by gg3 » Thu 10 Feb 2005, 00:27:22
Personally I think that style is gross, because it comes directly from "prison style" with the low-hanging pants meant to resemble the poor fit of prison uniforms. And kids who run around glorifying gangsterism are in my opinion full of sh*t.
On the other hand, what's far more obnoxious is government-legislated fashion. Someone should challenge that law on Constitutional grounds because it is a) an infringement of a form of expression that is not specifically obscene (i.e. there is no nudity involved), b) discriminatory against youth (you can bet it won't be enforced against workmen with loose suspenders), c) unconstitutionally vague (tell me, dear legislators, what exactly is a "lewd manner"?)
Re. "lewd manner," it's quite clear this is targeted against kids, i.e. 12 and up. To be terribly blunt about this, I think some of those legislators and their puritanical constituents get secretly aroused when they see young teenagers dressed that way. In other words, what they're really protecting against is their own pedophile urges. And *that* is *truly* disgusting.
Meahwhile, the youth of Virginia should take to wearing plain white jockey shorts (i.e. the most unmistakable form of underwear) on the outside of their regular pants. Just get the underpants a couple sizes too large and put 'em on over their pants. Or perhaps underwear with a printed design that shows the old slogan "Don't Tread On Me!"
And let the battle begin!