Yeah, no one looked weird before the 60s: zoot suits, racoon coats, flappers, crew cut hair, pegged pants, bobby sox, poodle skirts, beehive hairdos, saddle shoes.
I think some people are looking too far into why kids and young adults wear these types of clothes. Quite a few of my male friends wear their pants this way, and its not because they are rebelling against their parents or society, or because they want to shock people, its because the look is “in fashion” for young men in their social and age group. I was reading all the reponses and I am just thinking to myself, he doesn’t wear those because of that! And I think there is a line between a slight sagging of the pants and having your entire rump hanging out. I like the way my boyfriend dresses, and he does sag his pants, but not to the extreme.
Yeah, I think that the lady was rather rude. But, although I hate to sound like one of those old farts that goes on about these kids today, I think that this whole baggie pats and the associated regalia goes much further and is a little more ominous than some folks are giving credit for.
As I understand it, the origin of this fashion was based in the fact that while in prison the dungarees that the prisoners were issues were of a notoriously bad fit. This fashion (as I understand it) was either young thugs fresh out of prison wearing the prison wear as a badge of honor, or folks on the outside paying tribute to their friends still on the inside.
Golf hats upside down and/or sideways, as I understand it is a pretty universally know gang sign. Same with the one pant leg rolled up and so on. So, make no mistake about it, these young folks are imitating gang fashion. This is not only troubling from a morality POV, but I should guess can be dangerous as well.
Just my $0.02.
Reading this made me remember something very important: Man, do I hate old people. :mad: especially the ones who think that they’re better than me (because I do kick quite a bit of ass).
Semi-reformed baggy pants-wearer checking in here. Let it be known that I never did the visible boxers thing, though. Even today, if I lift my shirt up, my boxers stick out above my beltline- it’s just more comfortable that way. My pants aren’t hanging off my ass, though- they’re belted around my hips, maybe two or three inches below where my dress pants sit. I always wear a shirt long enough to cover the boxers, anyway.
When I did wear giant pants (Jncos, Bullheads, that kinda stuff) I expected to get a rise out of old people. The same way I turn up the radio if someone at a stoplight glares at me because it’s too loud (if they just asked, I’d turn it down in a second). Plus, I have really big feet, relative to the rest of me. This results in what I call “Golf Club Syndrome” when I wear narrow-leg trousers. So, extra-wide pants, which were a) way cooler than the crap that the “wigger” kids were wearing, and b) as I say, wide enough to hide my giant feet, were definitely the way to go.
While the woman is clearly in the wrong here, I’d wager your buddy either didn’t care or enjoyed the reaction he got. If he can’t handle it, tell him to start dressing preppy.
You know the best part? Assuming that you do no meet a premature demise, someday you will be an old person! Cool!
Not if he keeps posting like this he won’t be.
BraveNewSquirle - I am older than you (almost certainly). Nobody thought they were better than you based on your clothes. That only became clear when you posted.
Consider this a cyber-pantsing.
Regards,
Shodan
Old people are evil.
For wearing pants?! Just ‘cos they don’t have their pants hiked up to their ribs like Abe Simpson doesn’t mean they’re out fancy walkin’ on a sidewalk meant for regular walkin’.
I love the irony in that. Evidently when he goes to jail they let him keep his belt.
Um…I don’t see the wisdom in that. The woman in the OP, provided she has been accurately represented, obviously found the outfit to be obscene. Otherwise, she wouldn’t have had such a fit! I imagine her having a similar reaction to the OP when her friend is accosted by Elaine Benes for wearing a fur.
I submit that the better rule is that it is incredibly rude to point out another’s rudeness. She may have found the OP’s friend’s display to be in poor form; however, calling him out on (her perception of) his rudeness is an even greater offense.
This leads to the conclusion that the OP was indeed polite.
IMHO, of course.
The issue isn’t whether you like the baggy pants look or not. Hell, I don’t like the look of polyester pantsuits on old women, or old men who pull their pants up to their nipples, but I would NEVER have the audacity to say something to one of these fashion victims.
I find it hard to believe that people think it’s ok to “point and laugh” at someone who is dressed differently. Give the kids a break. We all wore silly stuff when we were growing up. It’s a right of passage. I don’t think it’s so important that we should concern ourselves with the wardrobes of strangers. People need to learn to mind their own business in these matters.
I have to admit that I am a little torn here. On the one hand, I am all about keeping things smooth and non-confrontational in public, and so can agree that it is simply poor form to point and laugh (although to be fair, I can had occasions where I have seen things in public and laughed simply because I can’t help myself). On the other hand, imitating gang wear seems a little more serious to me than some folks are taking it. I am sure that for the most part the intent is “shock the old farts” but I am not sure that the consequences are as benign as they once were.
Alright I wear my pants semi-baggy, no underwear in public though, and I think what you folks have to realise is that it’s just a style. When teens wear their clothes that emulate gangsters, most of them aren’t thinking “I want to look like a real gangster,” they’re thinking it looks cool. 
To illustrate, a few years back when I was in Grade nine all of us guys had to take a judo course in P.E. Our teacher tells us about the origin of baggy pants, i.e that it’s derived from prisoners, and where other recent fashion trends came from (gangs, criminals etc.) 95% of the class wore baggy pants, and no one had heard about where it came from before (or cared for that matter.) So it’s not as if we’re idolizing gangs.
The really funny thing, though, to those of us who grew up in Western Washington (where Seattle is G ), is the way y’all thought that look was some sort of fashion statement. I guess in a way it was - Nirvana/Pearl Jam et al decided that, instead of putting on “stage clothes”, they’d just go on stage wearing what they normally wore every day.
'Cuz you see, flannel-and-jeans really had nothing to do with “grunge”. Moss, maybe, but not grunge. It was simply the standard mode of dress amongst the middle-to-lower-classes in Western Washington. I think it’s a combination of the weather and the prevalence of logging industries there. (In fact, if I remember correctly, Cobain grew up in a logging town.) The rain falls all year 'round, though it’s not constant. It’s not hot enough there to wear shorts most of the year. It’s not cold enough to dress warmly most of the year. The temperature is fairly mild most of the time, never too extreme. So the flannel shirt worn over a T-shirt is the perfect attire for the climate. If the temperature is cool, the flannel keeps you warm. If the weather warms up, you can take off the flannel and tie it around your waist - it’s not heavy enough to be annoying.
If anything, the youth of Western Washington mostly just made small modifications to the “uniform” from one generation to the next. For my grandfather, it was heavy trousers, T-shirt/tank, flannel shirt tucked in and buttoned to the neck, and suspenders. For my dad, it was jeans, T-shirt/tank, flannel shirt tucked in but without the top 2-3 buttons fastened, and a belt instead of suspenders. For me, it was the same, but with tighter jeans and the flannel untucked and unbuttoned, and no belt.
Naturally, there were other styles that came and went, but the “jeans & flannel” look has remained a constant through several generations.
Now, I have to say that I rather enjoy the current “skin-tight, low-rise jeans & thong-showing” look popular with the young ladies today 
Yeah, I’ve seen them. I’ve seen them on the local high school kids and the racks at Mervyns last weekend. I wish they would go away again and stay away.
The GI Generation made rude comments about the styles of the mods and hippies.
The Baby Boomers made rude comments about the styles of the preppies and punks.
Generation X is now making rude comments about the baggy pants brigade.
And someday, your contemporaries will make rude comments about the way your children dress.
I must say that I don’t mind the baggy, underwear-showing trend among my peers… especially the better-looking ones. Tight t-shirts as well. For quite the same reason others have chimed in about low-rise + thongs.
Of course the ones with belts quite literally around their legs just look dumb.
Please, that’s like the school that banned pink clothes “out of concerns that the color has become associated with gang activity.” Even though there was no evidence of gang activity.
Phase42-I just can’t believe that we thought dressing up like lumberjacks was cool!
Once again, I’m amazed at how people evidently forget about what they thought when they were teenagers. Or maybe teens today care less about their parents than you folk did. But I can assure you, the majority of teens dress the way they do because it’s comfortable, or it’s what their friends are doing, or they simply like the look, to hell with what others think of it.
But I suppose the concept of “teens don’t exist solely to be a collective menace to little old women and puppies and babies” is beyond most people. The woman in the OP had NO RIGHT to criticize that guy. If she had gone up to a 29-year old, or someone in her own age bracket, or someone older than her - meaning, anyone not a teenager - and gone into a diatribe about how disgraceful their clothing was, there would be absolutely no debate over how astoundingly rude she was.
Not everyone likes the same fashions. Not all teens dress to ‘shock’ the older folk - most of us really don’t give two ounces of crap what you people think about us.
Yep I used to wear bell bottom jeans, now I wear regular jeans.
I wore ‘tennis’ shoes, now I wear ‘running’ shoes.
My hair was longer in the '70s, I remember when leather vests where in. And cowbot shirts.
Sure stlyes change. But none of the previous styles have anything on the baggy pants with the crotch at the knees style. Sillyest damn thing I have ever seen.
And my god, it looks so incredibly uncomfortable, and impractical. How the hell do you get somthing out of your pocket?
Very rude behaviour. And this is coming from a 40ish woman who thinks the whole baggie pants thing is hilarious looking. Like a toddler with full and sagging diapers. (hey, you asked :D)
However, I would never be rude enough to yell at some stranger about what they should or should not be wearing.
I did ask one young man, very politely, and not in a judgmental way, (in a class i subbed for a few months back), how they kept them from falling down.
His answer really made me understand these young men a WHOLE lot better than I previously did. He looked a little sheepish and said “we don’t”, and then he kind of blushed and gave his pants some adjustment.
What I don’t get is, the young women dress in such a cute way, and the young men look like they wrapped up in denim bedsheets.
The venerable Miss Manners, BTW, would agree that correcting someone in public is rude, rude, rude.
Tangent: Being different from your parents is a rite of passage. As in a ritual. Not a right.