Monday, November 03, 2008

It is time for function to triumph over form

Dear Girls Wearing Tights Under Your Short-Shorts,

I know. Every time I talk about how tights aren't pants and how you can't wear them as such, I mention both 'under skirts' and 'under shorts IF YOU NEED TO' as ways you can wear them. However, you no longer need to. I don't know how to convey this to you. We are no longer in the 'Let's still pretend it's summer' segment of fall. We have entered into the rainy-ass almost-winter portion, and it is cold. It is damp.

I KNOW! This means that all other legs are covered up, and your legs are getting all the leg-ttention. Bully for you. But you could just, I don't know, wear a pair of really tight pants, couldn't you? Even leggings would be better than this.

Sincerely, The Girl in Gumboots. No, the other one. Not the designer expensive gumboots, the ones from Superstore. Little-boys section.


Meaghan said...

Thanks for entering our giveaway! We will be doing the drawing Nov 7. We do this giveaway every week so be sure to check back often


Anonymous said...

Okay, I'm older says ...

Dear Girls Wearing Tights Under Your Short-Shorts,

Did most of you know that you appear, from behind, to have two asses? Yes, you do, one dropping down on top of the other. This can make 'behind the butt' observers feel like: (1)they could also wear short shorts and never need a wax, (2)they could make some males easy, (4)jealousy is so not needed, (5)they simply have to snicker/gasp/giggle/roll-eyes.