May 31st, 2008 at 9:35 am
Tights Are Not Pants
I’m not sure if any of you have been around college undergraduates recently, but those of us who have (The Atlantic’s offices are right by the GWU campus) have noticed a somewhat distressing trend toward young women wearing tights as pants. Under the circumstances, I thought I might take the opportunity to plug the work of the good people at TightsAreNotPants.com who are trying to point out that tights are, in fact, not pants.
This comes to me via Nylon magazine which it seems also has a print feature on this in their May issue.
77 Responses to “Tights Are Not Pants”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Basketball
Blanche Lincoln
Budget
Cars
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
EU
Finance
Football
Gender
Health Care
History
Inequality
Infrastructure
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NBA
Pakistan
Palestine
planning
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Sarah Palin
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
May 31st, 2008 at 9:57 am
Yglesias specializes in douches. That’s what he knows about. That’s what he does.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:14 am
Yeah, this is really distressing. Nothing drives me up the wall like young women wearing anything tight. Seriously, this might be the worst attempted meme since the “Blow Jobs: Never Before 8 PM” movement back in ‘82.
@Petey: Ah, raising the level of discourse as usual early on a Saturday morning, eh, Creepy Matthew Yglesias Stalker Guy?
May 31st, 2008 at 10:21 am
Seriously!
80s aerobics videos = not sexy.
Ballet class = not sexy.
So who in their right mind would think that tights-as-pants would be sexy? Why not add a sweatband, crimped hair, and ballet shoes while you’re at it?
But seriously, American women seem to be afflicted by chronically bad fashion. Remember “Capri pants”? If SUVs were an item of clothing, they’d be Capri pants.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:27 am
Let me echo the comments of the distinguished Senator from the State of Moff. Young women in tight clothing are a part of the American way of life– a national resource that should be cherished and held sacred.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:31 am
I’m not sure if any of you have been around college undergraduates recently, but those of us who have (The Atlantic’s offices are right by the GWU campus) have noticed a somewhat distressing trend toward young women wearing tights as pants
Oh it’s distressing alright. Distressing the front of my pants…because of all the boners I get looking at them…. which in turn stretch my pants…because of my ample penis.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:39 am
Seriously. You think this is disturbing?
May 31st, 2008 at 10:52 am
I’m with Matt and Noah, there’s much more attractive clothing out there than (often oddly colored) tights.
When I was in college I remember it became the fashion for girls to wear pajamas around all day. I had no problem with it as long as understood it to simply be a sign that it was now acceptable to be too lazy to put pants on (an idea I was very sympathetic to at the time), but when I discovered that many girls would change out of the cloths they actually slept in, and put on going-out-pajamas I was perplexed. Maybe that’s when I relized I would never understand the “trendy” aspect of fashion.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:54 am
I miss campus life, especially in the spring when the skankwear comes out.
But I hope the tights thing doesn’t migrate to older women if they haven’t kept themselves in fighting trim. Maybe it’s just the big govt liberal in me, but there ought to be a license to go below certain minimal levels of coverage.
May 31st, 2008 at 11:03 am
drjimcooper’s first post wins.
May 31st, 2008 at 11:08 am
I too work near the GWU campus, and have found my afternoon walk to the Metro increasingly enjoyable lately
May 31st, 2008 at 11:12 am
We must put a stop to these college girls in their tight clothing!
Usage note: isn’t the word “douche” normally reserved for males? I’ve never heard anyone in my life call a woman a “douche” or a “douche bag.”
May 31st, 2008 at 11:13 am
I wish someone would tell the buff MALE students that tights are pants. Codpieces optional.
May 31st, 2008 at 11:20 am
The less pants women wear the better.
May 31st, 2008 at 11:25 am
Just as an addendum, though, I think there is a way that tights-as-pants can work: if they’re combined with a long jacket and a pair of Uggs in the winter. That look is kind of sexy, actually. It’s pretty popular here in Michigan these days.
As for the pajama look, I’m really sad to see it go out of style. Also, hip-hugging cargo pants – weren’t those great?
May 31st, 2008 at 11:25 am
Usage note: isn’t the word “douche” normally reserved for males? I’ve never heard anyone in my life call a woman a “douche” or a “douche bag.”
Posted by jim | May 31, 2008 11:12 AM
I thought that was weird too. I thought it was another attempt to find a male equivalent to “bitch.”
May 31st, 2008 at 11:28 am
It could very well be argued that pants and so called ‘tights’ are a construct of subsets, in which tights are a subset of pants. The universally accepted definition is thus:
“A garment extending from the waist to the knee or
ankle, covering each leg separately.”
I think this argument is a distinction without a difference, and ultimately a charade designed as a marketing tool in order to distract young men and women from…from…from, uh, what my 61 year old wife would call ’sloppy seconds.’
McCain-Clinton 2008!
May 31st, 2008 at 11:32 am
I don’t understand what il professore said, but I’m changing my answer to agreement.
May 31st, 2008 at 11:36 am
Uh, what, exactly, is disturbing about women wearing tights?
May 31st, 2008 at 11:42 am
This post is useless without pics.
May 31st, 2008 at 11:50 am
Skirts are not pants, either.
Are you going to come out against skirts too?
May 31st, 2008 at 11:52 am
Every man Jack here is eager to shout his approval for tight clothing on women, but at least remind yourselves that every new skanky revealing fashion trend always gets worn by 100 ugly heifers for every 1 smokin filly.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Matt, this is just a weird post. The pictures I found ostensibly being women wearing tights as pants are actually women wearing short shorts with tights, or short skirts with tights, or long shirts with tights. I’ve been seeing that since the 60’s and miniskirts. I found only one picture of a woman wearing just tights with underwear beneath. My daughter noted that she looked about as confused as anyone caught without pants in public might look – and probably doesn’t count.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Aleks, there’s already 2 male equivilent words for ‘bitch’. They are ‘dick’ and ‘prick’. Sometimes dick is elongated to ‘dickhead’, but only usually among older people. There’s a gender neutral term for it as well, ‘asshole’.
I believe ‘douche bag’ is an attempt to find a term for it that isn’t considered an obscenity.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Although it’s your blog and you can say whatever you want, I just want to say that I want back the minute I spent reading this post and skimming the comments.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:11 pm
From the following article:
http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/node/8132#
“Muslims’ modest clothing shouldn’t prevent anyone from trying sports, Huq says. “We do everything, it’s just differently. There’s not as many restrictions as people think.” This fall, for a beginning running class, she ran wearing tights, a big shirt, and a loose-fitting scarf.”
You see, Muslim women wear tights when they play sports or go jogging. Obviously, the women who wear tights are leftist, defeatist, anti-American traitors who supporting Islamic terrorism and global jihad.
Michelle Malkin
May 31st, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Socal, I’ll come out against skirts. Legs never did anything for me, personally. All skirts do, unless they are the very short and clingy type, is obscure a woman’s ass. Tights though, I’m all for that. Anything that clings to a woman’s backside is a pleasant fashion trend as far as I’m concerned.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Aleks, there’s already 2 male equivilent words for ‘bitch’. They are ‘dick’ and ‘prick’. Sometimes dick is elongated to ‘dickhead’, but only usually among older people. There’s a gender neutral term for it as well, ‘asshole’.
I believe ‘douche bag’ is an attempt to find a term for it that isn’t considered an obscenity.
Posted by Soullite | May 31, 2008 12:07 PM
Have you heard a girl called a douche bag or an asshole? I haven’t, so I think both of those, as well as dick, prick, fag (yes, obviously it’s a gay specific slur, but it’s usually directed against guys the director doesn’t truly believe are gay), cocksucker, and bastard are all generally male equivalents of bitch.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:32 pm
douche -> louche
May 31st, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Tight clothes and skirts are made of win.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:55 pm
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!! FOR HILLARY!!!
May 31st, 2008 at 2:01 pm
MATT SHUT UP.
ANY ATTEMPTS TO COME TWIXT ‘WOMAN’ AND ‘TIGHT,’ IN ANY FORM, IS COUNTER TO MY WEEN.
WE LIKE OUR WOMEN TIGHT.
WE LIKE THEIR CLOTHING TIGHT.
WE LIKE IT WHEN THEY TIGHTEN UP THAT FIGURE.
MOST OF ALL, WE LIKE IT WHEN THEY TIGHTEN UP THEIR SPENDING HABITS
YAH, THAT’S TIGHT.
May 31st, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Aleks: Yes, I’ve heard girls and women called ‘assholes’ before. You’re right about ‘Douche’, though. I’ve never heard it used to refer to women. It’s kind of bizarre when you think of it, really. But my point is that they all essentially mean the same thing, a mean/rude person who acts out of either spite or with the complete disregard of other people.
May 31st, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Let me second Matt’s denunciation of women wearing clothing that reveals their shape. This I shall not abide!
May 31st, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Seriously, this is a movement I can get behind. I’m no fashionista, but I often wonder how many college girls actually look in the mirror before leaving their apartment.
May 31st, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Ahaha! That made me smile!
http://seoanalytic.com
May 31st, 2008 at 2:50 pm
This post has really brought out the best from the MY.com community.
I wait to hear from Rap Scold Douthat.
May 31st, 2008 at 3:08 pm
This reminded me of something else I had seen.
http://armsandinfluence.typepad.com/armsandinfluence/2008/05/pants-against-n.html
May 31st, 2008 at 3:09 pm
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!
May 31st, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Like, remember back when in the future the cool kids were all going to wear skintight monocolor unisex bodysuits?
And then back when we laughed at the idea that the cool kids would all wear skintight monocolor unisex bodysuits?
And then Dov Charney?
May 31st, 2008 at 3:36 pm
mwg @ 12:09 pm:
Me, too.
May 31st, 2008 at 3:39 pm
mwg @ 12:09 pm:
Me, too.
May 31st, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Reminds one of the answer Robert Mitchum gave when some reporter asked him: “What makes a woman good in bed?”
Mitchum: “Proximity”
May 31st, 2008 at 4:50 pm
I’ve used and maybe overused the terms “douche” and “douchebag” in the past few years. However, after doing some recent high school and college newspaper advising and then picking up some bartending shifts at my old job from college, I must declare that the people now using this term the most are undoubtedly who it was supposed to describe.
May 31st, 2008 at 4:56 pm
One might also say — and I wish someone would — that “Pants Are Not Shorts.” With the advent of the warm weather, once again young men are appearing in public wearing what I think they think are shorts — but if they were perhaps one millimeter longer people would be saying, “Why are your pants so short?” Seriously, doesn’t wearing “legwear” that’s that long defeat the purpose of wearing shorts in the first place?
May 31st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I don’t know if I am the first to say it (too lazy to read all the comments) but this really does make the distinction between pants (underwear) and trousers (well, pants on you side of the pond I guess) in British English all the more important.
May 31st, 2008 at 4:58 pm
One might also say — and I wish someone would — that “Pants Are Not Shorts.” With the advent of the warm weather, once again young men are appearing in public wearing what I think they think are shorts — but if they were perhaps one millimeter longer people would be saying, “Why are your pants so short?” Seriously, doesn’t wearing “legwear” that’s that long defeat the purpose of wearing shorts in the first place?
May 31st, 2008 at 6:39 pm
GWU girls in tights? Can we have some pictures please?
May 31st, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Judging from my perspective as a het male at a large university two hours south of DC:
Tights as primary legware=crazy awesome!
However:
1) As I think someone said above, the ladies generally aren’t wearing tights as pants per se, but under a skirt or a long sweater;
2) if they’re not, most of the time they’re either jogging or going to/coming from the gym.
Conclusion: tights are far less douchey than the midriff-baring jeans that were the previous tacky fashion trend, in part because tights tend to flatter a greater variety of body types. Lowcut jeans make all girls who aren’t model-thin look unconfortable.
May 31st, 2008 at 7:34 pm
As I think someone said above, the ladies generally aren’t wearing tights as pants per se, but under a skirt or a long sweater
That was the case one/one and a half years ago. Nowadays, the tights are worn without anything over them.
May 31st, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Anyone willing to denounce capri pants has clearly never worn them. They are awesome. They are not pants. They allow a bit of breeze on your leg. They show off sexy ankles and sometimes calves. They aren’t shorts so you can wear them to work. They are short enough to motivate you to shave but not short enough to make you feel naked. They make your legs look longer. They give us short women regular length pants to wear. (Yes, I’ve worn wide-leg capris as real linen pants. I’m not ashamed.) And, they’re cute as hell. Also, they make you feel really springy without making you look underage. Short shorts are for 16 year olds.
http://islandsurf.com/images/products/large/473766_stn_LG.jpg
Look! Look at the awesome cute!
May 31st, 2008 at 8:47 pm
yea. anyways, pts for guy who did “distressing” a la family guy, the guy who equated attractive women to fillys…. and those who managed a discussion over douche while not high. i’m sure there were others but not everyone can win.
May 31st, 2008 at 10:39 pm
This generation has fashion troubles.
I don’t think they know a thing about raising children either.
June 1st, 2008 at 1:06 am
I wouldn’t call it “troubling” – my God, how? – but if it reduces the number of sundresses being worn, that would be a bad thing.
June 1st, 2008 at 1:35 am
Every man Jack here is eager to shout his approval for tight clothing on women, but at least remind yourselves that every new skanky revealing fashion trend always gets worn by 100 ugly heifers for every 1 smokin filly.
That’s the price we pay for progress. Only a Luddite would complain.
June 1st, 2008 at 2:36 am
They make your legs look longer.
No they don’t. The other points you made I can agree with, but Capri pants make your legs look shorter.
June 1st, 2008 at 8:18 am
Whether or not you find something attractive should have zero impact on whether strangers wear it. As strange as it may sound, other people may have priorities that they rank higher than your viewing pleasure.
June 1st, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Male tights are traditional and, as I just discovered, amazingly affordable.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:28 pm
They make your legs look longer.
Maybe capris really do that, but they also make your hips look 5 ft wide.
June 2nd, 2008 at 12:09 am
some gay men do not like women
November 29th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
NEW HAVEN — Attorneys squared off in federal court Wednesday, exchanging legal arguments for more than two hours over a First Amendment question on whether a high school student should have been disciplined by school officials for calling
January 14th, 2009 at 9:21 am
laptop battery
laptop batteries
February 8th, 2009 at 9:22 pm
laptop battery
March 1st, 2009 at 6:09 pm
cialis
It is the coolest site,keep so!
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:49 am
levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 11th, 2009 at 3:46 am
I heard there was a new line coming out soon.
March 11th, 2009 at 4:30 am
Great site. Good info
March 12th, 2009 at 11:15 pm
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 14th, 2009 at 5:11 am
Incredible site!
xanax
March 16th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
Do you guys have a recommendation section, i’d like to suggest some stuff
March 17th, 2009 at 2:24 am
Incredible site!
tramadol
March 17th, 2009 at 11:28 am
this is seriously the dumbest blog ever written. look at how most men look and dress these days… then complain that women have horrible fashion sense and you don’t like our tights. WE LIKE OUR TIGHTS they’re feminine. so back off.
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:04 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 am
buy viagra online
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:08 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:06 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 5:21 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right viagra
April 16th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Give please. His priority did not seem to be to teach them what he knew, but rather to impress upon them that nothing, not even… knowledge, was foolproof.
I am from Kuwait and also now’m speaking English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: “What is cheap airline tickets fly courier.”
Thank you so much for your future answers
. Lovie.