This new article, published on the Canadian site sachem.ca, can be read here http://www.sachem.ca/opinions/article/153619 . The author, an apparently intelligent man, still manages to plumb new depths of ignorance, blinkeredness (if that's a word!) and Victorian narrowmindedness - I thought The Times article was bad, but this is incredible! What planet is he from?? I did notice the item is in a folder called 'Opinions' - thankfully! And, the author's picture has a caption marked 'William Thomas - Humour' beneath it. If he thinks this drivel is meant to be funny...
Thomas also starts off with the dreaded 'M' word (mantyhose - that makes me want to throw up!). He refers to male legwear as a 'mass wardrobe malfunction', and states that wearing it 'would double your chances of Elton John following you home'. Here we go again - another ignoramus who thinks that gay men like men in legwear - where do they get that???? He then goes on to say that 'we already have a men's garment to keep you warm and cosy - it's called long underwear'! Why would any man in his right mind want to wear something bulky, scratchy, uncomfortable and which falls down all the time, when he can have a garment which is warm, lightweight, comfortable, doesn't move and isn't itchy? No contest! Why is it somehow thought 'manly' to wear something uncomfortable? Is this harking back to the days when monks wore hair shirts under their habits?
After passing through various desparaging remarks about wolf whistles from construction workers, Peter Pan etc, he says 'mantyhose is a very, very, very bad idea'. Why?? We (men) had tights first, centuries before women 'stole' them. He then continues to reinforce his blinkered views by comparing men who wear to Robin Hood and The Village People - back to the old 'gay' hobbyhorse again!
Next, he makes a totally unwarranted link between the advent of 'thongs' and the arrival of male legwear - wrong again! Tights pre-date thongs by about 2,000 years - go check your history, pal!
He laments that men's legwear is part of a moving of men's clothing 'toward androgyny'. Wrong again! We didn't start the trend of clothing moving towards 'unisex' - the women did that, by 'adopting' jeans, t-shirts, polo shirts, shorts etc (all of which were men's garments before the womenfolk stole them c. WW2) - so if he has to moan at anyone, it isn't us guys!
He makes out 'mantyhose is not fashion, it's fetish.' Wrong again, Einstein! Then he witters on at length about 'manbra's' (a solution without a problem, if there ever was one!) and 'prophecies' more garments making the crossover to the male wardrobe.
He concludes with 'Men are supposed to dress like men, look like men, smell like men, which sets us apart from women'. No argument there - I don't know any males who are attempting to do otherwise - or should we still be wearing trousers made of sailcloth, smell of sweat and have dirty fingernails? Come on man - this is the 21st century - not the 19th!
