House Rules - Tonight's top story

[Bocaj Claw]

Well this may be similar to the way the buttons differ on men and women's shirts. I can't remember it exactly but button shirts orginally (and maybe still do) button on different sides depending on which gender it was made for. Men's shirts were made so that they could wield a sword and button a shirt at the same time (don't ask me why).

[Dr. Doog]

<!--QuoteBegin-KingOfKings+Jul 23 2005, 05:52 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (KingOfKings @ Jul 23 2005, 05:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> Not sure what that has to do with 'skirt' sitting having a closer relation and origin to women than men, but interesting. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> are you absolutely sure thats true? I highly doubt that people only started crossing their legs when they were women who had to do it because they wore skirts.

[KingOfKings]

<!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> are you absolutely sure thats true? I highly doubt that people only started crossing their legs when they were women who had to do it because they wore skirts.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>No, I lied. During olden times, women just sat with their legs spread and men crossed their legs instead because it's just so insanely comfortable scrunching yourself up as opposed to stretching out. <!--emo&<_<--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... ns/dry.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='dry.gif' /><!--endemo--> <br><br>Yes, I'm sure women cross their legs to cover up whats under their skirt.<br><br>You know, a group of people didnt get together and say "HEY, LET'S ASSIGN SITTING STYLES!"<br><br>It was ADAPTED. Men never had any reason to cross their legs during the "You know, maybe public exposure ISN'T such a good idea..." age, so they never did. Except now some men do because...I guess they copy it or something. I don't know. If I was sitting on my couch right now, sitting like that would not cross my mind when searching for comfort.<br><br>Hell, it doesn't even look or sound comfortable.

[Dr. Doog]

<!--QuoteBegin-KingOfKings+Jul 23 2005, 07:25 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (KingOfKings @ Jul 23 2005, 07:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> No, I lied. During olden times, women just sat with their legs spread and men crossed their legs instead because it's just so insanely comfortable scrunching yourself up as opposed to stretching out. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br>See? I <i>told</i> you.<br><br>how do you know that they needed a reason? couldn't they have just done it as a whim, and maybe it stuck, but due to some horriffic culture loss, this idea was lost, and has resurfaced again as part of master plan to rule the entire galaxy? <!--emo&:arr:--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... pirate.png' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pirate.png' /><!--endemo-->

[Bocaj Claw]

Why would women want to take over the world through sitting styles? All the ones I've asked have told me that they already rule the world. Secretly. Like the mice. But opposing them. Which explains those sitcoms with the screeching women standing on chairs. Don't mind me I'm rambling again.

[Richard K Niner]

Oh, come on. If you try, I'm sure you can overthrow the mice <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://definecynical.mancubus.net/forum ... s/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Bocaj Claw]

I shouldn't tell you, but as a cat a dog, the cats have been on take from the mice for centuries. We even get rid of their "rogues" for them. Mmm. Finger lickin good! ... But without fingers...

[dcsimpson]

<!--QuoteBegin-KingOfKings+Jul 23 2005, 06:59 PM--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> (KingOfKings @ Jul 23 2005, 06:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> <br>...I said I didn't care right in the thing you quoted.<br>I just care that people think there's no such thing as a proper way to sit. As if you sit on your head in an interview, NOBODY is going to wonder or even care. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br> Which I had to "quote" selectively because it was too long to quote in its entirety, which is odd if you in fact don't care.<br><br>And quoting an extreme and highly implausible example of a much narrower phenomenon you initially tried to discuss is a form of changing the subject. Nobody is claiming you wouldn't be stared at for sitting on your head, and it's absurd to use that to defend your point. That's like if people claiming the opposite of your point--that there is in fact no longer a significant gender distinction in how people are allowed to sit--tried to defend that point by pointing out that both men and women have the same number of legs.

[KingOfKings]

Just what is it you think I care or don't care about, anyways? I care about some things in this conversation, but not everything. Like I think the way Ozy is sitting was intended for girls, but I don't think that if you sit like that, you're a girl.

[KingOfKings]

And I think you're all taking what I'm saying too seriously. Like that if you sit like a girl you're breaking some sort of unwritten rule about sitting. I'm not saying that.

[Dr. Doog]

no, the point is that that way was not <b>originally</b> intended <b>just</b> for girls.

[KingOfKings]

Why wouldn't it be? All the facts point to yes, it was.<br><br>There's no reason for man to have adapted that. It requires slim curves and joints, it doesn't really look very manly, it's a bit confining sitting like that (unless you're a bit...lacking), girls sit like that way more often than guys, and girls have more use for it than guys. This is like arguing dresses weren't intended for girls. You can tell they are just by LOOKING at them. And just because sometimes a man can wear a dress doesnt mean that dresses are for men too.

[Gizensha]

One of KingofKings posts brings up a very interesting point.<br><br><i>If</i> men are meant to sit ankle on knee and women knee on knee, and the knee on knee thing is so you can't see what's up their skirts...<br><br>How are Scottish men who are wearing a kilt meant to sit?<br><br>Also it is completely ludicrous to suggest that sitting knee on knee is going to risk causing injury to certain specifics of male anatomy. The act of sitting knee on knee moves all relevent parts of the anatomy well out of the way.<br><br>The suggestion that there's a propper way of crossing legs is ludicrous. To suggest that this propper way is different for men and for women is sexist. And yes, before you give that 'high heels and a skirt' comment again, this is sexist. Skirts are far more comfy than pants. I have experience of this (well, ish. It was a dress.)<br><br>In fact, by your own logic (the preciousness of male anatomy), males have more bussiness wearing skirts or kilts than women.

[Bocaj Claw]

Hm. Could we agree that we <i>don't</i> agree with each other and just leave it at that?

[KingOfKings]

This board is the only one I know of that has people that think sitting like you have a skirt on isn't feminine.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> How are Scottish men who are wearing a kilt meant to sit?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Well, in Scotland, wearing a kilt is proper and ordinary. In America, or anywhere else, where a skirt is NOT proper or ordinary. It's call CULTURE.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> The act of sitting knee on knee moves all relevent parts of the anatomy well out of the way.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>What? No, it definitely doesnt. Not the bottom part. That either gets pushed up with your hand, crushed down.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> The suggestion that there's a propper way of crossing legs is ludicrous. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>I know. But it's there. And why do you spell it "propper" anyways?<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> To suggest that this propper way is different for men and for women is sexist.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Men and women are different. Deal.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> And yes, before you give that 'high heels and a skirt' comment again, this is sexist. Skirts are far more comfy than pants. I have experience of this (well, ish. It was a dress.)<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>Fine, then I'm sexist for stating that skirts are for women. I don't care, it's true.<br><br><!--QuoteBegin--> <table border='0' align='center' width='95%' ><tr><td class='quotetop'><b>Quote:</b> </td></tr><tr><td class='quotebody'> In fact, by your own logic (the preciousness of male anatomy), males have more bussiness wearing skirts or kilts than women.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table> <!--QuoteEEnd--><br><br>But they don't. Oh well. What do you want me to do about it?