The socks aren’t the problem anymore
It always used to be the phrase from my mother’s generation to mine - she said, sounding ridiculously old all of a sudden just because she couldn’t think of a better opening line - if, perhaps they thought you should have tried harder or done better, or perhaps behaved in some other way that suggested your socks were less than taut:
“Pull your socks up”, they would say.
And you would be able to go on your way knowing that next time you would perform better because your advisor had so succinctly pinpointed the problem (loose socks).
It’s trousers, now.
And believe me, the phrase “PULL YOUR TROUSERS UP” is never far from my lips. It was never far when I lived on the shores of the English channel, and is even more often there now I live on edge of the Pacific ocean. I never say it, though, obviously. Because common wisdom says that people with their trousers halfway down their legs are either mad or very dangerous.
Or having a poo, I suppose.
But you don’t meet many of them on the street. One hopes.
It’s a modern Gangster look. As adopted by old school rap artists and their colleagues, by the truly tough at heart, and by those who really want people to think they’re tough. Even though they’re not. Really. At all.
The teenagers of Hassocks were well into it.
The trousers have to be pulled quite a way down the legs, the waistband (the term ‘waist’ here used in the loosest possible sense: literally) nestling somewhere around the mid-thigh. It’s called sagging. Never say I don’t do research for my blog. I totally looked it up on wikipedia and EVERYTHING. The trousers top off half way up their thigh, but far above, their boxer shorts rise. All the way up to wear they should normally go. around the waist. Where trousers are.
Some say it’s representative of a certain toughness borne out of urban poverty (the “We were so poor I had to wear my big brother’s hand-me-downs and I had to learn to fend for myself” effect. Though on reflection you could probably stick a “motherfucker!” on the end there for good measure, why not) - the other root source is said to be prison clothing, where they take away your belt just in case you hang yourself.
The funny thing is, the boys round here who follow the fashion - and there are many many many - wear belts. They wear belts, which sit around the top of their jeans, at mid thigh-level, not actually doing a job. Just being weight that serves only to pull their jeans further down, which, frankly, is fair enough, because they’re Being Worn WRONG. In order to counter this effect, many young men are forced to walk down the street - limping slightly (as they will, it’s apparently a sign that denotes having simply ginormous balls and a penis the size of a Viennetta, though it’s easily confused with ‘skipping down the street because you’re pretending you’re Strawberry Shortcake in your head and singing the theme from Heidi‘ but, you know, they try not to think about that reading too much) and also HOLDING UP THEIR TROUSERS WITH ONE HAND.
I’m not sure if I can say this strongly enough: If you’re having to hold your trousers up with your hand even though you’re wearing a belt, you are officially Doing It Wrong.
I don’t know if you’re reading this, saggy-boys. This probably isn’t your kind of blog; we don’ share much common ground - I spend a lot of time talking about cultural differences and social observations; you spend a lot of time HOLDING YOUR TROUSERS UP WITH ONE HAND.
Do you see what the difference is there? I’m able to do stuff, because MY trousers are staying up without my direct intervention. It’s like they were MADE to do that.
Of course, people are sometimes wary of these boys with their half-empty attitude to trousers. They feel that they are in some way scary, or threatening, that they are not only intending to demonstrate their toughness/criminality through their clothing, that they may lend action to this later on to demonstrably prove their toughness.
Now answer me this: What the fuck are they going to do to you?
Seriously. Their legs are half bound by heavy denim. What the hell can they POSSIBLY do to harm you or anyone else?
They might have a gun tucked in their waistband, I suppose. But then, by the time they’ve bent all the way down there to get it, you could probably have kneed them in the face. Or at least run away shouting “Hay-elp! HAY-ELP!” like Penelope Pitstop.
What else? Yes, they could steal your handbag, perhaps.
But only with one hand, and then waddle off down the street at a slow to moderate pace, handbag under one arm, other hand gripping their useless knee-belt, while you phone the police. And, maybe, if you can’t get through, phone the police in the next town, who might have to drive fifteen miles or so and then get stuck in a traffic jam and STILL pick him up before he gets to the next block, because the fuckwit’s got a belt around his knees and is running bent double because apparently ‘he doesn’t want them to fall down’.
That’s another thing I don’t quite get, here.
Apparently they’re forced to keep a hand constantly to the ‘waist’ band so their trousers don’t fall down. The boys waiting for a bus at the end of our street, all of them about fourteen or fifteen, with trouser-malfunctions and intense pride in that, pass the time waiting for the bus taking turns ganging up and pulling each others trousers down.
And oh the shame and the laughter and the humiliation when they do.
But. Um. Are your trousers not down already?
I can see your undercrackers. Is that not what people would usually be trying to protect?
Have we suddenly entered a new weird semi-Victorian age where the ankles are, once more, a truly sexual body part to be hidden at all costs? Or is it the knees?
Other than that, I’m a bit stuck as to the threateningness of it - and it IS threatening, apparently, whole cities and states have banned it, see that Wikipedia article I tirelessly looked up (but can’t be arsed to link to again, obv) for reference.
But I just can’t feel threat. The only threat I feel is the threat of not being able to hold it in one day and just blurting out “For the Love of CHRIST you look like an absolute TOOL! Just Pull Your TROUSERS UP! Is it that hard to comprehend how they work?”
And then the look on the moron’s face will turn overcast and stormy, and I will suddenly sense he is going to run after me and commit shennanigans. And I will run away. And then stop and wait for him because he’s trying to hold his trousers up at the same time, poor lamb, and it’s not going to be a fair race otherwise. And then I will run again. And then I will stop again. And then I will run again.
Until I get bored.
Either that or I could just make some leaflets about the mechanics of clothing and pass them out.
I do hope I’m not being culturally insensitive, am I?
Because I’ve encountered trouser-fucktards of all creeds and colours, and I think they’re ALL idiots, please trust me on that.
They’re idiots, every one.
Are you reading, by some fluke? You, with half-mast kecks?
Then yes. Yes, I mean you.
Moron.
Pull your damn trousers up.
Of course, the very clear message it sends to all the sexy ladies, who are all just gagging for it, is “Y’know, I could have these off in, like, one second”.
Comment by Drew — 23 October, 2008 1:03 am
Of course, people are sometimes wary of these boys with their half-empty attitude to trousers
Or even… with their half-assed attitude to trousers? :-)
Comment by Brennig — 23 October, 2008 1:03 am
Drew - the business end is strictly, I shudder to say, already off. Bleurgh.
Brennig - whole-assed, I think you’ll find.
Comment by anna — 23 October, 2008 1:07 am
See, my understanding of this phenomenon is that it originated in prisons where a certain sort of bloke would go around with his trousers half down as a sort of, um, advertisement. (A friend of mine who is a criminal barrister tells his teen clients this and then chuckles to himself as they promptly yank their trousers straight up to their ears.)
Comment by Katy Newton — 23 October, 2008 1:35 am
I thought it was just me who was baffled by this, and has to resist the older-than-my-years matronly desire to sneak up behind them and pull them up.
Surely as winter is drawing in the cold would effect any advertising that might be being attempted.
Comment by surprised — 23 October, 2008 1:42 am
I’ve never seen people with trousers down to their thighs. I don’t think I’d be able to restrain myself from shouting “WHAT ARE YOU DOING YOU FUCKTARD?” at them if I saw some.
My manager at work, however, does wear his trousers so they balance halfway down his bottom. He has a very perky, rotund bottom so they stay up fine, but this guy is my MANAGER. Surely he should be covering himself up? How can you demand respect from your employees when the employee can see that today you’re wearing bright pink boxers with little black hearts?
Comment by Amy — 23 October, 2008 1:44 am
I think you should start a charity in which people donate money to buy braces and then you hand them out on the streets. That way if their ‘friends’ do pull their trousers down at least there is a chance they’ll come pinging up again in a hilarious clown like manner and afford us all a good laugh.
Comment by Katyboo1 — 23 October, 2008 2:00 am
Oh! I don’t think they call them braces in the USA though. I think they call them something weird like suspenders. I have vague memories of having a very confusing conversation with an American man wearing braces who kept talking about his suspenders and making me rather puzzled.
Comment by Katyboo1 — 23 October, 2008 2:01 am
Ah, but the pink boxers with the little black hearts suggest the response methinks (though perhaps not in a work situation).
If people were to sit around and discuss how cute the undergarments are and what pictures would look fine and dandy on them the self-consciousness caused may encourage a re-evaluation of correct masting.
Do people who sag ever go commando?
Comment by Miss Nomer — 23 October, 2008 2:06 am
I spotted a chap with ridiculously distended trousers in New York this week. He was also draped with gold crosses etc. None of this is remarkable except that he paused by a large synagogue, genuflected, kissed the nearest dangling crucifix and waddled onwards. Odd.
Comment by JamesA-S — 23 October, 2008 2:38 am
Excuse the gush, Anna, but that post has had me chortling happily for the past five minutes. It’s just as well I work from home as l kept making little explosions of laughter.
Comment by Z — 23 October, 2008 2:43 am
Oh, I don’t mean a physical gush of course, I mean in a gushingly complimentary sort of way, of course.
Comment by Z — 23 October, 2008 2:44 am
In Banksy’s book wall and piece, he writes about sagging, and says that if you paint graffiti in a fountain and your trousers look like you’ve wet yourself, no amount of ghetto-ness will compensate for that.
Of course, men aren’t the only culprits, here. These women’s jeans have attached underwear so that they can ride ever lower.
And, Miss Nomer: Oh I really hope not. You’ve frightened me now.
Comment by Anna F — 23 October, 2008 3:52 am
I always thought that trouser thing had to do with self-handicapping. Oh-all-knowledgable Wikipedia even claims that women are less tolerant of it than men. Makes perfect sense to me…
Comment by driedfrog — 23 October, 2008 4:12 am
I can’t stand this one. I’m not saying we should all go around like Simon Cowell, but surely there’s a middle ground.
Comment by Cliff — 23 October, 2008 4:33 am
What is this “trouser” that you speak of?
Comment by Meg — 23 October, 2008 5:18 am
It is the most ridiculous fashion ever, ever, ever.
So it made me very happy to read a news item a while ago about a mugger who was caught within half a block because, well, his trousers had fallen down.
But I still can’t understand why that doesn’t seem to happen, like, *all the time*.
Comment by scroobious — 23 October, 2008 6:42 am
This made me laugh SOOOOOO much! I know EXACTLY what you mean! My 18 year old son, and also, rather more regretably, 27 year old ‘friend’ both do this very strange thing ( though not as extreamly as some!) and it does indeed drive me crazy.
Comment by justme — 23 October, 2008 7:42 am
Finally. Finally someone said it. Finally.
Comment by Hennie — 23 October, 2008 9:15 am
hahahahahahahaha I’d like a water-pistol and from a distance, spuuuuuurrrrt….
Comment by guyana gyal — 23 October, 2008 11:50 am
I watched a teenager’s pants fall down a few months ago, because he forgot to hold them up. I laughed until I nearly peed. I really wanted to pull over and applaud, but alas, I was in traffic (driving, that is).
As Katy mentioned, there is an UL/myth that the origin of sagging was in prisons, to advertise sexual receptiveness, in many senses of the word “receptive.” I have read the debunkings and know that it’s not a valid origin, and I am usually a stickler for not perpetuating myths and urban legends, but my son and all of his friends have heard me say many many times how odd it is that they’d want to walk around with their pants down when everyone knows it’ll make people who’ve been in prison think that they’re saying, “Come have anal sex with me, big boy!”
Comment by elayne — 23 October, 2008 12:28 pm
My son is so used to wearing his trousers like this, that when he was fitted for a suit last year, he kept trying to tell the taylor that his “waist” was somewhere further south. It was quite funny.
Comment by Maria — 23 October, 2008 12:54 pm
Hilarious! Tools. All tools.
Comment by Kathryn — 23 October, 2008 1:20 pm
“It’s a modern Gangster look.”
Real gangsters wouldn’t be caught dead with their pants halfway down. Real gangsters dress sharp, wear expensive suits and shoes, and know how to get rid of their enemies without anyone finding out.
These are gangster wanna-be’s. They’re punks with attitude, nothing more. It seems that they’re taking their cue from the handyman/plumber (maybe with the name of Joe) that shows up to your house, squats down by your sink, and makes you privy to his butt crack because he was too lazy to put on underwear that morning.
Real gangsters know that the waist is for the wearing of a stylish belt in order to keep one’s pants firmly secured.
At the end of the day, ti is simply another fashion statement that will die out. I
m still waiting for the mod look of the 60’s to take hold again. ;-)
Comment by a usual suspect — 23 October, 2008 1:29 pm
Dod be careful about expressing your disapproval. You know that one free hand they have? Well, they could use it to bust a cap on your head.
Comment by Sheila O — 23 October, 2008 1:29 pm
Oops, that was “Do be careful…”
Comment by Sheila O — 23 October, 2008 1:29 pm
Sheila - Oh, I’d never say it out loud. But if they wanted to, they’d have to catch me first…
Comment by anna — 23 October, 2008 1:38 pm
This made me laugh and laugh. I want to give a special shout out to
“I will suddenly sense he is going to run after me and commit shennanigans”
Bananas
Comment by asta — 23 October, 2008 2:53 pm
I was just going to point out that Merkans usually call them pants, but the thought of da kidz with their pants hanging down was too gross.
Comment by Mr Farty — 23 October, 2008 3:12 pm
You have just put into writing the precise thought I had when I was stopped at a red traffic light in Bow the other day and observed that one man with half mast trousers had altered his entire gait to ensure that his trousers stayed mid-thigh. And on his grey trousers he was wearing a white leather belt - as if to highlight the ridiculousness of his trousers.
He did have quite nice boxers though - a midnight blue satin, which I thought would work nicely as the lining in a suit.
Comment by Damian — 23 October, 2008 4:12 pm
LMAO! Too funny! My mom and I were talking about this the other day. I’d love to see their faces when you yell “trousers” at them though lol. I doubt they will know what you are talking about.
Comment by Julie — 23 October, 2008 10:11 pm
To quote Denis Leary:
“Here’s the pants and here’s the underwear, there’s twenty-seven inches of underwear, what the fuck is that about? Explain it to me. That’s one of the most basic rules that we all know about: the underwear goes inside the pants. Not here, not here, not here, INSIDE THE FUCKING PANTS! That’s why it’s called under-fucking-wear.”
Comment by Chz — 24 October, 2008 1:47 am
I was thinking about this today when I saw a tough guy, pants down, holding girlfriends hand and looking stormy in front of Alexandra Palace.
Somehow the whole tough guy thing was diffused by his pink boxer shorts.
Comment by Damian — 24 October, 2008 9:12 am
Oops, I meant “girlfriend’s”.
Comment by Damian — 24 October, 2008 9:13 am
Well I tried to comment….but messed up my E mail address and it wouldn’t let me! Grrrr! So I am just doing this one to fix the wrong address. I loved the post!
Comment by justme — 24 October, 2008 2:17 pm
I know!! What can they be thinking- do you remember that great slow-mo of the boys in Clueless with their trousers down? I really really hate being at eye level with someone’s underpants on the metro too.
Comment by Daisy — 24 October, 2008 2:46 pm
Brilliant! I’ve been giggling for about 5 minutes now - thank you :-)
Comment by clareyt — 24 October, 2008 3:16 pm
I couldn’t have said it better! Honest. I really couldn’t. I wish I could. But, no. So, thank you!!!
Comment by Shannon Williams — 25 October, 2008 8:02 pm
I’d heard (from my homies on the street obviously) that the trend comes from prisons, where your belt is removed following arrest to prevent suicide attempts.
If that’s true, then wearing it with a belt becomes doubly ridiculous. :-)
Comment by Alan — 27 October, 2008 2:08 am
whattha fuck???? U dont got no dun right ta cum here+strt brngin al datsheet n ting U got nuffin nxt time i cu im gonna waddle rght up2u+cuss u wiv my 1free hand u betta watch out cos i can waddle reel fast+i onli trip sumtimes so u betta watch out.
Comment by Cherry — 27 October, 2008 7:48 am
I am SOOOO with you on this. Am I getting old? Is that why I find myself walking around, shaking my head and saying “Tsk, tsk, the youth of today!”
Comment by 12ontheinside — 27 October, 2008 5:44 pm
It’s a strange state of fashion is it not? In order to conform and fit in with the trends, one has to in fact wear their clothes in an IRREGULAR manner. It’s like a paradox, only less deep.
Did you catch the Rah/Sloanie trend before you left the UK of wearing the bottom of your shirts outside your jumper? You have to make one side stick out lower than the other, don’t you know!
Disclaimer: That’s not to say I don’t do these things, haha! Does it reflect better or worse on me that I am aware of this yet continue to do so? I guess I’m a sheep programmed by the mass media. On the other hand, I maintain to myself that I personally like the whole bedraggled look. It’s much easier to ‘maintain’.
Comment by Stephen K — 29 October, 2008 5:10 pm
Can I get an amen here?
Comment by TurntheScrew — 30 October, 2008 3:35 am
Their shirts are so long (I saw them in the store being sold yesterday) that they’re basically dresses. They autta just make dresses with denim as the bottom half. I don’t mind mild sagging or a slightly loose fit, but yeah, it’s silly when they’re halfway down the thigh.
Comment by F — 30 October, 2008 2:09 pm
Taken this morning - http://twitpic.com/k4wc
There were four of them, but I was probably risking my life taking this already.
Comment by Cliff — 5 November, 2008 2:51 am
Ohhhhh….I like the prison explanation!.Way better than my assumption that it was simply boys making sure people knew how well-endowed they were. I mean, those who manage to walk along WITHOUT actually needing the hand for additional support of said trousers MUST have something else to hold them up, mustn’t they? Obviously. And Cliff - you’re a seriously brave man.
Comment by mel — 14 November, 2008 5:14 pm
God, this is so true. What possesses kids to do these things? How do they hope to be accepted if they can’t even master a beltbuckle? Isn’t that one of the fundamental rules of life?
The worst thing is, many girls think it’s hot. Eurghh. If I liked someone who did this, I’d be annoyed he’s baring himself to the whole of England. Well, I do like someone who does this; this is his worst trait.
I do think the way they would hastily deny homosexuality with a ‘no homo’ contradicts how they allow gays to peer at their behinds, deliberately tempting them. There is no logic.
But all in all, it to me just seems like some sort of idiotic declaration that one utterly fails in life and belt-usage.
Comment by Jamal — 23 January, 2010 4:52 pm