So I know the title question is fairly subjective, but that's my personal opinion, as well as the opinion of almost everyone I know.
Women in thigh length shorts... it just looks normal. It looks right. It looks like she's wearing clothing actually made for her.
But guys in thigh length shorts... it just looks sort of... ugh... weird. And excuse me for saying so... gay. No offense to actual gay people, but thigh length shorts just don't look very masculine. It just doesn't look right. It sort of looks like he didn't have any clean shorts, and just wore one of his girlfriend's shorts since it's better than nothing.
Just look at the woman in the first pic in thigh length shorts, versus the two guys... she looks great, but on the guys it just doesn't look right if you ask me.
If it helps you compare better if they're in the same picture rather than in separate ones, then here you go.
I don't exactly know why, though... perhaps a woman's thighs just simply look BETTER than a guy's. Or shorter shorts have become more associated with femininity these days.
Now I'm not saying guys look bad in shorts in general, everyone looks good in shorts. Just not thigh length shorts. Knee length to slightly above knee length look good on guys.
Now that I think about it, women don't really look good in knee length shorts... it looks like they're restricting their legs too much. It just looks like their thighs need some air.
Guys look good in knee length shorts, but not thigh length shorts... women look good in thigh length shorts, but not knee length shorts... probably due to society brainwashing me.
Why do thigh length shorts look so much better on women than on guys?
Post Opinion
13 Opinion
Like
Share
Follow
1 likes
What is your opinion?
Add Opinion
Most Helpful Opinions
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
It might have to do with a man's legs (typically) being harry that make it less flattering. It's not as flattering to see THAT much hair, hence why knee length shorts look better on men (less hair to see because less leg being shown).
Those last two photos that you posted, for example --if you were to shave the guys' legs and crop out the top half (so that we don't actually know that it's a guy), I think most people would say that those legs look nice in those shorts.
On a personal level, though, I agree --I think thigh length shorts are more flattering on women and knee length shorts are more flattering on men.
You're totally right on the leg hair on guys thing. More leg equals more leg hair... in which makes things less flattering.
You're also right about the shaving and cropping on the last two photos. Though the guy with his girlfriend already looks like he has his legs shaved... there's really no difference in smoothness in between their legs. They look just like his girl's legs. However, the guy in the last photo with the 2 girls, you can definitely tell his legs look a bit fuzzier and less shiny than theirs. In which suggests he definitely has leg hair. I couldn't tell at first, but looking closer I definitely see it.
Probably because you are a guy and that is your preferance lol
1
3 Reply
Asker
+1 y
Hey, you're quite pretty! Your skin looks really clear, your hair looks nice, and you have a really nice smile! I really don't mind the braces, by the way. That's also a pretty white blouse. You don't look dark skinned, but the white makes you look tan.
And you're only 16? Holy shit, I thought you were in your mid 20's! Well some girls develop quicker than others I guess, haha.
But either ways, enough about your looks. Yeah, that's probably exactly why! Lol! As a straight guy, I naturally prefer female thighs over male thighs. And of course, it's just a preference in general, lol.
12? Damn... talk about conflicting views... how do you go from mid 20's to 12... lol!
I guess it also depends on the picture, the angle, the clothes you're wearing, etc. It also depends on personal opinions. Perhaps you look older than what you yourself see yourself as. Or I'm not very good at telling ages. Could be anything, really, lol.
In the profile picture you definitely look like you're in your mid 20's; much older than 16, and DEFINITELY much older than 12, lol. I don't know how to describe it, but your facial features look it, and your blouse looks something more like a grown woman would wear, rather than a teenage girl.
Not that it's a bad thing, though. :) You still look really beautiful in the picture, and I like your genuine looking smile.
And whether you look 12 or mid 20's, neither is a bad thing. If you look 12 now, it's possible you'll look a lot younger when you're like 60. If you look mid 20's, you just simply developed faster :)
because its in your mind. In your mind guy are suppose to be cool, rugged; shorts that like make them look feminine.
Second all the guys you picked where out of shape, while all the girls you picked where slim, small waist, not fat. You got fooled with that advertising. Just whats how the girls in advertising are never out of shape, never below average looks, or if they are their body is above average. It can look good on a guy too;
Not gonna lie, that guy DOES look good in those shorts... he almost makes me question my sexuality... but he looks more so ready for the beach rather than everyday life on the streets or at school. I forgot to mention, thigh length shorts on guys are great at the beach... long knee length shorts are too much of a drag for swimming. But for casual everyday life, such short shorts on guys are not necessary.
And that girl actually does not look bad in those shorts. She looks pretty good if I do say so myself. She doesn't even look overweight, more-so average. Sure, she's not as attractive as the models I chose... but she doesn't look bad at all. I've seen WAY fatter girls than her in MUCH shorter shorts. Plus, her legs do look pretty nice and smooth.
Most Helpful Opinions