[ back ]
Fashion police ready for undercover work
BEYOND MY CONTROL BY CHRISTINE THOME
Fashion police ready for undercover work
The "Priorities of the Panties" is coming to a showdown. Throughout the country, cities are placing House bills known as the "Baggy Pants Bill" on the books of their local legislatures, making it illegal for boys and men to expose a large portion of their underwear when they wear their shorts or pants far from the designated waistline.
I haven't seen my waistline in several years, but I think that means exposing anything below the belly button in front and the plumber's crack on the backside.
I'm all for improving dress codes in the public school, but are baggy pants really worthy of the time, attention and taxpayers' money needed to enforce a law that carries hefty fines and community service?
Obviously, the police officers in these communities are looking for easy catches, because there's no way these young men, with their shorts below their fannies, can run very fast.
Beyond what I see on television, I don't know much about police procedures, but I have to imagine an officer's call might sound something like this:
"Adam one five, Adam one five, there is a box-out in progress on Main Street. Over."
"What the heck is a box-out?" the dispatcher will ask.
"A box out -- you know -- too much of the boxers hanging out. I got a group of boys showing way too much of their 'Kiss Me I'm Irish,' 'Hula Girls' and 'Red Heart' boxers. It's absolutely disgusting."
"Um, OK," the dispatcher will say, stifling a laugh. "Hold on a minute, Bob. The guys at the station want to know if you need backup for your box-out."
"Very funny."
If the fashion police are going to enforce dress codes, I believe there are far more flagrant fashion flaws than the baggy pants. Have you been to a county fair lately? The police in those communities could round up 70 percent of the attendees and hold them in the dairy barn until the appropriate fines are paid.
If they're going to fine young men whose boxers hang out, then I think they should fine old men who wear socks with their sandals. Fines would be doubled for black socks.
Any woman over the age of 25 should not be allowed to walk the streets with any words prominently displayed on her backside. I don't care if you have the best butt in town; leave that look for the teenagers.
I've never understood the need for a thong. There's so little material there, it kind of defeats the whole purpose of underwear. But if you're going to wear a thong, please keep it to yourself and leave the whale tail out of sight. Men wearing thongs will be subject to the death penalty.
My 14-year-old son is guilty of showing more boxers than he should, and his sisters have pants him several times to make the point that it is a stupid look, but for some reason he keeps at it. I figure if I can see his underwear, then at least I know they're clean, which is more than I can say for most pieces of clothing in his room.
My rule is that he can wear his shorts and pants anyway he wants at home, but, once he goes out the door, his pants and T-shirt must cover any showing boxers. For the most part, we have a mutual understanding on this point, but last week he did get tired of my nagging.
"Mom! I'm just going to a friend's house. I'm not going to school or in town. Leave me alone!" he yelled.
"Pull 'em up or sit it out," I demanded.
"Fine!" he yelled back as he yanked up his shorts and slammed the door.
"Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you!" I yelled back. "And most importantly, I'd better not catch a glimpse of anything covering that split!"
[ back ]
