@baconhound said:

just leave him be on that one

@gftchris said:

You're thinking of Scotland.

But anyway, as I understand it, the concept of wearing trousers is basically because men needed to ride horses in battle (otherwise they could ride side-saddle like the ladies of the time). Do you happen to ride a lot of horses? I know I don't. Do we think Danny Shelton is any less manly for wearing a lava lava? I certainly wouldn't call him out on it, and good luck to the first UDFA that does so!

I'm assuming everyone's ok with girls wearing trousers?

The reason as I see it, was because of feminism. Females demanded a Change in cultural norms, they wanted it to be acceptable that they were doing a "male" job and filling a "male" role. And that it was to be championed if they did or were interested in something masculine.

Males never had a cultural revolution demanding the same things and we largely still enforce the old norms on ourselves.

In the 6000 years the Earth has been around people have lived under the oppressive notion that there is actually a difference between men and women. It's time someone bravely fought against this outrage! Thank you for your courage.

By the way let's hope the federal government Red the fashion designers offices and finds the people responsible for putting a piss flap in the formal e-mail designed underwear. I assume brassieres will either be outlawed or required for everyone? Obama, you have a new quest!

WSS

But the enlightened ones living in the end times know soooo much more today.

Typically at a young age girls and boys NATURALLY detest other...you've heard it, "eewwww boys" or "eeewwww girls". They detest everything about each other, down to the toys they play with.

Nothing surprises me anymore. The taking down of gender signs is a small step toward eradicating feminity and masculinity in the name of "progress".

@calfoxwc said:

Good grief. Are there that many rocks in Great Britain for somebody

to grow up under one of em, and never to have come out from under it,

until he was grown up???

Stop monkeying around, Chris. And note, it isn't a

conservative source, so you can't whine about that, science denier.

*******************************

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html

So you're saying because boys and girls willbtrend towards toys or dolls, all bits and girls should play with those things, and stigmatise any that want to play with the other?

to force self-exclusion to the norms of gender, and society, with a fringe

of mentally/emotionally undeveloped liberals.

Maybe they are that minority who never self-actualized into who they would have been

as adults or teens.... never to grow to believe in anything, not even themselves.

So they emotionally lash out, and force themselves to be social victims. Gives them a reason

to at least believe in their anti-socialness.

just lost in early stages, maybe never to go any further as people.

or something. Who knows?

Interesting.

1. Liberalism and Victimhood - Creators

   www.creators.com/opinion/.../liberalism-and-victimhood.html

   Dennis Prager Opinion Columns - Liberalism and Victimhood ... If you want to understand the negative impact of feminism on women (and men) and, by extension, the ...

2. Liberalism and Victimhood - The Dennis Prager...

   www.dennisprager.com/liberalism-and-victimhood

   Liberalism and Victimhood. Tuesday, Jun 3, ... the destructive effects of liberal teachers, Democratic politics and liberal news media on African-Americans, ...

@gftchris said:

Well because modern Western world kids don't live in places and times where wearing a dress or something similar is seen as "tough". You can be different and still make it but if you are soft as a male you will likely have a rough time growing up.

to grow up under one of em, and never to have come out from under it,

until he was grown up???

Stop monkeying around, Chris. And note, it isn't a

conservative source, so you can't whine about that, science denier.

*******************************

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html

WSS

@westside-steve said:

If you can give me one even vaguely tangible example where that might affect how someone should dress, and that can only apply to one gender, I'll address it. Apart from wearing a bra or jock strap, there's not much in nature that would dictate what clothes people wear.

WSS

@westside-steve said:

What I wonder about (and for once I will forego any hyperbolic examples)

WSS

Awe. No neutering the entire population and cloning humans to reproduce?

I will happily admit that as a trend men will be better than women at some jobs that require superior physical skills. Equally women will tend to be better than men at some jobs that require any of the number of things women are better than men at. But again, what does that have to do with how people dress? If you have a woman physically strong enough to, I don't know, hauling lorry tires around a factory (although that'll be done by machines now anyway), would you demand she wear a dress?

WSS

@logicisforsquares said:

I can understand that, you're just looking out for the safety of your boy, and like I say, most people would be on the same page. But why do kids determine that wearing a dress is soft? As above, the lava lava is just what's worn in those places, and kilts were traditional battle dress for centuries in europe.

I suspect it's more to do with being different than being soft, as kids tend to isolate and destroy anyone who doesn't conform to absolutely every social norm.

@gftchris said:

Completely o.k. with the girl wearing pants. Not so much with boys wearing sun dresses.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

You're thinking of Scotland.

But anyway, as I understand it, the concept of wearing trousers is basically because men needed to ride horses in battle (otherwise they could ride side-saddle like the ladies of the time). Do you happen to ride a lot of horses? I know I don't. Do we think Danny Shelton is any less manly for wearing a lava lava? I certainly wouldn't call him out on it, and good luck to the first UDFA that does so!

I'm assuming everyone's ok with girls wearing trousers?

@gftchris said:

What would be more irksome is that you think it's up to your wife to 'let' your kids wear clothes - you have a say in that as well.

Anyway, I'm sure 95% of the population agrees with you, that girls can play sports and get muddy, but if a boy starts hosting tea parties for his action figures something's not right. The question I'd ask you, is why? And I'm serious here, and I'm not trying to say you're wrong or I'm better, or anything like that, I just want to know why you, and society as a whole, feel this way.

One set of interests by the girl may end up with her being the "cool girlfriend" later in life. The boy wearing a dress and hosting tea parties will get 10 kinds of shit because young boys are what they are. They will bust balls and try to find a pecking order. Being "soft" will make the boy's childhood rough.

@gftchris said:

I've heard that this has been common in England for decades, no?

@logicisforsquares said:

What would be more irksome is that you think it's up to your wife to 'let' your kids wear clothes - you have a say in that as well.

Anyway, I'm sure 95% of the population agrees with you, that girls can play sports and get muddy, but if a boy starts hosting tea parties for his action figures something's not right. The question I'd ask you, is why? And I'm serious here, and I'm not trying to say you're wrong or I'm better, or anything like that, I just want to know why you, and society as a whole, feel this way.

@gftchris said:

Heaven forbid a little boy likes to wear a dress, or a little girl wants spiderman PJs. Kids should know their place.

I know this will make me sound like a dick but I would not give a shit if my daughter liked Spiderman but would be irritated if my wife let a son of mine wear a dress.