We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 69 of 69

Thread: Shorts

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    M
    I am still holding to that there needs to something other than just long pants in game, however. I call it 'shorts' but you can call it what ever you want and make the specifics on length and tailoring to fit that what ever, just as long as it is not long pants.
    Maybe take a hint from old man Tolkien, then?

    Here are a few quotes from here and there:

    ‘It has everything to do with it,’ said Gandalf. ‘You do not know the real peril yet;
    but you shall. I was not sure of it myself when I was last here; but the time has come
    to speak. Give me the ring for a moment.’
    Frodo took it from his breeches-pocket, where it was clasped to a chain that hung
    from his belt.

    - FOTR, 'The Shadow of the Past'

    'Dressed up like this, sir?' said Sam. 'Where are my clothes?' He flung his circlet,
    belt, and rings on the grass, and looked round helplessly, as if he expected to find
    his cloak, jacket, and breeches, and other hobbit-garments lying somewhere to
    hand.

    - FOTR, 'Fog on the Barrow-Downs'

    The flies began to torment them, and the air was full of clouds of
    tiny midges that crept up their sleeves and breeches and into their hair.

    - FOTR, 'A Knife in the Dark'

    'Very well, I will take it,' said Frodo. Bilbo put it on him, and fastened Sting upon the
    glittering belt; and then Frodo put over the top his old weather-stained breeches,
    tunic, and jacket.

    - FOTR, 'The Ring Goes South'

    He opened the bundle. Frodo looked in disgust at the contents, but there
    was nothing for it: he had to put the things on, or go naked. There were long
    hairy breeches of some unclean beast-fell, and a tunic of dirty leather. He
    drew them on.

    - RotK, 'The Tower of Cirith Ungol'

    Or you could take a hint from Beorn and stride around manfully wearing just a long tunic. I'm sure that'd be very airy

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    14,404
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Or you could take a hint from Beorn and stride around manfully wearing just a long tunic. I'm sure that'd be very airy
    I think you mean "hairy."

    That said, a long enough tunic doesn't *need* breeches, braies, trews, or even puttees to cover the legs.
    Eruanne - Shards of Narsil-1 - Elendilmir -> Arkenstone

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by djheydt View Post
    I think you mean "hairy."

    That said, a long enough tunic doesn't *need* breeches, braies, trews, or even puttees to cover the legs.
    No, "airy", as in no trousers means your legs will get cold draughts up them.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    Yeah, I know. It does make it hard on me in my Political Blogs when I post things like Slavery and Genocide Indexes. Sad thing is I know why this is happening but then that gets into politics which is not allowed in this forum.

    But I think I can state this much:
    As Europeans, since your geography is so close and trains can run you from one country to the next faster than a person can drive from one State to the next in the USA and everything about your history is dependent upon that geography that you face every day you tend to remember it more. It is like Calculus or even Algebra: if it isn't applicable to your everyday life it isn't important and is therefor forgotten. If part of the set is applicable to your life then the whole set remains at least familiar. In the USA Mexico is south (and to most people anyone crossing that border is Mexican) and Canada is North. Finding either on the map isn't needed as finding anything on the map isn't needed because we have this huge ocean on either side of us protecting us from everyone else. This makes it an 'over there' thing where 'there' is defined as 'not here'. That is the philosophical and sociological explanation of it.

    The fact that this is a situation that is obviously not sufficiently countered by the Public Education system in the USA is where the politics begin and where I will stop here.

    What I would find interesting is a study of Americans dealing with a side-by-side comparison of an American's RL geography skills as compared to their geographical knowledge in a video game that they play regularly. The brain is a funny thing.
    That explanation doesnt really cover the constant "No, that is a continent", though; does it?

    To be fair, it isnt a standard, Euro-centric map; although at least they didnt use the monstrosity that is the Chinese world map (with China in the middle); THAT is really confusing.

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarbro View Post
    That explanation doesnt really cover the constant "No, that is a continent", though; does it?

    To be fair, it isnt a standard, Euro-centric map; although at least they didnt use the monstrosity that is the Chinese world map (with China in the middle); THAT is really confusing.
    Geography is about referencing places to each other on a map.

    It does cover that because the whole of geography is meaningless if "over there" means "not here". If you do not need to find 'there' there is no reference for 'here' other than looking around one's self, and that is not is not geography.

    Here country folk rarely use street names or even distance in directions, instead they use points of reference, like the "Blue house with the fence" or "The tobacco sign" (which they fail to mention is faded to barely visible and is painted on the roof of a barn) then go three roads up and turn right (without mentioning that two roads are dirt roads and one thing that looks like a road is actually a very long driveway although a country person can typically tell the difference between a dirt road and a driveway). They also won't mention that two of the roads are within a mile or two but the third one is like five miles past those so by the time you get to mile three you want to turn around and look for the road you 'missed'. Also 'fence' rarely means 'barbed-wire fence'. I have no idea what this has to do with the topic at hand but I do find it interesting (meaning: rib splitting hilarious) watching city folk try to deal with country directions.

    To Dr. No: Seriously though, Cannons aside (yes with two n's), Breeches is British for Britches which is archaic Country-centric for pants. What you are trying to say about them is incomprehensible to an American, just like the American word Venison means deer meat but not deer, just the meat ,while in, what is is it Gaelic?, it means deer, live or dead, antlers and hide included. Sure we might both speak 'English' but we do not speak the same language.

    So we are back to the OP of wanting shorts which can be defined as 'pants that do not reach down to the ankle'. For girls here it means above the knee. For men they can cover the knee even when sitting or squatting and still be shorts.

    Knickers and pantaloons are archaic underwear although they can refer to types of pants so those terms get confusing and only work within context of company (region or economic) more than context of the conversation itself.

    So instead of trying to 'educate' Americans about a foreign language try to understand someone who speaks English and what they are meaning. Advancing the American's stereo-typical view of the Britt is not becoming.
    Making Brides Princesses Again!

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,205
    It doesnt matter where on the map it is, Africa is not a country, neither is Asia, or South America; they couldnt even identify their own continent!!!!

    To get back on topic, I went over to my mums house yesterday, and found my step-dad wearing hideous pinky-brown plaid shorts (and a "T" shirt that says "I am NOT an American" in Chinese).

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    Yeah, I know. It does make it hard on me in my Political Blogs when I post things like Slavery and Genocide Indexes. Sad thing is I know why this is happening but then that gets into politics which is not allowed in this forum.

    But I think I can state this much:
    As Europeans, since your geography is so close and trains can run you from one country to the next faster than a person can drive from one State to the next in the USA and everything about your history is dependent upon that geography that you face every day you tend to remember it more. It is like Calculus or even Algebra: if it isn't applicable to your everyday life it isn't important and is therefor forgotten. If part of the set is applicable to your life then the whole set remains at least familiar. In the USA Mexico is south (and to most people anyone crossing that border is Mexican) and Canada is North. Finding either on the map isn't needed as finding anything on the map isn't needed because we have this huge ocean on either side of us protecting us from everyone else. This makes it an 'over there' thing where 'there' is defined as 'not here'. That is the philosophical and sociological explanation of it.

    The fact that this is a situation that is obviously not sufficiently countered by the Public Education system in the USA is where the politics begin and where I will stop here.

    What I would find interesting is a study of Americans dealing with a side-by-side comparison of an American's RL geography skills as compared to their geographical knowledge in a video game that they play regularly. The brain is a funny thing.

    That's an interesting theory, but could you perhaps explain to us why most Australians, like myself, don't seem to be so geographically confused. Our island/continent is 3/4 the size of the US, and we are far more isolated from the rest of the world, not sharing a border with anyone. Yet it seems most Australians have no problem finding most European countries on a world map, and certainly seem less confused about the difference between a country and a continent.

    Please enlighten us.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    7,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    To Dr. No: Seriously though, Cannons aside (yes with two n's), Breeches is British for Britches which is archaic Country-centric for pants. What you are trying to say about them is incomprehensible to an American, just like the American word Venison means deer meat but not deer, just the meat ,while in, what is is it Gaelic?, it means deer, live or dead, antlers and hide included. Sure we might both speak 'English' but we do not speak the same language.
    Breeches is just an English word, it's not 'British' English. Look in an American English dictionary, you'll find it doesn't say "chiefly British" or anything next to 'breeches' like it would for a genuinely ''British' word. In any case, even if you consider the word to be archaic then we're talking about a fantasy here. Archaic words and dress in a fantasy? Oh noes, the horror, can't have that!

    Besides all that, even if it were an exclusively British word then LOTR is written in British English, something the game respects and 'breeches' is a word that appears repeatedly in the books because hobbits wear them! (And so do some Orcs, it seems).

    So we are back to the OP of wanting shorts which can be defined as 'pants that do not reach down to the ankle'. For girls here it means above the knee. For men they can cover the knee even when sitting or squatting and still be shorts.
    No, we're back to you needing to remember that we're not talking about twentieth century stuff here. What you think counts as shorts for girls is neither here nor there because it's just not relevant.

    So instead of trying to 'educate' Americans about a foreign language try to understand someone who speaks English and what they are meaning. Advancing the American's stereo-typical view of the Britt is not becoming.
    No, I'm trying to educate you about your own language. It's only foreign to your experience, not to American English

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Langie View Post
    That's an interesting theory, but could you perhaps explain to us why most Australians, like myself, don't seem to be so geographically confused. Our island/continent is 3/4 the size of the US, and we are far more isolated from the rest of the world, not sharing a border with anyone. Yet it seems most Australians have no problem finding most European countries on a world map, and certainly seem less confused about the difference between a country and a continent.

    Please enlighten us.
    You still give nod to the Queen. This makes you more or less (I know more of 'less' than 'more') still part of the British Empire. That gives you a different world-view and view of the world than we have here. More than that will get into education and politics. Also, unlike Australia and Brittan the USA has not been challenged on our own home ground for longer than our young nation has a national memory of (oh yeah, back in the Wild West Days... that is pretty irrelevant to most people for it reads more like a romance novel or fairy-tale). But the final key is education and politics.

    Dr. No, my definition and idea of "shorts" is completely relevant for I am the one that suggested them. If you believe that Tolkien thought they should come to just below the knees and be secured there with string or button, then that is also relevant. However relevant of what you think Tolkien was describing, in specifics, still does not change what I am suggesting, in specifics. I have already conceded that anything but long pants would an acceptable compromise to me. But yeah, I really want Daisy Dukes. In the end, as always, it is the Devs who decide, not you or me, and hence my willingness to compromise ... with them, not you.

    However trying to force a word down my throat ("breeches") while insisting my word is wrong is unbecoming.
    Making Brides Princesses Again!

  10. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    You still give nod to the Queen. This makes you more or less (I know more of 'less' than 'more') still part of the British Empire. That gives you a different world-view and view of the world than we have here. More than that will get into education and politics. Also, unlike Australia and Brittan the USA has not been challenged on our own home ground for longer than our young nation has a national memory of.
    You are correct about the nod part, that's about the only influence the British monarch has in Australian affairs. After the dismissal of a democratically elected Australian government in 1975, the law was changed to give the monarch zero powers in Australian affairs. As to our world view, Australia is both geographically and politically more closely tied to the Asian region, and diplomatically closer to the US than to Britain. We have actually fought alongside the US in more wars than any other country.

    Once again your knowledge of world history is found wanting, no foreign power has ever fought on Australian soil, we were invaded from the air by the Japanese the day after the Pearl Harbour bombings, and some Japanese midget submarines entered Sydney harbour and sunk a relatively unimportant vessel before being destroyed. No enemy has ever set foot on our soil.

  11. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Langie View Post
    You are correct about the nod part, that's about the only influence the British monarch has in Australian affairs. After the dismissal of a democratically elected Australian government in 1975, the law was changed to give the monarch zero powers in Australian affairs. As to our world view, Australia is both geographically and politically more closely tied to the Asian region, and diplomatically closer to the US than to Britain. We have actually fought alongside the US in more wars than any other country.

    Once again your knowledge of world history is found wanting, no foreign power has ever fought on Australian soil, we were invaded from the air by the Japanese the day after the Pearl Harbour bombings, and some Japanese midget submarines entered Sydney harbour and sunk a relatively unimportant vessel before being destroyed. No enemy has ever set foot on our soil.
    I said "Challenged". Many towns along the Northern Coast were scared to point that toilet paper stocks were in no danger of being depleted and normal consumption resumed only after large numbers of Yanks started disembarking.

    Aside from LA fighting Will-O-Wisps nothing even close happened in the USA. Sure a couple of Aleutian Islands were actually occupied but those were as much a concern to most Americans as Midway was, as far as homeland under immediate threat was concerned, after all Alaska is just a handful of Frontiersmen and Eskimos living in ice-domes and rubbing noses (I don't make this up, this was everyone's I knew view of Alaska when I was a kid and that was from four different regions of the country). Also it is true a couple of U-boats were sunk off the Eastern Coast but no one knew that until decades after the war although there were rumors and the coastal cities did black outs, but that was more of an over-precaution in most people's minds and the U-boat rumors in most people's mind were faked to make people more cautious. We were fighting the war "Over There" (there's a song about that, ok it was WW1 but it found a revival and was used for the Bond Drives) so we didn't have to "Here" and in this way keep Mom and the Sweetie safe from harm.

    Hawaii became a State in 1959 so the attack on Pearl Harbor was an attack on American Boys, not American land, but it was a devastating attack that led to fears of what would come next if we didn't respond, so we responded and the entire War was "Over There" like the first one was. Of note is the Philippines was attack at the same time as Pearl Harbor and that alone would have triggered our entry into the War if Pearl Harbor would never had happened, at least that is my opinion. But the military truth is, to take the Philippines the Japanese had to attack the Fleet at Pearl Harbor.

    The final thing making a big part of the USA psychology is most people (in the USA) think we are the World's only Super Power completely ignoring both China and someone else, as well as many coalitions around the world that could give the USA at least a regional run for the money. The reason Americans think this way comes full circle back to Education and Politics although some bit of it is pure hubris, a hubris that Great Brittan once had in the middle of the last half of the 18th Century.

    That makes a completely different psychology between Australia and the USA.

    ... bow or nod.

    It is because of history and no insult to anyone else and their history. Rebelling against a World Super Power when you are a gnat on the world stage gives a peoples an attitude. Gold was not yet discovered in the future USA, that was all in Central and South America, Spanish and Portuguese lands. India had spices and the Orient silk. All we had was cotton, tobacco, and furs. Even Iron and coal had yet to be uncovered here. We were only a handful of backwards back woods religious freaks that were closer to heathens we settled among than civilized. It was insanity to even contemplate rebellion and the fact that the meetings leading up to it were all held in Taverns does not escape my notice.
    Last edited by Milii; Jul 19 2018 at 12:24 AM.
    Making Brides Princesses Again!

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,205
    @Millie, your last two replies.


    OMG !!!! Not only that you would write that, but that you actually might BELIEVE that.

    I think a recent US High Court judgement says it all, it denied that being taught to read at school was a right (under US law). if your education system has fallen that low - it explains how Mr Tiny* got voted in.


    *Hands, Brain, or Reproductive system; not mouth or ego, for obvious reasons.

  13. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    Stax of Wordz


    So that wall of text was as much as to say that the fact that a great many Americans can't find their own country on a world map is because they won their independence through war rather than diplomacy?

    Interesting take on things

  14. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Langie View Post
    So that wall of text was as much as to say that the fact that a great many Americans can't find their own country on a world map is because they won their independence through war rather than diplomacy?

    Interesting take on things
    Hubris, ego. A sense of others don't matter because of a self-centered attitude. It is unfortunate but I see it all the time not just on a National idea but on an individual one. I think it is really sad

    But there is a lot more to it than just that. There is politics deeply infused in the Public School system (and even College) so everything taught has bend to it. By what I have observed other countries have kept most of their education sticking to the facts and not editing education (and not just History) to a political end-goal. You can't know what you don't know. I have yet to find an American University that teaches Austrian Economics or certain branches of Philosophy. In fact after taking a few Philosophy courses I have come away with the (false) feeling that Plato wrote about Socrates and Aristotle wrote about Plato but had little significant self-writing of Aristotle's own. Not one class used On Rhetoric for instance, although the Public Speaking class used lots of the ideas from it without mentioning the works once. Thomas Aquinas is barely mentioned (and then out of context when mentioned) and John Stuart Mill is only mentioned as a footnote in History courses. That's right, the two Philosophers who were the most influential on our Founding Fathers are basically ignored while every college student has read Plato's Republic thinking that that somehow is related to our own form of Republic.

    If the teachers learn this stuff, what do you think they teach the kids in Primary School?

    The Philosophy behind the reading not a Right:
    And no, Reading is not a 'Right' as by definition of our Founders (based on the works of two of the above mentioned Philosophers) a Right is something granted by God, not Man, and cannot be given by men or government although governments can attempt to take them away. It is also something every person is born with, which makes sense for it comes from God. Something that is taught cannot be a 'Right', something that man invented cannot be a 'Right'.
    "But the Second Amendment is about Guns and man invented those!"
    The First Amendment is not about free speech, it is about Free Thought. As person cannot think freely if one is not exposed to thoughts and ideas that challenge their own.
    The Second is about defense of one's own life and property, and one's family and loved ones, against all that would seek to do them harm, including but far from limited to a government. I believe Sam and Gandalf both said something about that idea.
    Third and Fourth are about the Rights to own stuff and privacy, to live as one chooses within one's own domain.
    The rest are basically about the Right to fair treatment under the law, which goes back to the Right to have and live one's own life.
    The Declaration of Independence mentioned three Rights: Life, Liberty (freedom from being forced to do anything), and the PURSUIT of Happiness (the attempt at, not the result).
    If reading makes you happy then you have the Right to try to learn to read, but the actual knowing how to read is a result and is not a Right.

    But, since Thomas Aquinas and JS Mill are not taught in schools people do not know these things. However other Philosophical discourses are taught that oppose these ideas, the ideas and thoughts the USA was founded upon, and here we leave the realm of Philosophy and a discourse on American Education and enter the realm of Politics for the mere mention of the Philosophers' names that are taught in college are so linked with politics they cannot be separated by most people.

    This is Philosophy btw, not Politics. Sure Politics stem from Philosophy but then so does Science and Culture and the discussion at the moment is about Culture and the Science called Sociology, both of which are greatly affected by education.
    Making Brides Princesses Again!

  15. #65
    Race of Dwarves in Daisy Dukes?
    It will give me a reason to log on just to laugh uncontrollably.

    Race of Elves in Daisy Dukes?
    Eh! Please no! /puke

    Race of Hobbits in Daisy Dukes?
    If they fit yesterday, they won't after second breakfast today.

    Race of Men in Daisy Dukes?
    Only if it isn't limited to Females. I'll be ready for a 2nd round of laughs when I see a Man Cappy dismount wearing a pair.

    Race of Beorning wearing Daisy Dukes?
    Might I suggest shape shifting Spandex?


    Why stop there? Goblin and Orc Daisy Dukes. Sure to be a sell out at the Lotro store. A new skin for the Uruk-Hai fresh with frills and a bow at the back.
    All the G.I.R.L.s will love this. It needs to be a thing now.
    Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza" Sapienza University of Rome

    Graduate PhD con lode Scienze della Politica

  16. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by sapienze View Post
    Why stop there? Goblin and Orc Daisy Dukes. Sure to be a sell out at the Lotro store. A new skin for the Uruk-Hai fresh with frills and a bow at the back.
    All the G.I.R.L.s will love this. It needs to be a thing now.
    Naw, I imagine Orcs would go for shiny Hot Pants and Booty Shorts, no matter the gender.

    And Daisy Dukes are for girls; men who try to wear them look silly.

    Making Brides Princesses Again!

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Milii View Post
    wall of text
    Perhaps you missed the point, they are not being taught to read or write at school, so went up through the court system to try and force the local education authority to do what it is supposed to do, but refuses to do - teach.

    How is anyone supposed to function in a modern world without those VERY basic skills? It is almost as if the Powers That Be want them to remain poor and ignorant.

    Sorry if it sounds like I am picking on the US, I have come across plenty of examples of non-education - right up to degree level, here in the UK; semi educated people, with almost no understanding (and no desire to understand), the world around them, are teaching "knowledge and understanding of the world" to rooms full of impressionable children.

    As long as it is in the "Teachers Ed" book, they think they are educated.

  18. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Yarbro View Post
    Perhaps you missed the point, they are not being taught to read or write at school, so went up through the court system to try and force the local education authority to do what it is supposed to do, but refuses to do - teach.

    How is anyone supposed to function in a modern world without those VERY basic skills? It is almost as if the Powers That Be want them to remain poor and ignorant.

    Sorry if it sounds like I am picking on the US, I have come across plenty of examples of non-education - right up to degree level, here in the UK; semi educated people, with almost no understanding (and no desire to understand), the world around them, are teaching "knowledge and understanding of the world" to rooms full of impressionable children.

    As long as it is in the "Teachers Ed" book, they think they are educated.
    Mow you have done what I was trying to avoid doing; you have crossed from philosophy and sociology into Politics, or at least to answer this crosses that line. Do what Toto did and pull back the curtain. look at those who pull the levers.

    Making Brides Princesses Again!

  19. #69
    Might as well add the top for what I think the shorts should go like to go with my hat:



    You see, my other Sheriff's/Bounder Outfit is only really good for snowy-cold places and is lousy for Summer-time:

    Last edited by Milii; Yesterday at 03:00 PM.
    Making Brides Princesses Again!

 

 
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload