To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
At least there’s nothing about pants.
That is so true. I will think of this the next time I see moobs and a beer belly. Thank all gods for shirts.
If you’re not wearing a shirt, your treasure trail won’t itch, so you won’t be absentmindedly rubbing your furry abs and revealing tantalizing little glimpses. So yay for shirts?
If that’s a college, and it looks like it might be from the very institutional nature of the architecture and the sign, then it’s probably (and sadly) necessary to make that explicit, thanks to the whirlwind of hormones and posturing.
While I was in a dorm a few years back, the residents on the male-only floors were reminded by the hall director that shirts were “appreciated” in the common areas about three weeks after move-in.
There was also one semester that there were signs on the back of the locker room doors at the student rec center not only reminding people that the dress code mandated a shirt, but defining what had to be covered in order for what you were wearing above your waist to be considered a shirt, because there was a sudden fad of guys with armholes so oversized that more pectoral muscle was exposed than was covered and girls wearing tops that covered less than the sports bras underneath.
If shirt, then pants.
It’s a very simple equation that should always be observed.
Aside from the fact that courtesy cannot “require” anything, in what sense do they mean “courtesy”? Courteous behaviour? Means? Indulgence? The possibilities for interpreting this sign are endless. Does it mean that one cannot be courteous unless wearing a shirt? Or that courtesy will not be shown to those not wearing shirts? It seems like a blanket statement, but does it apply in clothing optional situations too, like at beaches? If this actually is a college, it’s a depressingly poor use of English.
I wear a slanket/snuggie and nothing else underneath. Is that ok?
Fuck that shit. Shirts are always optional.
A story my dad told me:
Back in the day when he was in high school, the administration would, in the spring, make something like the following announcement: “Since the weather is getting warmer, we would like to remind you that shirts and shoes are required at all times.”
And that often inspired people to streak through the hallways wearing a shirt and a pair of shoes. (And a ski mask, so as not to be identified and suspended.)
Venomlash, even when I see asscrack I’m tempted to yell “Don’t Look Ethel”!
Urgutha, completely acceptable.
@9: As a kid, I always thought those “no shirt, no service” signs in stores and malls were awfully presumptuous. What if people didn’t wear pants? Why are we assuming this baseline of decency? Surely, if a person needs to be reminded to wear a shirt, pants are not far behind.
@6 It’s perfectly good English. The rules are no different whether I say “courtesy requires shirts”, “Rule 7B requires shirts”, or “my mother requires shirts”. Courtesy requires a lot of things. Courtesy requires the use of “please” and “thank you.” Courtesy requires smiling and nodding at small children who repeat things endlessly when you really want to tell them to shut up and/or go bother someone else. Courtesy requires abstention from sex, if you’re on a crowded bus.
I heartily applaud the creator of that sign for using three words instead of some long, non-blaming, bullshit-laden thing that marketing or PR people would stuff with emotionally-loaded words, passive voice, and weaselly conditional words that result from trying to make it seem like they’re not telling what to do because they’re merely presenting a hypothetical, like “We would like to remind our guests that some of your fellow guests may find it discourteous for others not to wear shirts while using the facilities.” This tells you straight out: if courtesy requires shirts, then no shirt = no courtesy and I hope that most of us are still smart enough to realize that displaying a lack of courtesy is synonymous with being rude.
12: stuff and nonsense. If shirtlessness is such a rampant problem that they need to remind people they must wear them, then a bullshit, namby-pamby, fake-polite sign like “courtesy requires shirts” is not the way to do it. “Shirts required at all times,” “students must be properly attired,” “no nudity” or something similar–and much clearer and more to the point–would have been much more appropriate.
Courtesy requires shirts, but true love waits.
Eh, courtesy requires a lot of things, but a shirt is rarely among them.
Now, puritanism–that requires a shirt.
@4: so true. And, if it’s a college or other place where near-adolescent men congregate, then the sign requires the addendum “and abhors Axe.”