Inching Closer to Taliban Rule
As if dress codes in school aren’t bad enough, there could soon be a statewide dress code in effect for Virginia:
The Virginia House of Delegates has tentatively approved a bill to crack down on people who wear low-riding pants.
Freshman Norfolk Delegate Algie Howell Jr. introduced the bill at the urging of constituents who are offended by the exposed underwear.
Howell said, “That’s why they’re called undergarments. They’re supposed to be worn under something else.”
Delegates approved a measure that would allow police to assess a $50 fine on anyone who exposes their below-waist underpants in a “lewd or indecent manner.”
Another anti-youth law passed by an anti-youth legislature meant to control another slight detail of how young people live their lives. While the bill doesn’t specifically impose an age restriction, it is quite obvious that senior citizens don’t sag their pants so they look cool on the shuffle board court.
One plea of dress code and school uniform supporters is that they are only policies governing one’s clothing at school, students can still wear what they choose after school. Soon that might no longer be the case.
What types of governments seek to control every aspect of their citizens lives? Oh yea, governments like the Taliban that impose strict behavior and appearance guidelines on women, and governments like in the United States that impose strict behavior and appearance guidelines on youth. Thankfully we’ve progressed past stoning, but I’ll thank you not to govern how high or low my pants must be.
February 8th, 2005 at 9:19 pm
The Taliban obviously did a whole lot more than just dictate strict standards of dress, but that doesn’t make American legislatures doing this kind of shit any less outrageous.
February 8th, 2005 at 11:27 pm
You’re right, this law will affect youth more than the elderly, but so do speed limits. (That’s where we get the age-discriminating term “Sunday Driver”) I’m not saying it’s a good idea, but I think it’s one that should be considered on maybe a community level. I’d live somewhere where it were banned, just to not have to see saggy pants. (Obviously there’d be other considerations.)
February 9th, 2005 at 8:44 am
I’d much rather live somewhere that had a requirement for all members of a subgroup to wear a dunce cap at all times. As for which subgroup? Let’s say it should be made up of all of those people who support legal restrictions on saggy pants.
February 9th, 2005 at 11:17 am
>smiles
February 9th, 2005 at 11:18 am
Gah. That comment didn’t post right. I was just saying that I’m okay with wearing a dunce cap, because once you let the government single out subgroups, it’s hard to say when to stop. As I’m approaching antiquity (25 is ancient on a college campus) I’m ready to join the suppressors.
February 9th, 2005 at 1:35 pm
I’ve already hit that number myself, and I’d rather see the supressors wise up and reach for a better life for all of us. Low slung pants won’t harm you, so I don’t see why you want to harm those who wear them.
February 9th, 2005 at 7:57 pm
Yea, resist joining the supressors!
February 10th, 2005 at 11:39 pm
Inching Closer to Taliban Rule
As if dress codes in school aren’t bad enough, there could soon be a statewide dress code in effect for Virginia: The Virginia House of Delegates has tentatively approved a bill to crack down on people who wear low-riding pants….