A lot of fashion displays body parts some people would rather aren't shown - sagging jeans are hardly alone in this. I don't see what's so offensive about a little bit of arse or boxer showing, either. These aren't Victorian times. Everyone's got an arse. It's just another part of the human body, there's nothing offensive about it. It's very easy to not be judgmental, I think. If someone finds the human body offensive, it's their job to get over themselves.
I just think some of the comments in this thread are all very childish and high-schoolerish. I assumed most of us had grown up enough not to get judgmental or enraged by something as superficial as someone else's fashion, but some of the comments above and below me indicate not.
In a perfect world there wouldn't be laws against public lewdness. Everyone would would wipe their behinds & be blessed with a perfect body. However that is not the case. Some people don't have the common sense to realize they have bodies few people want to look at.
If I chose to wear my underwear over my plaid doubleknit pants and on my head with my jacket turned inside out are you actually going to tell me that you are the one being immature and childish because you think I look like an idiot?
It's the offended people who have to get over themselves and realise they don't have a right to tell other people what to wear. It's not anyone else's job to tip-toe around their easily-offended, Victorian, squeamish, egocentric attitudes. These are backwards and discriminatory attitudes, and society should no longer accommodate them. What you wear should never be based on what *other* people want to see. What you wear should be based entirely on what *you* want to wear. What you are supporting is discrimination based on looks. I submit to you that discrimination based on looks is not fundamentally different to discrimination based on race, gender, nationality etc.
That's a false comparison, because there are three broad reasons I'm against your position. Firstly, the position is body-shaming. Secondly, the position is anti-subculture (sagging trousers are associated with a subculture). Thirdly, the position is anti-individual expression. Your example only addresses the third reason, the individual expression, not the other two reasons. It's also a false comparison because thinking someone looks like a bit of a fool is just not equitable to the genuinely hateful attitude some people hold towards sagging. Now, if you were genuinely displaying a hateful attitude to our hypothetical pants-headed friend... then I would think you were over-reacting and, yeah, childish.
Please let me know if what I'm saying doesn't make sense, and I'll attempt to clarify my reasoning :)
Good luck with changing people's opinions. The reality is that a person would have a difficult time getting hired for a job with much responsibility if they "sag" their pants. I didn't make those rules. That's just the way it is. It's just a fad. In 20-30 years down the road you'll think it was a dumb idea as well. Sort of like big wide bell-bottoms or parachute pants. There are so many larger issues to spend time and effort worrying about other than fighting for public acceptance of sagging pants.
Meh. Just because there is a social rule, doesn't mean that rule is right and it doesn't mean I will stop supporting people because they break it. You, on the other hand... you may not make the rules, but you sure do seem to like defending them. And just because convincing people is difficult, doesn't mean I won't stand for what I know is right. And I think you underestimate the ability of people to see new ways of thinking from a careful explanation backed by conviction :P
What you are talking about is called "power dressing". I think power dressing is smarmy, slick, superficial yuppie bullshit, and anyone impressed by it is not a person I consider worth impressing.
I don't mean to be rude, but I'm not convinced you're taking in my points :P You don't have to listen to me, obviously. But I think I made it perfectly clear that I thought sagging was good because it was a legitimate form of individual and cultural expression, not because I thought it was cool, and that expression was what I was fighting for.
Thank you for typing out all the worfs Im too lazy to form, you're completely right in my opinion.
People seem to let things bounce off their skull if it makes perfect sense for some reason, dont ever give up lol, real human beings are all but impossible to find.
There may be bigger issues, but the small ones can be the most important. How can we live as one race and explore space together if we hate each other over pants? We'll never grow as a species if we cant get over this elementary bullshit.
Is it normal to like to sag my pants?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
It's a little difficult not to be judgmental when someone is showing their underwear and/or their ass crack. Do we really need to see that?
Not to mention there is a reason they call that thing a "waistband".
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
A lot of fashion displays body parts some people would rather aren't shown - sagging jeans are hardly alone in this. I don't see what's so offensive about a little bit of arse or boxer showing, either. These aren't Victorian times. Everyone's got an arse. It's just another part of the human body, there's nothing offensive about it. It's very easy to not be judgmental, I think. If someone finds the human body offensive, it's their job to get over themselves.
I just think some of the comments in this thread are all very childish and high-schoolerish. I assumed most of us had grown up enough not to get judgmental or enraged by something as superficial as someone else's fashion, but some of the comments above and below me indicate not.
--
CozmoWank
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
In a perfect world there wouldn't be laws against public lewdness. Everyone would would wipe their behinds & be blessed with a perfect body. However that is not the case. Some people don't have the common sense to realize they have bodies few people want to look at.
If I chose to wear my underwear over my plaid doubleknit pants and on my head with my jacket turned inside out are you actually going to tell me that you are the one being immature and childish because you think I look like an idiot?
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
It's the offended people who have to get over themselves and realise they don't have a right to tell other people what to wear. It's not anyone else's job to tip-toe around their easily-offended, Victorian, squeamish, egocentric attitudes. These are backwards and discriminatory attitudes, and society should no longer accommodate them. What you wear should never be based on what *other* people want to see. What you wear should be based entirely on what *you* want to wear. What you are supporting is discrimination based on looks. I submit to you that discrimination based on looks is not fundamentally different to discrimination based on race, gender, nationality etc.
That's a false comparison, because there are three broad reasons I'm against your position. Firstly, the position is body-shaming. Secondly, the position is anti-subculture (sagging trousers are associated with a subculture). Thirdly, the position is anti-individual expression. Your example only addresses the third reason, the individual expression, not the other two reasons. It's also a false comparison because thinking someone looks like a bit of a fool is just not equitable to the genuinely hateful attitude some people hold towards sagging. Now, if you were genuinely displaying a hateful attitude to our hypothetical pants-headed friend... then I would think you were over-reacting and, yeah, childish.
Please let me know if what I'm saying doesn't make sense, and I'll attempt to clarify my reasoning :)
--
CozmoWank
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Good luck with changing people's opinions. The reality is that a person would have a difficult time getting hired for a job with much responsibility if they "sag" their pants. I didn't make those rules. That's just the way it is. It's just a fad. In 20-30 years down the road you'll think it was a dumb idea as well. Sort of like big wide bell-bottoms or parachute pants. There are so many larger issues to spend time and effort worrying about other than fighting for public acceptance of sagging pants.
--
dom180
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Meh. Just because there is a social rule, doesn't mean that rule is right and it doesn't mean I will stop supporting people because they break it. You, on the other hand... you may not make the rules, but you sure do seem to like defending them. And just because convincing people is difficult, doesn't mean I won't stand for what I know is right. And I think you underestimate the ability of people to see new ways of thinking from a careful explanation backed by conviction :P
What you are talking about is called "power dressing". I think power dressing is smarmy, slick, superficial yuppie bullshit, and anyone impressed by it is not a person I consider worth impressing.
I don't mean to be rude, but I'm not convinced you're taking in my points :P You don't have to listen to me, obviously. But I think I made it perfectly clear that I thought sagging was good because it was a legitimate form of individual and cultural expression, not because I thought it was cool, and that expression was what I was fighting for.
--
ThisIsImpossible
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Thank you for typing out all the worfs Im too lazy to form, you're completely right in my opinion.
People seem to let things bounce off their skull if it makes perfect sense for some reason, dont ever give up lol, real human beings are all but impossible to find.
There may be bigger issues, but the small ones can be the most important. How can we live as one race and explore space together if we hate each other over pants? We'll never grow as a species if we cant get over this elementary bullshit.