Yes, the Bible says, don't cross-dress. When women started wearing pants in the 1960s, the designers Yves St Laurent and Halston did that, there was widespread unease and a sense that this was a bad thing to do. It was a brief concern. The designers said that women were so feminine that their femininity would come through even though they were in tailored trousers.

That proves true. In general nobody thinks a woman wearing pants is a man. But.

Yes, it's a different social mentality, and changed things. Unisex clothing did change things.

Now, in some quarters, wearing a skirt marks you as strange, perhaps a right winger, or low level. Only the high level, the boss's wife, or a quite senior woman executive, has the "right" to wear a skirt.

A woman who wants to be taken seriously is going to wear pants. Nice pants, but pants. A skirt will mark her as un-promotable. Of course if she is rich or a rising star, a skirt is ok.

Clothes really do matter. The Bible is right.

This started when women cut their hair short right after WW I.

Yes, all slopes are slippery.

Your pun on degenerate leading to no-generating any more generations is right.

Today, the only women with a lot of children are the women wearing skirts, often past the knee. Showing the knee was also a fertility-killer.

Babies are the big issue now, an issue you allude to.

Modesty leads to children, oddly enough.

If our young men today gave the girls around them to understand they liked the swish of a long or long-ish fluttery skirt, say the return of the 1940s demure but cute dress, the girls would wear whatever it was obvious got them male interest. The alpha males need to lead. Their opinions rule.

As many people on this thread are alpha males (the rest are lady pedes) they should do this. Besides, it will improve the view. Women wouldn't have worn skirts for two thousand years if men hated them. Oh no.