From the Washington Post:
Attention, parents: The state of Virginia understands that you lead busy lives, but lawmakers are confident that you will be only too happy to tack just one more task onto your morning routine—a quick pants check as the kids head out the door.
The House of Delegates voted 60 to 34 Tuesday to impose a $50 fine on anyone found wearing pants low enough that a substantial portion of undergarments is showing.
[….] Lots of kids these days are conducting a large-scale experiment to see if trousers can defy gravity. This results in the widespread public exposure of underpants.
This greatly offends Del. Algie Howell Jr., a Democrat from Norfolk and author of the no-low-pants bill, which still faces a vote in the generally more skeptical Senate. “People that live in my neighborhood don’t want to have to see undergarments,” Howell told me. “It’s not about individual rights; it’s about values. I own a group home; we take in kids who’ve been in trouble. Most of the men who come in in shackles and handcuffs are trying to hold up their pants. The way you dress does have something to do with how you behave.”
Since the state has an interest in fighting unemployment and crime, Howell figures the state is right to ban a practice that he says makes young people less attractive as employees and more likely to turn to crime.
Del. Lionell Spruill (D-Chesapeake) tried to sway his colleagues against the pants bill by reminding them of their own wacky fashion choices of yore. Amid much laughter about miniskirts, bell-bottoms, long hair and polyester pants, Spruill urged: “Let these kids express themselves. It will pass on.”
That didn’t work, so Spruill switched arguments: “This is a bill that will target blacks. They’re going to stop those kids for one reason and then do other things. This is another way to lock up black people in jail.”
But Del. Jack Reid (R-Richmond) replied, “Underwear is called underwear for a reason.” While the clothing excesses of past generations were “not offensive,” low-riding pants reflect “the coarsening of this society,” he said.
Reid also stressed that while the House of Delegates set the fine at $50 for most potential offenders, for “obvious reasons” that fine will increase to $1000 for “really really heavy women” and “ugly people.”
****
(h/t Kyle)
And then they came for my unfashionable mustache, and by that time, no one was left to speak up.
Take it a step further, I say! Ban the hanging of undergarments on clotheslines! Ban transparent underwear packaging! Put a big fence around ladies lingerie in WalMart!
Florida tried to pass a regulation on the wearing of “thong” bikinis. In the continuum of full-coverage down to floss, how much cheek is too much?
Tape measures in hand, policemen were LINING UP to volunteer for that duty.
I’d rather see $hit stained underwear hanging on a clothesline, than some of the baggy pants i see walking the streets of Detroit. But, I say we go right to the source of the problem … fine the parents. If you can find them.
I live in West Palm Beach. I guess I’ll be OK unless they pass a law against wearing very tight, white terrycloth shorts without underwear.
Reaaly suggests firing the politicians and sending them all home.
Frankly, people that walk around with their underwear exposed just makes it easier to point out the truely stupid amongst us.
Seriously Carin, should the government be getting into the fashion business? How about sheer shirts with no bras and erect nipples, should we regulate against that? Camel toes?
I’d rather walk by someone with droopy drawers and momentarily think they look like a jackass than have the government step in.
This legislation could single-handedly wipe out the plumbing trade in Virginia.
THE CAMEL TOE IS MY MASTER!
MORE PIE!
Jeff, not seeing their dicks is prudery. Not seeing ass crack is improving the scenery.
Well, it’s just not FAIR, for one thing. You guys get thongs, and see-through blouses … and what do “we” get. Bunchy boxer shorts … and people who look like they have midget legs because the crotch of their jeans is where their knees should be.
But, really – my point was more to the issue of where are the parents? My kid can dress and act like a pimp drug dealerthe day he moves out.
Sorry if I misunderstood you, my bad.
I bet you look adorable in them
One of the side benefits of these droopy drawers is that the lil’ dears can’t run as fast with their knickers around their ankles. Did the legislature think about how this could affect law enforcement?
I personally hope they go after the dark sock & sandals crowd next.
gail, it depends on whether or not I’m retaining water at the time.
Jeff’s last line reminds me of what my father used to say. Among other things. “Stretch pants usually don’t have a choice.”
Did you guys even read the article ? It says an increased fine of $1,000 for ugly and/or fat people – the first known instance of a beneficial progressive tax.
BTW, this doesn’t mean girls can’t let the tops of their thongs peek out over their jeans, does it ? Because that would be wrong.
If it weren’t for the familiar ass crack, I’d never be able to recognize my plumber.
That would be WILD to see a pair of baggy pants walking down Ferry Street!
This law must be close to setting a new record for stupid. Can I just tell everyone how very glad I am that it was concocted by a Democrat?
CRACK KILLS!
I once tried to influence campus fashion by walking around with the end of my shirt front pulled through my zipper, but it never caught on.
How asinine. ba-dump-BUMP!
But I admit, at least on campus, the incessant ass crack (both the tighty-whitey and thong variety) gets a little annoying after, oh, about ten seconds.
The societal ills of lowerider pants can be fixed much more easily. School uniforms.
True story: The whole baggy pants thing originated in prisons where homosexual inmates would wear their pants riding low to let the other inmates know they were available to be someone’s bitch. You should see the look on my student’s faces when I tell them that while I write them a referral for dress code.
I’m from Richmond. We go through this every year, even in the short session. Happily, the House is not the serious legislative body here, and the Senate traditionally snuffs out the pants fires of the frisky fervid delegates by ignoring their silly bills.
IOW, if this bill becomes law, I will eat my plumbers droopy drawers.
Reaganwarrior–you should put some kind of “don’t drink while reading this” warning on that comment.
Note to self: don’t Google camel toe.
There now. All gone.
Headline on SarahW’s link: “Virginia Senate Drops Pants”
I may have left out a word or two.
True story: The whole baggy pants thing originated in prisons where homosexual inmates would wear their pants riding low to let the other inmates know they were available to be someone’s bitch. You should see the look on my student’s faces when I tell them that while I write them a referral for dress code.
That’s funny. I heard it came from inmates being forced to remove their belts. (Shoelaces, too—hence the “open sneaker” fad.) Where do these “true stories” come from?
One can never really establish an origin of these kinds of grassroots fashion practices. However, it is most likely that the emulation of prison and jail wear is the origin.
Too much of the Hip Hop culture is celebration of jail culture.
The proper punishment for low riding pants is a wedgie.
This is the sort of bill you see when parents aren’t doing their jobs. Listen up, Moms n’ Dads, if you’re not responsible for your children’s behavior, some politician is going to think it’s his job to be responsible in your place. Is that what you want?
Later,
bbeck
PS: Turing word: ‘behind.’ Now come on, are these words planned?
Well I showed them…I’m not wearing any underwear! Now they have to make a law saying you can’t go commando to close that loophole! That may be a poor choice of words considering the prison angle mentioned above though.
Ana, while you are at it, also don’t google moose knuckle.
My wee wifey, when seeking clothing to wear to work, googled nurses uniforms. She found it educational.
The real true story of the baggy pants comes from gang members who need to conceal handguns.
Yep, Steve, and were too fucking stupid to buy holsters like us knowledgable rednecks.
knowledgable rednecks.
Those two words kind of repel one another like magnets. I wish to hell there was spellcheck on this little screen.