Recommended Posts

What if the guys aren't wearing the skirts to be like a woman? We're digressing to some degree, but it makes sense in connection with the article.

If a male student decides to wear a skirt to school, what is wrong with it? Does he need to say why he is wearing the skirt? If he does need to say, do you find there to be a difference between the answer of "I'm wearing it for the airflow" and "I'm wearing it because it makes me feel good about myself"?

Why would you wear clothing designed for women if not for 1) attention 2) they want to be a woman?

I notice that you're still sticking with the idea that skirts are for girls, trousers are for boys. In fairness a similar mindset was popular in the Victorian times, but then one woman went against it and started wearing trousers. Now look where we are, trousers are worn by both genders!

Actually. Pants (trousers) were historically worn by both genders. It's only the west where it wasn't the norm for the longest time. It's not so much sticking to the idea that skirts are for girls and pants are for boys. It's more along the lines of skirts are designed for women and not for men.

Finally, how do you define "part of their culture"? I mean, do you imagine the first Scot to wear a kilt was mocked by his village? How long does something need to continue for before it becomes "part of the culture"? If I started wearing a skirt tomorrow, I may be mocked. But if the trend kicks off and 100 years from now all guys in Switzerland are wearing skirts, does that make it part of the culture, or does that just make us a bunch of weirdos?

Well read up on the history of the kilt. It actually served a purpose and was modified for another purpose. You will be a bunch of weirdos because you are wearing clothes designed for women.

Humans simply haven't evolved to the point that we find a persons gender irrelevant. In other species, appearance plays a large role in choosing a mate, something which evolved as it proved beneficial to finding the mate with the best genetics. Men evolved to be more muscular and athletic because men were responsible for hunting and defending, while women would care for the children.

But things have changed significantly. Today, we live in a society where the differences in gender are mostly no longer needed. It's okay for a woman to have a career or for men to care for the children. But the biology we inherited from our ancestors sticks with us to this day, and it continues to be a barrier to progress and equality.

As for the original article, are people really so cynical? Students at Oxford are no longer required to dress a certain way based on their gender. Who cares if this move was politically motivated, it's a positive change regardless. Be happy about it!

Sorry but some things just aren't appropriate for certain environments.

Ahh, you mean it's more appropriate to oppress people than to tell ignorant people to take their ignorance and shove it?

Ahh, you mean it's more appropriate to oppress people than to tell ignorant people to take their ignorance and shove it?

<snipped> Take this example. It's not appropriate for a girl going to school to be dressing like she's from a titty bar. Likewise, it's not appropriate for a salesman in a tech corporation to be meeting customers in drag.

Edited by Calum
Personal attacks are against our rules.

Like I said. It's YOUR opinion. IF you get offended by it, that's YOUR problem.

Like I said. You're wrong. You are the extreme minority. Just because you think you're a special butterfly that needs to express themselves wherever they want to, it's not appropriate.

Like I said. You're wrong. You are the extreme minority. Just because you think you're a special butterfly that needs to express themselves wherever they want to, it's not appropriate.

I don't need to express myself. I just don't give a **** if someone else wants to. It's none of my business. and it's also none of yours.

Xilo, I think the main problem with your opposition to this is that no one is being harmed by a man wearing a skirt, are they? A man wearing what is deemed by many to be "women's clothes" harms no one, yet stopping him from wearing those clothes negatively effects his life because he is banned from expressing himself (even though him expressing himself causes no harm to anyone). So why be against it? :)

  • Like 2

Xilo, I think the main problem with your opposition to this is that no one is being harmed by a man wearing a skirt, are they? A man wearing what is deemed by many to be "women's clothes" harms no one, yet stopping him from wearing those clothes negatively effects his life because he is banned from expressing himself (even though him expressing himself causes no harm to anyone). So why be against it? :)

The only people that ever get offended by it are narrow minded hypocrites. People seem to have some problem realising that society is there for everyone, not just them. Transgender people and cross dressers are largely accepted and ignored in the UK, sadly in a lot of other parts of the world (particularly those still dominated by religion) those people are still belittled and treated like crap. It's about time people grew up and joined the 21st century, being a bigot is no longer cool or cute.

  • Like 2

I love when people like Xilo says the Majority agrees with him..

The Majority doesn't care. Whenever you see a poll about what people think, the majority of people don't take it.. The simple fact is the majority of people don't care about a lot of things, one way or the other.. It doesn't affect their lives in any meaningful way, so why should they.. A guy wearing a skirt, or a women in a Tie has no effect on me.. It doesn't keep me from going on about my life just the same as I did before they were.

Anyone saying that their lives will be affected by this is just speaking bull****. It's the same BS that was said about Gays being open, Women voting, Minorities having rights, etc.. Small views by small minded individuals who have such a narrow mind they can't cope with anything that is beyond their small viewpoints.. But thankfully after a generation, they turn into a dying breed that people generally only reference for comedy value..

  • Like 2

The Majority doesn't care. Whenever you see a poll about what people think, the majority of people don't take it.. The simple fact is the majority of people don't care about a lot of things, one way or the other.. It doesn't affect their lives in any meaningful way, so why should they.. A guy wearing a skirt, or a women in a Tie has no effect on me.. It doesn't keep me from going on about my life just the same as I did before they were.

Nobody really cares what you do outside of whatever you do. I never said all environments. If you want to look like a retard outside of whatever, than by all means look like a retard.

I specifically said certain environments which is what the majority will agree with.

Likewise, it's not appropriate for a salesman in a tech corporation to be meeting customers in drag.

There is a huge difference between a man dressing as a woman, and a man dressing in drag.

  • Like 2
Why would you wear clothing designed for women if not for 1) attention 2) they want to be a woman?

You say that it's clothing designed for women. I say it's clothing. That's the main point you seem to be missing. You keep trying to orient an inanimate object towards a gender.

Actually. Pants (trousers) were historically worn by both genders. It's only the west where it wasn't the norm for the longest time. It's not so much sticking to the idea that skirts are for girls and pants are for boys. It's more along the lines of skirts are designed for women and not for men.

You're right, trousers (pants are the things I wear under my trousers) were worn by both genders. Trousers are not gender specific. Why do skirts need to be?

Well read up on the history of the kilt. It actually served a purpose and was modified for another purpose.

Since I don't want to get a PhD in kilts I went to wikipedia. Apparently the great kilt served the purpose of being a cloak as well as a kilt. All other kilts were just forms of clothing.

You will be a bunch of weirdos because you are wearing clothes designed for women.

Technically we'll be a bunch of weirdos because we're wearing clothing that you would normally see on a woman. If I went to a tailor, I wouldn't say, "make me a man's skirt." I would say, "make me a skirt." I'm pretty sure that the finished product would look very similar to a woman's skirt (perhaps slimmer around the waist, mind).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Which finger's fingernail are we talking about? I can see how not having this info can lead to massive differences in interpretation.
    • This Chinese company is reportedly developing a feature Apple and Samsung can only dream of by Hamid Ganji While companies like Apple and Samsung have been relatively conservative with their devices’ battery capacities in recent years, Chinese manufacturers have taken the competition to the next level by introducing significantly larger batteries. However, the latest report from China suggests that a local company may already be developing a smartphone with a whopping 14,000mAh battery. Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station claimed on Weibo that a smartphone maker is developing a device with a 14,000mAh battery. If true, it would be the largest battery ever used in a smartphone and could, in theory, provide up to a week of battery life on a single charge. The leaker did not reveal the name of the company behind the device, but there are some clues. This week, HONOR unveiled the X80 Pro Max in China with an 11,000mAh battery and 90W wired charging support. The company also launched the Honor Win in January, which packs a 10,000mAh battery. HONOR, a former subsidiary of Huawei, has a proven track record of developing smartphones with unusually large batteries. However, other Chinese brands, including Xiaomi, have also launched devices such as the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max with 7,500mAh batteries. Though Chinese users on Weibo also believe the company behind the new battery is HONOR. Interestingly, Digital Chat Station said the device with the 14,000mAh battery weighs around 220 grams, making it lighter than the Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max (233 grams) and slightly heavier than the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra (214 grams). The iPhone 17 Pro Max currently packs a 5,088mAh battery in eSIM-only versions, while the Galaxy S26 Ultra features a 5,000mAh battery. Neither device is expected to see a dramatic increase in battery capacity in its next-generation successor. So when it comes to battery comparison, Chinese brands are unbeaten. HONOR smartphones are currently available in the EU, but the Chinese brand has no official presence in the United States due to restrictions imposed by the U.S. government.
    • Qualcomm takes on NVIDIA with new Dragonfly CPU and AI chips by Pradeep Viswanathan Microsoft, Google, Amazon, AMD, Meta, Apple, OpenAI, and several others have been developing their own chips for AI infrastructure. However, NVIDIA still remains the dominant player in the market. Today, Qualcomm announced a major expansion of its data center infrastructure portfolio to better compete with NVIDIA. The new lineup includes the Qualcomm Dragonfly C1000 CPU, Qualcomm High Bandwidth Compute technology, the Dragonfly AI300 inference accelerator, new connectivity products, and custom silicon solutions. Qualcomm claims that this new lineup improves performance per watt, token throughput, and total cost of ownership for AI data centers. The Dragonfly C1000 is a new data center CPU built with Qualcomm’s custom Oryon cores. This chip will feature more than 250 cores, frequencies above 5GHz, and a chiplet-based design. Qualcomm claims that this new C1000 can deliver more than 2x better performance per watt compared to existing server CPU offerings based on specifications. The Dragonfly C1000 will support PCIe Gen 7 with more than 2TB/s of connectivity, along with CXL, advanced RAS features, and both air and liquid cooling. Qualcomm expects the Dragonfly C1000 to be commercially available in 2028. Additionally, Qualcomm and Meta announced a multi-year, multi-generation agreement under which Qualcomm will supply Dragonfly C1000 data center CPUs for Meta’s next-generation server fleet. Qualcomm also announced High Bandwidth Compute, a new near-memory computing architecture designed to address AI’s memory bandwidth bottleneck. HBC Gen 1 will debut with the Dragonfly AI250, which is expected to sample in mid-2027. The AI250 will deliver 133TB/s per card, an 18x increase in effective memory bandwidth compared to the AI200 with LPDDR5X. The new Dragonfly AI300 with HBC Gen 2 is a rack-level AI inference platform from Qualcomm. Qualcomm claims that the AI300 can deliver 4x to 8x better performance per watt compared to existing GPU-based architectures based on memory bandwidth per watt per card. The Dragonfly AI300 is expected to be available in 2028.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Meta Plast earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      461
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      171
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      136
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!