Sup Forums, I have been doing some in depth research into canine clothing and how it would be worn...

Sup Forums, I have been doing some in depth research into canine clothing and how it would be worn, casually and non casually. I think my work is on point but would truly appreciate a second opinion..

Pic related

The second one. The front legs are, for all intensive purposes, arms. Thus, the dog would wear pants on his hind legs only and a shirt on his front legs.

Thanks user,

My only drawback is if the dog did wear a shirt in the way you described then he would run the risk of scuffing his cuff links on the ground no?

That's the price you gotta pay for being fashionable.

I suppose so, but would gloves and shoes be worn in the same way as described? or would there be a different set of rules regarding both garments, due to the fact that a dog uses his arms to walk/run?

Tough to say. In my opinion, I'd have to go 4 shoes, but I suppose some manner of modified glove would work too.

If you want to be professional, please refrain from using the words "on point"

Thanks for your input user...
Would the same rules apply to goatse??

>all intensive purposes

I'd say number 1, because again, front legs are arms. Also, 2 seems like it'd be hard to stay upright.

Point taken... faggot

Trolling is a art.

This was circulating fb a few years ago. Good find I guess

Your general rule is definitely proving to be the correct choice but how would you go about explaining the first choice when it comes to trees, I would generally stick to the fact that the reproductive organs are stored in the pants... Would you agree?

I suppose, but pants are less designed for the genitals and more specifically designed for the legs. The accepted rule seems to be that our genitals are covered, doesn't seem to matter by what. If you were walking around wearing a shirt tied around your junk like a loincloth, you wouldn't be considered naked. The tree's "legs" are the trunk.

I like your thinking but how would the reproductive organs of the tree be covered in a way that protects them, I mean following this rule I just come to the conclusion its a bit ridiculous to cover a trees reproductive parts with glove..

Left is wearing its pants like a nigger. Ass exposed, using its legs to keep them up. Dog on right is wearing them like a normal person would

I'm actually thinking gloves. Plus, it makes the tree look friendly, like its waving at you.

Thanks user,

Ill be sure to make note of this in my research..

Glad to be of service.

Come to think of it, thats a very valid point

The second one is the only way to go. The first doesn't even cover the anus.

Why would a dog feel the need to cover its anus?

I mean here we are having an intellectual conversation and you show up with this shit...

Typical /b... smh

>intensive purposes

Clever bait

...

...

Granted, But that is going by the law that a man walks on his hands and feet/knees. A dog on the other hand uses both the front and hind legs to transport itself and would require pants to coincide with this....

Could you give him a shirt too, for comparison

Kek'd

Most dogs don't wear french cuffs. I think you're good here.

...

...

What if he found himself in a position of marriage or looking for a job such as a waiter or sommelier...

Now, if it was part of his costume/uniform, I imagine they'd go for the french cuffs, but just as a day-to-day thing, I'd guess they're more of a button cuff or even a short sleeve type of animal.

I think the left is a much more feasible way of wearing pants due to the faeces.

I would need to see some evidence to back up this claim..

To render the dog as a short sleeve animal is quite a judgemental opinion user.

...

But I think a pant-wearin dog would be able to pull them down when needed, no?

this goes back to the goatse argument.

Which way would be the correct way to pull them down?