Ho or No?

Gotta lay off the Yahoo. However, since I'm already on edge, I'm going to share. According to this article, a minor celeb tweeted her opinions about current celeb fashion trends, specifically how she feels there is too much skin showing these days.

Lots of back-and-forth on this, including some top-dollar name-calling. "Institutionalized misogyny" was thrown down as well. Perhaps, but let's flip this argument.

Men attend formal functions dressed in full suits, and the cleaner the cut, the better the fit, the sexier they are. What's in a tuxedo? A full-sleeve button-down shirt with a tie, covering up the entire torso and arms down to the wrist. The jacket even hides the upper glute area. The slacks go down to the ankle. Shoes hide the entire foot.

I've got two words for you: Daniel Craig.

Hang on, I've got to get my breath back.

OK, I'm good now. So, let's talk about this showing too much skin thing. Why don't men go out in cut out shirts that show off biceps, cut pecs, ripped abs? What about tight-fitting hotpants? "Nearly naked" formals?

Oh yeah. They do. At the drag show.

Ask nearly any woman and she'll tell you that nobody notices her unless she's somehow flaunting her "good stuff." An actress isn't noteworthy in the style pages unless she is wearing something that leaves little to the imagination. Any actress will try you that to stay relevant, they have to be seen, photographed, published, and then talked about but not disparaged.

Yet the men are covered from neck to toe. I don't understand it. For a man to get noticed, he needs to be covered. For a woman, the less she wears, the better.

Why?

It's not about modesty in women. That concept is so antiquated it's ridiculous. No, it's about goose vs gander. If guys don't have to show off skin to get noticed, women shouldn't have to, either.

It's that simple.