- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:15 pm to mouton
quote:
Actually shorts are meant to be short. THese stupid shorts that hang below your knee are a newer phenomenom.
10"-11" shorts fall about an inch above or hang right above the knee. What is wrong with that? Yes, I understand historically that they were nuthuggers, but that doesnt mean it was right.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:19 pm to dnm3305
quote:Yeah man, these guys aren't masculine at all .
Slight exaggeration, but you cant tell me that you wears these and honestly feel masculine. The "frat" shorts were never intended for men to wear and it's a travesty that theyve been introduced.
Shorts didn't became popular in America until after WWII, and they certainly didn't go below the knee back then.
This post was edited on 4/15/15 at 2:22 pm
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:20 pm to dnm3305
quote:
Slight exaggeration, but you cant tell me that you wears these and honestly feel masculine. The "frat" shorts were never intended for men to wear and it's a travesty that theyve been introduced. I'd rather drink a beer with someone wearing cargo shorts past their knee than someone wearing 5" chino's.
I don't have those particular shorts (those are swim wear) but I have these:
LINK
ETA: I'm also short, so they probably don't look quite as short on me as they may look on some people. They are still a good 5 inches or so above my knee, though.
This post was edited on 4/15/15 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:24 pm to GreatLakesTiger24
quote:
Yeah man, these guys aren't masculine at all
I honestly do even know if I should reply because of how asinine this post is, but here goes...
In the first picture, 10-11" shorts werent even invented yet, and I cant believe I actually have to spell this out for you, but there's a difference between going on a combat mission (shorts would be incredibly stupid in a climate like that, but that's a tangent point) and going to a backyard bbq with some pastel 5" chinos. They are not the same thing.
The bottom picture is irrelevant because those are at least 8-9" inseams which is not what's being discussed.
quote:
they certainly didn't go below the knee back then
In what world does sitting an inch above the knee, what I actaully said, really mean sitting below the knee? Please explain.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:26 pm to Epic Cajun
You see, those shorts would look really nice if they'd be about 4" longer and sit an inch above the knee.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News