She's not wearing any pants!!! I know she's not a shining example of young womanhood, but the look she is currently sporting is one I see often around the traps on ordinary, every-day girls. She was just an easy photo for me to find with Google to give an example.
Somewhere, tights or pantyhose became pants. Now I'm not talking leggings, those cotton/lycra mix fitted pants that we all wore in the 80's and 90's. They're pants, you can't see through those, and there are usually seams on at least the inside leg. If they are made by Razamattaz or Kolotex, and come in a cardboard packet... they're not PANTS!! They go under a skirt ladies. They are not a garment on their own.
Are pants now considered an accessory? Something you can choose to wear to accessorise an outfit? So often I see young ladies wearing an outfit that consists of a white man's shirt, a wide leather belt worn high under the bustline like an empire line, and opaque tights or even pantyhose. Yes, sheer pantyhose.
I know Humphrey B. Bear never wore them, but he was a man in a large bear suit, not a lady on her way to work or the movies or shopping.
The other day, I was walking down the street (along Fairfield Road to be exact) and was walking behind a young lady wearing the white shirt/no pants configuration, when she started to walk up the stairs of the overhead pass to Yeronga Station... and I got flashed by a white cotton gusset!
That's right - as a pants substitute, she had those pantyhose on with the white cotton gusset. Talk about a traumatic experience.
Perhaps young women are adopting Coco Chanel's old adage of before you leave the house, take a look at yourself in the mirror and take one thing off... and they're choosing their pants to be that one thing.
It makes me wonder, do parents no longer say "You're not going out like that!" to their daughters any more? I remember being told that when I was fully clothed, only in some kind of trendy 80's garb that my parents totally didn't understand (ripped jeans, black tights with holes in them worn over coloured tights, fluorescent leg warmers and sweat bands to match... you know, that goofy stuff from the 80's), but I can't imagine what reaction I would have got if I'd have tried the "pantyhose as pants" combination. I mean, I used to get hassled if I had make-up on, let alone the lack of any garment covering my body.
I asked a young friend of mine the other day "Kylie, am I getting old? Is this why I don't get the "no pants" thing?" to which my dear young friend answered "No Kath, I'm only 21 and I don't understand the lack of pants thing either."
Phew, I thought I was just becoming like my parents and just not getting the younger generation. But I'm not bothered by all the other trends that folks are running around in these days, while I wouldn't necessarily wear them myself, I know it's just fashion and they'll look back on it one day and cringe, just like I do when I think of my fluoro leg warmers and stuff.
But no pants... well, there's just too much exposure. It's not just some crazy fad, it's the complete lack of one crucial garment in any ensemble. It would be ok if there was a skirt present in lieu of pants, but I'm talking about no acceptable lower body garment at all.
So young ladies, if you are reading this, please put some pants on if you haven't already got some on. Again, Razamattaz is not a brand of pants. Cardboard packets with plastic windows in them containing garments that are in colours like nude, flesh, sun bronzed, midnight black, these are not pants. If it has a white cotton gusset, it is expected that you will wear something over the top of it.
You'll thank me in 20 years, I promise you.