I agree that the possible punishment seems excessive, but there is nothing new about these laws - only that the enforcement now targets a trendy "fashion", if you can call it that. Most municipalities already have laws on their books that could be applied here - for an offense called Indecent Exposure. It doesn't have to be limited to trenchcoat flashers - a kid hanging his butt out for the world's disgust can be considered indecent. As i stated before, my understanding is that the ordinances target not the sag of one's pants, but rather what the pants should be covering.
I'm counting to one thousand now before responding to the insulting charge just levied - that my expectations of decency equal racism...998, 999, 1000!
Racist? Hardly! Around here the worst saggy pants offenders are white middle-class kids. But I might have expected that some would point fingers at the lone southern correspondent to this forum. Perhaps I'm too much a cynic, but over my five decades I have come to understand that few northerners can be expected to contain their smugness when it comes to issues of race, despite the double standard of their own anti-southern prejudices (to which they seem commonly oblivious). If you want to have a discussion on race, I'll indulge you in some other thread, where I'll be less inclined to bite my tongue and pull my punches.
As one who grew up in the rural South during the era of Civil Rights advancement and witnessed, albeit in youth, the struggles and the changes that resulted, I do not believe that the equal right to lewd displays and rude behavior was prominent among the causes for which Dr. King and others gave their lives.
Sasq
Baggy Pants
Maybe the following was taken as being racist -- since in the USA, many more blacks go to prison than whites, proportionate to the populations. So these comments, posted earlier, might have been seen as applying to blacks more than whites:
1) Poorer folks frequently can't afford to buy new clothing for each new kid that comes into the family, so "hand-me-downs" are very common, and frequently don't fit terribly well.
2) It's a play on prison clothing where belts are not issued for reasons of safety (they make for prettty good weapons, and are easy to hang one's self from). This has predictable results -- the trousers tend to sag, although not as much as is "fashionable" "outside".
And both would seem pretty damning to anyone who assumed they were aimed at them. Suicides in prison are fully understandable; I don't see how any sensitive mind could cope with his entire world of family, friends, and lovers drifting off without him, while he's faced with the sadism of the guards: "Wonder who your missus is sleeping with tonight?".
We who are more used to wrestling with the mighty conundrums of gardens and SUVs might fail to understand the reaction provoked by casual throw-away observations like these. Indifference can often be perceived as smugness; whether true or not, it is perception which creates reactions.
1) Poorer folks frequently can't afford to buy new clothing for each new kid that comes into the family, so "hand-me-downs" are very common, and frequently don't fit terribly well.
2) It's a play on prison clothing where belts are not issued for reasons of safety (they make for prettty good weapons, and are easy to hang one's self from). This has predictable results -- the trousers tend to sag, although not as much as is "fashionable" "outside".
And both would seem pretty damning to anyone who assumed they were aimed at them. Suicides in prison are fully understandable; I don't see how any sensitive mind could cope with his entire world of family, friends, and lovers drifting off without him, while he's faced with the sadism of the guards: "Wonder who your missus is sleeping with tonight?".
We who are more used to wrestling with the mighty conundrums of gardens and SUVs might fail to understand the reaction provoked by casual throw-away observations like these. Indifference can often be perceived as smugness; whether true or not, it is perception which creates reactions.
The only thing man cannot endure is meaninglessness.
It's interesting that as this group expands, more people from diverse backgrounds join us and I think this will be good for the group as a whole. More women are interested, more people from different cultures and ethnic roots. I hope nobody takes offence at whatever we say -- none of it is meant to be hostile, I'm sure.
Even people here from more or less the same demographic get upset with what each other say sometimes! So it's inevitable that things can go awry across divides of culture. Shame if anyone leaves the group because of it, and even worse if nobody takes notice of what caused it.
Even people here from more or less the same demographic get upset with what each other say sometimes! So it's inevitable that things can go awry across divides of culture. Shame if anyone leaves the group because of it, and even worse if nobody takes notice of what caused it.
The only thing man cannot endure is meaninglessness.
-
crfriend
- Master Barista
- Posts: 15176
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:52 pm
- Location: New England (U.S.)
- Contact:
The comments pointed up were mine, and had precisely nothing to do with race -- they were a comment on fashion. In my original composition I had a separate paragraph at the bottom of the post bemoaning the disproportinate number of blacks in prison or otherwise "under the supervision" of the "justice system", but decided against leaving it in so as not to contaminate what was intended as a fashion-related post.Maybe the following was taken as being racist -- since in the USA, many more blacks go to prison than whites, proportionate to the populations. So these comments, posted earlier, might have been seen as applying to blacks more than whites:
I assure everyone here that the comments were not levied toward any individual or racial group. If my observations were offensive to some, then I offer my apologies.And both would seem pretty damning to anyone who assumed they were aimed at them.
Retrocomputing -- It's not just a job, it's an adventure!
It's not illegal to wear just boxers. They do actually cover all your private parts. Therefore, a law that makes it illegal to wear baggy pants that partially covers boxers would seem unenforceable.My concern is what will happen if these statutes are upheld and the repurcussions that would hobble what people choose to wear.
I think this is very dangerous legislation.
Others? What do you think?
I doubt any of these laws will withstand judicial review. But if they do, please tell me about the next flight out of the country...