Women In Shorts MDR - Casual Night

[gelli8112]

Couldn't resist..

STOP signs are ignored, blinkers not used, people speeding.. Shorts!!!

 

Whilst I go off on a tangent, please Bare with me... It will make sense.

 

So my question to the Bare (naturalist) cruisers "letsgetwet"

Do you have to wear a bow-tie with the birthday suit? For Formal night.

And do the ambassadors really hand out towels at the entrance to MDR:eek:

And are you allowed to enter the WJ without any footwear?

 

Now the bare chartered cruises, solve all the issues of attire..:p:cool::

Everyone on those cruises have to follow the rules correct.

 

Imagine the look you would get if you had a pair of shorts on!!!

 

Captain Jake, you had a good run; unfortunately Pompey, who speaks the naked truth is now in charge. :D

[PompeySailor]

Let's get back to the original post

Casual night!!! Shorts.

ITS CASUAL NIGHT!!!

Not smart casual, not business casual, CASUAL!!

[LMaxwell]

Let's get back to the original post

Casual night!!! Shorts.

ITS CASUAL NIGHT!!!

Not smart casual, not business casual, CASUAL!!

 

I think the pictures shown in this thread of various ladies outfits look quite nice and appropriate for warm weather resort vacation wear.

 

If someone is not comfortable wearing that type of clothing, they do not have to themselves.

 

If shorts aren't okay, but a skirt is okay, where does a skort fall? Looks like a skirt, built like shorts, you'd have to be crawling under the table and looking up ladies legs to be able to tell the difference. That may be a problem.

[CheekyShorts]

Women's shorts can be way more fancy than pants! Why be so uncomfortable and frumpy in hot jeans or pants? :confused:

[gelli8112]

I think the pictures shown in this thread of various ladies outfits look quite nice and appropriate for warm weather resort vacation wear.

 

If someone is not comfortable wearing that type of clothing, they do not have to themselves.

 

If shorts aren't okay, but a skirt is okay, where does a skort fall? Looks like a skirt, built like shorts, you'd have to be crawling under the table and looking up ladies legs to be able to tell the difference. That may be a problem.

 

Lol. You guys are too funny. Enjoy the rest of your evenings and Happy cruising. :)

[JamesEM]

I live here in Myrtle Beach and during tourist season dressing up is a clean t-shirt.

[marci22]

Not to promote either view, but there are always people in shorts on any night labeled 'casual'.

[Havingfun2010]

I don't always understand the question. If it says no shorts, than why can't everyone just follow it? There is no such thing as "fancy", "pretty" or "dressy" shorts. Shorts are garments that have 2 legs, and are cut off above the knee.

 

Wearing or not wearing them, is simply the choice of being too lazy, to change, or not. Now I might get flamed for saying it, but the reality is most of the time, people just don't want to take the 5 minutes to change.

 

Same goes for footwear. Flip Flops, with some "bling" attached to it, is still a flip flop.

 

The other favorite is whether kids need to follow the dress code, like they are some special group of people, and should not follow rules or suggestions for proper dress! We are talking about teenagers, not 2 year olds. Just wanted to clear that one up.

 

Just follow the code. Jeans are ok, but keep the shorts for the beach/pool/or port. Put a nice collared shirt on, can be polo on casual night, no problem.

 

Please stop these silly debates, and use common sense. Shorts are shorts, and flip flops are flip flops, and kids are just the same as adults.

[heyabbott]

Can they please have a no poly-blend dress rule at the MDR. Some of these women in these poly blend dresses, with their wild floral designs and white faux patent leather shoes look like they ripped off the fabric from a bowling alley chairs to make their dress. Cotton, silk or linen only please ladies between Memorial Day and Labor Day

[LMaxwell]

I don't always understand the question. If it says no shorts, than why can't everyone just follow it?

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to wear shorts. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to make people wear pants on vacation is a dumb rule.

[kendon]

So if I wore a pair of black shorts that came right above the knee that wouldn't be ok to you, but if I wore a black skirt that came right above the knee that would be ok? The only difference is one is sewn in at the crotch.

 

What a dumb comment! If the sign says no shorts...it means just that. If the sign said no black skirts the come right above the knee...it means just that.

 

I think everyone in the world should do just what ever they want. How's that? Geez...grow up...

[LMaxwell]

What a dumb comment! If the sign says no shorts...it means just that. If the sign said no black skirts the come right above the knee...it means just that.

 

I think everyone in the world should do just what ever they want. How's that? Geez...grow up...

 

It's not a dumb comment at all. For all the people who go on and on about following the rule, they completely ignore the fact that for a woman the only difference between a skirt and a pair of shorts is where the crotch is sewn.

 

You can't ask a blind rule follower / someone with no critical thinking ability to explain anything to do with logic or rationality. A rule is a rule is a rule to them. Doesn't matter if it makes sense or not. If rule said jump off the ship, they'd do it because it was the rule.

 

The point is people DO want to do what they want, and aren't looking to infringe on anyone elses good time. If you can't have a good time because of what someone else is wearing, I guess I feel a bit sorry for you. People don't want to have their dress rigidly dictated by the company they are paying to take them on vacation.

 

Why is this like grasping quantum physics for some people? It's so plain and easy to understand.

[Adayatatime]

It's not a dumb comment at all. For all the people who go on and on about following the rule, they completely ignore the fact that for a woman the only difference between a skirt and a pair of shorts is where the crotch is sewn.

 

You can't ask a blind rule follower / someone with no critical thinking ability to explain anything to do with logic or rationality. A rule is a rule is a rule to them. Doesn't matter if it makes sense or not. If rule said jump off the ship, they'd do it because it was the rule.

 

The point is people DO want to do what they want, and aren't looking to infringe on anyone elses good time. If you can't have a good time because of what someone else is wearing, I guess I feel a bit sorry for you. People don't want to have their dress rigidly dictated by the company they are paying to take them on vacation.

 

Why is this like grasping quantum physics for some people? It's so plain and easy to understand.

 

I agree with this excellent post. I think some people are naturally inquisitive and question reason (thank goodness).

 

There will always be those who don't want to question anything at all.

[LetsGetWet!]

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to wear shorts. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to make people wear pants on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

Heck, since deedeetoo introduced the analogy into the thread...

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to speed. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to make people drive a certain speed is a dumb rule.

 

Here's a more germane one:

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to reserve pool loungers. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to not allow people to reserve pool loungers on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

Or maybe:

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to bring alcohol to drink in their room. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to prohibit people from bringing their own liquor on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

Or there's always:

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to smoke on their balcony. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to prohibit people from smoking on their balcony on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

The facts are - the cruise line gets to make the rules, whether you or I think they're "dumb" or not. The rules they make & publish are part of the atmosphere & experience that we are selecting and paying for when we sign up for our cruise. If you think their set of published rules is just "dumb" than it would be "smart" to pick a different vacation.

[LMaxwell]

I don't speed. That has a financial impact on me if caught, uses more fuel, and is dangerous to those around me. The cost benefit (time saved) is usually marginal or meaningless, therefore risk versus reward doesn't pan out.

 

I don't reserve a pool lounger. That directly impacts others. I don't even lay in the sun; so other people can fight over those spots.

 

I don't bring alcohol on the ship. Nor do I bring soda. Those items cut into cruise line profits. As a shareholder I believe they should be more diligent in efforts to curb behavior that directly negatively impacts revenue.

 

I don't smoke. I used to, but I no longer do. The cruise line has created a policy of no balcony smoking for safety and health reasons. If I smoked and blew it towards someone else that could physically make them uncomfortable and harm them. That's unfair. People have a right to clean air. If I broke said policy there would be a financial impact on me. It seems financial impact is one thing universally understood.

 

If I think a particular rule is "dumb" with a company I spend five figures per year with I am not going to switch out of spite. I am going to let the company know and try to get the policy changed. Just like people did with smoking; a majority of people let the company know they no longer agreed with a policy of allowing it on a balcony. Very simple. A rule that made sense in a different time and era may not make sense today. Nothing wrong with expressing ones opinions and seeing how the company reacts.

 

Have a great Monday.

[Captain Jake]

these dress codes threads are a blast , full of pot stirrers .

Got to love it.

Well ,Off to the Gym

May check in before going to the beach.

Have fun Y'all

:cj

Edited July 7, 2014 by Captain Jake

[LetsGetWet!]

You can't ask a blind rule follower / someone with no critical thinking ability to explain anything to do with logic or rationality. A rule is a rule is a rule to them. Doesn't matter if it makes sense or not. If rule said jump off the ship, they'd do it because it was the rule.

Here's where YOUR critical thinking & debate skills are solely lacking. Are you capable of logical debate without accusing your opponent of having "no critical thinking ability or rationality?" Because based on your ongoing posting style here, it would appear not.

 

I happen to disagree with you, and both my critical thinking skills and my rationality are quite good, thank you very much! I actually did a fair bit of competitive debate back in college days, and you'd have been laughed off the podium - or kicked off the team - if all you could manage was to continually devolve into baseless claims that your opponent was irrational with no critical thinking skills.

 

As I've previously said, the ENTIRE set of rules is at the discretion of the cruise line. That set of published rules is part of the cruise experience that you and I and everyone else is choosing when we make a decision to book and pay for a cruise. If you don't like the rules, than by all means lobby to try to get them changed.

 

But in the meantime, picking & choosing which of them YOU are willing to follow & which YOU decide you're just going to totally ignore - while claiming that anyone who dares disagree with you lacks critical thinking skills and is irrational - is simply rude, inconsiderate and more than a little ridiculous.

[Adayatatime]

Heck, since deedeetoo introduced the analogy into the thread...

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to speed. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to make people drive a certain speed is a dumb rule.

 

Here's a more germane one:

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to reserve pool loungers. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to not allow people to reserve pool loungers on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

Or maybe:

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to bring alcohol to drink in their room. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to prohibit people from bringing their own liquor on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

Or there's always:

 

Since you don't understand, I will lay it out for you. People want to smoke on their balcony. It's not a matter of being lazy. It's called a preference. Enforcing a rule to prohibit people from smoking on their balcony on vacation is a dumb rule.

 

The facts are - the cruise line gets to make the rules, whether you or I think they're "dumb" or not. The rules they make & publish are part of the atmosphere & experience that we are selecting and paying for when we sign up for our cruise. If you think their set of published rules is just "dumb" than it would be "smart" to pick a different vacation.

 

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at here. The rules are generally set by the passengers preferences and are subject to change at any time depending on profits.

 

There are also those relating the health and safety / insurance / the law.

 

Do you see no need for passenger questionnaires?

[Adayatatime]

Here's where YOUR critical thinking & debate skills are solely lacking. Are you capable of logical debate without accusing your opponent of having "no critical thinking ability or rationality?" Because based on your ongoing posting style here, it would appear not.

 

I happen to disagree with you, and both my critical thinking skills and my rationality are quite good, thank you very much! I actually did a fair bit of competitive debate back in college days, and you'd have been laughed off the podium - or kicked off the team - if all you could manage was to continually devolve into baseless claims that your opponent was irrational with no critical thinking skills.

 

As I've previously said, the ENTIRE set of rules is at the discretion of the cruise line. That set of published rules is part of the cruise experience that you and I and everyone else is choosing when we make a decision to book and pay for a cruise. If you don't like the rules, than by all means lobby to try to get them changed.

 

But in the meantime, picking & choosing which of them YOU are willing to follow & which YOU decide you're just going to totally ignore - while claiming that anyone who dares disagree with you lacks critical thinking skills and is irrational - is simply rude, inconsiderate and more than a little ridiculous.

 

 

Do you follow every single rule in life (NB - rule not law). Do you not question anything, ever?

Edited July 7, 2014 by Adayatatime

[American Bear]

What a dumb comment! If the sign says no shorts...it means just that. If the sign said no black skirts the come right above the knee...it means just that.

 

I think everyone in the world should do just what ever they want. How's that? Geez...grow up...

 

And those who complain the most are often the biggest offenders!

Who care what others wear!

[American Bear]

They tend to be far more lenient with women than with men. Have seen women in dressy shorts on every cruise in last few years.

 

We've seen on many occasions, even on formal nites, couples wearing tee shirts and shorts in the MDR! Even seen guys who wear their baseball caps on at dinner!:eek:

[caribbean sailor]

I'm not sure what constitutes fancy or dressy but it seems like women showing leg is different then men showing leg.

 

On a separate but related note, I'm hearing that Matt Lauer was on the today show in a suit that had shorts instead of pants - I guess times are changing.

 

 

I AGREE to see a women in shorts is a lot more pleasing to the eye,then a pair of hairy legs on a man.New rule no shorts for men in MDR. :D

[Grandma Dazzles]

Always read these dress code threads - but never have posted until now.

 

Personally follow the suggested guidelines - would not wear shorts on an evening in the MDR.

However, what other people wear doesn't really bother me.

 

The problem as I see it is that so many people would "stretch" what is appropriate. I am trying hard to make an effort not to use the words "dress shorts" but there is a difference. If shorts were permitted so many people would wear their gym/running/workout-type shorts and I honestly don't think they are appropriate for dinner. They are meant to be for working out - even the color coordinated "nice" running outfits - think Nike top and shorts as an example.

 

Men/women/kids - clean, appropriate short outfits/collared shirts, etc. - yes.

Gym/workout wear - no.

[LMaxwell]

Here's where YOUR critical thinking & debate skills are solely lacking.

 

Solely? My only flaw? How kind. Or sorely? In that case, I strongly disagree.

 

Are you capable of logical debate without accusing your opponent of having "no critical thinking ability or rationality?" Because based on your ongoing posting style here, it would appear not.

 

If you have some critical thinking or rationale on the topic besides resting on "a rule is a rule, follow rules or leave" answer I'd love to hear it.

 

 

I happen to disagree with you, and both my critical thinking skills and my rationality are quite good, thank you very much! I actually did a fair bit of competitive debate back in college days, and you'd have been laughed off the podium - or kicked off the team - if all you could manage was to continually devolve into baseless claims that your opponent was irrational with no critical thinking skills.

 

 

Well...we are on a web forum, not your college debate team of the past. It seems to me that you are the one that has some skills to sharpen. I'm not even sure what you are disagreeing with me about since you have not stated an actual opinion. You keep pointing at the sign and going "This is what the sign says". How is that a debate? That's stonewalling where I come from. The most you have addressed the issue is to make strawmen arguments that have little or no impact on the question at hand. Smoking? Speeding? Really? I won't have to make a huge mental leap to guess the record of your scholastic debate team.

 

As I've previously said, the ENTIRE set of rules is at the discretion of the cruise line. That set of published rules is part of the cruise experience that you and I and everyone else is choosing when we make a decision to book and pay for a cruise. If you don't like the rules, than by all means lobby to try to get them changed.

 

Rules not regarding health and safety tend to be flexible. I agree with you on your salient point, if I do not like a rule I should lobby for change. That's why I sent a well written letter to RCI directly on this topic. No point moaning on a forum; better to put a stamp on it and let 'em know in no uncertain terms what you value. Go ahead. Free country. Write a nice letter to lobby for the opposing point of view. I won't stop you.

 

't like the rules, than by all means lobby to try to get them changed.

 

But in the meantime, picking & choosing which of them YOU are willing to follow & which YOU decide you're just going to totally ignore - while claiming that anyone who dares disagree with you lacks critical thinking skills and is irrational - is simply rude, inconsiderate and more than a little ridiculous.

 

That's not what I said at all. Maybe you should read my post again about traditional, practical, and progressive mindsets. I do not believe that anyone that disagrees with me lacks critical thinking or is irrational. I think that a traditionalist lacks critical thinking skills (unquestioning) and is irrational (does not consider alternative viewpoints to be actionable even in the face of empirical evidence). Objectively speaking this is what most psychology scholastic material would label as a traditionalist.

 

I was recently reading a business book about the design, engineering, testing, deployment etc. of a radical product. A certain number, some 20-25% of testers totally balked at it. It wasn't like the old stuff. Too new. Too different. Too outside the norm. The company decided to ignore the traditionalists because they could not evaluate the new product properly. They were thinking of it in a vacuum of what they already knew and accepted and simply could not / would not change. If they built a new product for a traditionalist it would be outdated as soon as it hit the shelves. Younger buyers looking for innovation made up a larger market share. The company basically had to innovate away from old business habits or die. That product went on to become an empirical success and runaway sales leader in its sector, without the traditionalists.

 

Worse, you seem to be self-labeling yourself as a traditionalist AND then taking offense at the qualities of the label. I didn't label you as such. If you generally follow rules but question "can this be done better?" "would this change be a net positive?" "How can I enact change" then I'd consider you a practical thinker.

 

In short, I think my comprehension and debate skills are just fine and I happen to put myself into the practical sphere of thinking. You are the one using strong words like accusatory, rude, etc. I'm simply describing definitions of a mindset. I don't know you, I have no reason to be rude to you.

[LMaxwell]

Always read these dress code threads - but never have posted until now.

 

Personally follow the suggested guidelines - would not wear shorts on an evening in the MDR.

However, what other people wear doesn't really bother me.

 

The problem as I see it is that so many people would "stretch" what is appropriate. I am trying hard to make an effort not to use the words "dress shorts" but there is a difference. If shorts were permitted so many people would wear their gym/running/workout-type shorts and I honestly don't think they are appropriate for dinner. They are meant to be for working out - even the color coordinated "nice" running outfits - think Nike top and shorts as an example.

 

Men/women/kids - clean, appropriate short outfits/collared shirts, etc. - yes.

Gym/workout wear - no.

 

That all sounds quite practical to me