There are very few things in life that can cheer a young man’s gloomy, frost bitten, late-winter disposition than a sunny spring day: the crack of a baseball bat slicing through anticipatory silence, the smell of cut grass lilting gingerly in the air…the boobs…
Yes, each spring—as if part of some Pagan offering to whatever animistic entity bestows a bountiful harvest upon the humble inhabitants of this land—women shed clothes faster than a flaming Bobby Labonte after a 12-car pileup. They trade sweaters for sundresses; pants for formal shorts; Ugg boots for delicate sandals or sometimes more Ugg boots (to lesser amusement).
As not-very-acclaimed British astronomer and wizard Henry Percy remarked one particularly bright spring day, blinking wearily after hours of observing the sun emerging and retreating from behind the nimbostrati: “As the sunne goeth, so goeth the tattie-pies.” Using the parlance of his days, Percy waxed poetic on the plunging necklines he observed during the warmer months of the year; yet, there is more to this concept than mere philosophy, bloated as it is with ideas and conjecture.
It’s science. Centuries of research have proven an inverse relationship between the amount of sunlight per day and the amount of fabric society requires for a woman to cover her desirables. The resulting equation is written thusly:
s + c = k,
where total sunshine (s), measured in minutes per day, plus the total area of clothing worn (c), measured in yards of fabric per $100 spent at Anthropolgie or a store of equal urban hippyness, is constant (k).* As one increases, the other decreases in kind.
The formula above is useful in explaining the springtime phenomenon known in scientific circles as (s)Undressing. By taking this example further, mathematics can also be used to derive a woman’s overall desirability using a few simple variables:
a = [(t+s2)(w/b)] - h / [ (1-21/2)d]
At first blush, this formula may seem a bit complicated, but after a brief explanation, its simplicity is revealed. Overall attractiveness (a) equals the total area of exposed thigh (t) plus short-shorts (s2) multiplied by the ratio of waist (w) to butt (b) minus herpes (h) divided by the female irrationality factor (1-21/2 ) times intoxication (d).
It should be noted that mathematical formulas relating to fashion hold true only for women; mathematics has yet to explain the mystery that is man. Consider the following simplified equation:
t + s2 = a
As explained above, exposed upper thigh (t) plus short-shorts (s2) contributes to a very attractive ensemble. However:
(t + s2)/p ≠ a
When exposed upper thigh (t) plus short-shorts (s2) is divided by penis (p), it does not equal anything remotely attractive. This is known as “The Jorts Phenomenon” whereby an erstwhile attractive article of clothing worn by a female, in this case a stonewashed pair of Daisy Dukes that leave very little to an eager imagination, becomes legitimately disturbing when worn by a male (click at your own risk).
*This equation is not to be confused with the Beauty-Brains Postulate (B + b = k) used to explain the absence of all creative and constructive thought emanating from extremely beautiful (and not formerly obese) women.
Posts
2 comments:
The only thing you forgot to mention is that douchers come from the douchery. They are chewed up by Abercrombie, swished around like Tommy Hilfiger's junk, and spit out with popped collars, too much cologne and sticks up their asses (which they like).
oh...if only I could be one!
ps. this is awesome
Post a Comment