gives you what you need, it makes you angry because of all those years when she didn't.
> 
> I feel for you, BTDT. However, in my case, my husband did hear me, did allow me to get the angry resentment and hurt out while at the same time he stopped doing hurtful neglectful things giving me the opportunity try to heal. *It's hard to heal that resentment when it's not fully recognized and also when the behavior that caused it still crops up.*
> 
> This isn't about yoga pants or who she talks to or how she talks, this is about you not getting rid of that resentment.
> 
> Get thee to therapy ASAP.


So true.


----------



## Buddy400

Anon Pink said:


> @Depth.Inside,
> 
> I just read all of you other posts in your other threads.


Yeah, it's about a lot more than yoga pants!


----------



## gouge_away

Everybody gets that... Its not about yoga pants.

She cares more what strange men think, than what her husband thinks, of her.

I don't think she is narcissistic.
I don't think she values her husband anymore.
I think he is starting to invalidate himself.

OP,
This is going to get worse, worse than you ever imagined, or believed was possible, and even then, I think you would stay.


----------



## NewBoundariesMan

OP why don't you just throw that outfit away?

My wife used to have a pair of workout shorts she got before we were married that were like daisy dukes. She like them because she could see her legs while working out. Every guy in the gym liked them for that same reason.

She would do dead lifts in them and if you were behind her she may as well have been in a bikini.
The first time I saw her workout in them I asked her never to wear them again but she swore nobody was looking at her and I was being paranoid.

I threw them away.
Now she wears yoga pants which I am ok with.

I'll do the same thing to any clothes that I consider are over the line.
She set the precedence by throwing away a pair of my comfortable shoes because they were old and ugly.


----------



## happy as a clam

This thread is beyond ridiculous.

OP... your RETARDED jealousy over YOGA PANTS warrants SERIOUS COUNSELING for you. In truth, your wife dresses like a sl*t and the only way to deal with it is in the below advice...

Your wife's EXTREME narcissistic views (her needing applause from other males) is beyond STUPID within the boundaries of marriage. She needs SRRIOUS COUNSELING.

Get counseling, or file for divorce.

Your rage over her yoga pants is beyond ridiculous and IMMATURITY. She is playing you like a fine fiddle, and you are BUYING INTO HER TRAP. Hook, line, and sinker.

*UGH*


----------



## bbdad

I just may be so complacent in our trust or too concerned of other things to care. I don't care if my wife dresses in yoga pants - or whatever she wants. She is not a touchy-feely person, but I am, so I guess I don't see any issue with it. I have no issues if she is "touchy feely" the rare time when she acts that way. I don't expect it to go anywhere. As others said, where I come from, it is just normal. Nothing to be concerned with. I think many in our culture get a little uptight over things like that. But, I realize not everyone feels that way.

Also, we have a fairly stable and trusting relationship. I think we have been through so much craziness together that neither of us is really worried of the other stepping out. We have our major ups and downs, but have always made it through.

To the OP, I would say in my view, you are being overly sensitive. But, it is based on the world you were brought up to feel as what is normal. It sounds like it is not normal to you.


----------



## Anon Pink

happy as a clam said:


> This thread is beyond ridiculous.
> 
> OP... your RETARDED jealousy over YOGA PANTS warrants SERIOUS COUNSELING for you. In truth, your wife dresses like a sl*t and the only way to deal with it is in the below advice...
> 
> Your wife's EXTREME narcissistic views (her needing applause from other males) is beyond STUPID within the boundaries of marriage. She needs SRRIOUS COUNSELING.
> 
> Get counseling, or file for divorce.
> 
> Your rage over her yoga pants is beyond ridiculous and IMMATURITY. She is playing you like a fine fiddle, and you are BUYING INTO HER TRAP. Hook, line, and sinker.
> 
> *UGH*


I think this is over the top. HAAC do you really think this wife shows narcissism? I don't see it, I just see stubborn woman.

Needing applause from other men? Where did that come from? The woman is a competitor and a perfectionist. You know the type, has her hand in everything, is on every committee, knows everyone...and is as phony as they come! "Little Miss Perfects" aren't shooting for applause from other men, they need to appear perfect so that no one can see the mess they are inside.

I honestly think her behavior toward other men is probably fairly normal but it appears to OP as something different because she doesn't show her "Little Miss Perfect" persona to him. He gets the real woman. The woman who is no doubt on the selfish side and can't see the forest for the trees.

I don't see where she is "playing him" either. She is careless for sure, but I don't see nefarious intent in any of his descriptions, except that she projects herself as something she is not.

Divorce? You sure do use that word an awful lot. I actually think this marriage is very salvageable. I think OP needs therapy to get his head on straight so he can advocate for himself with his wife. If she met his needs he wouldn't have any problem with her behavior. That right there tells you that her behavior isn't really that far out of line for him.


----------



## gouge_away

Anon Pink said:


> I think this is over the top. HAAC do you really think this wife shows narcissism? I don't see it, I just see stubborn woman.
> 
> Needing applause from other men? Where did that come from? The woman is a competitor and a perfectionist. You know the type, has her hand in everything, is on every committee, knows everyone...and is as phony as they come! "Little Miss Perfects" aren't shooting for applause from other men, they need to appear perfect so that no one can see the mess they are inside.


Hysteria, she needs to get laid more.


----------



## Anon Pink

gouge_away said:


> Hysteria, she needs to get laid more.


Isn't that the truth!

I knew a woman who was just like that and she drove me nuts! I used to say, behind her back of course, that she really needed a solid fvcxking.


----------



## happy as a clam

Anon Pink said:


> Divorce? You sure do use that word an awful lot.


I sure do. Been there, done that. For 20 years. (Have you?) FYI, I also suggested marriage counseling FIRST.

You think my advice is over the top??? You're entitled to your own opinion. Personally, I think I'm spot on.

Lots of other people in my same boat (TAMers in loveless, asexual marriages) toss the D word around too.

The yoga pants are not the problem. They are an excuse for OP to blame his anger on. What is he really angry about?

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Constable Odo

Heatherknows said:


> As a side note this thread is a great ad for yoga pants. I have a ton of them and never realized that I had such a sexy wardrobe. Woohoo!


It isn't the clothing, it's the person and their attitude.

My SO can make a burlap coffee bag look hot.

For years, I've tried to tell women I've dated: it's all about attitude.

Finally I've found one that understands.


----------



## thread the needle

Constable Odo said:


> It isn't the clothing, it's the person.
> 
> My SO can make a burlap coffee bag look hot.


+1


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> Lulu lemon did not build an empire making fit women look like they are bag ladies.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I am so out of touch. I get all my best education on TAM.


----------



## Marduk

I'm baffled how it's surprising to some women that super tight pants that are designed to make their but pop in down dog in a sweaty hot yoga class are sexy.

I mean, it's the current generation's spandex, right?

Remember Wilma Deering from Buck Rogers?

That. Less shiny. Sometimes sheer. Sweaty. Down dog.

Oh, my.


----------



## samyeagar

marduk said:


> I'm baffled how it's surprising to some women that super tight pants that are designed to make their but pop in down dog in a sweaty hot yoga class are sexy.
> 
> I mean, it's the current generation's spandex, right?
> 
> Remember Wilma Deering from Buck Rogers?
> 
> That. Less shiny. Sometimes sheer. Sweaty. Down dog.
> 
> Oh, my.


They are essentially a second skin...they tighten, firm, slim,smooth, hide, accentuate...all the stuff airbrushing does, except in real time.


----------



## Heatherknows

marduk said:


> I'm baffled how it's surprising to some women that super tight pants that are designed to make their but pop in down dog in a sweaty hot yoga class are sexy.
> 
> 
> Oh, my.


I'm going to the gym today and now I feel super weird about putting on my yoga pants.

Thanks Marduk. :surprise:


----------



## EllisRedding

Kinda reminds me of the pants/shorts that have writings on the ass (like "Juicy") and then those females get all bent out of shape when a guy is looking at their ass (not trying to generalize here, I don't think any guys have worn these kinds of shorts lol)


----------



## Marduk

Heatherknows said:


> I'm going to the gym today and now I feel super weird about putting on my yoga pants.
> 
> Thanks Marduk. :surprise:


It's only weird if you make it weird.

Workout gear is a contextual thing. It's like wearing a bikini on the beach instead of walking through a mall. Is it surprising that bikinis are sexy? Or tight skirts? Or whatever?

It can be sexy but contextually appropriate.

I think it's also fine to rock with the soccer mom look.


----------



## samyeagar

marduk said:


> It's only weird if you make it weird.
> 
> Workout gear is a contextual thing. It's like wearing a bikini on the beach instead of walking through a mall. Is it surprising that bikinis are sexy? Or tight skirts? Or whatever?
> 
> *It can be sexy but contextually appropriate.*
> 
> I think it's also fine to rock with the soccer mom look.


The thing with yoga pants and leggings is that they are as common as jeans, in all seasons, and in any context where less than formal attire is accepted...which is just about everywhere any time.


----------



## Heatherknows

marduk said:


> It's only weird if you make it weird.
> 
> Workout gear is a contextual thing. It's like wearing a bikini on the beach instead of walking through a mall. Is it surprising that bikinis are sexy? Or tight skirts? Or whatever?
> 
> It can be sexy but contextually appropriate.
> 
> I think it's also fine to rock with the soccer mom look.


Note to self: Don't wear bikini to mall...might look strange.

>


----------



## samyeagar

Heatherknows said:


> Note to self: Don't wear bikini to mall...*might look strange*.
> 
> >



Might be strange and out of place, but still doesn't negate the fact that it's sexy...

So instead of people thinking damn, that's sexy, they'll be thinking what a weirdo wearing that to the mall, but damn, that's sexy


----------



## Marduk

Heatherknows said:


> Note to self: Don't wear bikini to mall...might look strange.
> 
> >


I'm not saying that at all!

I'm just saying that don't be surprised if people find that sexy.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Hint: the following are also widely considered to be sexy:
tight skirts
short skirts
low cut tops
tight clothing of almost any kind
high heels
stockings/lingerie
going commando
biting your lip
pouty lips
pony tails
not wearing pony tails
if you're hot, a burlap sack

and that's...


----------



## Heatherknows

marduk said:


> Hint: the following are also widely considered to be sexy:
> tight skirts
> short skirts
> low cut tops
> tight clothing of almost any kind
> high heels
> stockings/lingerie
> going commando
> biting your lip
> pouty lips
> pony tails
> not wearing pony tails
> if you're hot, a burlap sack
> 
> and that's...


What's not hot?


----------



## Lila

marduk said:


> Hint: the following are also widely considered to be sexy:
> tight skirts
> short skirts
> low cut tops
> tight clothing of almost any kind
> high heels
> stockings/lingerie
> going commando
> biting your lip
> pouty lips
> pony tails
> not wearing pony tails
> if you're hot, a burlap sack


Add to the list red clothing. 

True story. ..I own two identical dresses - one is black and the other is red. I wear them regularly to work. I might as well be invisible when I wear the black one. I'm a guy magnet when I wear the red one. 

And they say women are complex.


----------



## Heatherknows

Lila said:


> Add to the list red clothing.
> 
> True story. ..I own two identical dresses - one is black and the other is red. I wear them regularly to work. I might as well be invisible when I wear the black one. I'm a guy magnet when I wear the red one.
> 
> And they say women are complex.


Single women who are husband hunting should always wear red. In fact, a tight, short red dress and high heels would probably grab the most attention. As long as you don't look too much like a prostitute that should be the go-to outfit for women on Match.Com.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

Heatherknows said:


> What's not hot?



Short hair
Jeans on women with flat butts
Baggy sweat pants
Oversized t shirts in bed

I'm sure I'll think of some more. 

Birkenstocks.


----------



## Marduk

Heatherknows said:


> What's not hot?


On someone that is fit, confident, and healthy...

Not much.

Armpit hair turns me off, I guess.

Oh, #1 turn off is women that don't seem to enjoy being women.


----------



## Marduk

I think capris are a turn off. I don't know why. It's like you can't decide if you're wearing shorts or not. 

I don't understand why wearing those loose baggy housecoat kind of things are a thing. I don't like those. 

As a general rule, I don't like short hair as much as long hair. It's not a deal breaker, but unless you can rock that pixie look, don't. 

I don't like giant purses. It's not that they impact your sex appeal, I just find it confusing why you need to walk around with something the size of my carry on luggage the last time I worked in Asia for a month. 

Too much jewelry I find distracting.

Too much perfume or make up is gross. 

If you're wearing clothing that makes you look like you're hiding, makes me not notice you. 

You should look like you care about your appearance, but not so much that you're overly engineered about it. 

How a woman moves is important to me. Don't slouch and stare at the floor and shuffle along.

I think context is important. Don't go to pick up your kids looking like you're clubbing in Vegas, and don't go clubbing in Vegas looking like you're picking your kids up from school.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Satya

Heatherknows said:


> I'm going to the gym today and now I feel super weird about putting on my yoga pants.
> 
> Thanks Marduk. :surprise:


This should sober everyone up...


----------



## Heatherknows

marduk said:


> I think capris are a turn off. I don't know why. It's like you can't decide if you're wearing shorts or not.
> 
> I don't understand why wearing those loose baggy housecoat kind of things are a thing. I don't like those.
> 
> As a general rule, I don't like short hair as much as long hair. It's not a deal breaker, but unless you can rock that pixie look, don't.
> 
> I don't like giant purses. It's not that they impact your sex appeal, I just find it confusing why you need to walk around with something the size of my carry on luggage the last time I worked in Asia for a month.
> 
> Too much jewelry I find distracting.
> 
> Too much perfume or make up is gross.
> 
> If you're wearing clothing that makes you look like you're hiding, makes me not notice you.
> 
> You should look like you care about your appearance, but not so much that you're overly engineered about it.
> 
> How a woman moves is important to me. Don't slouch and stare at the floor and shuffle along.
> 
> I think context is important. Don't go to pick up your kids looking like you're clubbing in Vegas, and don't go clubbing in Vegas looking like you're picking your kids up from school.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


OMG you really put a lot of thought into this stuff. 

TBH if I'm not going to the gym I wear sweatpants and a shirt and a big hat to protect my hair and skin from the sun. In the summer I do tend to wear a lot of dresses. And if I'm going to the gym I wear the now infamous yoga pants, sneakers and a small top. 

I have no idea what anyone thinks of the way I dress except for one librarian who always compliments me on my dresses.


----------



## Marduk

Heatherknows said:


> OMG you really put a lot of thought into this stuff.
> 
> TBH if I'm not going to the gym I wear sweatpants and a shirt and a big hat to protect my hair and skin from the sun. In the summer I do tend to wear a lot of dresses. And if I'm going to the gym I wear the now infamous yoga pants, sneakers and a small top.
> 
> I have no idea what anyone thinks of the way I dress except for one librarian who always compliments me on my dresses.


Oh, librarians are hot, too.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Always Learning

NobodySpecial said:


> I had NO idea that some people thought of yoga pants as sexy. DH thinks of them as bag lady wear.


All depends on the body of the person wearing them.
Sorry, but on a fit women they leave little to the imagination and on a non fit women they reveal to much. The same hold true for some men's clothing as well.


----------



## samyeagar

Always Learning said:


> *All depends on the body of the person wearing them.*
> Sorry, but on a fit women they leave little to the imagination and on a non fit women they reveal to much. The same hold true for some men's clothing as well.


It does depend on the underlying body, but I think one of the appeals of yoga pants and leggings is that to a certain extent, they are very forgiving, which is why I liken them to realtime airbrushing, or photoshopping. They do tend to smooth out things like minor cellulite, make the legs and butt a bit tighter looking than they otherwise would be, things like that.


----------



## FormerSelf

I can agree with others that to focus solely on her attire is misplaced.

In all honestly, if OP felt that all areas in the relationship were dialed-in, he probably wouldn't break a sweat over what she wore. So basically, to focus on the outer wear is like trimming leaves...no, you have to get to the root and pay attention to the real issues that is the source of OP's anxiety.

If the true fear is that she may be a little too loose in boundaries...then OP ought to inventory his own behavior...if he is being someone who is controlling and codependent, where ( especially if she already has insecurities) she is not getting a sense of his validation and just deal with HIS insecurities as well. The result may be then she will naturally (consciously or unconsciously) try to seek validation from others or for performance.

I think the OP should do his best to be someone who engenders respect (not demands it), can step up to be a validating influence (within reason), and change his relationship dynamic to his spouse as well as to himself. At that point if she still is exhibiting validation-seeking behavior, then OP may have a reason to be concerned...and should insist on counseling (and in fact should be suggesting it now).


----------



## Heatherknows

samyeagar said:


> It does depend on the underlying body, but I think one of the appeals of yoga pants and leggings is that to a certain extent, they are very forgiving, which is why I liken them to realtime airbrushing, or photoshopping. They do tend to smooth out things like minor cellulite, make the legs and butt a bit tighter looking than they otherwise would be, things like that.


Note to self: Buy more yoga pants.


----------



## lifeisbetterthanalternat

I personally think charictorising yoga pants as "sltware" is harsh and judgmental. I find some yoga pants (depending on the person wearing them) to be pretty modest. Others I find to be way too sheer and might as well be painted on. Perhaps these are actually more "leggings" or something.In the latter case there is little left to the imagination. As most people, I am a hypocrite. While I trully enjoy the way they showcase the female body and frontal curves, I can see the controversy. Clearly, society has changed its view on what is appropriate attire. That said if a women wares them, she should realize the attention it will draw from us, knuckle dragging men. No we should not ogle or do so discretely (perhaps that is an oxymoron). 

That said the OP and other spouses have a duty to respect the others ideas of reasonable boundries and attire. Having said that acceptable boundries should be established in couples during the courting phase of the relationship. Personally, I am NOT ok with my wife touching other men that are not related to her/me and she feels the same about me. There are times when I have asked my wife to wear VERY skimpy, sheer tops and we have had fun watching men's reactions. I would not feel so comfortable if she did so without me around. 

It would seem that the OP's wife is demonstrating some peculiar behavior that warrants attention. I wonder if she has always been like this...perhaps i missed this as I did not read all of the posts in the thread.


----------



## gouge_away

EllisRedding said:


> Kinda reminds me of the pants/shorts that have writings on the ass (like "Juicy") and then those females get all bent out of shape when a guy is looking at their ass (not trying to generalize here, I don't think any guys have worn these kinds of shorts lol)


I saw one at the bellagio, mid 60s male wearing 'juicy' booty shorts! Hawt!


----------



## NotEasy

Heatherknows said:


> What's not hot?


Frowns and unhappy expressions.
Bad attitude
Anything very high maintenance

The clothes don't really matter, it is how they are carried.


----------



## Constable Odo

lifeisbetterthanalternat said:


> I find some yoga pants (depending on the person wearing them) to be pretty modest to practically being naked.


The first thought that enters my mind when I see my SO in yoga pants is "how quickly can I rip those off?"


----------



## NotEasy

New terrifying entry for the "whats not hot" list.

Overweight man wearing baggy yoga pants, going commando with the chandelier swinging. I wish I could to unsee that sight.


----------



## Anon1111

what I find amazing is how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing).

tight and short is always an easy go to, but women are much more resourceful than this.

For example, you've got the 80s style loose fitting top that reveals a bare shoulder and drapes to accentuate the chest.

You've got the 60s style oversized sunglasses that make you look like you've got manga eyes

you've got the habit of adapting male fashions and feminizing them which I think is a neat psychological trick (e.g., the various "boyfriend" styles, which suggest that you just picked some dude's jacket, shirt, pants, etc off the floor and put it on after getting railed)

the various "good girl" styles of every era that show subtle hints on not good girl underneath.

All the while insisting that you don't know what this does to men and you just like it because it's "cute"


----------



## Heatherknows

Anon1111 said:


> what I find amazing is how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing).
> 
> tight and short is always an easy go to, but women are much more resourceful than this.
> 
> For example, you've got the 80s style loose fitting top that reveals a bare shoulder and drapes to accentuate the chest.
> 
> You've got the 60s style oversized sunglasses that make you look like you've got manga eyes
> 
> you've got the habit of adapting male fashions and feminizing them which I think is a neat psychological trick (e.g., the various "boyfriend" styles, which suggest that you just picked some dude's jacket, shirt, pants, etc off the floor and put it on after getting railed)
> 
> the various "good girl" styles of every era that show subtle hints on not good girl underneath.
> 
> All the while insisting that you don't know what this does to men and you just like it because it's "cute"


Why do you think we don't know? I happen to think yoga pants aren't sexy but I'm not a guy. I do think if I wore high heels and a tight mini dress that I'd look sexy or a bikini and high heels...or lotion and high heels. 

We know.


----------



## Anon1111

Heatherknows said:


> Why do you think we don't know? I happen to think yoga pants aren't sexy but I'm not a guy. I do think if I wore high heels and a tight mini dress that I'd look sexy or a bikini and high heels...or lotion and high heels.
> 
> We know.


you know.... but you didn't know yoga pants are sexy?

one of these statements is false.


----------



## Westcott

I agree with the other poster that said it's mom "uniform" for many stay at home moms. I am a strong believer in meeting things head on (easier to say than do no doubt). I'd ask her straight up all these questions you have. I'm not sure it's as a direct hit to you as you're thinking it is. It could be some insecurity, feeling reliant on you, feeling bored being home with the kids all day... it might be her only source of "fun".


----------



## Marduk

Anon1111 said:


> what I find amazing is how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing).
> 
> tight and short is always an easy go to, but women are much more resourceful than this.
> 
> For example, you've got the 80s style loose fitting top that reveals a bare shoulder and drapes to accentuate the chest.
> 
> You've got the 60s style oversized sunglasses that make you look like you've got manga eyes
> 
> you've got the habit of adapting male fashions and feminizing them which I think is a neat psychological trick (e.g., the various "boyfriend" styles, which suggest that you just picked some dude's jacket, shirt, pants, etc off the floor and put it on after getting railed)
> 
> the various "good girl" styles of every era that show subtle hints on not good girl underneath.
> 
> All the while insisting that you don't know what this does to men and you just like it because it's "cute"


My father in law is very religious. And he has a habit of pretending not to know what's obvious and well known. 

For example, that his daughters dated in high school, or that people have affairs. 

Until I realized that such feigned innocence was in reality a very subtle and powerful strategy. Because it frees you to do what you want while simultaneously pretending to be innocent of it.

It's the same as me pretending not to notice that hot girl over there. It makes me free to actually notice her, while not owning up to it.

When I stopped pretending and started being really honest about that, everything changed.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> It's the same as me pretending not to notice that hot girl over there. It makes me free to actually notice her, while not owning up to it.


Trust me, I know you were watching me :x


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> Trust me, I know you were watching me :x


----------



## Heatherknows

Anon1111 said:


> you know.... but you didn't know yoga pants are sexy?
> 
> one of these statements is false.


It's only false if every single man on Earth finds them sexy. Go get a poll and get back to me.


----------



## Anon1111

Heatherknows said:


> It's only false if every single man on Earth finds them sexy. Go get a poll and get back to me.


from your other thread:

"..OK, but if I give him alcohol AND wear yoga pants does that give me more leeway? "


----------



## Anon1111

enough about yoga pants though.

we need to talk about yoga shorts.


----------



## Marduk

Anon1111 said:


> enough about yoga pants though.
> 
> we need to talk about yoga shorts.


Indeed.


----------



## Anon1111

any woman claiming she doesn't know what's going on with yoga shorts cannot be trusted


----------



## Heatherknows

Anon1111 said:


> from your other thread:
> 
> "..OK, but if I give him alcohol AND wear yoga pants does that give me more leeway? "


That was a joke. >


----------



## Heatherknows

Anon1111 said:


> any woman claiming she doesn't know what's going on with yoga shorts cannot be trusted


True enough. 

What about yoga shorts and high heels?


----------



## Anon1111

Heatherknows said:


> True enough.
> 
> What about yoga shorts and high heels?


great for doing squats in, in my opinion.


----------



## Marduk

Heatherknows said:


> True enough.
> 
> What about yoga shorts and high heels?


Don't forget the jell-o.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Heatherknows

Anon1111 said:


> great for doing squats in, in my opinion.


This isn't a joke. I get a really good lower body workout when I wear high heels. Never wore them to the gym to do the machines. If I ever do I hope someone stops me.


----------



## Marduk

Anon1111 said:


> great for doing squats in, in my opinion.


----------



## Fozzy




----------



## VermisciousKnid

Anon1111 said:


> great for doing squats in, in my opinion.


Coco Austin does squats in high heels with resistance bands:









It does a booty good! 👍


----------



## LainyLove22

The only time I felt self conscious about wearing yoga pants was a couple of years ago when Lululemon had issues with theirs being to thin.

These were my favorite " throw on for a quick errand " attire and it didnt matter what season it was and yeah it sucked when I had to discard about half a dozen of them  !!??


----------



## WandaJ

Anon Pink said:


> Which is the point I was making. *The OP, and several other men on this thread, act as if wearing yoga pants is some devious bid for an affair partner, someone even posted that yoga pants were slvtwear!
> *
> I'm just trying to give the OP perspective. Just because he finds his wife to be sexy as hell in yoga pants doesn't mean that when she wears them she is intentionally seeking validation from other men.


I haven't finished reading the whole thread yet, but yoga pants are officially banned in many US middle and high schools, even with long t-shirt or sweater. We are crawling towards burkas for our girls in this country.


----------



## WandaJ

Anon1111 said:


> what I find amazing is how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing).
> 
> tight and short is always an easy go to, but women are much more resourceful than this.
> 
> For example, you've got the 80s style loose fitting top that reveals a bare shoulder and drapes to accentuate the chest.
> 
> You've got the 60s style oversized sunglasses that make you look like you've got manga eyes
> 
> you've got the habit of adapting male fashions and feminizing them which I think is a neat psychological trick (e.g., the various "boyfriend" styles, which suggest that you just picked some dude's jacket, shirt, pants, etc off the floor and put it on after getting railed)
> 
> the various "good girl" styles of every era that show subtle hints on not good girl underneath.
> 
> All the while insisting that you don't know what this does to men and you just like it because it's "cute"


You know Anon, we do have to dress in something. come on!


----------



## john117

Anon1111 said:


> enough about yoga pants though.
> 
> 
> 
> we need to talk about yoga shorts.



I am this close to buying a women's pair for cycling. I have no desire to spend $80 for cycling shorts with padding and wearing a bib (cycling tights)... Not happening. All I want is cheap shorts down to just at the knee...


----------



## NotEasy

WandaJ said:


> You know Anon, we do have to dress in something. come on!


No you don't, you could go naked.>
That is my reply to my wife saying she doesn't have anything to wear. 

Back to seriousness though, like Anon I am amazed at how well females can alter and feminise clothes that are typically male. One of the most amazing styles for me was women in boilermakers overalls. Some of them really carry if off well, though I doubt a worker would iron their overalls or wear a see through blouse.


----------



## Forest

Yeah. Telling middle school girls not to wear yoga pants is so plainly heading straight into ISIS land.

Accordingly, middle school boys wearing a codpiece and pirate patch will be tolerated to complete this fantasy oppression.

Yoga pants are inappropriate for school wear. Is that surprising? Do you have to be told?

Leotards, ballet tutus, football uniforms, pajamas, skydiving suits, biohazard suits, body stockings, santa suits, nazi uniforms, asbestos blazers, tuxedos, skin diving apparel, suits of armor, mummy costumes, lingerie, spacesuits, togas, swaddling clothes, sagging pants, gorilla suits, fishnet stockings, speedo bathing suits...there are MANY things that are just not appropriate to wear to school. This is something that should be easy to understand.

How hard is it to recognize that there actually is appropriate and inappropriate forms of dress without resorting to some perceived, but non-existent sexist threat?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Forest said:


> Leotards, ballet tutus, football uniforms, pajamas, skydiving suits, biohazard suits, body stockings, santa suits, nazi uniforms, asbestos blazers, tuxedos, skin diving apparel, suits of armor, mummy costumes, lingerie, spacesuits, togas, swaddling clothes, sagging pants, gorilla suits, fishnet stockings, speedo bathing suits...there are MANY things that are just not appropriate to wear to school. This is something that should be easy to understand.


I never understood it and got sent home several times for wearing the above to school.


----------



## Faithful Wife

john117 said:


> I am this close to buying a women's pair for cycling. I have no desire to spend $80 for cycling shorts with padding and wearing a bib (cycling tights)... Not happening. All I want is cheap shorts down to just at the knee...


They're called _bike shorts_ and they make them for men. But hey if you'd rather wear women's yoga shorts...


----------



## Faithful Wife

Anon1111 said:


> what I find amazing is how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing).
> 
> tight and short is always an easy go to, but women are much more resourceful than this.
> 
> For example, you've got the 80s style loose fitting top that reveals a bare shoulder and drapes to accentuate the chest.
> 
> You've got the 60s style oversized sunglasses that make you look like you've got manga eyes
> 
> you've got the habit of adapting male fashions and feminizing them which I think is a neat psychological trick (e.g., the various "boyfriend" styles, which suggest that you just picked some dude's jacket, shirt, pants, etc off the floor and put it on after getting railed)
> 
> the various "good girl" styles of every era that show subtle hints on not good girl underneath.
> 
> All the while insisting that you don't know what this does to men and you just like it because it's "cute"


A few women have already said this but I'll try too....

You're going to look at us "like that" no matter what we wear. So we wear what we want. And yes, because its "cute".

When you get down to the teeny tiny outfits that (usually) young women wear, yes they want to be looked at "like that", but they don't care that it makes you think "how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing)." They just don't care what you think at all. Whether you are or aren't someone they are trying to attract, they aren't thinking to themselves "oh yeah I'm going to wear this Sl*twear and then PRETEND I don't know how hot I am, tee hee!"

No. They are thinking "F*ck yeah, I look hot in this! Stand back while I strut my sh*t." (cue Nicki Minaj music)

See, if she's wearing it, she could give a flip about anyone's judgmental eye. 

Now when you dial it back to your average mom in yoga pants who happens to also be hot as hell....no, she isn't usually thinking the same thing that the young woman in the Sl*twear is thinking. Hot yoga mom is thinking "yeah I look hot in this, I am glad I look hot, I need groceries, where's my list?" and walks out the door.

Who cares if she looks hot and she knows it? What harm is it doing?

I'm not talking about someone's hot wife who is making him jealous and acting inappropriately right now. I'm just talking about your average hot woman (and soooo many women are hot, IMO, I don't mean just Heidi Klum types, I mean the mom next door as much as any woman, because women are just plain hot). 

I really wish men would figure out how to light our fire with amazing variety of clothing, that it would be acceptable to try out all kinds of different styles, fabrics, fits, shoes, accessories...until it forced a fashion industry revolution and men could turn women's heads in the same way women turn men's heads. The first glance being that hot outfit, and then the interest stirred up from that causing women to check him out a little more and then notice all those lovely anatomical shapes that talk to us about your body.

There's really no reason that only women can do this and the men drool...that's just how it turned out for us in our society.

I think it would be interesting to live in a burka with other women in burkas, not in the religious way but just as a social experiment. All us women are in burkas, so men can't even see a difference in us. That causes us women to not notice each other and instead notice men. Then I bet we women would be eyeing the various clothing the men put on in a different way, and then men would be changing their clothing up to attract us, testing it and seeing what works. Like peac*cking in a way that can't be done now.

Of course this would only work with in a free society where women were choosing to do this, not under oppression.

You men would love to be able to attract us like that, right?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Here's another way to say it, Anon.

Whether you were aware of it or not, gay men have looked at you the way you have looked at women. They have fantasized about every speck of your body. No matter what you wear, a gay man can usually easily see the outline of your peen. He can also see other parts of you that he sexualizes. Even though you've probably not been around dozens of gay men at a time on a regular basis who were sexualizing you this way, it has happened far more often than you know.

So how do you dress so sexy and then pretend not to understand that a gay man somewhere is totally looking at the outline of your peen? When you walked out the door, did you coyly do this but then will pretend not to know what he's talking about, or even get offended, if you catch a gay man's eyes all over you? I mean, you must know that somewhere, somehow, a gay man is or has been imagining all kinds of sexual things he wants to do to your body.

If you don't know this, then you know it now. The same thoughts straight men have about women, gay men have about all types of men. That means you.

But no, you don't hardly give a thought to this, right? Even if you know it happens, you don't consider it when you are getting dressed, right?

Now let's say that you have a new job where it is you and 100 gay guys, no women. You may feel a bit weird at first, but you'd get used to it fast. Yep, they are leering, sexualizing you, and lookin' at your peen shape (and all your other shapes). Yep, they are fantasizing about all the ways they want to do you, just like straight guys do about the women they work with. You would understand this, but as long as the guys could not harass you - all they could do is keep it inside their own minds, and maybe sneek peeks when they could - you would eventually become desensitized to this attention. You may not go out of your way to drum up the peeks they gave you, but if it happened you would just understand that it is going to happen no matter what you wear. It wouldn't take much and as I said, it wouldn't matter anyway....YOU are a man there under those clothes, and these gay guys ARE going to be picturing you naked no matter what you wear.

So. How do you think you would feel about the way you dress? Would you be constantly stressing about "oh no if I wear that, the guys at work might sexualize me even MORE!" every morning? No, you wouldn't because you just can't be bothered with what other people think of you to that extent, no one can.

Of course if you start wearing assless chaps to work, clearly you want the attention....and if you did we would hope you are single and not just teasing these poor fellows! 

But in the case I'm describing, simply dressing in "nice" work suits is the equivalent of a woman working in a sexy, hot dressy work suit. If a man looks sharp, he looks hot (especially to gay guys). 

Now imagine having worked in the above company for 10 years. You are over it. You've heard everything. You know you are hot to all of these guys just by virtue of being a guy. You no longer consider it any reflection on yourself as a person, it is just something that happens, no big deal.

You simply can't care about this attention after awhile...and you just dress in what you want eventually...whether they are looking or they aren't. (But they always are).

ETA:

A funny related "open letter"...

http://www.daveywaveyfitness.com/inspiration-2/an-open-letter-to-hot-straight-men-at-the-gym


----------



## john117

Faithful Wife said:


> They're called _bike shorts_ and they make them for men. But hey if you'd rather wear women's yoga shorts...



They do make them except they're generally padded - no need - and look awful in my opinion - not to mention pricy. Cycling bibs are too thin and suited for 30 year olds... 

It can't be that hard to make men's knee high tight (compared to speedo style) shorts...


----------



## john117

My older daughter generally dresses in yoga pants in college. Comfortable if you have to pull all nighters and easy to clean after studio gunk gets all over. But comfort is the main reason. Skinny jeans and the like are good but not for 20 hour days.


----------



## Constable Odo

NotEasy said:


> No you don't, you could go naked.>


Scary thought, walking around Walmart.


----------



## always_alone

WandaJ said:


> I haven't finished reading the whole thread yet, but yoga pants are officially banned in many US middle and high schools, even with long t-shirt or sweater. We are crawling towards burkas for our girls in this country.


Really? Because they are so much worse than skinny jeans, booty shorts, and those Catholic mini-kilts??? :scratchhead:


----------



## always_alone

Faithful Wife said:


> I really wish men would figure out how to light our fire with amazing variety of clothing, that it would be acceptable to try out all kinds of different styles, fabrics, fits, shoes, accessories...until it forced a fashion industry revolution and men could turn women's heads in the same way women turn men's heads. The first glance being that hot outfit, and then the interest stirred up from that causing women to check him out a little more and then notice all those lovely anatomical shapes that talk to us about your body.
> 
> There's really no reason that only women can do this and the men drool...that's just how it turned out for us in our society.


Men used to peac0ck all the time. Men's fashions have included wigs and lace and frills, buckles and jewels, capes and rich fabrics and colours. Indeed I think men were the first to wear high heels.

But now, it's all neutrals, variations on the business suit or t-shirt and jeans. Boring!


----------



## WandaJ

Forest said:


> *Yeah. Telling middle school girls not to wear yoga pants is so plainly heading straight into ISIS land.
> *


some call it yoga pants, but they are simply another type of leggins. And it is leggins that are being banned. I used to wear leggins in college, it was not big deal. We are talkinga about leggins with long shirt, that covers your butt. All you see is .....legs. OMG, legs, who would think girls have legs???? How dare they?


----------



## NotEasy

john117 said:


> They do make them except they're generally padded - no need - and look awful in my opinion - not to mention pricy. Cycling bibs are too thin and suited for 30 year olds...
> 
> It can't be that hard to make men's knee high tight (compared to speedo style) shorts...


I think the padding is very necessary. Firstly to delay the onset of numbness. Secondly to keep certain parts warm in winter. The cold air seemed to be channelled between my legs and without padding caused what we called "brass monkey". 
It has been years since I rode heavily, but at the time I had padded and unpadded riding shorts. The only reason I had the unpadded ones was to wear over padded ones for extra insulation in really cold weather.
At the time I could buy unpadded shorts, but I also made them by removing old padding once it started to split. And when doing this cut the stitches from the padding side.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> A few women have already said this but I'll try too....
> 
> You're going to look at us "like that" no matter what we wear. So we wear what we want. And yes, because its "cute".
> 
> When you get down to the teeny tiny outfits that (usually) young women wear, yes they want to be looked at "like that", but they don't care that it makes you think "how ingenious women are at continuously finding new ways to dress hot (and pretend like they don't know what they're doing)." They just don't care what you think at all. Whether you are or aren't someone they are trying to attract, they aren't thinking to themselves "oh yeah I'm going to wear this Sl*twear and then PRETEND I don't know how hot I am, tee hee!"
> 
> No. They are thinking "F*ck yeah, I look hot in this!  Stand back while I strut my sh*t." (cue Nicki Minaj music)
> 
> See, if she's wearing it, she could give a flip about anyone's judgmental eye.
> 
> Now when you dial it back to your average mom in yoga pants who happens to also be hot as hell....no, she isn't usually thinking the same thing that the young woman in the Sl*twear is thinking. Hot yoga mom is thinking "yeah I look hot in this, I am glad I look hot, I need groceries, where's my list?" and walks out the door.
> 
> Who cares if she looks hot and she knows it? What harm is it doing?
> 
> I'm not talking about someone's hot wife who is making him jealous and acting inappropriately right now. I'm just talking about your average hot woman (and soooo many women are hot, IMO, I don't mean just Heidi Klum types, I mean the mom next door as much as any woman, because women are just plain hot).
> 
> I really wish men would figure out how to light our fire with amazing variety of clothing, that it would be acceptable to try out all kinds of different styles, fabrics, fits, shoes, accessories...until it forced a fashion industry revolution and men could turn women's heads in the same way women turn men's heads. The first glance being that hot outfit, and then the interest stirred up from that causing women to check him out a little more and then notice all those lovely anatomical shapes that talk to us about your body.
> 
> There's really no reason that only women can do this and the men drool...that's just how it turned out for us in our society.
> 
> I think it would be interesting to live in a burka with other women in burkas, not in the religious way but just as a social experiment. All us women are in burkas, so men can't even see a difference in us. That causes us women to not notice each other and instead notice men. Then I bet we women would be eyeing the various clothing the men put on in a different way, and then men would be changing their clothing up to attract us, testing it and seeing what works. Like peac*cking in a way that can't be done now.
> 
> Of course this would only work with in a free society where women were choosing to do this, not under oppression.
> 
> You men would love to be able to attract us like that, right?


Totally, 100% agree. Spot on. That makes sense to me.

Can you talk more about guys and clothing? I'm serious about it; it's something I've been working on for the past few years.

Made some strides there, actually. Wife loves it, and it does increase my confidence. I'm finding well-cut suits at work, and better casual wear at home than a stretched out 'Iron Maiden' t-shirt and paint-covered shorts does a lot.

But what do women in general look for in guy's clothing?

(Besides shoes. I think I finally get the shoe thing.)


----------



## NotEasy

Faithful Wife said:


> They're called _bike shorts_ and they make them for men. But hey if you'd rather wear women's yoga shorts...


Here we used to call bike shorts "knicks", as in knickers. And knickers is only used to describe womens underwear, not mens.
So hey, I used to wear women's underwear.


----------



## NotEasy

Faithful Wife said:


> Here's another way to say it, Anon.
> 
> Whether you were aware of it or not, gay men have looked at you the way you have looked at women. They have fantasized about every speck of your body. No matter what you wear, a gay man can usually easily see the outline of your peen. He can also see other parts of you that he sexualizes. Even though you've probably not been around dozens of gay men at a time on a regular basis who were sexualizing you this way, it has happened far more often than you know.
> 
> So how do you dress so sexy and then pretend not to understand that a gay man somewhere is totally looking at the outline of your peen? When you walked out the door, did you coyly do this but then will pretend not to know what he's talking about, or even get offended, if you catch a gay man's eyes all over you? I mean, you must know that somewhere, somehow, a gay man is or has been imagining all kinds of sexual things he wants to do to your body.
> 
> If you don't know this, then you know it now. The same thoughts straight men have about women, gay men have about all types of men. That means you.
> 
> But no, you don't hardly give a thought to this, right? Even if you know it happens, you don't consider it when you are getting dressed, right?
> 
> Now let's say that you have a new job where it is you and 100 gay guys, no women. You may feel a bit weird at first, but you'd get used to it fast. Yep, they are leering, sexualizing you, and lookin' at your peen shape (and all your other shapes). Yep, they are fantasizing about all the ways they want to do you, just like straight guys do about the women they work with. You would understand this, but as long as the guys could not harass you - all they could do is keep it inside their own minds, and maybe sneek peeks when they could - you would eventually become desensitized to this attention. You may not go out of your way to drum up the peeks they gave you, but if it happened you would just understand that it is going to happen no matter what you wear. It wouldn't take much and as I said, it wouldn't matter anyway....YOU are a man there under those clothes, and these gay guys ARE going to be picturing you naked no matter what you wear.
> 
> So. How do you think you would feel about the way you dress? Would you be constantly stressing about "oh no if I wear that, the guys at work might sexualize me even MORE!" every morning? No, you wouldn't because you just can't be bothered with what other people think of you to that extent, no one can.
> 
> Of course if you start wearing assless chaps to work, clearly you want the attention....and if you did we would hope you are single and not just teasing these poor fellows!
> 
> But in the case I'm describing, simply dressing in "nice" work suits is the equivalent of a woman working in a sexy, hot dressy work suit. If a man looks sharp, he looks hot (especially to gay guys).
> 
> Now imagine having worked in the above company for 10 years. You are over it. You've heard everything. You know you are hot to all of these guys just by virtue of being a guy. You no longer consider it any reflection on yourself as a person, it is just something that happens, no big deal.
> 
> You simply can't care about this attention after awhile...and you just dress in what you want eventually...whether they are looking or they aren't. (But they always are).
> 
> ETA:
> 
> A funny related "open letter"...
> 
> An Open Letter to Hot Straight Men at the Gym. | Davey Wavey Fitness



Thank you. That is a brilliant thought experiment. Like most brilliant things it seems obvious after the fact. I always got that women understood that they were looked at, but they didn't think about it all the time. Your post and the URL gave me a way to internalise it and really think about it.


----------



## Forest

WandaJ said:


> some call it yoga pants, but they are simply another type of leggins. And it is leggins that are being banned. I used to wear leggins in college, it was not big deal. We are talkinga about leggins with long shirt, that covers your butt. All you see is .....legs. OMG, legs, who would think girls have legs???? How dare they?


Are males allowed to wear them? A policy that is equally enforced among the sexes does not lend itself to sexism charges. How can that be a big, sexist deal? Its also not college. These are kids. Those leggings and long shirt can morph into a disco outfit before the first class.

This is not a big corporate boys club making these rules. These rules are made by the educators, probably a majority of them women, who spend their careers in these settings and have decided this is what is most beneficial to the education of the students. 

Why not rely on their knowledge, experience and judgement?

One more thought. I think we should agree (though I know we won't) that unless you have been either a teenaged schoolboy, or a teacher you cannot *really* know what is "distracting" in terms of how girls dress at school.


----------



## WandaJ

Forest said:


> Are males allowed to wear them? A policy that is equally enforced among the sexes does not lend itself to sexism charges. How can that be a big, sexist deal? Its also not college. These are kids. Those leggings and long shirt can morph into a disco outfit before the first class.
> 
> This is not a big corporate boys club making these rules. These rules are made by the educators, probably a majority of them women, who spend their careers in these settings and have decided this is what is most beneficial to the education of the students.
> 
> Why not rely on their knowledge, experience and judgement?
> 
> One more thought. I think we should agree (though I know we won't) that unless you have been either a teenaged schoolboy, or a teacher you cannot *really* know what is "distracting" in terms of how girls dress at school.


You are telling girls that they are responsible for boys not paying attentiont to school. You are telling the same boys that they do not have control over themselves, it's all because of the girls. skirt is too short, pants too tights, blouse too tight. 

And you right - this is message we are teaching our youth. No wonder, the idea of consent is so foreign to many young men later. They cannot help it, right? It is Eve all over again, with that damn apple. 

You know what? I think boys have it in it, they just have to be taught the right things. Girls have bodies, they have legs, boobs, etc. They cannot leave them at home. It is not their fault, that men find them distractive.


----------



## Marduk

As a former teenage boy, a cute girl in a burlap sack would have been more than enough for me to get...

Distracted.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## convert

I guess guys can wear them:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5azh84sc4


----------



## WandaJ

marduk said:


> As a former teenage boy, a cute girl in a burlap sack would have been more than enough for me to get...
> 
> Distracted.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


exactly. The only way to fix it to back to separate schools....


----------



## Marduk

WandaJ said:


> exactly. The only way to fix it to back to separate schools....


Oh, man, the girl's school was the biggest source of teenage fantasies...

I mean, what did they do there? What, with all the pillowfighting in lingerie going on... while practicing how to kiss with each other...

Animal House was a documentary, right?


----------



## WandaJ

marduk said:


> Oh, man, the girl's school was the biggest source of teenage fantasies...
> 
> I mean, what did they do there? What, with all the pillowfighting in lingerie going on... while practicing how to kiss with each other...
> 
> Animal House was a documentary, right?


oh my. We have to get separate planet to save you guys from the misery


----------



## TheGoodGuy

This thread is hilarious. BTW what happened to the OP?


----------



## Marduk

WandaJ said:


> oh my. We have to get separate planet to save you guys from the misery


Not gonna help...
a whole planet of babes with no men in sight?

Well, that would jump start the space program. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## WandaJ

TheGoodGuy said:


> This thread is hilarious. BTW what happened to the OP?


Who?:surprise:


----------



## Forest

WandaJ said:


> You are telling girls that they are responsible for boys not paying attentiont to school. You are telling the same boys that they do not have control over themselves, it's all because of the girls. skirt is too short, pants too tights, blouse too tight.
> 
> And you right - this is message we are teaching our youth. No wonder, the idea of consent is so foreign to many young men later. They cannot help it, right? It is Eve all over again, with that damn apple.
> 
> You know what? I think boys have it in it, they just have to be taught the right things. Girls have bodies, they have legs, boobs, etc. They cannot leave them at home. It is not their fault, that men find them distractive.


Wow. If leggings are "no big deal", this reaction sure is. I never said or inferred any of that off topic hysteria you just flung out. To suggest that teachers and boys are more clued in whether skin tight pants are are a distraction is now tantamount to promoting rape culture? That's really getting unglued over nothing. Well, really its avoiding the questions I originally asked.

If these pants are banned, the school has a reason. They don't do it just to get a few women in an uproar. Why can't you accept that there must be a reason? Like I said, its most likely experienced, professional women that call for this ban. You want to take it up with them? Are they promoting the rape culture?


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> As a former teenage boy, a cute girl in a burlap sack would have been more than enough for me to get...
> 
> Distracted.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


 You know you'd have had your eye glued to the yoga pants ten times more than a burlap sack, or something less flashy. You're just backed down.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> You know you'd have had your eye glued to the yoga pants ten times more than a burlap sack, or something less flashy. You're just backed down.


My point is that we can go down this path of trying to "fix" the fact that boys like girls by focusing on what girls dress like, or instead talk to both boys and girls about how to treat each other respectfully.

It's like preaching abstinence as safe sex. Ya, let's take 4.5 billion years of evolution out of the equation and put that on a teenager to self-manage.

Yoga pants didn't exist when I was a teenager. But spandex did. And miniskirts. And those knee high socks that still drive me crazy. And tight jeans. And halter tops. And tight sweaters.

And by the time I was my oldest son's age I had already made out with a few girls. Nary a yoga pant in sight.

So where are you going to draw the line?

It isn't girls' fault. Sure, they need to dress appropriately situation-wise, but it's not their fault that boys can't check them out and go on with their day. Two different issues.


----------



## Forest

Can either of you, Marduk, or Wanda answer why you believe these pants are banned in schools, and why you think you know better than the school administrators on this issue?

Marduk said:
"*Sure, they need to dress appropriately situation-wise*, but it's not their fault that boys can't check them out and go on with their day. Two different issues."

Aren't we talking about what clothing is appropriate in the first place? Clearly, the school officials feel this dress is inappropriate. So, what's the big deal? Don't wear the yoga pants to school. 

That is the whole point. They are not appropriate. Let it go.


----------



## WandaJ

Forest said:


> Wow. If leggings are "no big deal", this reaction sure is. I never said or inferred any of that off topic hysteria you just flung out. To suggest that teachers and boys are more clued in whether skin tight pants are are a distraction is now tantamount to promoting rape culture? That's really getting unglued over nothing. Well, really its avoiding the questions I originally asked.
> 
> If these pants are banned, the school has a reason. They don't do it just to get a few women in an uproar. Why can't you accept that there must be a reason? Like I said, its most likely experienced, professional women that call for this ban. You want to take it up with them? Are they promoting the rape culture?


I think marduk has replied to your sentiments much better than I would do. Girls will distract boys by mere presence, and it actually goes both ways - boys are distracting girls. And that's normal, we are distraction to each other in adult life too. That's a dynamic between sexes. Teaching respect towards each other is the key.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> Can either of you, Marduk, or Wanda answer why you believe these pants are banned in schools, and why you think you know better than the school administrators on this issue?


I can't answer why. I personally don't give a crap. School administrators are just people, no smarter or more enlightened than the rest of us.

Teen Forced to Wear Coat at School Dance Because of Her 'Inappropriate' Dress : People.com

The problem with dress codes is that people are human beings and subvert authority when said authority is stupid.

I once had a job where they came down on people for wearing jeans on casual fridays.

So, the first friday I wore a tux. The second friday I wore a kilt. The third friday I wore my dogi (martial arts uniform).

All 100% compliant with the dress code. Sure, I was immature about it, but f them.

The problem is that you can't legislate morality; and that's what people sometimes try to do.


> Marduk said:
> "*Sure, they need to dress appropriately situation-wise*, but it's not their fault that boys can't check them out and go on with their day. Two different issues."
> 
> Aren't we talking about what clothing is appropriate in the first place? Clearly, the school officials feel this dress is inappropriate. So, what's the big deal? Don't wear the yoga pants to school.
> 
> That is the whole point. They are not appropriate. Let it go.


How are girls going to learn what's appropriate without having the freedom to do so? How are boys going to learn how to be respectful around girls unless they have to do so?

Why do schools get to decide what's appropriate?

Why not let nature take it's course?


----------



## Marduk

WandaJ said:


> I think marduk has replied to your sentiments much better than I would do. Girls will distract boys by mere presence, and it actually goes both ways - boys are distracting girls. And that's normal, we are distraction to each other in adult life too. That's a dynamic between sexes. Teaching respect towards each other is the key.


I remember in high school having girls grab my ass (and sometimes crotch) on my way to walking into the change room after a football game. Usually shirtless.

Those tight football pants can be quite fetching, from what I hear...

I guess I was just asking to be molested.


----------



## Forest

How about a view from someone who has been there?

Ban yoga pants from schools - Chicago Tribune

Some highlights:

Girls in hallways and classrooms get jarred out of their tenuous-at-best academic mentality when someone strutting their stuff comes by and students of both sexes react with their typical shrieks, hoots, catcalls and hollers — behavior that is decried as predatory, misogynistic and frightening in other contexts....

They simply don't believe anyone should be stopped from wearing anything, anywhere lest their unimpeachable self-expression be infringed upon.

No, yoga pants aren't really the problem.

The real problem is parents who don't insist their children treat school as a place to learn and respect others, not a fashion runway bestowing the "right to rock tight pants."

end quote.

That's my point. I don't care about the pants, but I think the people that ban them care about our kids. I'd rather trust their judgement in the interest of education that blare away about rights to do whatever the heck you want all the time, and accuse anyone that gets in the way of being some kind of sexist or rape apologist.


----------



## Marduk

Lol. 

My wife freely admits to going to school dressed in baggy pants and oversized t-shirts just to change in the change room into mini-skirts and tight t-shirts. 

Listen. I know you want to hope that rules can keep people from being people. But eventually, people get to make up their own minds. 

If little Johnny can't deal with yoga pants in high school without flipping out, impregnating dozens of girls, and generally being an antisocial hormone, what's little Johnny going to do when he graduates and goes into big people world?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## WandaJ

Forest said:


> How about a view from someone who has been there?
> 
> Ban yoga pants from schools - Chicago Tribune
> 
> Some highlights:
> 
> Girls in hallways and classrooms get jarred out of their tenuous-at-best academic mentality when someone strutting their stuff comes by and students of both sexes react with their typical shrieks, hoots, catcalls and hollers — behavior that is decried as predatory, misogynistic and frightening in other contexts....
> 
> They simply don't believe anyone should be stopped from wearing anything, anywhere lest their unimpeachable self-expression be infringed upon.
> 
> No, yoga pants aren't really the problem.
> 
> The real problem is parents who don't insist their children treat school as a place to learn and respect others, not a fashion runway bestowing the "right to rock tight pants."
> 
> end quote.
> 
> That's my point. I don't care about the pants, but I think the people that ban them care about our kids. I'd rather trust their judgement in the interest of education that blare away about rights to do whatever the heck you want all the time, and accuse anyone that gets in the way of being some kind of sexist or rape apologist.


Look at highlighted parts. Do you really believe it's ok for boys behave this way, because the problem is girls not dressing the "right" way? That's what your post indicates. 

You say that real problem is parents who don't insist that children treat school as place to learn and respect other, not fashion place. You keep missing - in all your post - the part where boys should learn respect. School should be place where they learn to respect each other. Period.


----------



## naiveonedave

WandaJ said:


> Look at highlighted parts. Do you really believe it's ok for boys behave this way, because the problem is girls not dressing the "right" way? That's what your post indicates.
> 
> You say that real problem is parents who don't insist that children treat school as place to learn and respect other, not fashion place. You keep missing - in all your post - the part where boys should learn respect. School should be place where they learn to respect each other. Period.


exactly. 

I am also sure yoga pants and teeny skirts keep boys minds on their school work.


----------



## EleGirl

convert said:


> I guess guys can wear them:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD5azh84sc4


That's funny...


Here's another one 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlySZmiLgD0


----------



## EllisRedding

So I am confused by all of this. Basically there should be no dress code for school. All is fair game, otherwise how will boys ever learn  Or are we just talking specifically about yoga pants as some of the comment seem more general?


----------



## WandaJ

I am sure she would not be a distraction, as she is all covered... Because men and boys in 17-century did not fantasize about their girls at all. How would they? no yoga pants, no tank tops, no bikinis. Nothing that would distract them


----------



## EleGirl

naiveonedave said:


> exactly.
> 
> I am also sure yoga pants and teeny skirts keep boys minds on their school work.


Maybe the boys need to learn to focus on school, novel concept, I know.


----------



## WandaJ

EllisRedding said:


> So I am confused by all of this. Basically there should be no dress code for school. All is fair game, otherwise how will boys ever learn  Or are we just talking specifically about yoga pants as some of the comment seem more general?


Right now most school dress codes are all about not creating distractions for boys. The other day the girls was sent home because she had on leggins and long, almost to the knees baggy sweater. Believe me, she did not looks sexy, the opposite. It is going out of control. She missed half a day of learning because of it. And this is something that does not happens rarely.


----------



## naiveonedave

EleGirl said:


> Maybe the boys need to learn to focus on school, novel concept, I know.


that is the problem, the last time I checked they are teenagers, not adults. And focus for teenage boys is a problem, they don't need any help. And to tell them to change or grow up is absolutely ridiculous, they are who they are and have been for 1000s of years.


----------



## naiveonedave

WandaJ said:


> Right now most school dress codes are all about not creating distractions for boys. The other day the girls was sent home because she had on leggins and long, almost to the knees baggy sweater. Believe me, she did not looks sexy, the opposite. It is going out of control. She missed half a day of learning because of it. And this is something that happens rarely.


Out of control, maybe. Necessary evil, probably needed.


----------



## EllisRedding

WandaJ said:


> Right now most school dress codes are all about not creating distractions for boys. The other day the girls was sent home because she had on leggins and long, almost to the knees baggy sweater. Believe me, she did not looks sexy, the opposite. It is going out of control. She missed half a day of learning because of it. And this is something that happens rarely.


My question in this case, was it clear that the leggins were against the rules? As long as the school clearly lays out the rules (whether out of control or not) at least parents/students then hold the responsibility to adhere to them. Now obviously if it is not clearly stated and school officials make decisions about a student's apparel on the run, that is a whole other issue.


----------



## norajane

WandaJ said:


> I am sure she would not be a distraction, as she is all covered... Because men and boys in 17-century did not fantasize about their girls at all. How would they? no yoga pants, no tank tops, no bikinis. Nothing that would distract them


Maybe we should keep girls at home like they used to so the boys can concentrate better. Girls don't need school, right?


----------



## WandaJ

naiveonedave said:


> that is the problem, the last time I checked they are teenagers, not adults. And focus for teenage boys is a problem, they don't need any help. And to tell them to change or grow up is absolutely ridiculous, they are who they are and have been for 1000s of years.


So, you are saying girls must solve boys problems for them? Boys will be boys, but girls cannot be girls, right? Girls this age are discovering their sexuality the same way boys do. They ALL are distracted. We keep shaming girls about their bodies, and teaching them they are responsible for their male friends behavior. And teaching boys that they are not responsible for their own behavior. And then you complain about "consent laws". Guess what? If we don't teach boys that they are responsible for controlling their urges and actions, then we need those laws.


----------



## NotEasy

We had far stricter rules at high school, school uniforms fitted only by approved shops, girls skirts to the knee, boys trousers not low, buttons always done up, and on and on. And we still jeered, whistled and got distracted by each other. We should have had more of the respect and behaviour classes. But I think we would have still jeered, whistled and got distracted. We were teenagers.


----------



## Forest

WandaJ said:


> Look at highlighted parts. Do you really believe it's ok for boys behave this way, because the problem is girls not dressing the "right" way? That's what your post indicates.
> 
> You say that real problem is parents who don't insist that children treat school as place to learn and respect other, not fashion place. You keep missing - in all your post - the part where boys should learn respect. School should be place where they learn to respect each other. Period.


No. I don't believe its alright for boys to behave this way, and don't know why you'd think that.

The educator that wrote that piece was documenting the way inappropriate dress adds another layer to the battle obtaining respectful behavior. 

You are creating outlandish tangents to avoiding answering very simple questions regarding whether or not professional educators have valid reasons to enforce simple dress codes.


----------



## WandaJ

Forest said:


> No. I don't believe its alright for boys to behave this way, and don't know why you'd think that.
> 
> The educator that wrote that piece was documenting the way inappropriate dress adds another layer to the battle obtaining respectful behavior.


Because you are talking about respect only in the contest of the girls not dressing appropriately (whatever the school principal thinks it is ), but not boys who behave inappropriately. You seem to take it for normal, that it is girl's fault, not boys.


----------



## Forest

WandaJ said:


> Because you are talking about respect only in the contest of the girls not dressing appropriately (whatever the school principal thinks it is ), but not boys who behave inappropriately. You seem to take it for normal, that it is girl's fault, not boys.


I'd counter that you take it for normal that anyone who disagrees with you must be sexist.

In that regard, someone would be compelled to accuse you of wanting to castrate all boys to avoid the chance that one would commit a crime. Install robots to lash boys that whistle at girls. Force boys to wear a gag so as not to offend anyone. That outlandish baseless stuff is a waste of energy.

Still would love to hear why you think you know more than the school officials that make these decisions, and whether or not you feel those people are promoting a sexist, aggressive, disrespectful agenda.


----------



## Marduk

You can't mandate, legislate, codify, etc what is appropriate. 

It sounds simple but complex in reality and agents that will seek to manipulate the rules will always get you. I.e. Teenage humans. 

Read yourself some Malcolm gladwell or the guys that wrote freakonomics. 

You will always fail. 

And the downside of not doing it is what exactly? Boys getting a boner in class?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NotEasy

Oh, and at my high school the girls were also jeering, whistling and probably distracted. It wasn't just the boys. 

Perhaps this warrants a new thread though, we are going off track.


----------



## Eagle3

_Still would love to hear why you think you know more than the school officials that make these decisions, and whether or not you feel those people are promoting a sexist, aggressive, disrespectful agenda._

Forest, i wouldnt put school officials as the holy grail on what is right and wrong. I cant go a week without reading an article on some teacher sleeping with some student etc. 

Yes i am guilty as anyone on my love of yoga pants and such, but in the end that is on me. This shouldnt be put on the girs to be the ones checking themselves and made to feel unomfortable on what they are wearing. its up to the individual to control themselves on how to act. To me looking is fine, its if you cross the line when it becomes a problem.


----------



## naiveonedave

WandaJ said:


> So, you are saying girls must solve boys problems for them? Boys will be boys, but girls cannot be girls, right? Girls this age are discovering their sexuality the same way boys do. They ALL are distracted. We keep shaming girls about their bodies, and teaching them they are responsible for their male friends behavior. And teaching boys that they are not responsible for their own behavior. And then you complain about "consent laws". Guess what? If we don't teach boys that they are responsible for controlling their urges and actions, then we need those laws.


Nope, what I really said was don't create a distraction. Dressing like a tramp in front of a 14 yo boy going through puberty is as distracting as the class clown is acting up in class. To dismiss this is to dismiss our fundamental biology.

The parents of said girls are wrong in letting them dress this way. 

It is wrong to expect a 14 yo boy to not notice and be distracted by 'yoga pants' or an ultra mini. 

And as far as consent laws go, totally irrelevant to high school dress codes.


----------



## naiveonedave

marduk said:


> You can't mandate, legislate, codify, etc what is appropriate.
> 
> It sounds simple but complex in reality and agents that will seek to manipulate the rules will always get you. I.e. Teenage humans.
> 
> Read yourself some Malcolm gladwell or the guys that wrote freakonomics.
> 
> You will always fail.
> 
> And the downside of not doing it is what exactly? Boys getting a boner in class?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I agree until your last sentence. these distractions cause more than boners. Any distractions like this hurt the learning environment.


----------



## Forest

Eagle3 said:


> _Still would love to hear why you think you know more than the school officials that make these decisions, and whether or not you feel those people are promoting a sexist, aggressive, disrespectful agenda._
> 
> Forest, i wouldnt put school officials as the holy grail on what is right and wrong. I cant go a week without reading an article on some teacher sleeping with some student etc.
> 
> Yes i am guilty as anyone on my love of yoga pants and such, but in the end that is on me. This shouldnt be put on the girs to be the ones checking themselves and made to feel unomfortable on what they are wearing. its up to the individual to control themselves on how to act. To me looking is fine, its if you cross the line when it becomes a problem.


You don't abandon the whole system because someone, somewhere does something wrong.

I don't get the whole "they can't tell my kid not to dress like that- my kid can wear anything" attitude. 

It is still possible for a boy to attracted to a girl without disrespecting her, or wanting to rape her. Its also possible that school people know what they're doing when it comes to dress codes. They deal with the dynamic, and should get the nod when it comes to something so basic.


----------



## Eagle3

Im not saying kids can just wear whatever they want. But come on we are talking about yoga pants and leggings here. If someone was wearing a tube top or skirt barely covering their crootch of course that should be addressed. But yoga pants are just a form of sweats just form fitting.

Also it pretty hard to say this style of clothing is not made for kids to wear to school as if they go to any mall, Target, a walking park, etc they will see women all ages and sizes wearing them. Again lets not put the focus on who is wearing the outfit of this and to the people looking and responding.


----------



## Marduk

naiveonedave said:


> I agree until your last sentence. these distractions cause more than boners. Any distractions like this hurt the learning environment.


Show me one piece of data that demonstrates that. 

in fact, I could see the opposite being true.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> You don't abandon the whole system because someone, somewhere does something wrong.
> 
> I don't get the whole "they can't tell my kid not to dress like that- my kid can wear anything" attitude.
> 
> It is still possible for a boy to attracted to a girl without disrespecting her, or wanting to rape her. Its also possible that school people know what they're doing when it comes to dress codes. They deal with the dynamic, and should get the nod when it comes to something so basic.


It's also possible that our children when raised in a sex-positive, respectful and aware way are well equipped to explore their sexual identity with a minimum of guidance by their parents on how to dress (no, you shouldn't wear that and here's why) and themselves as learning lessons rather than being mandated on high. 

Somehow humans have got through high school for a few generations now, even giving each others boners. 

And the converse is also true. I was an honour role kid whos head was turned by every cute girl within my visual acuity range.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

It might shock people, but my high school had co-ed swim class. The girls did not wear burkas, but bathing suits. Somehow, no distracted boys drowned and, in fact, learned how to swim without jeering, howling, yelling or otherwise making the girls feel uncomfortable.


----------



## Marduk

norajane said:


> It might shock people, but my high school had co-ed swim class. The girls did not wear burkas, but bathing suits. Somehow, no distracted boys drowned and, in fact, learned how to swim without jeering, howling, yelling or otherwise making the girls feel uncomfortable.


I was going to say that same thing.

Somehow I did my coed swim class with hot girls in bikinis, and still learned how to free dive,scuba, and did my lifeguard life saving stuff on them. 

Shocking, I know.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

Yes it is in boys' nature to be distracted by girls. It is also in girls' nature to want to strut and flaunt their bodies and touch and flirt with boys.

To insinuate that the girls must control their natures but the boys "can't be expected" to control theirs is stupidity.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Yes it is in boys' nature to be distracted by girls. It is also in girls' nature to want to strut and flaunt their bodies and touch and flirt with boys.
> 
> To insinuate that the girls must control their natures but the boys "can't be expected" to control theirs is stupidity.


And that would be a truly boring world if that were true, anyway.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## WandaJ

Anyway. OP's wife needs to start giving more attention to him, and less to other men. Yoga pants or no yoga pants.


----------



## Forest

I don't know why I didn't ask this before. Has anyone else here actually raised a teenaged girl, and dealt with issues like this firsthand? 

I mean, am I dealing with people with experience, or just opinions?

If you meet that criteria, and still would let your daughter go to school in yoga pants, its pointless. Similar to they fact that if you have to explain to a person why yoga pants are not appropriate attire for any child to wear to school, its pointless to expect them to understand why.


----------



## Faithful Wife

I have two adult kids, one boy one girl. Have been through every conceivable type of trouble teenagers can get into with one or both of them, sometimes concurrently. Whether the girl child looked too cute or whether the boy child was distracted by cuties in class was not even on my radar.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> I don't know why I didn't ask this before. Has anyone else here actually raised a teenaged girl, and dealt with issues like this firsthand?
> 
> I mean, am I dealing with people with experience, or just opinions?
> 
> If you meet that criteria, and still would let your daughter go to school in yoga pants, its pointless. Similar to they fact that if you have to explain to a person why yoga pants are not appropriate attire for any child to wear to school, its pointless to expect them to understand why.


I have a daughter who's not quite that age, but close. 

And sorry, no, it's not only those with teenage daughters that get to voice an opinion about what human beings are allowed to wear.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> I have a daughter who's not quite that age, but close.
> 
> And sorry, no, it's not only those with teenage daughters that get to voice an opinion about what human beings are allowed to wear.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I can't imagine a more limp response than this. Why don't you just come out and say whether you think girls wearing Catwoman pants to school is OK or not? Afraid if you say they may not be appropriate someone is going to label you a rape apologist? You going to let your daughter wear that stuff to school? Yes? No?

If you've never had a child in this situation, you have a limited input, and less credibility. These are issues involved parents and school admin decide. You'll get your chance. Until then, you've got no experience to draw on. But when has that stopped anyone around here from trying to insert themselves?

Like I said, if someone has to be argued with to make them understand that this in not appropriate clothing attire for a school setting, its a pointless exercise. No one with any sense of taste would consider it. Some people would send their kids to Sunday School in hula skirts just to be difficult.

Still can't stand up and say you won't want your daughter wearing that stuff to school? Brother, what a world.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Wow, what a sh*t ton of shaming and insults.


----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> Can you talk more about guys and clothing? I'm serious about it; it's something I've been working on for the past few years.
> 
> Made some strides there, actually. Wife loves it, and it does increase my confidence. I'm finding well-cut suits at work, and better casual wear at home than a stretched out 'Iron Maiden' t-shirt and paint-covered shorts does a lot.
> 
> But what do women in general look for in guy's clothing?
> 
> (Besides shoes. I think I finally get the shoe thing.)


What I am hoping for is a fashion industry change and new standard, that then trickles down to the department stores where guys like you buy clothes. When the companies who sell clothes make the right clothes, and when you and other guys feel ok about peac*cking (and when women feel ok about you doing, too), then the change I'm hoping for will happen.

As it stands, extreme fashions for men are not really "allowed" except for gay men. So when straight men wear it, they look gay...because as it stands, that as a fashion choice is something straight guys just don't do. And women wouldn't like it either, right now...it will require a complete change in the fashion industry and acceptance first. I think we'll get there though, eventually out of sheer boredom.

Great shoes can always be done first and very easily, at least these are available. Whatever you can get away with to accessorize is awesome, IMO. Cool watches and belts and I like rings on guys, too. For me personally, I could handle a whole lot more than this, but honestly, it would make a guy look gay, the way things stand right now so ... you can only go so far. At least do the shoes and accessorize. Check out some hot black dudes and see if you can get away with anything they are wearing. They tend to be able to get away with more and still look straight.  ETA link: http://www.buzzfeed.com/ira/the-official-ranking-of-the-51-hottest-black-men-i-8p6m#.gngdgG88A

You can also figure out date nights that have a theme of some type so you can do some kind of masquerade or costuming or pull your tux out...but wear the tux with some brilliant colored shirt instead of white. Of course she gets to dress up too, but she will be seeing you in a completely different type of get up than she is used to and that's what catches our eye...just like variety of women's clothing catches men's eyes.

That's a start.


----------



## ConanHub

I don't have a daughter but I would want her to dress attractive and be confident. Yoga pants would be for exercise not everyday attire.

I do see an alarming trend with leggings or yoga pants being worn in place of slacks for a business uniform.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

I work with some really hot girls. They look hot, but not inappropriate. Leggings are part of normal work attire for them.

Like this:








The trick is basically to cover your butt. Then leggings are actually MORE clothes than bare legs or tights under a dress or skirt.


----------



## samyeagar

Faithful Wife said:


> I work with some really hot girls. They look hot, but not inappropriate. Leggings are part of normal work attire for them.
> 
> Like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The trick is basically to cover your butt. Then leggings are actually MORE clothes than bare legs or tights under a dress or skirt.*


They are, but still, the thing leggings have over bare skin is that they hide, shape, tone any of the blemishes, cellulite...all hose kinds of things...they present essentially a photoshopped and airbrushed version, in real time, for the imagination. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them, or wearing them, just what a large part of the appeal is.


----------



## EllisRedding

I am still curious as I don't think anyone has quite stated this, should there be no dress code in schools? Every kid should be free to wear what they want?


----------



## EllisRedding

Also, in terms of work attire, it really depends what type of job you do or what industry you are in. Leggings are not appropriate as business attire (for guys or gals) in my industry.


----------



## Eagle3

Forest i will respond to your inquiry, yes i have raised my step daughter from age 8 and she is now 19 so yes i have first hand knowledge of this and not just giving an opinion. And amazing thing is she was able to graduate HS get into college all the while wearing yoga pants to shchool at times.

I can double check but i dont recall any boys being too distracted to also graduate and move on.


----------



## Constable Odo

My SO wore her yoga pants to bed last night.

I promptly removed them.

>


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> I don't know why I didn't ask this before. Has anyone else here actually raised a teenaged girl, and dealt with issues like this firsthand?


I have a preteen girl and a teenage boy. We have always taken the approach that they live in the world and need to learn how to do so. But we have been open about our thoughts about things for our entire lives together. Like they have heard me opine about stuff like why female music stars have to dress like skanks to be taken seriously and why male music stars have to have a posse of skanks to be taken seriously. Topics of that nature come up naturally over the course of just BEING, so it is not like they don't know where Dad and I stand. 

We talk about enlightened self interest. I never, ever, ever have told my daughter how to dress. I shared what people might think about how she dresses, and how whatever SHE thinks, people will decide on their own what THEY think and even infer motivations in her attire that she never intended. Just educated her as to what to expect. 

Both of my children see how Dad and I treat each other. What we expect and how we respect each other. 

With both my son and daughter, we discuss the recent news and blogs on consent. I talk to my son, who has a bit more interest, about the topics on this board. I brought up a recent comment someone made about pushing past resistance. His comment was, I don't get it. Why would you want to have sex with someone who did not want to have it with you? That makes no sense.

My daughter has chosen a modest, sporty look. When she wears makeup at home, she chooses very light application. She hangs with the nice kids. 

My son reports only the popular kids dress like skanks. He has no patience for the popular kids anyway because, as he puts it, they are all douche bags.




> I mean, am I dealing with people with experience, or just opinions?
> 
> If you meet that criteria, and still would let your daughter go to school in yoga pants, its pointless.


What is pointless? I actually don't control my children's attire. Here is the neat trick. I don't have to. As it relates to yoga pants, neither of us find them offensive or inappropriate. Neither does the dress code. So we are good there. But since the spirit of her dress motivation is that of comfort for learning, leggings and yoga pants are fine. FAR less constricting than jeans which she hates.




> Similar to they fact that if you have to explain to a person why yoga pants are not appropriate attire for any child to wear to school, its pointless to expect them to understand why.


We don't believe in the word "inappropriate". We believe in results based decision making.


----------



## NobodySpecial

^^ Preteen girl is very, very pretty. She had to lock down her instagram account due to unwanted attention. Despite being dressed in a burka.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Oh the message to my son. You are in charge of your education, not what some girl chooses to wear to school. He agrees.


----------



## john117

EllisRedding said:


> Also, in terms of work attire, it really depends what type of job you do or what industry you are in. Leggings are not appropriate as business attire (for guys or gals) in my industry.



My wife is an IT / analytics consultant for a very large consulting company and wears leggings on a regular basis. Thankfully she has the body to pull it off - and my fashion sense  - but the end result is not unlike what FW posted above.


----------



## WandaJ

Forest said:


> I can't imagine a more limp response than this. Why don't you just come out and say whether you think girls wearing Catwoman pants to school is OK or not? Afraid if you say they may not be appropriate someone is going to label you a rape apologist? You going to let your daughter wear that stuff to school? Yes? No?
> 
> If you've never had a child in this situation, you have a limited input, and less credibility. These are issues involved parents and school admin decide. You'll get your chance. Until then, you've got no experience to draw on. But when has that stopped anyone around here from trying to insert themselves?
> 
> Like I said, if someone has to be argued with to make them understand that this in not appropriate clothing attire for a school setting, its a pointless exercise. No one with any sense of taste would consider it. Some people would send their kids to Sunday School in hula skirts just to be difficult.
> 
> Still can't stand up and say you won't want your daughter wearing that stuff to school? Brother, what a world.


I have two daughters, older will go to middle school next year. I do not mind the existence of basic dress code, ensuring that kids are dressed somewhat decently. I will not let my daughter to to school with her breast and stomach exposed. And this was the purpose of original dress codes requirements, as girls were wearing clothes that were exposing too much, and boys had those hanging down your knees pants showing butt crack.

But since that time the subjectivity of dress codes, and punishments put on students have started getting out of control. They lost their purpose, became the tool to for another witch hunt. 

I have no idea why yoga pants with long t-shirt or sweater are such big deal. Note: I am not talking about yoga pants and tummy showing tank top. Yoga pants and long t-shirt is what I used to wear to clean the house, I do not associate this with sexy at all. You see more of my legs when I am wearing shorts then leggins. 

Girls have bodies. They have hands, knees, elbows, breast, neck, ears, hair. What do you want us to do with them? Go back in the house and feel ashamed that we are broken that way?.That we are bad becuase we have breasts, and for some reason we cannot really fanthom they are distractive to you? If seeing my knee, or elbow, or the fact that my blouse is not as flat as yours is distracting you - I am sorry, but this is your problem, not mine.


----------



## Buddy400

NobodySpecial said:


> We talk about enlightened self interest. I never, ever, ever have told my daughter how to dress. I shared what people might think about how she dresses, and how whatever SHE thinks, people will decide on their own what THEY think and even infer motivations in her attire that she never intended. Just educated her as to what to expect.


That's perfect.


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> They are, but still, the thing leggings have over bare skin is that they hide, shape, tone any of the blemishes, cellulite...all hose kinds of things...they present essentially a photoshopped and airbrushed version.


We know. We like it on ourselves.

As for the "for the imagination" part (which I deleted from the quote), we don't care as it is irrelevant what your imagination will do.

We enjoy the look on ourselves. Period.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> I can't imagine a more limp response than this. Why don't you just come out and say whether you think girls wearing Catwoman pants to school is OK or not? Afraid if you say they may not be appropriate someone is going to label you a rape apologist? You going to let your daughter wear that stuff to school? Yes? No?


LOL. You're hilarious.

#1 I thought the basis for limiting what girls wear was to protect boys from the evils of girls sexual distractions. Not to protect girls.

#2 What's wrong with catwoman pants? Are you talking about those shiny versions of tights? Is that a problem now?

#3 Yes, I'd let my daughter wear shiny tights to school. With what I deem for my family and her age and maturity what else is appropriate.

#4 rape is driven by a need for power, not provocative clothing. 

Here's the data: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=djglp

In short, your entire line of thinking is substantively flawed and I reject it outright.


> If you've never had a child in this situation, you have a limited input, and less credibility. These are issues involved parents and school admin decide. You'll get your chance. Until then, you've got no experience to draw on. But when has that stopped anyone around here from trying to insert themselves?


Again, LOL. Where to draw the line? Must I be a parent? I'm an uncle of girls who are teenagers and dealing with this very stuff right now. I have a sister. I have a daughter who is about to be a teenager.

*And, even then, your whole line of thinking is totally flawed and based on fear and shame about female sexuality, not reason.*


> Like I said, if someone has to be argued with to make them understand that this in not appropriate clothing attire for a school setting, its a pointless exercise. No one with any sense of taste would consider it. Some people would send their kids to Sunday School in hula skirts just to be difficult.


I would be one of those people.

What are you going to do about it?

And what harm befalls society?

None.


> Still can't stand up and say you won't want your daughter wearing that stuff to school? Brother, what a world.


What a total joke.

How I parent is totally different than civil rights issues about what people are _allowed_ to wear.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> I am still curious as I don't think anyone has quite stated this, should there be no dress code in schools? Every kid should be free to wear what they want?


Yes, I 100% think there should be no dress code in schools.

I think the entire idea is stupid.


----------



## WandaJ

I just add that leggins is what my girls - both elementary school - wear almost everyday. Leggins or shorts. And most of their friends. They wear t-shirt that covers their bottom. It is very comfortable wear, they can run, jump, bike, play ball, etc in this. Much healthier than tight jeans squeezing instestines. I do not see anything inappropriate in this outfit. Print leggins are popular now. Why not?


----------



## always_alone

Faithful Wife said:


> Wow, what a sh*t ton of shaming and insults.


I find this whole idea that yoga pants and leggings are somehow the sexiest thing since they invented the bikini quite hilarious. I've been wearing leggings now for more than 20 years, long, long before they were in fashion, before everyone and their dog was wearing them, and most people just thought I was a freak because I had these patterned pants. No one thought it was sexy, or alluring, just odd. And possibly inappropriate, as I would wear them to work and they did have some pretty wild patterns on them, but in a "what a werido" kind of way, as opposed to a "why can't she just put on some clothes" thing

I dunno, I just don't get it. :scratchhead:


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> I find this whole idea that yoga pants and leggings are somehow the sexiest thing since they invented the bikini quite hilarious. I've been wearing leggings now for more than 20 years, long, long before they were in fashion, before everyone and their dog was wearing them, and most people just thought I was a freak because I had these patterned pants. No one thought it was sexy, or alluring, just odd. And possibly inappropriate, as I would wear them to work and they did have some pretty wild patterns on them, but in a "what a werido" kind of way, as opposed to a "why can't she just put on some clothes" thing
> 
> I dunno, I just don't get it. :scratchhead:


Leggings are not the same as yoga pants. I think they do something to women's bodies that I don't quite understand. And that makes me happy.

And maybe for me I started to find them hot when I was actually doing yoga.

Down dog is pretty awesome. And the cat/cow thing...

Wow.


----------



## Idyit

I have a teen age son and daughter. Son observes and rolls his eyes at obvious displays. Really a mature young man that I've spent a lot of time with regarding his thoughts and actions towards the opposite sex. He seems to get it that respect and character matter. 

Daughter is a petite, athletic rockstar in competition and the classroom. She enjoys dressing cute and feeling good in what she wears. Yoga pants are fine with this protective, fairly conservative dad. Leggings are another issue. She wears them to work out or around the house. I may have influenced her with this story.

I was traveling a lot a few years ago. After flight delays and reroutes the line at the ticket counter was long. A young woman dressed similar to what FW showed in pictures was in front of me. No big deal. She had some sort of long shirt and a button up jacket on so nothing exposed. That changed when she reached the counter and bent at the waist to retrieve items from her bag on the ground. I was embarrassed for her as she might as well have just dropped her pants altogether. For the record I did not stare but as I looked away there were quite a few pairs of eyes on her. Pretty sure cute went right out the window with that move.

~ Passio


----------



## john117

marduk said:


> Yes, I 100% think there should be no dress code in schools.
> 
> 
> 
> I think the entire idea is stupid.



Wait till your daughter goes to high school...


----------



## samyeagar

Faithful Wife said:


> We know. We like it on ourselves.
> 
> As for the "for the imagination" part (which I deleted from the quote), we don't care as it is irrelevant what your imagination will do.
> 
> We enjoy the look on ourselves. Period.


I do think that your editing my post changed the context of what I was saying. I was making the comparison between what leggings accomplish and what airbrushing accomplishes...both present an idealized form, as opposed to being au-natural.

I don't really care what others wear, and for what reasons they wear it as it is their prerogative, and in that, we are in total agreement.

There are still plenty of people saying that they don't see what the big deal about them is, and I don't see a big deal either, but the fact remains that many people, both women and men find them to be very attractive and sexy.


----------



## Marduk

john117 said:


> Wait till your daughter goes to high school...


Again, we're dealing with two separate issues. And this is a total false dichotomy with a metric ****-tonne of logical errors and poor reasoning and you're smart enough to see it.

I will fight until I die for my daughter's right to be free to do what she wants without intervention by society or stupid people telling her what she can do.

This is all very different to how I model and raise her as a parent.

One is her civil rights as a human being regardless of her gender.

The other is my accountability as a parent.

I do not fear the fact she is a girl. I am not ashamed to have a girl. I am not terrified of her sexuality or the _fact_ that she will explore it.

What I am is trying to raise a human being that treats herself and others with respect, to take accountability for her actions, and to not be a **** head.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> Again, we're dealing with two separate issues. And this is a total false dichotomy with a metric ****-tonne of logical errors and poor reasoning and you're smart enough to see it.
> 
> I will fight until I die for my daughter's right to be free to do what she wants without intervention by society or stupid people telling her what she can do.
> 
> This is all very different to how I model and raise her as a parent.
> 
> One is her civil rights as a human being regardless of her gender.
> 
> The other is my accountability as a parent.
> 
> I do not fear the fact she is a girl. I am not ashamed to have a girl. I am not terrified of her sexuality or the _fact_ that she will explore it.
> 
> What I am is trying to raise a human being that treats herself and others with respect, to take accountability for her actions, and to not be a **** head.


What civil rights are being infringed on, because a school dictates what can/can't be worn in school?


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> I do think that your editing my post changed the context of what I was saying. I was making the comparison between what leggings accomplish and what airbrushing accomplishes...both present an idealized form, as opposed to being au-natural.
> 
> I don't really care what others wear, and for what reasons they wear it as it is their prerogative, and in that, we are in total agreement.
> 
> There are still plenty of people saying that they don't see what the big deal about them is, and I don't see a big deal either, *but the fact remains that many people, both women and men find them to be very attractive and sexy*.


Yes. But the fact also remains that we don't care if men find them sexy or not.

Case in point: Uggs.


----------



## Faithful Wife

john117 said:


> Wait till your daughter goes to high school...


And wait until your son is a pre-teen. Gay men love to fantasize about young boys this age. Shall you instruct him to wear a burka at the bus stop since gay dudes at the stop light are going to be eye f*cking him every day?

Doesn't matter, they are going to do it even if he's wearing a burka.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> What civil rights are being infringed on, because a school dictates what can/can't be worn in school?


1. kids must go to school. It's a state mandated thing (unless you homeschool of course). But at the end of the day, it's something the state provides and mandates. This isn't the workplace. It isn't church. It isn't a club. It is the _state_.

2. anything that specifically restricts the female gender from what the state says they can do is both a civil rights issue and a gender issue.

Go form a private school with a dress code. And I'll happily laugh at the parents that send their school's there, because it's stupid. But a state school? No freaking way.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Yes. But the fact also remains that we don't care if men find them sexy or not.
> 
> Case in point: Uggs.


OMFG I hate those f'ing things. Why are they a thing? 

They seem like the boot version of crocs -- specifically designed to be simultaneously hideous and derogatory to the human form.


----------



## norajane

I was a teen in the 80's and leggings were everywhere. Only with those stupid freaking leg warmers!


----------



## samyeagar

Faithful Wife said:


> Yes. *But the fact also remains that we don't care if men find them sexy or not.*
> 
> Case in point: Uggs.


And the fact also remains, that it is irrelevant whether you care or not.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> 1. kids must go to school. It's a state mandated thing (unless you homeschool of course). But at the end of the day, it's something the state provides and mandates. This isn't the workplace. It isn't church. It isn't a club. It is the _state_.
> 
> 2. anything that specifically restricts the female gender from what the state says they can do is both a civil rights issue and a gender issue.
> 
> Go form a private school with a dress code. And I'll happily laugh at the parents that send their school's there, because it's stupid. But a state school? No freaking way.


Yes, and the school administrators try to provide an environment which they feel is best for all students when it comes to safety and learning. I know quite a few administrators who would argue that going with a "no dress code" policy would not achieve this.

I don't see what the big deal is, follow the rules. Kids will have plenty of opportunities outside of school to dress as they please


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> And wait until your son is a pre-teen. Gay men love to fantasize about young boys this age. Shall you instruct him to wear a burka at the bus stop since gay dudes at the stop light are going to be eye f*cking him every day?
> 
> Doesn't matter, they are going to do it even if he's wearing a burka.


I'll throw a couple things out there.

#1 I frequently went out at lunch hour to run around in my jeans and play touch football with no shirt on. I know I turned a few female heads and I'm sure I turned a few gay/bi male heads by doing so. Did I care? No. How many people's lives were harmed by my actions? None.

#2 -- and this is probably a pretty ****ty thing to admit, but what the hell, we're being honest here -- when I hit university for my first year I had just turned 17. And I went insane. Why? Because I discovered that there were whole armies of 18 year old girls hitting their first year, too -- and were being allowed to make their own decisions for the first time. And, being a freshly 17 year old university student, I decided to help them make some mistakes. And what mistakes they made! Why did they sleep with me and fall for every stupid line in the book? Because they were coddled until they were 18 and in university and suddenly unleashed into the world because they were 'adults.' Adults with no experience, no grounding, no street smarts. Comingled with horny, hot, adult males. Do you want that to be your daughter's first time exploring short skirts and attention from guys? Really?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> I can't imagine a more limp response than this. Why don't you just come out and say whether you think girls wearing Catwoman pants to school is OK or not?


I am not sure what catwoman pants are. A shiny version of leggings? To the degree that I "let" my kids do anything, I would. 



> Afraid if you say they may not be appropriate someone is going to label you a rape apologist? You going to let your daughter wear that stuff to school? Yes? No?
> 
> If you've never had a child in this situation, you have a limited input, and less credibility. These are issues involved parents and school admin decide.


Meh I am less convinced that the school admin is where I want the decision power. They don't care about much other than keeping the dissenters quiet on a topic like this. They have more noise coming out of the people who want boys not to be "distracted" by what someone else deems "inappropriate" than what constitutes comfortable and reasonable attire. I feel that parents who don't talk to their kids about the gangsta attire or their belly shirts are not doing their kids a service. But who am I to butt into that? They are the same kids who are bullies. I live in a small town. I have disagreed with their parenting (and often grandparenting, foster parenting and non-parenting) choices since I coached them in soccer in kindergarten. I am not going to change them to my way of thinking. That would be pure hubris.


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> And the fact also remains, that it is irrelevant whether you care or not.


Yes we get it.

Just as it is irrelevant if young boys know that gay men are fantasizing about them or not, it happens. They will understand it one day, maybe, or maybe not.

Either way, it is happening right now, everywhere, all the time.


----------



## Faithful Wife

norajane said:


> I was a teen in the 80's and leggings were everywhere. Only with those stupid freaking leg warmers!


I loves me some leg warmers. Still have some!


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> I'll throw a couple things out there.
> 
> #1 I frequently went out at lunch hour to run around in my jeans and play touch football with no shirt on. I know I turned a few female heads and I'm sure I turned a few gay/bi male heads by doing so. Did I care? No. How many people's lives were harmed by my actions? None.
> 
> #2 -- and this is probably a pretty ****ty thing to admit, but what the hell, we're being honest here -- when I hit university for my first year I had just turned 17. And I went insane. Why? Because I discovered that there were whole armies of 18 year old girls hitting their first year, too -- and were being allowed to make their own decisions for the first time. And, being a freshly 17 year old university student, I decided to help them make some mistakes. And what mistakes they made! Why did they sleep with me and fall for every stupid line in the book? Because they were coddled until they were 18 and in university and suddenly unleashed into the world because they were 'adults.' Adults with no experience, no grounding, no street smarts. Comingled with horny, hot, adult males. Do you want that to be your daughter's first time exploring short skirts and attention from guys? Really?


No offense, Marduk, but we discuss guys like you too. The words are not always kind. I would hate for my son to BE that guy as much as I would hate for my daughter to meet him. Though for both of my children I remind them that the people they are interacting with are young, immature and inexperienced JUST LIKE THEM. Preying on that immaturity is Not Nice, not in line with character and integrity.

How can we expect kids to make smart choices when we make the choices for them? 

Interestingly this debate rages on a local school Facebook page about uniforms for our school. Not a sword I would throw myself on, but I am not a fan.


----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> OMFG I hate those f'ing things. Why are they a thing?
> 
> They seem like the boot version of crocs -- specifically designed to be simultaneously hideous and derogatory to the human form.


Mmmm....comfy....cozy....cute and sexy.

We don't care if YOU think they are sexy, obviously.

See why this is relevant? (I know you do, I'm basically saying it for the benefit of those who still think our every decision is about what men think).


----------



## NobodySpecial

samyeagar said:


> I do think that your editing my post changed the context of what I was saying. I was making the comparison between what leggings accomplish and what airbrushing accomplishes...both present an idealized form, as opposed to being au-natural.
> .


I cannot think of anything more natural than a leg.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> Yes. But the fact also remains that we don't care if men find them sexy or not.
> 
> Case in point: Uggs.


OMG YES! Ugg are just bad. So are skinny jeans. Girls love(d) them anyway.


----------



## always_alone

NobodySpecial said:


> Meh I am less convinced that the school admin is where I want the decision power. They don't care about much other than keeping the dissenters quiet on a topic like this. They have more noise coming out of the people who want boys not to be "distracted" by what someone else deems "inappropriate" than what constitutes comfortable and reasonable attire.


I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock in school administration decisions either. They are mostly just reacting to squeaky wheels, and they have some pretty weird ideas about what is "appropriate".

I mean, look at what they've done to sex education. Or, for that matter, what they've done to "education".


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> Interestingly this debate rages on a local school Facebook page about uniforms for our school. Not a sword I would throw myself on, but I am not a fan.


I'm not a fan of uniforms either, but I did like an article I read recently about gender neutral uniforms, made so that boys can wear skirts and girls can wear sailor suits, as they choose.


----------



## john117

Proper ergonomics says bend at the knees :rofl:


----------



## NobodySpecial

I am unclear what people think we would be protecting girls from. My ELEVEN year old daughter knows that GROWN MEN check her out. Should I be protecting her from that? Sure I should! But not by locking her in a chastity box. But by posing challenging thought bubbles into her fantastic brain.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> I'm not a fan of uniforms either, but I did like an article I read recently about gender neutral uniforms, made so that boys can wear skirts and girls can wear sailor suits, as they choose.


It is less of a gender issue for me than a life skill issue. We would still be boxing them into rules rather than teaching them how to be.


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> I am unclear what people think we would be protecting girls from. My ELEVEN year old daughter knows that GROWN MEN check her out. Should I be protecting her from that? Sure I should! But not by locking her in a chastity box. But by posing challenging thought bubbles into her fantastic brain.


Yep. Most of us knew this from that very young age.

I wonder if most men knew adult gay men were checking them out when they were pre-teens? And if they did or their parents did, what exactly would they propose the child do about it?

It happens.

You guys can either take responsibility for what you look at and stop blaming the object of your attention, or you can stuff your erections up your own butts....it is not our problem.


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> It is less of a gender issue for me than a life skill issue. We would still be boxing them into rules rather than teaching them how to be.


Right. The article was about schools that already have uniforms as dress code. These uniforms were designed to at least not force the boys into pants and the girls into skirts, if they didn't feel inclined to either one they could do the other or both. A small step.


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> I cannot think of anything more natural than a leg.


Nor can I...with the cellulite, spider veins, stretch marks...that is why I make the comparison to airbrushing...leggings are a thin second skin that cover all those perceived flaws up, while showing an idealized form.


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> Nor can I...with the cellulite, spider veins, stretch marks...that is why I make the comparison to airbrushing...leggings are a thin second skin that cover all those perceived flaws up, while showing an idealized form.


As I said, that's why we like them. WE GET IT, we KNOW it. WE LIKE THEM.

Do you really think it would stop a guy from looking and fantasizing if he saw cellulite, stretch marks and spider veins anyway? Because no, it doesn't.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> Yes, and the school administrators try to provide an environment which they feel is best for all students when it comes to safety and learning. I know quite a few administrators who would argue that going with a "no dress code" policy would not achieve this.
> 
> I don't see what the big deal is, follow the rules. Kids will have plenty of opportunities outside of school to dress as they please


Again, in my view, this reasoning has some flaws in it.

School administrators are just people. With their own flaws and cognitive biases. They have no right to mandate what the state finds appropriate. This is what laws are for.

As I have already provided, there is no data and no grounding in the idea that provocative dress promotes rape or rape culture. None. Zero. Nada. Zip. The whole "but what about the children" is a spurious and misleading argument. What children need is education on how to be safe, how to be respectful, how to know you're being respected, and to stand up for your own decisions. 

For me, being empowered to dress the way you want is on the same plane as telling my daughter she is empowered to tell a boy "no." It is her choice, her call to make. I will not disempower her decision making, even as I seek to guide it and inform it.

If you don't see what the big deal is, go back and look at how gay and lesbian kids were treated in high school in the '80s. I know of at least two that were _thrown out_ of my high school for holding hands or hugging the person they were seeing, even though such behaviour was never an issue for straight guys.

Hell, I was once caught by a teacher when I had a girl pressed up against my locker with her legs wrapped around me and my tongue in her mouth. He gave her ****, and then laughed at me.

We need to collectively learn in society the difference between the rule of law and morality. The rule of law in western society enforces public liberty above all -- in fact, codes for safety are usually arrived at philosophically by protecting one's liberty through remaining whole. This is why 'innocent until proven guilty' is a thing. The philosophy of law is an important thing.

Morality is how we think we _should_ behave, not how we _must_ behave. And this is a very different thing. You have a legal right to disagree with how someone dresses themselves, but not to interfere (with exceptions to public nudity issues which are themselves thorny).

These two *need* to remain distinct and separate. For similar reasons as why church and state need to remain separate; *because you cannot mandate morality.* And because while the church (or those claiming to hold the moral high ground) often holds it's leaders as above the moral code, no-one is above the law.


----------



## NobodySpecial

samyeagar said:


> Nor can I...with the cellulite, spider veins, stretch marks...that is why I make the comparison to airbrushing...leggings are a thin second skin that cover all those perceived flaws up, while showing an idealized form.


I can get leggings that cover that stuff up???!! Please post me a link! Mine are more like. Pants.


----------



## Marduk

NobodySpecial said:


> No offense, Marduk, but we discuss guys like you too. The words are not always kind. I would hate for my son to BE that guy as much as I would hate for my daughter to meet him. Though for both of my children I remind them that the people they are interacting with are young, immature and inexperienced JUST LIKE THEM. Preying on that immaturity is Not Nice, not in line with character and integrity.
> 
> How can we expect kids to make smart choices when we make the choices for them?
> 
> Interestingly this debate rages on a local school Facebook page about uniforms for our school. Not a sword I would throw myself on, but I am not a fan.


I agree. I was trying to give that very point - don't make your daughters rebel right into a guy like I was' arms and bed.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## samyeagar

Faithful Wife said:


> As I said, *that's why we like them. WE GET IT, we KNOW it. WE LIKE THEM.*
> 
> Do you really think it would stop a guy from looking and fantasizing if he saw cellulite, stretch marks and spider veins anyway? Because no, it doesn't.


And there were some women right here on this thread that couldn't understand the appeal, or how they could be considered sexy...that they didn't even realize that was a thing associated with yoga pants and leggings.


----------



## Faithful Wife

samyeagar said:


> And there were some women right here on this thread that couldn't understand the appeal, or how they could be considered sexy...that they didn't even realize that was a thing associated with yoga pants and leggings.


But they ARE aware that they hide cellulite. Wasn't the air brushing effect your point?


----------



## WandaJ

samyeagar said:


> And the fact also remains, that it is irrelevant whether you care or not.


And it is irrelevant if men find it hot and sexy. It's their problem. We still do not care. I know, irrelevant.


----------



## NobodySpecial

samyeagar said:


> And there were some women right here on this thread that couldn't understand the appeal, or how they could be considered sexy...that they didn't even realize that was a thing associated with yoga pants and leggings.


I actually did not discover this until this thread. I asked my husband. He said, it depends on who they are on. It certainly would never have occurred to me prior to that.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> But they ARE aware that they hide cellulite. Wasn't the air brushing effect your point?


Who is "they" and where do I get these trimming leggings?


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> I can get leggings that cover that stuff up???!! Please post me a link! Mine are more like. Pants.





Faithful Wife said:


> But they ARE aware that they hide cellulite. Wasn't the air brushing effect your point?


Assuming NobodySpecial's post was not in jest...


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> I actually did not discover this until this thread. I asked my husband. He said, it depends on who they are on. It certainly would never have occurred to me prior to that.


You clearly aren't gay enough. Don't you know how HOT women's butts are in YOGA PANTS!!!

I'm going to summon them to revoke your bi card.


----------



## NobodySpecial

And when did it become bad to have your clothing flatter you? When my husband had a paunch, he did not wear muscle shirts.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> Again, in my view, this reasoning has some flaws in it.
> 
> School administrators are just people. With their own flaws and cognitive biases. They have no right to mandate what the state finds appropriate. This is what laws are for.
> 
> As I have already provided, there is no data and no grounding in the idea that provocative dress promotes rape or rape culture. None. Zero. Nada. Zip. The whole "but what about the children" is a spurious and misleading argument. What children need is education on how to be safe, how to be respectful, how to know you're being respected, and to stand up for your own decisions.
> 
> For me, being empowered to dress the way you want is on the same plane as telling my daughter she is empowered to tell a boy "no." It is her choice, her call to make. I will not disempower her decision making, even as I seek to guide it and inform it.
> 
> If you don't see what the big deal is, go back and look at how gay and lesbian kids were treated in high school in the '80s. I know of at least two that were _thrown out_ of my high school for holding hands or hugging the person they were seeing, even though such behaviour was never an issue for straight guys.
> 
> Hell, I was once caught by a teacher when I had a girl pressed up against my locker with her legs wrapped around me and my tongue in her mouth. He gave her ****, and then laughed at me.
> 
> We need to collectively learn in society the difference between the rule of law and morality. The rule of law in western society enforces public liberty above all -- in fact, codes for safety are usually arrived at philosophically by protecting one's liberty through remaining whole. This is why 'innocent until proven guilty' is a thing. The philosophy of law is an important thing.
> 
> Morality is how we think we _should_ behave, not how we _must_ behave. And this is a very different thing. You have a legal right to disagree with how someone dresses themselves, but not to interfere (with exceptions to public nudity issues which are themselves thorny).
> 
> These two *need* to remain distinct and separate. For similar reasons as why church and state need to remain separate; *because you cannot mandate morality.* And because while the church (or those claiming to hold the moral high ground) often holds it's leaders as above the moral code, no-one is above the law.


They have no right, that is part of their job  They are also not mandating based on the state, as each district can decide on what the dress code should be. I actually asked a few teachers and an administrator of a large school district about this, and they just scoffed at the idea of not having some guideline for a dress code.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> You clearly aren't gay enough. Don't you know how HOT women's butts are in YOGA PANTS!!!
> 
> I'm going to summon them to revoke your bi card.


I think my failure is more in line with a lack of fashion sense.


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> And when did it become bad to have your clothing flatter you? When my husband had a paunch, he did not wear muscle shirts.


Some gay dudes would have fantasized about him anyway. Mmm....paunch.


----------



## norajane

My Chicago public school dress code consisted of no shorts and no gang colors. Cheerleaders walked around on game days in their shorty short short skirted uniforms (no leggings) and everyone was still expected to listen to the teacher. Benetton and Firenza sweaters over leggings were standard wear for the girls. Flashdance sweatshirts and shirts were standard over leggings. My standard uniform once I went to college was sweatshirt over leggings. I think guys still managed to graduate despite the distraction.

Is the morality police more aggressive in 2015? Where were they in the 80's and 90's?


----------



## always_alone

Faithful Wife said:


> But they ARE aware that they hide cellulite. Wasn't the air brushing effect your point?


I'm pretty sure that all clothes cover up skin/flaws? :scratchhead:


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> I think my failure is more in line with a lack of fashion sense.


Well, take a good look at some yoga mom butts, you'll see it. HAWT!!!

Be sure not to blame your chick wood on her though, it isn't her fault.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> They have no right, that is part of their job  They are also not mandating based on the state, as each district can decide on what the dress code should be. I actually asked a few teachers and an administrator of a large school district about this, and they just scoffed at the idea of not having some guideline for a dress code.


I don't agree. 

Their job is to educate, not dictate. And there are many stupid laws. I'm Canadian so I don't claim to understand how it happens there. 

Have you ever seen a guideline work? Against a smart rebellious person? What rule? Square inches of skin? 

There are always ways to subvert such rules that just causes more hand wringing and rules. Why?

Because you can't do it, that's why. It just doesn't work.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## samyeagar

WandaJ said:


> And it is irrelevant if men find it hot and sexy. It's their problem. We still do not care. I know, irrelevant.


And I never even alluded to the thought that women SHOULD care. Sexy is in the eye of the beholder, and is completely mutually exclusive from the person being viewed.


----------



## NobodySpecial

norajane said:


> My Chicago public school dress code consisted of no shorts


It is going to be well into the 90s here today. There is no air conditioning. Ugh.


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> I don't agree.
> 
> Their job is to educate,
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


And NOT on matters of morality. I would not agree with the VAST majority of current culture's understanding of morality and would not want that **** shoveled into my kids' mouths.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> Well, take a good look at some yoga mom butts, you'll see it. HAWT!!!
> 
> Be sure not to blame your chick wood on her though, it isn't her fault.


Sorry. I prefer my women in dresses. I mean you remember the Loves Baby Soft ads, right? You can love hard, or you can love soft. I'll take soft.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> Well, take a good look at some yoga mom butts, you'll see it. HAWT!!!
> 
> Be sure not to blame your chick wood on her though, it isn't her fault.


And ANd And. WHo is thinking about hawt in the grocery store? Or hell, a yoga class?


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> And ANd And. WHo is thinking about hawt in the grocery store? Or hell, a yoga class?


Men.

And me, apparently.


----------



## always_alone

NobodySpecial said:


> I actually did not discover this until this thread. I asked my husband. He said, it depends on who they are on. It certainly would never have occurred to me prior to that.


I knew many women liked them because they found them figure flattering, supposedly for all body types. 

But I had no clue they were such a hot topic, sexy item. My SO describes them as "those stupid pants that everyone wears".


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> I don't agree.
> 
> Their job is to educate, not dictate. And there are many stupid laws. I'm Canadian so I don't claim to understand how it happens there.
> 
> Have you ever seen a guideline work? Against a smart rebellious person? What rule? Square inches of skin?
> 
> There are always ways to subvert such rules that just causes more hand wringing and rules. Why?
> 
> Because you can't do it, that's why. It just doesn't work.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


They are supposed to provide a safe/productive environment for educating. For example, one part of the dress code at my school was no hats while in school. This was implemented after issues with kids stealing hats, causing fights, etc... 

We can just agree to disagree b/c I will also rely on the actual admistrators/teachers when it comes to providing the best environment for our children to learn instead of worrying about some girl crying b/c she can't show her midsection or some guy crying b/c he cant show off his package wearing speedos, claiming some sort of civil rights violation ...


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> Men.
> 
> And me, apparently.


Ok. This is definitive. That someone else might find me hot at the grocery store is something I think about, care about, exactly never.


----------



## Marduk

norajane said:


> My Chicago public school dress code consisted of no shorts and no gang colors. Cheerleaders walked around on game days in their shorty short short skirted uniforms (no leggings) and everyone was still expected to listen to the teacher. Benetton and Firenza sweaters over leggings were standard wear for the girls. Flashdance sweatshirts and shirts were standard over leggings. My standard uniform once I went to college was sweatshirt over leggings. I think guys still managed to graduate despite the distraction.
> 
> Is the morality police more aggressive in 2015? Where were they in the 80's and 90's?


Maybe you forgot these guys:








_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

Tammy Faye actually didn't have anything to do with her husband's bullcrap.

She went on to be a wonderful advocate for the gay community and many other good causes.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> They are supposed to provide a safe/productive environment for educating. For example, one part of the dress code at my school was no hats while in school. This was implemented after issues with kids stealing hats, causing fights, etc...


For the record, if my kid were stealing hats, I would MUCH prefer he learn the lesson of the inadvisability of theft. Instead we have to have rule upon rule so that the kid in a box environment can safely play to the lowest common denominator.


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> For the record, if my kid were stealing hats, I would MUCH prefer he learn the lesson of the inadvisability of theft. Instead we have to have rule upon rule so that the kid in a box environment can safely play to the lowest common denominator.


Unfortunately that is true, you can be the best possible parent for your kid but that doesn't mean other kids are getting the same. You end up having to make rules because of the a$sholes ...


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> Unfortunately that is true, you can be the best possible parent for your kid but that doesn't mean other kids are getting the same. You end up having to make rules because of the a$sholes ...


Where the parallel falls down for me is who is being hurt. When someone steals a hat, there is a kid without a hat. When someone steals lunch money, there is a kid without a lunch. Who is really harmed by someone else' attire?


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> They are supposed to provide a safe/productive environment for educating. For example, one part of the dress code at my school was no hats while in school. This was implemented after issues with kids stealing hats, causing fights, etc...
> 
> We can just agree to disagree b/c I will also rely on the actual admistrators/teachers when it comes to providing the best environment for our children to learn instead of worrying about some girl crying b/c she can't show her midsection or some guy crying b/c he cant show off his package wearing speedos, claiming some sort of civil rights violation ...


Well, we can agree to disagree but I don't understand how this impacts safety or learning effectiveness.

We may want it to, but I have seen no evidence that it achieves either, and it does so at the explicit expense of people's liberty. 

Again, I'm Canadian and not American, but I understand personal liberty is a value we tend to share.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> Where the parallel falls down for me is who is being hurt. When someone steals a hat, there is a kid without a hat. When someone steals lunch money, there is a kid without a lunch. *Who is really harmed by someone else' attire?*


Men who want to blame their boners on women.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> Men who want to blame their boners on women.


There is a worldview where boners are bad and to be blamed on something? That's weird. Yes, I am being tongue in cheek with sentence one. But not sentence two.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Tammy Faye actually didn't have anything to do with her husband's bullcrap.
> 
> She went on to be a wonderful advocate for the gay community and many other good causes.


And I personally still find her disengenous. 

But I'm a cynical bastard. Maybe people can change. 

It's like all those outed gay republicans who were formerly pushing for anti gay marriage laws who suddenly switch sides when they're outed.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Anybody remember how in the 80s, heavy metal was the giant threat to kids?

What with the back masking, devil symbols, corrupting lyrics... "But what about the children?"

I still remember a teacher taking away my "killer dwarfs" cassette in junior high. For my own protection, of course. 

I guess we've transferred the devil onto our daughter's behinds in tight pants.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> And I personally still find her disengenous.
> 
> But I'm a cynical bastard. Maybe people can change.
> 
> It's like all those outed gay republicans who were formerly pushing for anti gay marriage laws who suddenly switch sides when they're outed.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Did you watch the documentary about her? It would likely make you see her differently. She was never anti-gay. Clearly a drag queen herself, she loved her people.


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> Where the parallel falls down for me is who is being hurt. When someone steals a hat, there is a kid without a hat. When someone steals lunch money, there is a kid without a lunch. Who is really harmed by someone else' attire?


Well, in my example a hat would be considered attire, and it was an issue causing fights ...



marduk said:


> Well, we can agree to disagree but I don't understand how this impacts safety or learning effectiveness.
> 
> We may want it to, but I have seen no evidence that it achieves either, and it does so at the explicit expense of people's liberty.
> 
> Again, I'm Canadian and not American, but I understand personal liberty is a value we tend to share.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I asked a teacher, and they said it would cause issues in their classroom b/c inevitably there would be kids who would abuse it, take their attire (or lack of) too far. Now the teacher would have to spend part of her attention managing the classroom environment. Sure, I know it is easy to say that everyone should learn to respect each other, in an ideal world that would be great, We don't live in an ideal world though.


----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> Anybody remember how in the 80s, heavy metal was the giant threat to our children?
> 
> What with the back masking, devil symbols, corrupting lyrics... "But what about the children?"
> 
> I still remember a teacher taking away my "killer dwarves" cassette in junior high. For my own protection, of course.
> 
> I guess we've transferred the devil onto our daughter's behinds in tight pants.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


The devil was always in our butts, too. We knew it, they knew it, the devil knew it. Duh. That's why our butts look so good in yoga pants.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> Well, in my example a hat would be considered attire, and it was an issue causing fights ...


I might fight with someone who deprived me of a hat.




> I asked a teacher, and they said it would cause issues in their classroom b/c inevitably there would be kids who would abuse it, take their attire (or lack of) too far. Now the teacher would have to spend part of her attention managing the classroom environment.


I would be interested to know what that means in real, practical terms. The conversation is so frequently cast in vague terms like managing the environment. I would be curious to know what "too far" was and what the specific challenge to the environment was. Otherwise it's just noise.



> Sure, I know it is easy to say that everyone should learn to respect each other, in an ideal world that would be great, We don't live in an ideal world though.


Nope. That's the point. To teach young people to live in the world that they are in. I concede that the kid in a box model already poses challenges. But if there is a need to make a change, I would sure like to know why, and with more than vague statements about managing the environment.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Did you watch the documentary about her? It would likely make you see her differently. She was never anti-gay. Clearly a drag queen herself, she loved her people.


To be fair, I haven't. 

Is it worthwhile?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone

Faithful Wife said:


> Men who want to blame their boners on women.


Don't forget those men and women who would like to blame all potential, but not yet realized, boners on women.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> Well, in my example a hat would be considered attire, and it was an issue causing fights ...
> 
> 
> 
> I asked a teacher, and they said it would cause issues in their classroom b/c inevitably there would be kids who would abuse it, take their attire (or lack of) too far. Now the teacher would have to spend part of her attention managing the classroom environment. Sure, I know it is easy to say that everyone should learn to respect each other, in an ideal world that would be great, We don't live in an ideal world though.


Perfect example of the wrong decision being made with all the best intentions and why teachers should never be allowed to make them. 

What's easy or best from their perspective isn't what best for society. 

And to remove people's liberty because other people are stupid is, well, lazy thinking on behalf of the education system. 

Doing what's right can sometimes be hard and scary.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial

always_alone said:


> Don't forget those men and women who would like to blame all potential, but not yet realized, boners on women.


And the inability to use said boners on the girls supposedly adverting a desire for THEIR boner by their attire.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> Perfect example of the wrong decision being made with all the best intentions and why teachers should never be allowed to make them.
> 
> What's easy or best from their perspective isn't what best for society.
> 
> *And to remove people's liberty because other people are stupid is, well, lazy thinking on behalf of the education system.*
> 
> Doing what's right can sometimes be hard and scary.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


IDK, I know quite a few people in the education system who seem to know what they are doing, and have a better understanding about how best to go about educating our children.

Based on the bolded why have any laws? I mean after all, laws are enacted in part b/c of the stupid


----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> To be fair, I haven't.
> 
> Is it worthwhile?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It was excellent, fascinating, and endearing.

The Eyes of Tammy Faye

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6aGqvkYcO8


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> Don't forget those men and women who would like to blame all potential, but not yet realized, boners on women.


What if I blame women for not wearing yoga pants enough?

I mean, think of all my boners that could have been but never were!!

Will someone save all my future boners!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife

Not to worry, there's always porn.


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> Perfect example of the wrong decision being made with all the best intentions and why teachers should never be allowed to make them.
> 
> What's easy or best from their perspective isn't what best for society.
> 
> And to remove people's liberty because other people are stupid is, well, lazy thinking on behalf of the education system.
> 
> Doing what's right can sometimes be hard and scary.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I think it is fair to concede that school is an artificial environment. The ratios of teachers to student or support staff is insufficient to deal with each and every incident that arises. And since the students are required to be there, often without any internal motivation not to be a ****wit, schools can be stuck between a rock and a hard place. I feel for the kid who has to go out to recess or gym without protection from the sun. But I can fundamentally get where theft and having to react to it would prove a systemic enough issue to have to do something systemic about. I hate it. But I can see it.

I sure would like something less vague when trying to justify the curtail of every freedom. And not because I want my fist up in the air about my kids' rights. I want my kids to live as close to the real world as possible. So they learn about it. In real life, so often freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility. BUt the schools too often don't have the means to teach responsibility in the absence of their parents doing so.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> IDK, I know quite a few people in the education system who seem to know what they are doing, and have a better understanding about how best to go about educating our children.
> 
> Based on the bolded why have any laws? I mean after all, laws are enacted in part b/c of the stupid


The underlying philosphy of law is generally that the laws are in place to protect liberty and economics in society. 

For example, why do we have speeding laws? Is it to punish stupid speeders or to protect people who get run over by stupid speeders?

If it was as simple as protecting everybody, the speed limit would be 1 km/hr.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## samyeagar

NobodySpecial said:


> I think it is fair to concede that school is an artificial environment. The ratios of teachers to student or support staff is insufficient to deal with each and every incident that arises. And since the students are required to be there, often without any internal motivation not to be a ****wit, schools can be stuck between a rock and a hard place. I feel for the kid who has to go out to recess or gym without protection from the sun. But I can fundamentally get where theft and having to react to it would prove a systemic enough issue to have to do something systemic about. I hate it. But I can see it.
> 
> I sure would like something less vague when trying to justify the curtail of every freedom. And not because I want my fist up in the air about my kids' rights. I want my kids to live as close to the real world as possible. So they learn about it. In real life, so often freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility. *BUt the schools too often don't have the means to teach responsibility in the absence of their parents doing so*.


This...a thousand times over.


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> The underlying philosphy of law is generally that the laws are in place to protect liberty and economics in society.
> 
> For example, why do we have speeding laws? Is it to punish stupid speeders or to protect people who get run over by stupid speeders?
> 
> If it was as simple as protecting everybody, the speed limit would be 1 km/hr.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Oh Marduk, if we were all to agree to the underlying philosophy of law, the world would be a much simpler place. And Facebook would be a lot quieter.


----------



## Marduk

NobodySpecial said:


> I think it is fair to concede that school is an artificial environment. The ratios of teachers to student or support staff is insufficient to deal with each and every incident that arises. And since the students are required to be there, often without any internal motivation not to be a ****wit, schools can be stuck between a rock and a hard place. I feel for the kid who has to go out to recess or gym without protection from the sun. But I can fundamentally get where theft and having to react to it would prove a systemic enough issue to have to do something systemic about. I hate it. But I can see it.
> 
> I sure would like something less vague when trying to justify the curtail of every freedom. And not because I want my fist up in the air about my kids' rights. I want my kids to live as close to the real world as possible. So they learn about it. In real life, so often freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility. BUt the schools too often don't have the means to teach responsibility in the absence of their parents doing so.


Ever hear the saying two wrongs don't make a right?

Or, beware the law of unintended consequences?

I'm math, there's this nasty thing called local domain optimization. You can optimize something for he horizon you know about, not realizing it's actually at the bottom of a trough- you're optimized for the ****ty situation instead of getting out of the ****ty situation to begin with.

It's like asking a factory owner in China how to fix pollution. He'd likely say we need bigger factories so there's less overall pollution instead of a more radical solution. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone

marduk said:


> What if I blame women for not wearing yoga pants enough?
> 
> I mean, think of all my boners that could have been but never were!!
> 
> Will someone save all my future boners!
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


That's all of the other threads: blaming women for not being sexy enough, not caring enough about sex or looking good, or "letting themselves go". There had to be one or two about how women are too sexy to balance all of those out.


----------



## Faithful Wife

5 Ways Modern Men Are Trained to Hate Women | Cracked.com

#3. We Think You're Conspiring With Our Boners to Ruin Us


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> The underlying philosphy of law is generally that the laws are in place to protect liberty and economics in society.
> 
> For example, why do we have speeding laws? Is it to punish stupid speeders or to protect people who get run over by stupid speeders?
> 
> If it was as simple as protecting everybody, the speed limit would be 1 km/hr.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


And you could argue that speeding laws infringe on a persons liberty to drive as fast as they want ...


----------



## Marduk

Oh, and I want my killer dwarfs cassette back.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> And you could argue that speeding laws infringe on a persons liberty to drive as fast as they want ...


Which is why they balance, right? Fast but not too fast?

Want to know why?

Because there's a point where economics outweighs safety, that's why. 

And that's how law works.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> That's all of the other threads: blaming women for not being sexy enough, not caring enough about sex or looking good, or "letting themselves go". There had to be one or two about how women are too sexy to balance all of those out.


That was my point. 

The whole projection of my sexual response onto womankind is stupid.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> Which is why they balance, right? Fast but not too fast?
> 
> Want to know why?
> 
> Because there's a point where economics outweighs safety, that's why.
> 
> And that's how law works.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yup, and the same could be said about a dress code that has balance to it ... that is how laws work, right...


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> Yup, and the same could be said about a dress code that has balance to it ... that is how laws work, right...


Hence public nudity laws...

Which I personally don't agree with either but not enough to get as fussed about, I guess.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> Hence public nudity laws...
> 
> Which I personally don't agree with either but not enough to get as fussed about, I guess.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


If you consider public nudity the balance ... what is more liberating than walking around in the nude ...


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> Ever hear the saying two wrongs don't make a right?
> 
> Or, beware the law of unintended cosequences?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Of course I have. I mitigate those consequences every day for myself and with my children. 

I remember a call from my son's middle school teacher. She was telling me how, while joking around, my son called another kid (his friend) a name. I don't remember the name now. But it was not one that registered on my radar as a swear. I waited for the teacher to continue with what the problem was. When it was clear that she was done, I asked her if the kid was hurt, offended or there was some kind of negative result I was missing. She said no, they were just joking around. I said, Ok, I will talk to him about it. It won't happen again.

I spoke to my son and relayed the conversation. He asked what the problem was. I confessed I did not really know. Maybe it was a level setting language in the over all classroom so as not to have to interpret the motivation of every student who utters an insult any any other. DS said well the best move forward is to just be more careful in her class. He is not stupid. He did not take away from this that there is any horrible crime in the razzing of a friend he knew would not care. He used his enlightened self interest to decide that this is a battle not worth fighting. I asked if he wanted me to press his case with the teacher. He asked why, am I being punished? I said no but there are no rules or guidelines that say you did anything wrong. He rolled his eyes and said, no Mom, I got this one. I will just be careful how I joke in her class.

So yeah, having to follow arbitrary and often unclear rules means the smarter, better behaved kids will have to curtail their otherwise unoffensive behavior.

But WOULD the unintended consequences be to fighting every single "unfair" requirement by the school? It would not aid the well behaved kids much. It would probably cause a big uptick in the punitive response to the already disadvantaged kids. The result is an uptick in the need for support staff. Higher taxes for towns like mine that already have a hell of a time passing the budgets... And no real benefit for any of the students.

So where there are real outcomes from systemic behaviors like fights that break out after theft, I can understand eradicating that from the learning environment some freedom. A hat? A debit card style lunch payment system? No hard core reason to fight that fight.

AFAIC the girl's attire issue is a different one. I will leave the boys and gang clothes off as simply out of scope of this discussion. There IS a systemic attitude in the USA that girls' attire ARE responsible for boys' behavior. And that is wrong enough that it needs changing SYSTEMICALLY. Unless and until there is a real, concrete and systemic reason to view this otherwise, that is where I stand.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> If you consider public nudity the balance ... what is more liberating than walking around in the nude ...


This is really funny. Public nudity is totally legal where I live. It does not happen often. But you do see people walking down the street stark naked from time to time. The world did not miss a beat. I think my son said something like huh, I did not know that was legal.


----------



## Faithful Wife

It's legal where I live, too.


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> If you consider public nudity the balance ... what is more liberating than walking around in the nude ...


Which is why I personally consider it not a big deal. 

But I guess I consider that a more equitable balance than telling women what they can wear to be safe or not distract men.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial

Faithful Wife said:


> It's legal where I live, too.


One little interesting side point might be how little actual affect that its occurrence actually has. When we let it be a non issue, well, it's a non issue.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> Which is why I personally consider it not a big deal.
> 
> But I guess I consider that a more equitable balance than telling women what they can wear to be safe or not distract men.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


That is fine. Just to clarify, I have not singled out females in particular in any of my posts with this discussion


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> That is fine. Just to clarify, I have not singled out females in particular in any of my posts with this discussion


I guess I would support boys' wearing their pants around their knees to the same degree. They may look stupid as hell. But I can't see what they would be doing the "learning environment".


----------



## Faithful Wife

NobodySpecial said:


> One little interesting side point might be how little actual affect that its occurrence actually has. When we let it be a non issue, well, it's a non issue.


Around here, you just can't use nudity to solicit anything or that can cause a safety hazard. So the strippers cannot stand nude outside the strip clubs, for instance. (They do stand out there in see through clothing, however). You also cannot ride your bike nude down the street as it can cause traffic problems.

Except on naked bike day. 

But the rest of the year, no.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> LOL. You're hilarious.
> 
> #1 I thought the basis for limiting what girls wear was to protect boys from the evils of girls sexual distractions. Not to protect girls.
> 
> #2 What's wrong with catwoman pants? Are you talking about those shiny versions of tights? Is that a problem now?
> 
> #3 Yes, I'd let my daughter wear shiny tights to school. With what I deem for my family and her age and maturity what else is appropriate.
> 
> #4 rape is driven by a need for power, not provocative clothing.
> 
> Here's the data: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=djglp
> 
> In short, your entire line of thinking is substantively flawed and I reject it outright.
> 
> 
> Again, LOL. Where to draw the line? Must I be a parent? I'm an uncle of girls who are teenagers and dealing with this very stuff right now. I have a sister. I have a daughter who is about to be a teenager.
> 
> *And, even then, your whole line of thinking is totally flawed and based on fear and shame about female sexuality, not reason.*
> 
> I would be one of those people.
> 
> What are you going to do about it?
> 
> And what harm befalls society?
> 
> None.
> 
> What a total joke.
> 
> How I parent is totally different than civil rights issues about what people are _allowed_ to wear.



Just another self-absorbed parent with an ego that supercedes the interests of their child. You've got professional educators telling you to your face what they feel is in the best interests of all of our children, and you don't care. You'd rather play the hero in front of bunch of yes-women on the internet. 

Hopefully, your husband has a more sensible approach.


----------



## EleGirl

Forest said:


> Just another self-absorbed parent with an ego that supercedes the interests of their child. You've got professional educators telling you to your face what they feel is in the best interests of all of our children, and you don't care. You'd rather play the hero in front of bunch of yes-women on the internet.
> 
> Hopefully, your husband has a more sensible approach.


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Marduk's husband?????? :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## john117

The dress code is not the real issue - the mixed signals sent to young women are the issue.

On one hand society over sexualizes them by pushing fashions that are not always "a good idea" and on the other hand woe be to those young people who don't follow the chaste party line of the parents, schools, etc. 

You have a product that has been attributed mythical powers by the media and peer groups and expect them to not wear it? 

My girls were lucky to have fashionista parents and they learned about the "good stuff" at an early age. Not the "slvtty" stuff but Filene's Basement, Loehmanns, Nordstrom Rack, Macy's and the like. But judging from their peers it's omg time.


----------



## WorkingOnMe

This thread has completely jumped the shark.


----------



## NotEasy

Faithful Wife said:


> Around here, you just can't use nudity to solicit anything or that can cause a safety hazard. So the strippers cannot stand nude outside the strip clubs, for instance. (They do stand out there in see through clothing, however). You also cannot ride your *bide* nude down the street as it can cause traffic problems.
> 
> Except on naked bike day.
> 
> But the rest of the year, no.


My mind is obviously in the toilet. I read that as 
You also cannot ride your *bidet* nude down the street.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> Just another self-absorbed parent with an ego that supercedes the interests of their child. You've got professional educators telling you to your face what they feel is in the best interests of all of our children, and you don't care. You'd rather play the hero in front of bunch of yes-women on the internet.
> 
> Hopefully, your husband has a more sensible approach.


I wonder if you would so quickly dismiss your parental role if your child was being mishandled by these superior professionals. I was a professional educator, and I know the training they get. God it is largely about rubrics. They need the kids to learn the three r's. Most programs don't even have instruction in classroom management whose goal is simply to make sure the kids don't kill each other so that the three r's can be drilled.

Every parent of every child in the public school system has run afoul of a "professional educator" with their head firmly positioned up their petunias. It's our JOB as parents and community members to be involved in these decisions at the school board level. And they want and expect if of us. When we don't their motivation, probably rightly from a big picture point of view, is to get through the three r's with the smallest interruption possible. But like it or leave it, our kids are all in the same box all day and WILL take away social messages. I feel it is well within my right and obligation to have a say in that so that they grow up to be well rounded human beings.

I think you mistake Marduk's point to be about allowing his precious flower to do whatever she likes. That is a mistake. I don't know if he has sons. But the EXACT same message that we send our girls is sent to our boys when we tell them that girls are a distraction. Their bodies are a problem for them. And they have no control over it. That is not a lesson I teach to my son. He is a better young man for it.

Interestingly enough you have not touched on the content of the conversation. Just that the rule book handed down by a perceived authority is being questioned. That is not uncommon. But I don't see why we, the people, aren't the authority. It is not different than law as has been brought up previously by other posters. When my representatives seek to pass a law I disagree with, I fight it. When they seek to pass a law that I agree with, I support it. When they pass a law that my enlightened self interest, or the interest of my children, would be served by breaking and the consequences are tolerable, we break it. By law my then 11 and 8 year olds were too young to drive. But I did not want my kids getting behind the wheel when they were in the permit class for the first time. Inexperience is a huge problem with young drivers. So we took they out to the parking lot to learn to drive. Had we gotten a ticket, we'd have taken responsibility, thanked the officer, and paid it. 

Thinking tends to be good for people. When the people who are charged with running this country abdicated that responsibility, we end up with ****ty community.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> Just another self-absorbed parent with an ego that supercedes the interests of *their child*. You've got professional educators telling you to your face what they feel is in the best interests of all of our children, and you don't care. You'd rather play the hero in front of bunch of yes-women on the internet.
> 
> Hopefully, your husband has a more sensible approach.


Oh one other small matter. Their interest is not in any one individual child. It can't be. They have too many.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Constable Odo said:


> So, if your daughter wants to wear this:
> 
> 
> 
> to school, you would 100% support her "right" to do so?
> 
> Be serious.


If that were my daughter, and really actually old enough to be in my house, I would be more concerned with why she wanted to.


----------



## Forest

Constable Odo said:


> So, if your daughter wants to wear this:
> 
> 
> to school, you would 100% support her "right" to do so?
> 
> Be serious.


Ah, you've pulled a Double Lindy now. Not only are you a rape apologist for posting that picture, you're also a controlling closed-minded chauvinist for suggesting the attire is inappropriate. Impressive.

The yoga thing will pass, and another expression of freedom worth dying for will trump educational common sense. Notice how his butt is covered?


----------



## Constable Odo

Forest said:


> Ah, you've pulled a Double Lindy now. Not only are you a rape apologist for posting that picture, you're also a controlling closed-minded chauvinist for suggesting the attire is inappropriate. Impressive.


The key is to offend as many as possible with as few words as possible.


----------



## WandaJ

you guys are missing point. it is not about wearing whatever you want to school - it is about having those rules rely on common sense and without sending wrong message that the girls and their bodies are problem. 

But it is easier to set the rule then teach kids about respect and self respect, self control and individual responsibility. Teach them the each one of them is responsible for the ir own behavior, and learning, and they cannot blame the world around them for distractions. Personal responsibility, that's all.


----------



## Forest

WandaJ said:


> you guys are missing point. it is not about wearing whatever you want to school - it is about having those rules rely on common sense and without sending wrong message that the girls and their bodies are problem.
> 
> But it is easier to set the rule then teach kids about respect and self respect, self control and individual responsibility. Teach them the each one of them is responsible for the ir own behavior, and learning, and they cannot blame the world around them for distractions. Personal responsibility, that's all.


So, if Ian Anderson (pictured) showed up at the local school in that outfit, and the girls hooted and giggled, would that mean they needed some sensitivity training, and Ian was a victim?


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> So, if Ian Anderson (pictured) showed up at the local school in that outfit, and the girls hooted and giggled, would that mean they needed some sensitivity training, and Ian was a victim?


What would you teach your daughter about what SHE needs? You seem to just like to call people names. What's your point?


----------



## Mrs.Submission

Forest said:


> No, you're not an ass, but the first guy that asks for pictures might be.:scratchhead:
> 
> The whole yoga pants thing is a trap. If you don't like it, you're saying its slvtware. If you do like it, you're objectifying. They should be worn with an understanding. "Wear this, but don't complain about the staring".
> 
> A married woman should not dress that way if you object. A mother should not dress that way to functions involving kids, classmates.


This. I believe that spouses should dress to please themselves and their partners as well. If my husband is wearing a color that doesn't suit him, I will let him know that I think he would look better in something else. I will also make comments about how well an outfit fits and run an iron over his clothes if they are wrinkly. 

My husband doesn't like it when I wear revealing clothing. I wear a 36C and my cups runneth over very easily. :smile2: I also have a round ass, so when I wear short shorts or miniskirts it is prominent. My husband has never told me not to wear certain things but he will ask me to cover up. He doesn't like it when other men leer at his wife. 

What worsens the OP's situation is that his wife is actively seeking attention from other men. I don't think that is appropriate or respectful at all.


----------



## Mrs.Submission

Forest said:


> Ah, you've pulled a Double Lindy now. Not only are you a rape apologist for posting that picture, you're also a controlling closed-minded chauvinist for suggesting the attire is inappropriate. Impressive.
> 
> The yoga thing will pass, and another expression of freedom worth dying for will trump educational common sense. Notice how his butt is covered?


:surprise:


----------



## EleGirl

Forest said:


> Ah, you've pulled a Double Lindy now. Not only are you a rape apologist for posting that picture, you're also a controlling closed-minded chauvinist for suggesting the attire is inappropriate. Impressive.
> 
> The yoga thing will pass, and another expression of freedom worth dying for will trump educational common sense. Notice how his butt is covered?


There's a guy who walked around our town for years with just that kind of undershorts (G-string, whatever). Few if anyone objected. He was never arrested for it. People just realized that he was rather, um, eccentric.

If a woman did the same thing you can only imagine the hell that would have broken loose.

Now why is that?


----------



## Marduk

I can't see the picture.

But again, yes. I would defend her _right_ to do so even if I question or object as a parent about her willingness to do so.

Why do you not see these as two different things?


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> Just another self-absorbed parent with an ego that supercedes the interests of their child. You've got professional educators telling you to your face what they feel is in the best interests of all of our children, and you don't care. You'd rather play the hero in front of bunch of yes-women on the internet.
> 
> Hopefully, your husband has a more sensible approach.


#1 I'm a straight dude
#2 you have it backwards -- my ego doesn't supercede my children's interests, and it's not my ego at all. It's that my fear doesn't supercede my children's interests.
#3 I don't care? Hell, in our circle of friends I'm known as "superdad." Whatever dude. If you think what your daughter wears should be mandated by the government... there are several nations that would agree with you. Go find one.


----------



## Marduk

NobodySpecial said:


> What would you teach your daughter about what SHE needs? You seem to just like to call people names. What's your point?


It's fear.


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: Marduk's husband?????? :rofl: :rofl:


My wife is going to **** her pants when she finds out I have a husband.

I've always pined for this guy:









Maybe it's his yoga pants.


----------



## NobodySpecial

marduk said:


> It's fear.


People who think this way vote. I'm scared.


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> #3 I don't care? Hell, in our circle of friends I'm known as *"superdad."* .


Sorry dude, I call BS on this, and I have the T shirt/Key chain to prove :wink2:


----------



## Marduk

EllisRedding said:


> Sorry dude, I call BS on this, and I have the T shirt/Key chain to prove :wink2:


I have no doubt you're an awesome parent who cares about his kids. 
At the end of the day, the question in my mind is why anyone would want that parenting to be implemented via public policy rather than their parenting.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## john117

Marduk, as a fellow superDad and parent of two very fashionable young ladies... And mega liberal... 

Let's just say I side with the school. While I taught great fashion to my girls (and my wife as well) I realize there are parents who have no issue with their girls dressing like Miley Cyrus or the St. Pauli beer girl in high school. 

Does this impact my kids? No. But given what's happening in schools today I would say the school is concerned for their own (staff) rather than other students. Not too difficult to hurl accusations... 

Also the public schools are publicly funded but what I'm paying is not the full cost - so I am subsidized by others or like now I subsidize others. So it's their call to some extent. The schools don't want the 1% to spoil it for the 99%. And things have indeed been toned down since the days my kids were in high school.

When I was a graduate student and was teaching I did have to worry about the coeds . But thankfully they behaved. Younger TA's did try to hit on their students, profs hit on everyone, you name it. But high school is different.


----------



## Marduk

You make no sense john.

You want to put rules in place to protect the staff from the evils of teenage girls sexiness?

So adult teachers now aren't accountable for their own behaviour? Teenage girls are?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding

marduk said:


> I have no doubt you're an awesome parent who cares about his kids.
> At the end of the day, the question in my mind is why anyone would want that parenting to be implemented via public policy rather than their parenting.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


If my kids didn't get me the shirt and keychain I would think I was a horrible dad, but alas :grin2:

I do agree with John117. Also, whether or not I am a great parent doesn't mean that the other kids in the school are getting the same from their parents.

Now keep in mind, I am not singling out gender here, nor am I saying kids should be covered from head to toe. I do believe their should be some general guidelines in terms of a dress code, finding a balance between over doing it and coming in nude (similar to what we discussed yesterday about finding balance in laws, i.e. speeding)

I also do trust the people I have spoken to who have years/decades in the school system (as teachers, principals, administrators) who feel that having no dress code whatsoever would be counterproductive to the learning environment.


----------



## Marduk

I think that's a fair argument Ellis even as I disagree with it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> I also do trust the people I have spoken to who have years/decades in the school system (as teachers, principals, administrators) who feel that having no dress code whatsoever *would be* counterproductive to the learning environment.



I guess the one thing I would still like to understand is why? No one seems to want to answer that. I think it is perfectly necessary and right to support the school in their endeavor to teach our kids. But when these kinds of statements are sent forth on nothing but authority, I can't help wondering the reasoning behind them.


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> I guess the one thing I would still like to understand is why? No one seems to want to answer that. I think it is perfectly necessary and right to support the school in their endeavor to teach our kids. But when these kinds of statements are sent forth on nothing but authority, I can't help wondering the reasoning behind them.


Well, in my example yesterday with hats it did cause issues (theft and fighting). Some people I spoke with felt that not everyone was mature enough to handle if a girl came in with her ass cheeks hanging out or a guy walked around with speedos letting everyone know how happy he was. Additionally these are distractions that teachers might have to deal with in the classroom, taking their attention away from what they should be doing.

Kids will get plenty of opportunities to wear as much or as little as they want outside of school, or when they are done school.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> Well, in my example yesterday with hats it did cause issues (theft and fighting).


Yah that was a measurable affect. But what is the affect of clothing?



> Some people I spoke with felt that not everyone was mature enough to handle if a girl came in with her ass cheeks hanging out or a guy walked around with speedos letting everyone know how happy he was.


Ah. There it is.


----------



## john117

marduk said:


> You make no sense john.
> 
> 
> 
> You want to put rules in place to protect the staff from the evils of teenage girls sexiness?
> 
> 
> 
> So adult teachers now aren't accountable for their own behaviour? Teenage girls are?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



I'm talking appearance - not behavior. You better believe schools are paranoid. 

When my kids were in HS a very popular and very capable science teacher got into trouble for touching a girl. Did it matter he was also an excellent coach of some activity that requires physical interaction.... So he was the target of an accusation... Poof. Is he do anything improper? I don't think so. But given our crazy society one never knows.

Eta: he was a "posture coach" in our marching band..


----------



## Marduk

john117 said:


> I'm talking appearance - not behavior. You better believe schools are paranoid.
> 
> When my kids were in HS a very popular and very capable science teacher got into trouble for touching a girl. Did it matter he was also an excellent coach of some activity that requires physical interaction.... So he was the target of an accusation... Poof. Is he do anything improper? I don't think so. But given our crazy society one never knows.
> 
> Eta: he was a "posture coach" in our marching band..


That is targeting female sexuality to blame for ****ty male behaviour and I strongly disagree with it. 

False accusations are a separate issue. That has nothing to do with what girls wear. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> Ah. There it is.


Yes, that has been stated before, not sure why it is a revelation all of a sudden  Just b/c you teach your children how to act a certain way doesn't mean everyone else gets the same teachings. It is about what is best for all the kids in the school, which is where you have to put some trust in the administrators that they take this into consideration.


----------



## john117

I agree - the school is - pun intended - covering their own ass. But the end result is they have to set rules in order to do so.

Do I agree? Kind of. Some parents really don't have a clue. It's like capped broadband. A few people spoil it for the rest.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> Yes, that has been stated before, not sure why it is a revelation all of a sudden


Because several posters on this board said precisely the opposite. You referred to a teacher but did not give the teacher's reason why. I think that teacher is making a mistake. 




> Just b/c you teach your children how to act a certain way doesn't mean everyone else gets the same teachings. It is about what is best for all the kids in the school,


That's the rub, isn't it? Which kids? 



> which is where you have to put some trust in the administrators that they take this into consideration.


Why would I need to do that? There are 2 reasons that I think that that is a bad idea. 1. The number one complaint teachers and administrators have after resources is the lack of parental involvement. Seems to me that they want and need my opinion. 2. They don't serve MY kid. They don't even always serve right or best social development. They serve expedience to academic rubrics. 

Anyway. You've differentiated your PoV from some others. I get it. Can't say I agree but thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Forest

EleGirl said:


> There's a guy who walked around our town for years with just that kind of undershorts (G-string, whatever). Few if anyone objected. He was never arrested for it. People just realized that he was rather, um, eccentric.
> 
> If a woman did the same thing you can only imagine the hell that would have broken loose.
> 
> Now why is that?


So you'd call this appropriate attire for school, and if any females had a problem dealing with it, support Wanda's theorem that THEY are the ones who are behaving outside the norm?

OK. Since the word norm now confuses or offends some. I'll just ask if you think a female being distracted by this outfit is some kind of deviant that need treatment? Or could it be that the outfit itself is simply not appropriate for school? Since that's what boys that react to some attire girls wear seem to need. That is, according to most of these yoga-pant-rights cabal.


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> Because several posters on this board said precisely the opposite. You referred to a teacher but did not give the teacher's reason why. I think that teacher is making a mistake.
> 
> 
> 
> That's the rub, isn't it? Which kids?
> 
> 
> 
> Why would I need to do that? There are 2 reasons that I think that that is a bad idea. 1. The number one complaint teachers and administrators have after resources is the lack of parental involvement. Seems to me that they want and need my opinion. 2. They don't serve MY kid. They don't even always serve right or best social development. They serve expedience to academic rubrics.
> 
> Anyway. You've differentiated your PoV from some others. I get it. Can't say I agree but thanks for clarifying.


No problem NS, I don't expect us all to agree or see things from the same POV. Your experience (which listed in your 2 reasons) differs from mine, so naturally we will draw different conclusions.


----------



## NobodySpecial

john117 said:


> I agree - the school is - pun intended - covering their own ass.


That, at least, was funny!


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> No problem NS, I don't expect us all to agree or see things from the same POV. Your experience (which listed in your 2 reasons) differs from mine, so naturally we will draw different conclusions.


Well, we can't all agree all the time. As long as you recognize that you are wrong. 

JUST KIDDING.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> So you'd call this appropriate attire for school, and if any females had a problem dealing with it, support Wanda's theorem that THEY are the ones who are behaving outside the *norm*?


What is the importance of the norm?


----------



## Forest

NobodySpecial said:


> What would you teach your daughter about what SHE needs? You seem to just like to call people names. What's your point?


The point of the post was that I asked someone else a specific question, not you.


----------



## Forest

NobodySpecial said:


> What is the importance of the norm?


Again, I asked someone else this question, not you. Please let them respond.


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> Well, we can't all agree all the time. As long as you recognize that you are wrong.
> 
> JUST KIDDING.













:grin2:


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> Again, I asked someone else this question, not you. Please let them respond.


So you only converse with people to whom you have asked a direct question. Got it. Methinks you probably lack an answer. But there it is.


----------



## Forest

NobodySpecial said:


> So you only converse with people to whom you have asked a direct question. Got it. Methinks you probably lack an answer. But there it is.


 I had asked questions to a certain person, then you reply with these quips that are completely unrelated, and basically nonsense. ("What is the importance of the norm?") Its simply rude.

I'll answer any question you'd like if you can clearly deliver it, and it has any bearing to the discussion.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> So you'd call this appropriate attire for school, and if any females had a problem dealing with it, support Wanda's theorem that THEY are the ones who are behaving outside the norm?
> 
> OK. Since the word norm now confuses or offends some. I'll just ask if you think a female being distracted by this outfit is some kind of deviant that need treatment? Or could it be that the outfit itself is simply not appropriate for school? Since that's what boys that react to some attire girls wear seem to need. That is, according to most of these yoga-pant-rights cabal.


You're mixing two things. 

Would I personally consider it appropriate? No. 

Would I consider it illegal? No. 

Do you see the difference?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> You're mixing two things.
> 
> Would I personally consider it appropriate? No.
> 
> Would I consider it illegal? No.
> 
> Do you see the difference?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Of course I do. Its my exact position on girls yoga pants at school.

Why do you feel this is (pictured, Ian Anderson) is inappropriate, but the yoga pants on a girl appropriate? Why the double standard? 

This is the whole point; what we're waiting to hear.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> I had asked questions to a certain person, then you reply with these quips that are completely unrelated, and basically nonsense. ("What is the importance of the norm?") Its simply rude.
> 
> I'll answer any question you'd like if you can clearly deliver it, and it has any bearing to the discussion.


I guess I don't get my answer. Not sure why continuing a discussion on a public forum is rude.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> Of course I do. Its my exact position on girls yoga pants at school.
> 
> Why do you feel this is (pictured, Ian Anderson) is inappropriate, but the yoga pants on a girl appropriate? Why the double standard?
> 
> This is the whole point; what we're waiting to hear.


I didn't say that what he was wearing was inappropriate. Sorry, I thought you asked if a girl wearing a g-string and no pants to school was appropriate.

My work is blocking most of the pictures.

I would find a boy OR a girl wearing a g-string and nothing else to school inappropriate. 

But I would struggle to find it illegal.


----------



## Marduk

NobodySpecial said:


> I guess I don't get my answer. Not sure why continuing a discussion on a public forum is rude.


It's rude because the position is unskilfully articulated and based on flawed reason, and he really wants to be right.

As opposed to Ellis' last argument where I can at least see his point even as I disagree.


----------



## Marduk

Let me turn the tables on you @Forest.

If you were king of the universe, what rules would you put in place for appropriate school attire? Or in general?


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> I didn't say that what he was wearing was inappropriate. Sorry, I thought you asked if a girl wearing a g-string and no pants to school was appropriate.
> 
> My work is blocking most of the pictures.
> 
> I would find a boy OR a girl wearing a g-string and nothing else to school inappropriate.
> 
> But I would struggle to find it illegal.


He is wearing leggings and a codpiece. Leggings is a term that goes with yoga pants, right? So is it now appropriate?


----------



## Forest

NobodySpecial said:


> I guess I don't get my answer. Not sure why continuing a discussion on a public forum is rude.


You never asked any question in any coherent way.

If you're talking about that "norm" thing, its pretty vague inaccurate question.

What is the importance of the norm?

The norm is determined by each person, who assigns whatever importance to it they desire. I was addressing EleGirl, not you, so my question was for her to interpret. I sought to learn whether she felt the attire in question was within or without "the norm" as she observes it.

If you want answers, simply ask them in a consistent manner.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> Let me turn the tables on you @Forest.
> 
> If you were king of the universe, what rules would you put in place for appropriate school attire? Or in general?


I would consult the faculty, seek their input and ask why they felt this way. If there was a clear consensus, and the suggestions seemed to have merit, I'd implement.

As I've said, this yoga pants thing is such an easy call. Any person with some common sense, wisdom, and experience in public interaction among kids should see it.

What would you do, wring yours hands, and let everyone wear anything they wanted?


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> It's rude because the position is unskilfully articulated and based on flawed reason, and he really wants to be right.
> 
> As opposed to Ellis' last argument where I can at least see his point even as I disagree.


You know as well as I she never asked a direct question.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> He is wearing leggings and a codpiece. Leggings is a term that goes with yoga pants, right? So is it now appropriate?


for a boy to wear leggings and a codpiece?

I once was asked by my coach and the drama teacher to help out with a play that called for a couple beefy guys to lift and throw some girls around.

My attire for the play -- as seen by the entire school -- was black tights and a codpiece. And nothing else.

And was it appropriate? Sure, why not?


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> You know as well as I she never asked a direct question.


My problem with your arguement is that it is based on emotion, not reason.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> for a boy to wear leggings and a codpiece?
> 
> I once was asked by my coach and the drama teacher to help out with a play that called for a couple beefy guys to lift and throw some girls around.
> 
> My attire for the play -- as seen by the entire school -- was black tights and a codpiece. And nothing else.
> 
> And was it appropriate? Sure, why not?


So you are OK with wearing the boys wearing leggings/codpiece to school? 

Yes or no?


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> I would consult the faculty, seek their input and ask why they felt this way. If there was a clear consensus, and the suggestions seemed to have merit, I'd implement.
> 
> As I've said, this yoga pants thing is such an easy call. Any person with some common sense, wisdom, and experience in public interaction among kids should see it.
> 
> What would you do, wring yours hands, and let everyone wear anything they wanted?


If it's such common sense you should be able to articulate it clearly.

Without hand-waiving.

Give me a simple list of rules for what boys and girls are allowed to wear to school in Forest world. That are clear and fair and reasonable for everyone to follow.

And will keep the girls safe from the boys eyes, and will keep the boys eyes safe from the girls.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> So you are OK with wearing the boys wearing leggings/codpiece to school?
> 
> Yes or no?


I guess in your mind 'sure' doesn't mean 'yes' even though its a synonym.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> I guess in your mind 'sure' doesn't mean 'yes' even though its a synonym.


You were talking about a stage costume, and did not commit that you'd think it appropriate for everyday school wear. 

So you think boys should be allowed to wearing leggings and a codpiece to school. Really brilliant, Marduk. All I can say is that you've sacrificed anything bordering on reason and intelligence for some lame cause. 

Wow. Viva La Codpiece! Fight the tyrants! How about you put up a codpiece avatar to show how enlightened you are?


----------



## Marduk

Ok so answer the question @Forest. 

What rules would you have in place in your magical kingdom filled with unicorns and rainbows and shiny happy teenagers abstaining from naughty thoughts at school?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> You were talking about a stage costume, and did not commit that you'd think it appropriate for everyday school wear.
> 
> So you think boys should be allowed to wearing leggings and a codpiece to school. Really brilliant, Marduk. All I can say is that you've sacrificed anything bordering on reason and intelligence for some lame cause.
> 
> Wow. Viva La Codpiece! Fight the tyrants! How about you put up a codpiece avatar to show how enlightened you are?











_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> Ok so answer the question @Forest.
> 
> What rules would you have in place in your magical kingdom filled with unicorns and rainbows and shiny happy teenagers abstaining from naughty thoughts at school?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


We're talking about yoga pants and school girls. 

Save your shiny unicorn schtick. Nobody is interested.

You've made you position clear, albeit extremely goofy and nearsighted. Your great codpiece choir will be 'round to exalt you.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> You know as well as I she never asked a direct question.


Oh I must have been unclear. You asked Ellie who was adhering to the norm. I had not seen Ellie mention norms. So I was asking you why you thought norms were important to the discussion.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> We're talking about yoga pants and school girls.
> 
> Save your shiny unicorn schtick. Nobody is interested.
> 
> You've made you position clear, albeit extremely goofy and nearsighted. Your great codpiece choir will be 'round to exalt you.


You said the rules were easy and common sense. 

So what are they?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> We're talking about yoga pants and school girls.
> 
> Save your shiny unicorn schtick. Nobody is interested.
> 
> You've made you position clear, albeit extremely goofy and nearsighted. Your great codpiece choir will be 'round to exalt you.


For something that is supposed to be clear and obvious, you are certainly going to great effort to avoid clearly laying it out.


----------



## Forest

NobodySpecial said:


> For something that is supposed to be clear and obvious, you are certainly going to great effort to avoid clearly laying it out.


Oh brother. We're discussing specifics here. The silly yoga-type pants/leggings. Yes, I think it is obvious schoolgirls shouldn't wear them. 

Don't try and overbroaden this to detract from a bad position.


----------



## NobodySpecial

Forest said:


> Oh brother. We're discussing specifics here. The silly yoga-type pants/leggings. Yes, I think it is obvious schoolgirls shouldn't wear them.
> 
> Don't try and overbroaden this to detract from a bad position.


Woooosh! Plonk.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> Oh brother. We're discussing specifics here. The silly yoga-type pants/leggings. Yes, I think it is obvious schoolgirls shouldn't wear them.
> 
> Don't try and overbroaden this to detract from a bad position.


what about skirts?

What about tights under dresses?

What about in gym class?

Can boys wear yoga pants?

What about spandex? Really tight pants? Those "jegging" things that are apparently a thing?

My point is this. Put a rule out there, and it will be worked around. Censorship has a problem -- it's that people don't want to follow rules they perceive as stupid. So they route around it.

Check this out:
Freakonomics » Study Shows School Uniforms Improve Attendance, But Not Grades

and if you look at the problem more abstractly, check these out:
Freakonomics » unintended consequences

My problem is not that I think you have your heart in the wrong place or that I think it's wrong for you to try to protect your kids. It's not that I think you're a bad person or wrong for feeling the way you do.

It's that if you take a cold hard look at it, this problem sits in a domain that isn't solvable by the rule of law. It's a social problem. And when you try to solve social problems with the rule of law, you get all kinds of funky consequences to that.

Like these:
http://globalnews.ca/news/2022870/school-dress-codes-are-they-discriminatory-or-necessary/

And at the end of the day kids are still going to find ways to dress sexy and ogle each other. Because that's actually part of what growing up is.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> Let me turn the tables on you @Forest.
> 
> If you were king of the universe, what rules would you put in place for appropriate school attire? Or in general?


Since I gave you my response to this, how about your obliging on this question:

Since you bravely gave your approval to this look for school children:




How do you think it would go over with your community, neighbors, family etc when you'd proudly tell them yougave the go-ahead for kids to wear this to school?

Think you'd get lots of support? 

Think you'd smell some tar a-brewin'?

Well, Viva la Codpiece! I've got football to watch.


----------



## EleGirl

Forest said:


> So you'd call this appropriate attire for school, and if any females had a problem dealing with it, support Wanda's theorem that THEY are the ones who are behaving outside the norm?


I find it funny that you think that photo proves anything. The guy is wearing tights. He is not showing any skin on his legs. There is no “indecent exposure.” His outfit is comical. It’s not indecent.


Forest said:


> OK. Since the word norm now confuses or offends some. I'll just ask if you think a female being distracted by this outfit is some kind of deviant that need treatment? Or could it be that the outfit itself is simply not appropriate for school? Since that's what boys that react to some attire girls wear seem to need. That is, according to most of these yoga-pant-rights cabal.


Where did I say that it was appropriate attire for school? 

I don’t think anyone here is suggesting that a girl should be able to go so school wearing just a g-string. 

We are not talking about boys reacting to girls in g-strings. We are talking about pants.

Do you really believe that boys cannot be taught to focus on their studies when a female is around? Exactly how much must a female cover up to protect the boys?


----------



## Forest

EleGirl said:


> I find it funny that you think that photo proves anything. The guy is wearing tights. He is not showing any skin on his legs. There is no “indecent exposure.” His outfit is comical. It’s not indecent.
> 
> 
> Where did I say that it was appropriate attire for school?
> 
> I don’t think anyone here is suggesting that a girl should be able to go so school wearing just a g-string.
> 
> We are not talking about boys reacting to girls in g-strings. We are talking about pants.
> 
> Do you really believe that boys cannot be taught to focus on their studies when a female is around? Exactly how much must a female cover up to protect the boys?


First things first.

I was asking you: Do you believe this is appropriate attire for a person to wear to school?


----------



## EleGirl

Forest said:


> Oh brother. We're discussing specifics here. The silly yoga-type pants/leggings. Yes, I think it is obvious schoolgirls shouldn't wear them.
> 
> Don't try and overbroaden this to detract from a bad position.


Do you realize that there are many different styles of 'yoga pants'?

There are ones that are so more like tights and are light weight material, such that what's under them can be seen.

There are one from thicker material that are like peddle pushers. 

There ones, again of thicker material that are straight legged and reveal nothing. Some look could easily be warn 

Then there are the ones that are bell bottomed and look dressy enough to wear to work.

There are some that are made well enough, out of good fabric and that can be warn with a dressy jacket, heals, etc.


----------



## Forest

EleGirl said:


> Do you realize that there are many different styles of 'yoga pants'?
> 
> There are ones that are so more like tights and are light weight material, such that what's under them can be seen.
> 
> There are one from thicker material that are like peddle pushers.
> 
> There ones, again of thicker material that are straight legged and reveal nothing. Some look could easily be warn
> 
> Then there are the ones that are bell bottomed and look dressy enough to wear to work.
> 
> There are some that are made well enough, out of good fabric and that can be warn with a dressy jacket, heals, etc.


First things first.

I was asking you: Do you believe this is appropriate attire for a person to wear to school?


----------



## EleGirl

Forest said:


> First things first.
> 
> I was asking you: Do you believe this is appropriate attire for a person to wear to school?


I think that it does not fit the current fashion.

In the 1500's, most of the men would have been dressed like that. Their leggings would have been made with wool though.

Aside from it not fitting the current fashion, I have no problem with a guy being dressed like that. He's covered form head to toe.

If a guy showed up at school like that he'd be laughed at. the attention he got would be because it's funny in today's 'standards'.

If the girls whistled at him, it would not be because they thought he was sexy. It's be because they thought he was funny.

I would expect both the boys and girls to able to get a good laugh (which is what he seems to be going for) and then to be able to settle down and concentrate on their work.

What would not happen is he would not be shamed because his body is dirty, or because he makes the girls think about sex, or because the gay guys suddenly were too turned on by him to think.

He would not be called a slvt, a [email protected], and so forth.

Look, I get that schools set dress codes because they do not want to have to spend their time evaluating each person's outfits to see if they are inappropriate. I loved it when my kids wore uniforms all the up to the end of 8th grade. It saved me tons of money and there was no argument about what they wore to school. I would have even be ok with uniforms in high school. But their high school did not have uniforms.


----------



## EleGirl

Forest,

Why exactly do you object to girls wearing yoga pants to school?


----------



## Forest

EleGirl said:


> I think that it does not fit the current fashion.
> 
> In the 1500's, most of the men would have been dressed like that. Their leggings would have been made with wool though.
> 
> Aside from it not fitting the current fashion, I have no problem with a guy being dressed like that. He's covered form head to toe.
> 
> If a guy showed up at school like that he'd be laughed at. the attention he got would be because it's funny in today's 'standards'.
> 
> If the girls whistled at him, it would not be because they thought he was sexy. It's be because they thought he was funny.
> 
> I would expect both the boys and girls to able to get a good laugh (which is what he seems to be going for) and then to be able to settle down and concentrate on their work.
> 
> What would not happen is he would not be shamed because his body is dirty, or because he makes the girls think about sex, or because the gay guys suddenly were too turned on by him to think.
> 
> He would not be called a slvt, a [email protected], and so forth.
> 
> Look, I get that schools set dress codes because they do not want to have to spend their time evaluating each person's outfits to see if they are inappropriate. I loved it when my kids wore uniforms all the up to the end of 8th grade. It saved me tons of money and there was no argument about what they wore to school. I would have even be ok with uniforms in high school. But their high school did not have uniforms.


Does this mean you'd support a person wearing the referenced outfit to school? You'd be comfortable with that?


----------



## Forest

EleGirl said:


> Forest,
> 
> Why exactly do you object to girls wearing yoga pants to school?


As I've stated several times, I find them to be not appropriate for school wear, and am surprised (dumbstruck, more accurately) any parent would. I would have never considered allowing my daughter to wear such an item. A father allowing his daughter to wear something like that to school is just dumb.

Fortunately, my daughter would have had enough wisdom and common sense to realize they were not a tasteful choice.

I agree (with your subsequent post) that school uniforms are the overwhelmingly best option. Clearly, parents and students no longer can be relied on to make an intelligent decision on what is appropriate attire for school. They are also better on the budget, and at creating an environment for students of that age to concentrate on school.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Kids DO wear stuff like that guy to school where I live. Little kids are allowed to wear Halloween costumes to school. Middle school and high school kids wear clothes that might as well be costumes, as in the pictured guy above. They also have green and blue hair, piercings, wear totally zany make up sometimes. Some guys wear jeggings and leggings. Other guys wear their jeans belted below their butts (I seriously don't understand the physics of this), though this is not allowed in school. We do have a dress code, here it is for the school closest to me (nothing about leggings or yoga pants):


Chains/Wallet Chains:
Chains may not be worn at school.

Coats and Jackets:
Coats and jackets shall remain in lockers during the school day. Students may use them when
they go outside at lunch recess.
Fleece vests, windbreakers and light fleece jackets may be worn during class with the teacher’s
permission.

Hats:
Hats and “hoodies” are not to be worn in the building at any time. Hats shall remain in lockers
during the school day. Students may use them when they go outside at lunch recess.
Students may not wear the hoods of hooded sweatshirts on their heads.

Holes:
Very “holey” clothing is not acceptable. NO holes are allowed in inappropriate areas regardless
of what is underneath.

Messages on clothing:
Clothing with messages promoting drug use, gang affiliation, tobacco, violence or alcohol is not
acceptable. This includes sexist or racist or homophobic messages. No “put down” clothing is acceptable.

Pants:
Pants worn by males or females should not expose undergarments. Pants may not hang below the
hips, even if covered by a long shirt. 
Pajama bottoms are not permitted at school.

Shirts:
Shirts must adequately cover undergarments and midriff. This means no bra straps should be
visible.
No spaghetti straps or bra straps should ever be visible.
Shirts may not be low cut in the front or back. This means visible cleavage and low backs are not
acceptable.

Skirts:
Skirts that are not too short or tight may be worn. Our guideline is the point on your leg that the
bottom of your index finger reaches when your arm is straight down by your side.
If a skirt has a slit, it may not be cut higher than the point on your leg that the bottom of your
index finger reaches when your arm is straight down by your side.

Shoes:
Bedroom slippers, slides, and flip flops are not permitted at school. Shoes with wheels are also
not appropriate at school.

Shorts:
Shorts (walking shorts) that are not too short may be worn. Our guideline is the point on your leg
that the bottom of your index finger reaches when your arm is straight down by your side.

Sunglasses:
Sunglasses may not be worn in the building at any time either on the face or on your head as an
accessory.


----------



## Pollo

Depth.Inside said:


> My wife is a flirt.
> 
> However, she does manage to flirt with every guy she meets. She runs her hand down their arm, smiles, etc.
> 
> Now on to the point and maybe I'm just an ass
> 
> Honest opinion, amid I just an off base ass?
> 
> _Posted via Mobile Device_
> _Posted via Mobile Device_
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


What the hell is wrong with you?? Why are you so scared about calling out your wife? Are you afraid that she's going to say you're "oppressing" her?

Tell her you're not putting up with her flirting with other guys and giving them a show. Don't compromise, tell her not to wear that crap outside and tell her she's not allowed to touch any other guys like that again. 

Be a man.


----------



## Forest

EleGirl said:


> Aside from it not fitting the current fashion, I have no problem with a guy being dressed like that.
> 
> *If the girls whistled at him, it would not be because they thought he was sexy*. It's be because they thought he was funny.
> 
> 
> What would not happen is *he would not be shamed* because his body is dirty, or because he makes the girls think about sex
> 
> He would not be called a slvt, a [email protected], and so forth.


So, basically, its all the exact opposite of what we'd assume if a girl wore this outfit?

Because he's male, he cannot be shamed? If he's whistled at, he's not being harassed, because he's male? His maleness provides carte blanche to females to behave toward him in whatever way they see fit? 

He would not be called a slvt or [email protected], because...only males are capable of calling females those things? Are females just incapable of the behavior we seem to expect, and blindly attribute to boys?

It seems that because he was born male, its impossible for him to be victimized. Then, on top of this he has to be assumed to be incapable of recognizing affirmative consent?

That's a pretty slick setup. A ready-made fall-guy/villain for the professional victims.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> Since I gave you my response to this, how about your obliging on this question:
> 
> Since you bravely gave your approval to this look for school children:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you think it would go over with your community, neighbors, family etc when you'd proudly tell them yougave the go-ahead for kids to wear this to school?
> 
> Think you'd get lots of support?
> 
> Think you'd smell some tar a-brewin'?
> 
> Well, Viva la Codpiece! I've got football to watch.


How can I say this any differently?

You keep harping on one thing, and the point is not that one thing at all.

What I deem appropriate is DIFFERENT than what can be ENFORCED by rules.

Do I think it's appropriate that people have affairs? No. Do I think it should be illegal? No. Why? Because that way there be dragons, that's why. Polyamory, threesomes, condoned affairs, people escaping ****ty relationships, arranged marriages, all kinds of things. You can't enforce morality with law.

Do I think it appropriate that girls wear those stupid little hats? No. Do I think it should be illegal to wear them in public places? No.

Do I think it's appropriate that people listen to country music? No. I personally find it offensive. Should it be illegal? Much as I'd like that, no.

Etc.

This is not an appropriateness issue. That is a personal decision, left to individuals. This is a civil rights issue. With a deep connection to shaming girls for getting bumps and curves that poor innocent boys just can't stop looking at.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> Does this mean you'd support a person wearing the referenced outfit to school? You'd be comfortable with that?


BINGO.

Rules are not put in place to make YOU feel comfortable.

I'm sure you'd like that. I'm sure you'd like everyone to comply with what makes you feel comfortable.

And I'm sure that the rest of the world wouldn't.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> As I've stated several times, I find them to be not appropriate for school wear, and am surprised (dumbstruck, more accurately) any parent would. I would have never considered allowing my daughter to wear such an item. A father allowing his daughter to wear something like that to school is just dumb.


And that would be your choice, and I would respect that choice.

I just wouldn't respect your willingness to enforce YOUR choice on MY daughter.

Do you see the difference?


> Fortunately, my daughter would have had enough wisdom and common sense to realize they were not a tasteful choice.


Cool by me.


> I agree (with your subsequent post) that school uniforms are the overwhelmingly best option. Clearly, parents and students no longer can be relied on to make an intelligent decision on what is appropriate attire for school. They are also better on the budget, and at creating an environment for students of that age to concentrate on school.


And this is clearly unsupported by any data. In fact, the opposite is true.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> How can I say this any differently?
> 
> You keep harping on one thing, and the point is not that one thing at all.
> 
> What I deem appropriate is DIFFERENT than what can be ENFORCED by rules.
> 
> Do I think it's appropriate that people have affairs? No. Do I think it should be illegal? No. Why? Because that way there be dragons, that's why. Polyamory, threesomes, condoned affairs, people escaping ****ty relationships, arranged marriages, all kinds of things. You can't enforce morality with law.
> 
> Do I think it appropriate that girls wear those stupid little hats? No. Do I think it should be illegal to wear them in public places? No.
> 
> Do I think it's appropriate that people listen to country music? No. I personally find it offensive. Should it be illegal? Much as I'd like that, no.
> 
> Etc.
> 
> This is not an appropriateness issue. That is a personal decision, left to individuals. This is a civil rights issue. With a deep connection to shaming girls for getting bumps and curves that poor innocent boys just can't stop looking at.




You're sure better at asking questions that answering them. I don't think anyone asked or is interested in affairs, little hats, country music or bumps and curves. 

Let me repeat: regarding your thumbs up for the codpiece outfit;

How do you think it would go over with your community, neighbors, family etc when you'd proudly tell them yougave the go-ahead for kids to wear this to school?

Think you'd get lots of support?

By the way, ever have a kid that attended a uniform school?


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> BINGO.
> 
> Rules are not put in place to make YOU feel comfortable.
> 
> I'm sure you'd like that. I'm sure you'd like everyone to comply with what makes you feel comfortable.
> 
> And I'm sure that the rest of the world wouldn't.


Do you also have an intolerance with one person asking another's opinion? No one speculated about rules and comfort. It was purely a seeking of Ele's opinion.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> You're sure better at asking questions that answering them. I don't think anyone asked or is interested in affairs, little hats, country music or bumps and curves.
> 
> Let me repeat: regarding your thumbs up for the codpiece outfit;
> 
> How do you think it would go over with your community, neighbors, family etc when you'd proudly tell them yougave the go-ahead for kids to wear this to school?
> 
> Think you'd get lots of support?
> 
> By the way, ever have a kid that attended a uniform school?


I could say the same of you, buddy. 

Would I say that I'd get support? No, I'd probably get laughter. 

Would I say that it should be against the rules? No. 

Is that clear enough?

Because you sure haven't answered any of my questions. Why is that?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> I could say the same of you, buddy.
> 
> Would I say that I'd get support? No, I'd probably get laughter.
> 
> Would I say that it should be against the rules? No.
> 
> Is that clear enough?
> 
> Because you sure haven't answered any of my questions. Why is that?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


*What question? Where?* All that stuff you typed was rhetorical questions posed to yourself. (?) Do you expect me to talk about country music and hats? You didn't ask that stuff to get an answer, just to dodge. 

The only other actual question I see that you asked was:
"Do you see the difference?" in regard to forcing your kid to wear something.

I don't care what you allow your kid to wear. I'm not forcing in on them. I'm saying that I believe school dress codes have enough of a logical basis that they should be adhered to.

So, its pretty plain. I'm not going to support kids wearing absolutely anything that they see the Kardashians flopping around in. Protecting that "right", (which of course is not a "right" at all) is a fool's errand.

We all talk so much of how hard a teacher's job is, how important it is to try and draw in high quality people. We expect them to teach, discipline, instill values, and provide stability to a lot of kids that don't get any of that in the home. We pledge all kinds of support and goodwill, until they try and tell us what kind of pants our kids wear. Then, suddenly they're maniacal despots trying to trample civil rights. All the benefits and opportunities of education take a back seat to petty concerns and inflated egos.


----------



## Marduk

So, again, @Forest, codify the rules for me. Because that's what law is - it's what is written down and equal for all. It's not what you mean for it to be, it's what the words say it is. 

I think you'll find them very hard to define fairly or reasonably, and even harder to enforce. 

Every rule can be followed to the letter and still subverted.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding

A quick question for those who are against any sort of dress code. Assuming your child goes to a school that does have a dress code, if you believe the dress code is unreasonable (which of course if you don't believe in dress codes you would), would you be ok with your child defying the dress code?

This goes back to an example earlier in this thread about a girl who got sent home for I guess wearing leggings, even though her arse was covered with a long sweater. I wasn't sure if the school in question actually had a code against this outfit, or someone decided on the fly.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> A quick question for those who are against any sort of dress code.


I can answer despite the fact that I am not against any kind of dress code.



> Assuming your child goes to a school that does have a dress code, if you believe the dress code is unreasonable (which of course if you don't believe in dress codes you would), would you be ok with your child defying the dress code?


What does "be ok" mean? As with anything, I would make sure she was aware of the consequences. One of the things I don't like about the way our dress code is written is that it is incumbent on the dresser to not make others "uncomfortable". "Uncomfortable" is SOOOO subjective. To read here, my work out clothes would make some people "uncomfortable". So if she were being called on the carpet for someone else' discomfort, but she had real practical reasons to support the attire, I would support her. I would not fight the fight FOR her, but I would support her. For example, strictly speaking, displaying shoulders is against the dress code. It has been 90 degrees here recently. And there is nothing immodest about shoulders. If anyone were to enforce that policy, I would totally have her back if she wanted to fight it.



> This goes back to an example earlier in this thread about a girl who got sent home for I guess wearing leggings, even though her arse was covered with a long sweater. I wasn't sure if the school in question actually had a code against this outfit, or someone decided on the fly.


There would be a pretty big difference in my opinion if this was a school stated policy or some random teacher operating independently. In the former case, daughter suffers the consequences of failing to follow the rules. In the latter, Mom has a discussion with the teacher.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> So, again, @Forest, codify the rules for me. Because that's what law is - it's what is written down and equal for all. It's not what you mean for it to be, it's what the words say it is.
> 
> I think you'll find them very hard to define fairly or reasonably, and even harder to enforce.
> 
> Every rule can be followed to the letter and still subverted.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I have no idea what you're talking about. Codify what rules?

What law have we discussed? What is that gobble-de-**** about the law and it means to be, the words it is...? 

If you are talking about dress codes, refer to the dress code that is in place at your child's school, and follow it. I have no ability to influence that, and no reason to waste time drafting a model dress code for you.

If you don't like it, you have basic recourse to change the situation. You likely have elected representatives. You can speak to the school board. If you don't like the way it is you can change school systems. Or you could run for school board. You could run on the Codpiece Platform.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> I have no idea what you're talking about. Codify what rules?
> 
> What law have we discussed? What is that gobble-de-**** about the law and it means to be, the words it is...?
> 
> If you are talking about dress codes, refer to the dress code that is in place at your child's school, and follow it. I have no ability to influence that, and no reason to waste time drafting a model dress code for you.
> 
> If you don't like it, you have basic recourse to change the situation. You likely have elected representatives. You can speak to the school board. If you don't like the way it is you can change school systems. Or you could run for school board. You could run on the Codpiece Platform.


Again with the dancing and no answer. 

What rules would you put in place for a dress code?

Write them down.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EllisRedding

NobodySpecial said:


> I can answer despite the fact that I am not against any kind of dress code.
> 
> 
> What does "be ok" mean? As with anything, I would make sure she was aware of the consequences. One of the things I don't like about the way our dress code is written is that it is incumbent on the dresser to not make others "uncomfortable". "Uncomfortable" is SOOOO subjective. To read here, my work out clothes would make some people "uncomfortable". So if she were being called on the carpet for someone else' discomfort, but she had real practical reasons to support the attire, I would support her. I would not fight the fight FOR her, but I would support her. For example, strictly speaking, displaying shoulders is against the dress code. It has been 90 degrees here recently. And there is nothing immodest about shoulders. If anyone were to enforce that policy, I would totally have her back if she wanted to fight it.
> 
> 
> 
> *There would be a pretty big difference in my opinion if this was a school stated policy or some random teacher operating independently. In the former case, daughter suffers the consequences of failing to follow the rules. In the latter, Mom has a discussion with the teacher.*


As for the bolded, this is what I was trying to get at. That example was brought up as if the school had completely overreacted, but without understanding the other side (i.e. the school) it is hard to make a determination of what is/isn't correct.

In terms of being "ok" with, I agree that at a minimum you should make them aware of the consequences if they fail to comply with the rules. However, going with your "heat" example, where do you draw the line? If every kid decided to go with their own interpretation of what would help them stay cool regardless of the dress code, how can one person say their way is right and others is wrong. In the case of the school, how can they say "Well, even though shoulders in a no no we will make an exception for you" unless the make the exception for everyone regardless of how egregious their violation was?


----------



## Idyit

Interesting discussion. Why do they call it a cod piece? I've never heard of that general region referred to as a cod.

~ Passio


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> Again with the dancing and no answer.
> 
> What rules would you put in place for a dress code?
> 
> Write them down.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I think your codpiece is too tight. No reason to be petulant with others because you can't express yourself. If you asked a coherent question, you'd get better answers.

You know very I've never expressed a desire to draft any rules or dress code. That is for your representative school board. I simply advocate adhering to them.

"Write it down." You're getting pretty pushy. Going to stomp your feet? You don't get everything you want. Its symptomatic of your whole profile. You want to everything your way, and don't want any rules applied to you.

Just for whimsy, how's this. If student wears something the staff deems inappropriate attire:
First offense: 1 week detention
Second offense: Dad wears codpiece to school


----------



## Forest

Idyit said:


> Interesting discussion. Why do they call it a cod piece? I've never heard of that general region referred to as a cod.
> 
> ~ Passio


Awright. I wiki'ed. Apparently cod is old english slang for scrotum.


----------



## Idyit

Forest said:


> Awright. I wiki'ed. Apparently cod is old english slang for scrotum.


Hahaha.... I've learned something today.

~ Passio


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> I think your codpiece is too tight. No reason to be petulant with others because you can't express yourself. If you asked a coherent question, you'd get better answers.
> 
> You know very I've never expressed a desire to draft any rules or dress code. That is for your representative school board. I simply advocate adhering to them.
> 
> "Write it down." You're getting pretty pushy. Going to stomp your feet? You don't get everything you want. Its symptomatic of your whole profile. You want to everything your way, and don't want any rules applied to you.
> 
> Just for whimsy, how's this. If student wears something the staff deems inappropriate attire:
> First offense: 1 week detention
> Second offense: Dad wears codpiece to school


So any of the staff can deem anything inappropriate? Just randomly?










And a question can't get any more coherent than asking you to write it down, which you won't. Perhaps you should look up what the word means.

This is what happens when you argue from emotion instead of reason.


----------



## NobodySpecial

EllisRedding said:


> As for the bolded, this is what I was trying to get at. That example was brought up as if the school had completely overreacted, but without understanding the other side (i.e. the school) it is hard to make a determination of what is/isn't correct.
> 
> In terms of being "ok" with, I agree that at a minimum you should make them aware of the consequences if they fail to comply with the rules. However, going with your "heat" example, where do you draw the line? If every kid decided to go with their own interpretation of what would help them stay cool regardless of the dress code, how can one person say their way is right and others is wrong. In the case of the school, how can they say "Well, even though shoulders in a no no we will make an exception for you" unless the make the exception for everyone regardless of how egregious their violation was?


I am not suggesting a singular exception but to work within the system to change the rule.


----------



## Forest

marduk said:


> So any of the staff can deem anything inappropriate? Just randomly?
> 
> And a question can't get any more coherent than asking you to write it down, which you won't. Perhaps you should look up what the word means.
> 
> This is what happens when you argue from emotion instead of reason.


This is funny. I made the comment about the dress code, and included "Just for whimsy" at the outset to show it was a farce. You then took the comment seriously and get all worked up. You close with that "argue from emotion instead of reason" bit you keep repeating.
See the parallels about emotion and reason?

You've asked, and I've replied to the dress code thing several times, why can't you realize that? Why don't you ask me to re-write some of Homer's works, or draft plans for a new dam? That, like dress codes, is another thing I never pretended to have authority over, and have no reason to write down to make you feel important.

Hey, lets let our professionals and elected representatives set a policy, then follow it.


----------



## Forest

"This is what happens when you argue from emotion instead of reason."

I can't believe I'm getting lectured on reason from a person that thinks codpieces are OK for school wear.


----------



## Marduk

Forest said:


> "This is what happens when you argue from emotion instead of reason."
> 
> I can't believe I'm getting lectured on reason from a person that thinks codpieces are OK for school wear.


Tell me why they're not. 

Back it up with facts.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Forest

Forest said:


> "This is what happens when you argue from emotion instead of reason."
> 
> I can't believe I'm getting lectured on reason from a person that thinks codpieces are OK for school wear.





marduk said:


> Tell me why they're not.
> 
> Back it up with facts.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Now you want facts to support why kids should not wear codpieces to school? 

:slap: (because I couldn't find an emoticon for either Hari Kari or upchucking in a bucket.)

Can we agree this has gone on too long, is now borderline irrational, and no one else wants to listen?


----------



## Forest

Idyit said:


> Hahaha.... I've learned something today.
> 
> ~ Passio


And despite being an Idyit! 

You're probably the only one so fortunate.

Now that you know what codpiece means, what does Passio mean?


----------



## Idyit

It's the Latin word for passion. It's root meaning was to suffer or sacrifice. Some uses were general but often it referred to doing so for what or who you love. I like the word, it helps ground me that "it's not all about me". Our 'passions' will always replace something else, thus sacrifice.

Easy to see in early romance or several sections on this website. 

~ Passio


----------



## Forest

Idyit said:


> It's the Latin word for passion. It's root meaning was to suffer or sacrifice. Some uses were general but often it referred to doing so for what or who you love. I like the word, it helps ground me that "it's not all about me". Our 'passions' will always replace something else, thus sacrifice.
> 
> Easy to see in early romance or several sections on this website.
> 
> ~ Passio


Are you willing to entertain the notion you were divinely directed here?


----------



## Marduk




----------



## EleGirl

EllisRedding said:


> As for the bolded, this is what I was trying to get at. That example was brought up as if the school had completely overreacted, but without understanding the other side (i.e. the school) it is hard to make a determination of what is/isn't correct.
> 
> In terms of being "ok" with, I agree that at a minimum you should make them aware of the consequences if they fail to comply with the rules. However, going with your "heat" example, where do you draw the line? If every kid decided to go with their own interpretation of what would help them stay cool regardless of the dress code, how can one person say their way is right and others is wrong. In the case of the school, how can they say "Well, even though shoulders in a no no we will make an exception for you" unless the make the exception for everyone regardless of how egregious their violation was?


That shoulder example reminds me of the dress code when I was in high school here in New Mexico.

Girls had to wear dresses and skirts. No pants of any kind were allowed.

We had a blizzard (we had lots of them). I called the school to ask if I could wear pants because of the blizzard and the 1.5 miles I had to walk to school. I was told yes as were all the girls who called in. When we, and a lot of other girls got to school we were told by the principle that pants were not allowed.. to go home to change into dresses/skirts.

So they wanted us to talk back home in a blizzard. And then walk back in that same blizzard with bear legs. WTH....

We all refused. The principle did nothing when we refused.

Just because the school has a policy, does not mean that it makes sense.


----------



## Daniel2514

Bro, according to your story, I think it is normal to be pissed off. Don't assume yourself an ass.


----------



## Normalguy062302

Dude...as long as she's not screwing anyone else...enjoy the view. Anytime my wife wears yoga pants or leggings, I love it. She's not the smallest thing in the world either...about a size 18. I love to see that tight material around her backside and her legs. She thinks they're comfortable and she likes what they do to me. Tell your wife that when she wears them you love watching her butt shake. Then rip them off and go to work. Remind her that you are the reason she wears them, not other guys and you'll probably get more lucky too.


----------



## Pollo

And I guess you're ok with her flirting with other guys and showing off her a$$ to them too?


----------

