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

    • Stellarium 26.2 by Razvan Serea Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked eye, binoculars or a telescope. It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go. Stellarium key features: Realistic simulation of the sky, sunrise and sunset Default catalogue of over 600,000 stars Downloadable additional catalogues for up to 210 million stars Catalog data for all New General Catalogue (NGC) objects Images of almost all Messier objects and the Milky Way Artistic illustrations for all 88 modern constellations More than a dozen different cultures with their constellations Solar and lunar eclipse simulation Photorealistic landscapes (more are available on the website) Scripting support with ECMAScript (a few demo scripts are included) Extendable with plug-ins: 8 plug-ins installed by default, including: artificial satellites plug-in (updated from an on-line TLE database) ocular simulation plug-in (shows how objects look like in a given ocular) Solar System editor plug-in (imports comet and asteroid data from the MPC) telescope control plug-in (Meade LX200 and Celestron NexStar compatible) The major changes of this version: Added new sky culture Added new plugin: Planes Many improvements in plugins Many improvements in Core and GUI Many updates in sky cultures. [full release notes] Download: Stellarium 26.2 (64-bit) | 456.0 MB (Open Source) View: Stellarium Home Page | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NASA: This asteroid may not kill us but it probably won't be far off either by Sayan Sen Image by Zelch Csaba via Pexels New observations by NASA's James Webb Space Telescope have eliminated the last remaining impact threat posed by asteroid 2024 YR4, ruling out the possibility that the near-Earth object could strike the Moon in December 2032. NASA said observations collected by Webb on February 18 and 26, 2026, enabled scientists to refine the asteroid's orbit enough to "rule out a chance of lunar impact on Dec. 22, 2032." Instead, asteroid 2024 YR4 is now expected to pass the Moon at a distance of about 13,200 miles (21,200 km). The agency stressed that the update "reflects improved precision in our understanding of where the asteroid is expected to be in 2032 rather than a shift in its orbital path." The announcement closes a remarkable chapter in planetary defence that began in late 2024, when the approximately 60-metre-wide asteroid briefly became the most closely watched near-Earth object in the world. Discovered on December 27, 2024, by the ATLAS telescope in Chile, 2024 YR4 initially appeared to have a small chance of colliding with Earth on December 22, 2032. As astronomers gathered more observations, the impact probability briefly climbed to around 3%—the highest ever recorded for an asteroid of its size—before steadily falling as its orbit became better understood. By early 2025, international observations had ruled out any significant risk to Earth. However, astronomers were left with another possibility: a roughly 4% chance that the asteroid could instead strike the Moon. "The probability that asteroid 2024 YR4 will strike the Moon on 22 December 2032 is now approximately 4%," the European Space Agency (ESA) had said last year, noting that "there is a 96% chance that the asteroid will not impact the Moon." ESA said such an impact, while unlikely, would have presented an extraordinary scientific opportunity. "It is a very rare event for an asteroid this large to impact the Moon – and it is rarer still that we know about it in advance. The impact would likely be visible from Earth, and so scientists will be very excited by the prospect of observing and analysing it," said Richard Moissl, Head of ESA's Planetary Defence Office. "It would certainly leave a new crater on the surface. However, we wouldn't be able to accurately predict in advance how much material would be thrown into space, or whether any would reach Earth," he added. The asteroid also exposed an important blind spot in planetary defence. Because 2024 YR4 approached Earth from the direction of the Sun, it remained hidden from ground-based telescopes until after its closest approach. "We looked into how Neomir would have performed in this situation, and the simulations surprised even us," Moissl said. "Neomir would have detected asteroid 2024 YR4 about a month earlier than ground-based telescopes did. This would have given astronomers more time to study the asteroid's trajectory and allowed them to much sooner rule out any chance of Earth impact in 2032." He added, "As an infrared telescope, like Webb, Neomir would have also immediately given us a much better estimate for the asteroid's size, which is very important for assessing the significance of the hazard." The latest NASA observations underscore the value of space-based infrared telescopes in tracking faint asteroids. According to NASA, Webb made "among the faintest ever observations of an asteroid," extending the object's observational record by nearly eight months at a time when it had become too faint for other telescopes. That additional data allowed scientists to eliminate the remaining uncertainty surrounding its 2032 flyby. Although asteroid 2024 YR4 is now confirmed to pose no threat to either Earth or the Moon, scientists say its discovery remains one of the most significant real-world tests of the international planetary defence system, demonstrating how continued observations can rapidly transform an object once considered hazardous into one whose future path is known with high confidence. Source: NASA, ESA This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Yup. Google is just scraping the entire internet for their own ad profits without sharing revenue with the sources. It's obviously stealing, but since these sites depend upon Google's search scraps to survive... As for me, I just stopped using Google for anything except Reddit searches. If Reddit's own search wasn't complete crapola, I'd never use Google search again.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      Admir earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      First Post
    • Apprentice
      daryld went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Contributor
      Carltonbar went up a rank
      Contributor
    • One Month Later
      The_Focal_Point earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      418
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      130
    4. 4
      Xenon
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!