TubeNet

YOU tell this kid that you don't trust him...

To pull a great quote from the page..."is that a shotgun in your pants or a re you just happy to see me?"

You gotta love trolls...and h4x0r5.

Sou

Virtues in a diversified world: tolerance, forbearance, taking someone for who he/she really is, etc.

So, why the hell are you trying to either develop or propagate another negative stereotype with this stupid poll?

BELTS!...ya gotta have belts.
My nephew does security work and has caught his sharew of "suspects" thanks to baggy pants.

iiipopes wrote:Virtues in a diversified world: tolerance, forbearance, taking someone for who he/she really is, etc.

So, why the hell are you trying to either develop or propagate another negative stereotype with this stupid poll?

So why the hell do you think wearing baggy pants got started? A fashion statement?

TubaRay wrote:So why the hell do you think wearing baggy pants got started? A fashion statement?

Not enough TubeNet thongs were available...

windshieldbug wrote:

TubaRay wrote:So why the hell do you think wearing baggy pants got started? A fashion statement?

Not enough TubeNet thongs were available...

Now that's a fashion statement!

You know, I would have loved to see that kid actually walk, there would be no way that he could. And even if he could he would be making so much noise with all that crap. B.S. Just another excuse for the older generation to come down on the younger. You would have thought they would have ended that cycle. Every generation is the worst that the adults have ever seen and they don't feel same and the end of the world is coming and it's the total breakdown of society because their pants are big, but the fact that they wore tie-dye and smoked dope was them just being young kids.
Whatever,
Bill "who is usually seen is baggy clothes because they are comfortable and not so much for a fashion statement, but it seems to work well in my favor" Pritchard

TubaRay wrote:

iiipopes wrote:Virtues in a diversified world: tolerance, forbearance, taking someone for who he/she really is, etc.

So, why the hell are you trying to either develop or propagate another negative stereotype with this stupid poll?

So why the hell do you think wearing baggy pants got started? A fashion statement?

Actually, my understanding is that the whole baggy pants thing ("baggin") to show underwear started in prison as a way to show that one was "available" for sex. I have noticed when I share this tidbit of information with students they immediately tend to hike their pants up.

Tubadork wrote:Every generation is the worst that the adults have ever seen and they don't feel same and the end of the world is coming and it's the total breakdown of society because their pants are big, but the fact that they wore tie-dye and smoked dope was them just being young kids.

True enough. Just think about how each generation hates the next's music...usually dismissing it as "noise." That said, however, smoking dope and wearing tie-dye seems a lot more interesting form of rebellion than showing your underwear. But maybe that's just (old) me.

kegmcnabb wrote: Actually, my understanding is that the whole baggy pants thing ("baggin") to show underwear started in prison as a way to show that one was "available" for sex. I have noticed when I share this tidbit of information with students they immediately tend to hike their pants up.

Now that's really funny! Yep! From my experience working with kids, that is exactly the response I would expect.

kegmcnabb wrote:That said, however, smoking dope and wearing tie-dye seems a lot more interesting form of rebellion than showing your underwear. But maybe that's just (old) me.

I actually didn't smoke dope, but I'll admit to having worn tie-dye. I also wore bell-bottoms. And yes, those were pretty stupid, but why would anyone think the "display your underwear" look to be cool. About the only look which readily comes to mind, which would be even less cool, would be some of us wearing a TubeNet thong(or any other thong, for that matter).

kegmcnabb wrote:
Actually, my understanding is that the whole baggy pants thing ("baggin") to show underwear started in prison as a way to show that one was "available" for sex. I have noticed when I share this tidbit of information with students they immediately tend to hike their pants up.

Effective, but untrue:

http://www.snopes.com/risque/homosex/sagging.asp

Now, the ethical question: you now know that the story is untrue, but you also know that it works. Do you continue to use it?

Doug "I would"

TubaRay wrote:

iiipopes wrote:Virtues in a diversified world: tolerance, forbearance, taking someone for who he/she really is, etc.

So, why the hell are you trying to either develop or propagate another negative stereotype with this stupid poll?

So why the hell do you think wearing baggy pants got started? A fashion statement?

I'm not naive, and I'm not an idiot. In a "former life" I both prosecuted and defended such. (Damn, now everyone knows. I knew I couldn't keep it hidden forever, but, oh, well...) So I've dealt with all sides of this issue. Yes, as Doc will probably agree, there are times when issues of manner of dress combined with other actions raise legitimate suspicions that warrant investigation, but I've also had to protect a few civil rights, on both sides of the courtroom table, just because with some people, it was only a fashion statement taken out of context.

There is just no need on a forum for a poll that calls attention to a stereotype, unless the purpose is to try to diffuse the stereotype.

BTW - you wouldn't want to see me in my underwear in public, boxers, briefs, thongs, commando, or otherwise!

iiipopes wrote:I've also had to protect a few civil rights, on both sides of the courtroom table, just because with some people, it was only a fashion statement taken out of context.

So how do YOU know what her honor is wearing under those robes?

iiipopes wrote: There is just no need on a forum for a poll that calls attention to a stereotype, unless the purpose is to try to diffuse the stereotype.

Although I mostly agree with the sentiment in your post, I have to question why it is OK to try to diffuse a stereotype, and it is not OK to call attention to one. Isn't this a case of "what is good for the goose is good for the gander?"

windshieldbug wrote:

iiipopes wrote:I've also had to protect a few civil rights, on both sides of the courtroom table, just because with some people, it was only a fashion statement taken out of context.

So how do YOU know what her honor is wearing under those robes?

Or what she isnt wearing...

TubaRay wrote:

iiipopes wrote: There is just no need on a forum for a poll that calls attention to a stereotype, unless the purpose is to try to diffuse the stereotype.

Although I mostly agree with the sentiment in your post, I have to question why it is OK to try to diffuse a stereotype, and it is not OK to call attention to one. Isn't this a case of "what is good for the goose is good for the gander?"

Instead, more like, "Sauce for the goose." To call attention to it without taking steps to diffuse it only perpetuates it.

As far as under the robes, I have the right to remain silent....

bloke wrote:

Where does this car wear it's tires?

I guess that that video shows more not to trust baggy shirts than baggy pants. He had more stuffed in his pants with a larger shirt than with pants.
B.T.W., I know a kid that wears his pants as low as those guys in that picture. He's constantly wearing a county issue ankle bracelet, and the teacher constantly gives him a hard time about it.