Latin for “voice crying in the wilderness,” this blog is a personal pressure valve to speak countercultural truth to unduly accepted norms. more
Want to stay up-to-date with future posts? Subscribe to email notifications or take advantage of the RSS feed.
Have something to say or a message to convey for which a comment just won’t suffice? Here’s a contact form.
Nemo igitur vir magnus sine aliquo adflatu divino umquam fuit.
This is interesting in light of a documentary about women and trousers in the mid-1900s Finland. At the time, women usually had to cover their legs down to the ankles. The common opposition to women in trousers was that they would reveal too much of the body contours.
But fast forward a few decades, and it’s hard to imagine that women’s clothing was supposed to cover more of the body than men’s.
I now prefer kilts/skirts to shorts in the warm season, and I think they do cover more of my body. I can’t imagine that being a problem to anyone.
Hey, thanks for the visit and my profoundest apologies for the delay in approving your comment. I’ve been away, but nearly back to civilization at which time I will give you a proper reply.