Well!, it was just a matter of time that I realize these low rider pants of mine had to go. Being 75 yrs. old and wearing these pants to the mall and playing golf did make others take a second look at me. I really didn't like them that well, as the cool breeze was tough on the skin on the back- side.



Va. Bill Sets Fine for Low-Riding Pants





RICHMOND, Va. - Virginians who wear their pants so low their underwear shows may want to think about investing in a stronger belt.


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.


"This is a foolish bill, Mr. Speaker, because it will hurt so many," Spruill said before the measure was approved 60-34. It now goes to the state Senate.


The bill's sponsor, Del. Algie T. Howell, has said constituents were offended by the exposed underwear. He did not speak on the floor Tuesday.


Spruill and Howell, also a Democrat, are both black.

I guess next time I go to Virginia, I better make sure not to bring along any of my low rise pants. What if I wear a shirt that covers my underwear...I better make sure that my facial expression doesn't give away the fact that my shirt is covering the little part of my underwear that might be peaking out on top...
Better yet, maybe next time I go to Virginia, since all I own is low rise pants, let's say I wear no pants at all.


-Eva

N/T.

What does "N/T" mean?

Well now, Eva. that would certainly be classified as a 'stimulating' occurrence to go without the low-rise pants.

Being that I was only kidding about wearing the low-risers, I probably wouldn't look so great in a pair.. But than I see a young women with that perfect body that can wear them, and than there are some.. well!, it's not for them.

I would think the clothing retailers in Virginia might be fighting these individuals in the state legislation..

Skeeter,

I was being serious about my low rise pants. I was just making fun of the whole thing. . Also, I'm not exposing anything indecent , except for maybe a little piece of fabric - which my shirts always do cover. I do see on the streets young heavy set girls who should not be in low rise pants, but most of them aren't exposing anything indecent.

I agree with you that clothing retailers in Virginia will probably be fighting this.

-Eva

It means that I said everything I wanted to in the subject line and that there is No Text in the message.

Why will plumbers be in trouble?

-Eva

Thanks for the explanation Jesse. I hadn't read the subject.

I guess the whole darn state will have to keep their TVs off, one of the biggest jokes is workmen wearing (almost wearing) pants that seem to be glued in place. No way could anyone walk with so much exposed and have their pants stay up.

So what's wrong with underwear?

It seems as if the plumber line went over my head, but I got it now...

I agree with you dori, what is wrong with seeing some underwear, at least everything is covered. I guess for some sick people, just seeing the underwear puts certain thoughts in their heads.. who knows though.
I find the whole thing ridiculous.


-Eva

Don't move to Florida, Eva.. I heard today that Florida is considering the same legisiation. Does that mean there is a rage against the low-riding plants?

Should other states follow, you will see the market changing on the design. And Walmart will have the market sewed up. Of course you could just go buy the regular type.

Aw shucks...and here I was, enjoying looking at all that flesh showing out from under all those low-riders! I saw a kid trip over his pants legs one day. They had drooped over his heel...I made sure he saw me laughing...

But it's not fair just to target the pants...what about all that midriff flesh shown by the girls and their too fat counterparts, as well as the too fat women trying to be young girls?

Oh well...what's one more freedom taken away? Those flesh-flashers could be terrorists trying to shock us virgin Americans to death! The next High Terror Alert color will be ......flesh-tone!

Guess we might as well just order our burkas and our caftans, folks.

Catherine

I'm not too concerned. I'm not planning on visiting Florida anytime soon.
Though the sunbathers there show alot more skin than when I wear my low-risers. Also, it's so warm there that if I do visit, I'll just wear my skirts.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I find all of this to be ridiculous.

-Eva

Well, I guess I'm not the only one who found this proposed bill ridiculous.



Link
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/s ... 00,00.html

Of course, the fact that it was Republican's that opposed this bill and a Democrat that proposed it makes me scratch my head. I normally do not find myself agreeing with Republicans on anything (I'm sure the Republican's that opposed the bill only opposed it because a Democrat was proposing it).
Either way, I'm happy that this proposed bill got the shaft. There are more important issues to tackle.

-Eva

When I was a young girl in the sixties it was indicent when just a hint of a bra strap was seen under a dress. Today they are exposed by purpose.

Times as well as fashion have changed, nothing against it if only these clothes that look sexy on slim young girls would only be worn by them and not by all others as well!

Traude

BTW what would have become the next target for a fine?
Thongs hanging on the line in the garden for they probably could stir the imagination? The whole thing really was ridiculous!