From Meghan’s legs to Gordon Ramsay quiff…here are the new rules of distraction

You might have seen that Labour deputy chief Angela Rayner was this week accused of distracting the opposition in the House of Commons by crossing her legs whereas carrying a dress. Ha ha ha.

Well you have got to chortle. We had been hoping that Rayner had been caught sprawled asleep throughout the entrance bench like Jacob Rees-Mogg, carrying a mini skirt (very a lot “in” at the second), however sadly no. This actually was only a case of leg-crossing shaming.

The story nonetheless has legs (apologies). Angela has taken to carrying trouser fits, a minimum of for now, and apparently everybody has one thing to say about “leggate”. But what we’re fascinated about now are the rules of distraction: can legs in trousers be distracting or should they be legs in a Karen Millen (in the sale) dress? Can males’s legs be distracting? Is man spreading a distraction, or an annoyance, or each?

(If you’re a lady, man spreading in trousers beats leg crossing in a dress by a rustic mile, on the distract-o-meter, as do any quantity of issues we are completely happy to checklist in the curiosity of conserving issues in perspective.)

The Chart of Distraction, in no explicit order

  • Sitting with calves angled at 40 levels (see Meghan). This hasn’t occurred for a bit, not since she was entrance row with the Royal household for that transient second post-wedding – however keep in mind how bizarre and distracting it was? Like a synchronised swimming manoeuvre (Princess Pose) or a DVT resistant position.
  • Boris’s hair. It’s so distracting! And if the motivation for intentionally messing it up is hair-thinning, then the place precisely is he going bald? Very a lot interferes with concentrating on PMQs.
Back to top button