Short shorts in late 40s?

[Anonymous]

Many 40+ women have nicer legs than obese cottage cheese 20-somethings. Wear what is comfortable for you. Short shorts are all that is sold for women, but you can buy boys shorts for variety if you want a longer piece. I'd stick with your short shorts though.

[Anonymous]

I don’t wear workout or yard work clothes to run errands. Instead, I do wear shorts in a longer length and a nicer top. No one is judging you, wear what you like.

[Anonymous]

I wore shorter shorts this weekend. The one thing that I had forgotten was that you get chair stripes on your legs if you go out to eat.

Also -- funny what counts as short on different bodies. I have long legs. My "short" shorts have a 5" inseam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh, you aren’t in great shape and are late 40s wearing “causal athleasure” tanks and short shorts- this sounds totally frumpy to me, never mind how your legs or backs of your arms look. If you want to be in tanks and shorts I think that can look fine, but you need to have better quality clothes. I think some 3-5 inch inseam chino shorts and a linen sleeveless shirt would look better and more put together.

You have NO idea what shape OP is in. Stop embarrassing yourself. Your envy is on full display.

Actually she said she “isn’t really athletic, but is somewhat fit.” That doesn’t sound like great shape to me. That sounds like she isn’t obese, but if you want to look good in very short shorts nearing 50, having an average mom bod won’t do it. Hey, she asked for opinions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many 40+ women have nicer legs than obese cottage cheese 20-somethings. Wear what is comfortable for you. Short shorts are all that is sold for women, but you can buy boys shorts for variety if you want a longer piece. I'd stick with your short shorts though.

Very true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many 40+ women have nicer legs than obese cottage cheese 20-somethings. Wear what is comfortable for you. Short shorts are all that is sold for women, but you can buy boys shorts for variety if you want a longer piece. I'd stick with your short shorts though.

Very true.

Maybe the 20 something has some cellulite, but the late 40 something likely has sagging knees, spider veins or varicose veins going on. Very for women in late 40s have fit and tones legs with no cellulite AND no noticeable veins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How short are we talking? I don’t want to see anyone’s ass cheeks regardless of age.
I’m also late 40s. I have a 5 inch inseam that I really like but those are hard to find. I have another pair that are maybe 4 inch that I think are too short but I wear them anyway because it’s hot.

+1
I don't really think that wearing short shorts and tight tank tops is appropriate for people of any age outside of actually working out, but that's mostly because I don't want to see anyone's butt and because that's really skimpy overall. I don't think age has anything to do with it. I don't think older people have some obligation to cover themselves, but I also wish that younger people wouldn't feel the need to run around in really skimpy clothes, either.

[Anonymous]

I'm 45 y/o and I wear 5 inches min, I can't do 3 inches anymore but I'm on the taller side (5'7). It is absolutely OK for the right body type - see

http://www.egotastic.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Kate-Beckinsale-Shorts-3.jpg

[Anonymous]

If I wore short shorts it would totally embarrass my teen daughter. I'm tall though, so I look ridiculous in anything shorter than mid thigh.

[Anonymous]

2 inch inseam is very short. I’m more petite than you are and very athletic and I would not wear 2 inch shorts. Maybe 3 to 5 inches but definitely not 2 inches except to be around the house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2 inch inseam is very short. I’m more petite than you are and very athletic and I would not wear 2 inch shorts. Maybe 3 to 5 inches but definitely not 2 inches except to be around the house.

Agree. That is super short and I'm 5'5" I'm in great shape and athletic and I wouldn't wear a 2 inch inseam outside the gym. In fact, my lululemon gym shorts are 4in inseam and feel plenty short. Don't you have regular clothes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Man here. Of course wear what you want, but I'll say women of that age look good in that if there's no cellulite.

OP, please help us to normalize cellulite by wearing shorts even if you have some!

Men have cellulite too, they're just allowed not to shave or wax their legs, so you can't tell.

I'm totally OVER the double standards. OVER IT.

UGH.

[Anonymous]

Wear what you want! I'm 43 and don't wear workout clothes to run errands, but I do wear shorts and tank tops (nice, non-cotton ones). I'm 5'5" and prefer my shorts to hit mid-thigh (roughly a 5" inseam). I have some veins on my legs and a little cellulite, but I don't care. My legs have carried me through two pregnancies and through all of life's adventures. They have logged thousands of miles running, biking, swimming, and hiking. They aren't perfect, but they are toned and strong. I couldn't care less what others think of me in shorts.

[Anonymous]

Short shorts are fine, but honestly a 2 inch inseam is preeeeetty short for most anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I picked these up the other day at Target. Highly recommended for staying very cool and flattering without any extra bulky fabric.

https://www.target.com/p/women-s-premium-knit-waistband-run-shorts-all-in-motion/-/A-81616300?preselect=81479215#lnk=sametab

These do look bulky and big. Are they better on / in real life?