Tuesday, May 23, 2006

A Word About Short Shorts.

There has been much ado made about the New York Times’ devotion to bathing trunks lately, and just how short they can go. We, for one, didn’t really have an opinion for a long time. We wear shorts all the time during the summer, and have never thought twice about it.

But in the past year or so, we’ve come across an interesting phenomenon: gays who don’t wear shorts. Many men, fag or otherwise, don’t wear them as a rule. Even if it’s hot out. Sure, they might throw on a pair of old college lacrosse shorts to go running or play basketball (HA! Imagine gays playing basketball), but board shorts? No way, Jose. Cargo? Nope. Seersucker? Not even in P-town.

And why this fear of short pants? Two words: chicken legs.

Gays, who spend so much time toning their upper bodies, often are frustrated by the difficulty of growing quads, hammies and calves. So they give up. After all, you barely notice them in the bedroom, so why bother? Just keep ‘em under wraps for the rest of your day. As a result, many of us have oddly skinny legs.

But now that bathing suits are getting shorter, what are those gays going to do? This could be a serious problem. What happens if we go all Euro, and box-cut boyshorts become the norm? Will everyone need to add an entire hour to their already crowded gym routine of chest presses and lotion applying? Will beach bunnies begin comparing calf implants?? Will everyone start waxing their LEGS as well as their chests??? WHAT IF OUR LEGS GET SO BIG WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO PLEATED PANTS, PEOPLE?!?!


The New York Times: Causing Gay Panic Since 1851

PS – This is hilarious.

2 comments:

Frank said...

It might not be such a bad thing if gays were forced to work on their legs a bit more. I like a nice pair of gams on a fella. Of course, the fact that my legs are the one part of my body that I actually think are nice has NOTHING to do with anything. Of course.

Patrick said...

This is very good news.