By Zach M., June 2006
It has been difficult for me to understand why young children, and boys in particular, develop an attraction to short shorts. After all, sexual arousal is normally thought to be associated with teenagers and adults and to be triggered by the sight of the opposite sex, in the case of heterosexual individuals. Why would a boy of 5 be so excited just to be wearing short shorts?
Babies probably enjoy being naked in their first months or years, and then their parents make them wear more and more clothes. From that point on, wearing shorts is probably felt by the kid as a throwback to a time of unrestricted fun, while pants are associated with having to behave. Having bare legs must thus be a factor, but it does not seem sufficient to explain the boy's excitation.
I for one remember that I was never aroused by wearing swimsuits, even though they were always briefer than any shorts I wore. (These shorts were still quite short, since this was the seventies.) After all, everyone would be wearing brief swimsuits at a pool. I tended to be more impressed by wearing shorts when I was among only a few in a group to be showing my legs, and even more when I was alone in shorts in a group. In those situations, I felt like I could be seen as the kid who was too frivolous and could not resist the temptation of going out in bare legs, while the more "serious" kids had wisely chosen pants...
So my natural shyness probably contributed to augmenting the excitation of wearing short shorts. At the pool, wearing a swimsuit was necessary, while wearing shorts was a choice I made (or that my parents made for me), and there was a chance other kids might judge me. One thing was certain, I knew that being in shorts got the attention of other kids, some of whom were probably wishing they could go change into shorts. Upon meeting almost anyone when in shorts, I could see their gaze go immediately to my legs.
Aside from nakedness and shyness, another factor must have been the shorts themselves. I remember that I distinctly preferred shorts whose hem was ample enough to move around as I walked. The hem would tickle my upper thighs, thus reminding me constantly that I was in shorts and that other people could see my legs completely. I also liked the inseam to be very short, because that meant that sitting with my legs apart would allow my contrasting underwear to show. I had seen some girls sitting like that in their short shorts and I felt naughty doing the same.
This explains why, in my case, the most important thing about a pair of short shorts is the cut. I prefer shiny nylon tricot shorts, but I can get aroused in any shorts that are sufficiently short and ample. The looseness of the shorts helps hide an erection, while it can at the same time allow my butt cheeks to show a little if the wind is strong enough. In those occasions, I am not even trying to be an exhibitionist: I am just enjoying the fact that I am not making any effort to cover my butt with absolute certainty...
There is also some ambiguity about running shorts: they are risqué, but still decent, and perfectly justified when out on a run. People can assume that I wear them too high because I have a thing for skimpy shorts, but they can't be certain. I on the other hand know very well that this running habit I've taken up is an elaborate but healthy scam I've come up with to justify running around in unnecessarily high cut shorts.