Thursday, July 31, 2008

looks like someone beat you up and stole half your pants



shorts can be very useful and exciting.

they allow people with giant calves to wear something other than robes when they go out in public. they enable everyone else to go swimming and slip-and-sliding in something other than jeans. they singlehandedly made it possible for larry bird to set the record for the world's whitest thighs.

because of this undeniable usefulness (calfpeople, everyone else) and excitement (white thighs!), shorts have their proper time and place. the gym? yes. an amusement park? sure. on famous soccer players who shave their legs? why not? in the workplace, matched up with a tie and jacket? hopefully you didn't get lulled into answering in the affirmative. the answer is no. unequivocally no.

which brings us to the wacky-ass article in today's new york times style section, in which it's proclaimed that "shorts are no longer an office 'don’t' . . . these days they are downright respectable."

i guess i could ramble on for a few more two-sentence paragraphs as to all of the reasons why shorts absolutely remain an office 'don't' (at least for those of us who 'do' want to keep our jobs) and why shorts suits are not - and never will be - anything approaching respectable.

or, i could spare you the unnecessary effort of reading all of that and just let the article's picture hang its own thesis.





(and there you have it. anyone else think the clown on the far left doesn't look like he's setting a new trend in workplace fashion as much as he looks like he was taking a nap in a cornfield and got run over by a combine harvester? the other two don't look much better, by the way; i just don't know the names of any other farm machinery.)




25 comments:

PS said...

Found your blog on "just a girl".
Your a keeper.

joe dude said...

wow, thanks.

it's great to have ya.

Food&PantsMan said...

I happen to be an expert on pants and I find these short suits disturbing, to say the least. To say the most, I find them VERY disturbing.

joe dude said...

yes, they're definitely some non-trivial level of disturbing.

thanks for lending the weight of your (obvious) expertise to that position.

Russell said...

I am officially taking the day off work just in case I see anybody dressed like this.

joe dude said...

maybe i'm making this up, but it seems like you take a lot of days off.

if they made trophies for that i'd mail you one.

Russell said...

thanks-I'll take the day off to make sure that I get it.

joe dude said...

haha. good deal.

Julie_Gong said...

images of small boys skipping with giant lollipops comes to mind when i look at the guy in the first picture.

joe dude said...

haha. it makes me think of david copperfield (the dickens one, not the statue of liberty-disappearing one).

i'm not sure which is creepier, mine or yours. probably yours.

just a girl... said...

you had me at calf people!

joe dude said...

exactly as i'd planned!

lb said...

If a combine is the only piece of farm machinery you know, does this mean you have no idea what rock picking is?

joe dude said...

that seems like some sort of trick question, and 'rock picking' is somehow going to mean 'dating the opposite sex' or something like that, but no.

i have no idea what rock picking is.

M said...

haha, from the NYT article:

"I haven't asked them, but I'm sure women like looking at a man's calves, or if he has them, nice ankles".

hilarious.

what are nice ankles??

joe dude said...

ha, who knows.

i'm just going to presume that there is such a thing and that i have em, then i'm gonna start planning my outfits to draw as much attention to them as possible.

Anonymous said...

the first dude looks like a totaly douche

joe dude said...

i think he looks like he had no idea what he was getting himself into when he signed up for the photo shoot.

M said...

haha, you ankle hussy

lb said...

There is no trickery in that name, rock picking is exactly what it says. You are in a field, of crops that is, and usually riding on a trailor or wagon(not Little House on the Prairie covered wagon type), and if you see a rock fist size or bigger, you get off the trailor/wagon and pick it up and put it on the trailor/wagon. Or you just ride in the bucket of the tractor and jump off. Personally, I prefer the latter, due to the higher risk involved.

joe dude said...

molly,

takes one to know one.



lb,

i've still got nothin on rock picking, but, growing up, i used to walk around our yard and pick up sticks before i mowed it. can we count that?

ps - what's a tractor?

lb said...

Rocks=sticks. Doesn't make the grade, unless of course you can show how the transitive property can be used to make rocks=sticks. Once that is accomplished, then that'll count.
Here is the exact tractor we use.
http://www.woodentoystore.co.uk/images/71380tractor.jpg

joe dude said...

transitive property? you're speaking my language, girl.

sticks = things that break my bones

stones = things that break my bones

stones = rocks

rocks = things that break my bones

sticks = rocks


qed


ps - awesome tractor

lb said...

One slight problem, you forgot to put the 'proof' part of it with your work. Proof aside, well done, sticks being stones are well accepted now, or at least from you. I always knew there was a reason as to why you were my favorite person. Actually knowing the transitive property sealed that title for pretty much, oh, the next week. That's a new record!
Thanks, took the picture of the tractor myself, and yes, that is the actual farmer I work for too.

joe dude said...

hmm, i thought what i did there was a proof.

i guess that's why it took me 4 tries at sixth grade to get to seventh.