Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,540

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    "marstc09" wrote:
    "C" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    Good.

    No one wants to see more than three inches of your underwear.



    Unless you're an attractive young woman. Then it's encouraged.
    Nobody I know who "sags" their pants has their underwear showing. How is it alright for a women but not a man?
    Fine by me.
    But you get my point. How often do you see thongs hanging out?
    Well, it's hard to miss them when I have to shove dollar bills in them.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  2. #12
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,180

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    "Mr" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    Good.

    No one wants to see more than three inches of your underwear.



    Unless you're an attractive young woman. Then it's encouraged.
    Nobody I know who "sags" their pants has their underwear showing. How is it alright for a women but not a man?
    What's your definition of "sagging" then? No one I know has their pants far below their waist if they're going commando.

    I guess I'm missing something.

    And the woman part was a joke.
    They are trying to make justifiable through underwear. It is not like the style is too wear pants lower than waistline and not have a larger shirt on. Who the hell wears sagging pants and a tiny ass t-shirt?
    Ok now I see what you mean.

    I don't know actually, no one I know of does that.

    But really, whats the point of sagging under a big shirt, might as well pull them up and wear them more comfortably if no one can see it lol
    Actually I think is is uncomfortable to wear my pants at my waistline. I usually have mine about an inch down.

  3. #13
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,180

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    "C" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "C" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    Good.

    No one wants to see more than three inches of your underwear.



    Unless you're an attractive young woman. Then it's encouraged.
    Nobody I know who "sags" their pants has their underwear showing. How is it alright for a women but not a man?
    Fine by me.
    But you get my point. How often do you see thongs hanging out?
    Well, it's hard to miss them when I have to shove dollar bills in them.
    Greedy strippers!

  4. #14
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    [quote author=Mr Anderson link=topic=46395.msg805662#msg805662 date=1216585552]
    Good.

    No one wants to see more than three inches of your underwear.



    Unless you're an attractive young woman. Then it's encouraged.
    Nobody I know who "sags" their pants has their underwear showing. How is it alright for a women but not a man?
    What's your definition of "sagging" then? No one I know has their pants far below their waist if they're going commando.

    I guess I'm missing something.

    And the woman part was a joke.
    They are trying to make justifiable through underwear. It is not like the style is too wear pants lower than waistline and not have a larger shirt on. Who the hell wears sagging pants and a tiny ass t-shirt?
    Ok now I see what you mean.

    I don't know actually, no one I know of does that.

    But really, whats the point of sagging under a big shirt, might as well pull them up and wear them more comfortably if no one can see it lol
    Actually I think is is uncomfortable to wear my pants at my waistline. I usually have mine about an inch down.
    [/quote]
    It depends what I'm doing.

    When I'm wearing my jeans at work I wear them at my waist, it's really hard to move comfortably with them lower, I have to squat and make other sorts of weird movements that would be uncomfortable/impossible wearing them low.

    But when I'm not at work I do wear them lower, but at this time of the year I usually just wear shorts.

  5. #15
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,180

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    "Mr" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    "marstc09" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    [quote author=marstc09 link=topic=46395.msg805665#msg805665 date=1216585755]
    [quote author=Mr Anderson link=topic=46395.msg805662#msg805662 date=1216585552]
    Good.

    No one wants to see more than three inches of your underwear.



    Unless you're an attractive young woman. Then it's encouraged.
    Nobody I know who "sags" their pants has their underwear showing. How is it alright for a women but not a man?
    What's your definition of "sagging" then? No one I know has their pants far below their waist if they're going commando.

    I guess I'm missing something.

    And the woman part was a joke.
    They are trying to make justifiable through underwear. It is not like the style is too wear pants lower than waistline and not have a larger shirt on. Who the hell wears sagging pants and a tiny ass t-shirt?
    Ok now I see what you mean.

    I don't know actually, no one I know of does that.

    But really, whats the point of sagging under a big shirt, might as well pull them up and wear them more comfortably if no one can see it lol
    Actually I think is is uncomfortable to wear my pants at my waistline. I usually have mine about an inch down.
    [/quote]
    It depends what I'm doing.

    When I'm wearing my jeans at work I wear them at my waist, it's really hard to move comfortably with them lower, I have to squat and make other sorts of weird movements that would be uncomfortable/impossible wearing them low.

    But when I'm not at work I do wear them lower, but at this time of the year I usually just wear shorts.
    [/quote]

    If they are going to do this then they should make it a law that men can't wear tighter pants compared to women. To me that is more disturbing.

  6. #16
    dcboardr41 is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,051

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    do the Po's have tape measurers with them and will measure how much my boxers show? screw that

    Pissing on the Pack since 08'

  7. #17
    BadlandsVikings's Avatar
    BadlandsVikings is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    26,572

    Re: It's the law: No sagging pants in Chicago suburb

    ban pants

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-06-2009, 02:40 PM
  2. "Pants Man"
    By shockzilla in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-04-2008, 07:32 AM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-05-2007, 05:52 AM
  4. Old Uniform Pants
    By Zeus in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-01-2006, 10:04 PM
  5. Building blows up in Northwest suburb of Twincities!
    By whackthepack in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-28-2004, 11:44 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •