Pants, by definition, are: an outer garment covering the body from the waist to the ankle, with a separate part for each leg. One cannot have one pant, although I suppose if one has only one leg and removes the extra part, one might have a pant? My dashboard dictionary doesn’t suppose, it just defines, and pant has only to do with heavy breathing.

According to this definition then, pants cover the entire lower half of the body. Unless you live in the land of hip-hop, of course, where all bets are off and pants cover the lower half of the legs – no guarantee for anything on up.

Personally, I find it ridiculous. It looks stupid. It makes normal movement less than . . . fluid, shall we say. I’ve watched the boys try to run around my neighborhood with the waistband of their jeans around their thighs and their pantlegs bunched around their ankles, and I’ve laughed out loud at the visual. I watch boys hold their pants up by grabbing the crotch and swaggering, and I’ve wondered if I should allow my daughter to wear tops that require her holding her breasts in order to keep said top from falling off. I’ve decided that no, I shouldn’t.

I’ve heard the stories of this fashion trend originating as an act of solidarity with “the brothers in prison” who’ve had their belts taken away. Which strikes me as ridiculous for two reasons – first, because when belts are taken away, usually one is handed a jumpsuit or drawstring pants to replace one’s streetwear. Been awhile since I’ve been in prison, so I can’t say for sure. Secondly, I find it troubling that kids look to “brothers in prison” to emulate. Sure, some are there unfairly, but face it, most are not. They are there because they are criminals, and the culture has moved from sympathizing through clothing to eyewitnesses not talking to police about crimes simply because one shouldn’t be a rat. Sixty Minutes did an interesting piece on that not long ago.  But that is whole ‘nother post for a more serious time.

Today I am speaking only of pants, because now, a Louisiana town has determined that we must put an end to this wearing of pants incorrectly.  Thank God someone is finally taking action.

Supposedly this is about indecency. Somewhere in the aforementioned article, a councilperson is quoted as including butt cracks in what mustn’t show. Private parts in general should not show. OK, but since when did sagging pants show private parts? They look stupid, they show underwear, they make walking a whole different act – but I have yet to see actual private parts. I see a lot more skin and the edges, shall we say, of a lot more “private parts” on women who wear bikini tops and ultra-lowrise jeans and mini shorts . . . but they aren’t deemed illegal. Except for butt cracks. God save the plumbers of Louisiana.

The town has implemented $500 fines and possible jail time for this. Oh my. This is what is important? This is how we should be spending the time and energy of our local governments? I guess the school system in their town is in excellent condition, as well as all the municipal services, street conditions and common areas. Whew.

Or wait, maybe they aren’t. Maybe they are going to create the “Sagging Pants Fund,” and use all SPF money to improve the quality of life for everyone by planting flowers in the medians, buying new books for the school libraries and lowering taxes. Perfect. Now there’s a plan we can really get behind. And the pants will return to their rightful position, covering the body from waist to ankle. Ahhhhh . . . order. We just needed more order.