Approved fashion in Virginia
Va. Bill Sets Fine for Low-Riding Pants — This was a fad that had come and gone in California a few years ago. These Virginians should get a clue and check the calendar. meanwhile the newer fad is for women to have the thong panties pulled out from low-rider jeans. This will be a $50 fine too, I suppose, hurting a more interesting trend that may now never appear in Virginia. :) You blew it!
The state’s House of Delegates passed a bill Tuesday authorizing a $50 fine for anyone who displays his or her underpants in a “lewd or indecent manner.”
Del. Lionell Spruill Sr., a Democrat who opposed the bill, had pleaded with his colleagues to remember their own youthful fashion follies.
During an extended monologue Monday, he talked about how they dressed or wore their hair in their teens. On Tuesday, he said the measure was an unconstitutional attack on young blacks that would force parents to take off work to accompany their children to court just for making a fashion statement.
Your talking about whale tails, I’ve spotted a few here in VA 🙂 It’d be a shame if they became extinct.
I don’t know why someone would want to dress like that. A lot of those low riding pants are very expensive. I can’t understand that mindset, “Gee, I’m going to pay a lot of money to look low class”. I don’t think they need a law for it though. The law will be rarely enforced. I don’t know if breaking a misdemeanor allows an officer to arrest you and search you. If it does, that will be one of the few times that law is enforced.
Long Live freedom od X Pression!
Each stroke of the law makers pen is a giant step backwards for mankind!
It’s all good news for the cops who will be looking for these ‘criminals’.
Cop: Excuse me miss, I see your thong is hanging outside your pants. That’s a naughty one…
Miss: Are you sure? Can you show me the way it’s supposed to be?
I read that this fad originated in prisons where inmates were not allowed to wear a belt because of its potential as a strangling device, therefore their State issued pants would fall down exposing their underwear.
Oh, and let’s make it clear. This law will only apply to young black males anyway, not young juicy-thonged babes.
A good way around this law would be to wear low-rider jeans WITHOUT UNDERWEAR!
Good point David. What about plumbers. We will be deprived of jokes.
If it were a law for health and safety……that would make more sense. After all, some of these boy’s pants are so low slung that I can’t see how the poor kid could RUN. Crotch at the knees just isn’t a turn on for me…..
So, wait….the style is to emulate prisons? So, it’s the O.G. look? Or is it ..to facillitate prison rape? ..The low down, means PANTS?
I’m so confused.
Update:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/10/droopy.pants.ap/index.html
Interesting test case all the way around. Does accepting that the legislation was wrong imply that it is o.k. to walk around with underwear and no pants, as long as the privates are covered? If so, then I suppose briefs are as legitimate as boxers? And women can wear bras and no tops, since, for example, bikini tops reveal no more skin?
My questions aren’t rhetorical by the way.
I see kids– white and black– pulling up their pants while wearing these outfits, and I can’t figure it out: Why are they pulling up their pants if the idea is that their pants aren’t supposed to be pulled up?
I used to live in Florida and have spent considerable time at the nude beaches. There’s really no mystique to nudity, and I always found that aspect of the experience unremarkable. What I always wished people would understand, however, is that *most* people look better with their clothes on.
Now of course, one has to define what having one’s clothes on means. I enjoyed my simpler times in Florida….