Bum-out baggy jeans fashion? WTF

People don’t realise that there are actually reasonable reasons behind the annoying practice of people wearing low-sagging jeans (with their asses exposed) that you're so tired of seeing on the streets with all these young people trying to act all bad and cool like G's n' all dat.

The usual reasons given for this are either the well-shared action of gay men in prison selling their asses and advertising the fact by having their panties showing, that it's "cool and popular" or that “it’s what the gangsters do”... I'm not sure who was the first person to wear that style with high publicity, but there were many rocking it for way less fashionable reasons...

Many people are too poor too own new trousers...

"If I’m not mistaken it started with the poor youths” the ones who owned and wore the same clothes for years after they grew out of them and had to wear ‘hand-me-downs’ that looked too short when pulled up above the waist. 

I remember “jack-ups” – old trousers that had legs ending above the ankles. The only alternative to embarrassment was to pull them down to make them reach the top of worn shoes and look close to normal... the short trousers then looked long enough but the backside was uncovered…That coulda been where it started..

Another possible reason for this is... body shape differences - before science and Kalergy concept made pecker sizes grow.

"Guess the caption"

“If I’m not mistaken this started from the “black” people before the 90’s”

Negro people typically have posteriors that have superior protrusion and genital packages that are relatively big. Try and pull old fashioned 90’s standard boot cut jeans up above the waist on a “black” man - it will not be very comfortable for him, they were not made to ‘his’ specification, because not enough space is there.. so more had to be made by pulling the trousers down.

"I don't like getting a hard-on from walking.."

Also, a protruding bottom on a clothed man was and is seen as undesirable to some (and the self-concious) so pulling trousers down could have been used as a way to hide ones asssesese.

As a pair of jeans ride low with the waistband up against the hips, instead of resting on top of them, left to hold on against gravity and movement, they gradually end up below the buttock, exposing the cheek. 

It’s unavoidable, a belt won’t help when trousers are (un)secured around something soft instead of hanging on hips. Obviously, really defiant street fashionistas will stupidly pull their trousers down to just above the knees due to trying to be extra special and different.. for many, I can imagine it is actually comfortable… or comforting.

I feel uncomfortable talking about this any more… There are many reasons for people wearing this style. 

To summarise, the overly saggy pant trend could have begun with a need for comfort or economic stability, not simply pure stupidity... However, now it is simply unnecessary and somewhat idiotic.

Also people have been wearing baggy clothing for millennia so stop hating...


Check these out!
A PERFECT LAW SYSTEM

EASTERN EUROPEANS

GAY DOUBLE STANDARD

Man Roles Feminists Don't Want

I could say a lot about this topic but, this time, I'll keep it limited to roles in employment.

Women, now, are of the opinion that there should be no division or difference in the vocational utility of either sex. They are now supposed to be equal to men in every way - bar intelligence, with which they swiftly claim superiority.

The truth is: women are happy to take a man's job, but only if it's not too physically hard.

A sort of imbalance..

They are eager to be bosses, secretaries, office workers, retail clerks, dentists etc. But despite 'equality', there are still many roles that women just don't or shouldn't want to do. The roles that they happily leave to men..

Only SSOTL...

So in the struggle for equality, they discovered that they don't really want it..

Someone tell me a job that only women do.. Don't say mothering.... Nope, not stripping, not midwifery.. nada... Not even childminding.. A little sorry..

Men will do any and all jobs, I understand that in the third world, women do all jobs and the concept of feminism isn't so widespread or accepted. Out there you can easily find a female road sweeper. Not in a western city. In the army, although women are welcome, they are seldom seen on the frontline - actually fighting.

For obvious but denied reasons, women do not do physically strenuous jobs, e.g lifting heavy objects for twelve hour shifts, window cleaning, night-shift security, home-visit plumbing or digging holes labouring. Or... Doing furniture removals or mining.

Women believe that they belong in a nice warm office, sitting down talking all day (or on a shop floor doing similar activities) and that men should be doing the stuff that they don't want to do. Breaking backs and getting dirty. Their excuse is.... Childbirth.

Men believe that we can all do the same jobs but, out of compassion, some jobs are too physically hard for women.

They're nearly the same thing..

The sexes are of equal mental capability but not in terms of physical capability. So, in relation to employment, the two groups are not identical and equality is impossible.

Feminism? What did you say?

I know I am a dick.. When I can.

SSOTL baby

.

Check These Out:

Fallacy Of CharityThe Real Truth About The Latest London Tube StrikesIdentify an Idiot - It Could be YouEuropean Poverty is Not the Same

The text below does not exist:

"Consider the recovery time needed for hard physical roles. If a job can only be done for 4 days out of the seven in a week, due to the need for three days of recovery time for the body, tell me why it shouldn't pay as much as five days of an easier job of similar value?"

In a scenario where a group of men and a group of women are working in the same organisation but the male group is doing hard physical work requiring muscle, strain, high risk and lots of energy while the female group is doing the easier, less strenuous work that should largely involve sitting down.. Is it fair that they get paid the same amount? Even if you somehow work out who's making more money for the company. About as fair as management types getting paid 10 times what regular staff do.  Actually, no, that's totally more unfair than the hardest jobs being left to the men, with no condoned or implemented pay difference.

With an enforced equality in mind - How would the feminists react if women were, by default, made to do the most strenuous, gruelling and painful roles and received the same pay as the men who were allocated to the easier jobs?

What's the tagline of this site again..

Would you expect the dispatcher ladies on the police radios to get paid the same salary as the cops out there raping peoples lives away ?

Why Ugly / Unattractive Girls Dont Go For Hot Men

Picture Precious (for a moment please)

For those who don't know...