| Is she or isn't she? |
Thu, 29 December 2005 13:49  |
|
|
Every once in a while I'm forced to ponder, 'Migod, that woman looks like she's wearing nylons!' But of course she isn't. It has something to do with foot pressure and the body's natural color. For example, often when a picture shows a woman barefooted it looks as if she's wearing reinforced tan or orange-hued hose. That's because the skin colour around her toes and on her heel gives almost the exact same look as if she's wearing the sheerest hose. Amazing, but true. Only sad that it's false.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Thu, 29 December 2005 18:26  |
|
Whoosh!!! Straight over my head!!!   
Anyone shed some light on the subject 
BB68
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Thu, 29 December 2005 19:02 |
|
| Barelyblack68 wrote on Thu, 29 December 2005 18:26 |
Whoosh!!! Straight over my head!!!
Anyone shed some light on the subject
BB68
|
No BB ... but it might make some sense once I've sampled a few single malts  
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Fri, 30 December 2005 20:42 |
|
Fashionista is correct. The bare legged brigade sometimes fools those of us looking for nylon-shorn legs.
While it may be part of Alan Smith 7 Myths, I believe Fash is saying the presentation of the female foot in pumps/court shoes allows those of us that look there first to get an instant expectation of nylon.
As our eyes inch up the female form toward her knee, the lack of nylon becomes more obvious. Fashionista needs nobody at this site to speak for him, but the color references he made coincide with my daily disappointments.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 15:08 |
|
True Fash and Reb, I recently had a French woman working for me that I could swear was wearing the sheerest of stockings, but no she had the perfect skin and hue that just gave her that appearance. This happened more than once, on different days, and I thought she had dressed up for those days. A very lucky woman if you ask me.
Whether it's the skin quality or a 10p per minute tan or as you speculate, an optical illusion, if it's in the mind what a good one!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 18:50 |
|
|
I'd rather not play the ' is she, is'nt she ' type of game .... give me a confident woman, who knows the power of dark nylons, (with RHT or seams for even extra emphasis) on untanned legs ... anytime
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 19:39 |
|
|
Is this REALLY such an important issue, gentlemen? Children in Somalia are starving.........!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 19:53 |
|
Yes, the argument over whether I am wearing stockings or not is moot for me. I am very fair and you could tell in an instant whether I were or not. Thank goodness there are the dark stockings; and on untanned legs!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 20:47 |
|
I always get confused as to stocking/no stockings, when the woman has a little bit of 'spare skin' at the ankle. it creases and looks like hosiery - then you realise that even with the patterned stockings available, no self respecting manufacturer would make stocking with a pattern of veins woven into them !!
Tarri
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 20:58 |
|
I always refer to a woman with varicose veins as wearing a pair of blue cords
BB68
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is she or isn't she? |
Sun, 01 January 2006 22:18 |
|
| Quote |
Children in Somalia are starving.........!
|
Good job we dont live there then.
|
|
|
|
| |
