No Pants Sighting of the Day

Posted August 21, 2012 by Kelly
Categories: No Pants Sightings

Location: RISE Nightclub, “Boston’s only after-hours dance club”

Offense: I hadn’t previously linked the no pants epidemic to cult mentality, but I’m gonna take that idea for a spin around the block. My first exposure to RISE was encountering a group of young-looking kids standing in line in the middle of winter to get into a dark and sketchy place in their underwear. Literally, underwear. A second encounter months later prompted the photo below. Even though the RISE website claims, “Never a dress code”, I’d beg to differ if this is what is waiting to get in. The actual outfit itself is certainly not the worst I’ve seen in Find Your Pants history. Yes, there are ripped fishnets involved. Yes, lacey underwear belongs on the inside of your clothes. Yes, it is a daring outfit to choose for a public setting. But I have a bigger issue with the venue than the outfit. Do you kids know what a cult is? Let me explain…

As soon as I visited the RISE website, the cult vibes crept eerily up my spine. First of all, it’s an 18+ club and claims to provide “Boston clubbers with a safe place to dance late at night”. Ok, fine. Decent idea, and I’m told they don’t serve alcohol so the safety meter does go up a few notches. But I feel like Charles Manson wrote the next passage:

The name RISE is no accident. When you ascend the stairs to our intimate, intense club, you’ll be “uplifted” by the dynamic music and the exhilarating vibe of the open-minded folks who gather here. There’s nothing “down and dirty” about RISE; our club is impeccably clean and draws its excitement from the positive energy of the members, guests, and staff. (www.riseclub.us/p/history)

Creeped out yet? Oh wait, there’s more. RISE is a private club that requires memberships. How do you become a member? You get introduced to “us” by an existing member and choose a membership level, ranging from $50-$750 per year in annual dues. Membership gets you to the front of the line, discounted/no cover and “nightly guests”. It apparently also gets you the privilege of baring your ass to all the other 18+ freaks who hang out there.

Verdict: I’m extremely supportive of healthy and safe hang-outs for young people. I’m also extremely supportive of pants. I’m beyond disturbed that parents would allow their kids out of the house looking like this young woman, and even though RISE claims there’s nothing “down and dirty” about its establishment, I’m not convinced. You can’t honestly tell me that nothing raunchy will be happening if girls are dressed like that in a room full of horny 18-year-old bros. And herein lies my argument for the cult mentality behind not wearing pants. Girls wearing their underwear as their outerwear will get attention from boys. Plain and simple. Other girls will see this and copy the trend if they, too, want attention. Suddenly, lacking pants becomes a way to climb the social ladder, gain friends, increase popularity. Girls who do not partake in this cult become susceptible to ridicule and loser status. It’s a cutthroat world in high school, and pants are being shed in order to get ahead.

Young ladies, let me preach to you real quick. $750 buys you a top-tier RISE membership, but self-respect is priceless. Not one of those 18-year-old horndogs is worth you prancing around in a thong. The love of your life will think you are sexiest in a T-shirt and jeans. A cult like this needs one less member.

They stand outside like this until at least midnight. In their underwear. At that time, I’m in bed. In my outerwear. PJs people.

Advertisements

No Pants Sighting of the Day

Posted July 1, 2012 by Kelly
Categories: No Pants Sightings

Location: I’m awaiting details on where, when and how this monstrosity of epic proportions occurred. If it happened somewhere in Boston proper or the surrounding suburbs, I might consider moving.

Offense: Where do I even begin. I have no words, yet I have so many words. Bullet points seem to be the only conceivable way to organize my frantic thoughts, so here we go…

  • Physics do exist. Laws of gravity and mechanics and forces acting upon the body are REAL. This is not scientology. What kind of physical force does one have to apply to a female body to GET THOSE LEGS INTO THOSE SHORTS?!?!
  • The amount of chafing this woman is experiencing has to be out of control.
  • If you are a grown woman and you purchased your shorts at Baby Gap, they are not going to fit.
  • This might be the first time I’ve seen someone create junk in the trunk using only back fat.
  • Don’t you think the tramp stamp is a little superfluous at this point?
  • I feel like I’m looking at Augustus Gloop stuck in the chocolate waterfall pipe.
  • Honey, your vagina is SUFFOCATING right now.
  • What kind of heavy machinery is required to get those shorts on and off?!
  • If that amount of fat is spilling out when the shorts are ON, I don’t even want to think about what landslide might await me when those suckers come off.
  • I feel sorry for whatever guy is going to attempt to “get in those pants”. Because that’s a shit ton of hard work and I doubt most guys would be down for that.
  • At least if she decides to go for a casual swim, she has a built-in inner tube. That shit floats.
  • I don’t think I ever fully appreciated how durable denim is.
  • Perhaps my favorite comment on this eye-burning horror of a photo is from Rachel: “She doesn’t just have a muffin top. She has the whole bakery.”

Verdict: There is absolutely 100% NO situation where you should be trying to pull this off. If you looked in the mirror and thought you actually looked GOOD, then you need to visit your eye doctor immediately. Because the cataracts might be getting to you early. In addition, I’m concerned about a severe case of hypoxia because there is very little chance that you are in any way able to take in a full breath. Brain damage is inevitable.

This segues perfectly into an article I read this week on gawker.com by Hamilton Nolan. He is completely in sync with my opinions on the shortening of women’s shorts and he had me at calling them “a gaggle of slatternly harlots”. Sigh. True poetry. I nodded in agreement throughout the entire article, but it wasn’t until I reached the comments that I was stopped dead in my tracks. The first comment, by Hello_My_Lover, stated, “I actually think that the short short hotpants shorts are way more flattering, particularly on ladies with bigger thighs, than the sort of ‘regular’ length shorts”. Wait what?! How is that remotely true?! She goes on to say that regular-length shorts get all “sucked up in the crotch”, whereas hot pants just start scrunched at the beginning. Ladies, your vagina is not quick sand. It will not consume your shorts. If they happen to ride up while you’re walking, you simply pull them down and carry on. The problem for this young woman is, of course, that in order to pull her shorts down, she’s gonna have to do some major digging. Trust me, breathing is fun. And if you take those shorts off (God-willing you’ll only need a shoe horn-like apparatus and not a crane), you too will able to experience what breathing is like.

Photo courtesy of Rachel, courtesy of “her boy Christian”. Christian, you might benefit from a visit to the fire station, because your eyes must be on FIRE.

No Pants Sighting of the Day

Posted June 7, 2012 by Kelly
Categories: No Pants Sightings

Location: Salem Street, North End

Offense: This may sound a bit surprising, but the fact that her shorty shorts are practically clawing their way to nestle into the crack of her ass is not the part of this outfit that bothers me the most. I am more disturbed by the choice to pair these shorts with nude tights and Keds.

Verdict: I feel like I’ve wandered onto the set of Saved by the Bell. And while I LOVE me some Zack Morris and still watch the reruns on TBS, the 90s are calling with their giant cell phone and they want their fashion trends back. Keds are no more. They are Thoms now. Nude tights are also a thing of the distant past. We women figured out a long time ago that tights or panty hose that mimic the color of skin are superfluous. They are itchy, uncomfortable, never fit for long-legged gals like myself, and rarely ever match our skin tone. Pale arms and tan legs do not make for a good look. The trend today is to just embrace whatever imperfections exist on those gams (bruises, scrapes, lack of melanin, what have you) and keep it bare!

My bottom line is that if you feel it necessary to sport nude tights under your clothing as a way to somehow “cover” yourself, then you are not wearing pants. If not having the “protection” of nude tights makes you feel exposed, then you are not wearing pants. Put the tights up in the attic with your old dance recital costumes where they belong and buy yourself some longer shorts.

I stumbled upon this girl and her boy toy while walking home from work at 11pm on a Wednesday. He must have taken her out for a real nice date. And with those shorts, he KNOWS he’s gettin some later.

It is Not Summer Yet. Put the Shorts Away.

Posted April 10, 2012 by Kelly
Categories: Sans Pants

Sea-son (noun): one of the four periods of the year (spring, summer, autumn, and winter), beginning astronomically at an equinox or solstice, but geographically at different dates in different climates (www.dictionary.com)

I realize that defining the word “season” seems rudimentary and unnecessary as it very commonly used, but I have noticed much confusion stem from such a simple word. Now in New England, Mother Nature is extremely finicky and our “seasons” (dubbed once by my friend Ashley and myself as Icy Death, Rain, Humidity, and Fall) are ill-defined. It was 80 degrees within the first few weeks of March, but it rained for 28 out of 30 days in June 2008. We could wake up to a Nor’easter tomorrow morning in April, or experience a balmy 65 degree day in December. It is a frustration that meterologists across the Commonwealth experience on a daily basis. So I sympathize with those of us who are easily confused by the constant uncertainty of New England weather and are either routinely under- or over-dressed. But there are certain clothing items that are clearly meant to be worn in only one season of the year, with very little overlap. One of those said items is shorts.

I’ve noticed a recent trend in walking the length of Boston University’s campus (where fashion trends are…interesting to say the least), where girls are wearing shorts with tights underneath for these current cold days that ideally should be spring-like. Now you would think that I would be pleased that these young ladies are covering their legs with SOMETHING, but alas, I have a fundamental problem with this clothing choice. Because you see, we are in dangerous territory of a no pants situation when your shorts are of summer-length (i.e. half your ass is hanging out), but your coat is of winter-length.

Let me dissect this a bit further. Your summer wardrobe is inevitably different than your winter wardrobe, no? Because what we have here is a seasonal mis-match. We have a summer item paired with a winter item. The winter item is too long for the summer item, plain and simple. I know YOU know you have something covering your ass underneath that coat, but I have no clue. So from MY perspective, you are wearing tights and a peacoat. And at this point, you leave me no choice but to get my camera and take your picture. You only have yourself to blame.

Look ladies, I know you feel that Boston winters are long and cruel and all you want is that glorious day when you can wake up, put flip flops and a skirt on, and breathe in that summer air. I long for it too. But I have my shorts safely tucked away for just such an occasion. Shorts prefer to be accompanied by bare legs anyway. There’s nothing to compete with for attention, and it’s much easier to go to the bathroom. Besides, it’s already April. Summer really is around the corner, you just have to wait a little bit longer. Stay strong. Keep the shorts where they belong right now…in your closet.

See not only was this girl wearing shorts with tights, she was wearing BLACK shorts with BLACK tights, covered by a BLACK peacoat. And you wonder why I think you're not wearing pants.

Honey when you cross seasons you have important decisions to make. In your case, it's get longer shorts or get a longer coat. Your choice.

‘Tis That Time Again…No Pants T Ride 2012

Posted January 9, 2012 by Kelly
Categories: No Pants Sightings

The day was Sunday, January 8th. The time was 2pm. The place was South Station on the Red Line. The crowd? About 100, very energetic, and beyond ready to take their pants off. Yes ladies and gentlemen, for the third year, I ventured out to document and photograph the No Pants T Ride in Boston, and would like to report my findings.

The premise is always the same: sign up for a team, get on a specific train car, take your pants off at your assigned station, get off the train, get back on the next one in the same car. The only behavioral norm assigned to participants is to act nonchalant, ya know, as if you’re actually WEARING pants. Unsuspecting T riders who do not realize this is happening will be in SHOCK and AWE! They will give these no pants wearers STRANGE LOOKS! They will LAUGH! They will POINT and take PICTURES! They will WHISPER to their friends!! But for me, having done this twice already, I knew exactly what to expect. And I actually found myself thinking, “Where’s the novelty in this?”

There’s a distinct difference between this event and the countless no pants offenses I have captured on film. With the former, these people may be a tad on the crazy side, but they are well-aware that they should normally be wearing pants. This is one day when they will take a walk on the wild side – either on their free will or on a dare – and do something crazy in public. However, the members of the latter group have no idea that they are committing a fashion crime. They actually think their lack of pants is sexy and cool and “in”. They somehow look in the mirror and think that they CAN’T see their ass through those tights they wear. So who is more delusional? The people who ride the T for 1 hour in their underwear on a cold day in January or the people whose clothing choices basically resemble underwear EVERY DAY?!

So nice try no pants T riders. Good job at getting up the courage to join all your friends and “shake it up” on a Sunday afternoon. These people are actually rewarded for taking their pants off, seeing as that there’s an after party at a bar (still no pants there…frightening). But unfortunately, these crazies will never hold a candle to the balls that the girls wearing tights, leggings, short-ass skirts, long sweaters, etc. etc. possess. Somehow, the aforementioned girls have ZERO SHAME. It’s a concept I might never understand. But for the first time, I can actually say I was a little bored by all these people without their pants.

Nevertheless, of course I got pictures! Duh.

My favorite part of this picture is that guy's face.

That chick in the panties and black tights was actually very pregnant. So congrats, new baby, your mommy is a crazy person.

 

Question: does a guy have more or less game when the girl's pants are already off?

 

When the clothed sit next to the unclothed...

 

Not sure why, but cowboy boots were a popular accessory for riding the T without pants.

Her legs are not diseased nor covered in tattoos. Those tights are just meant to ALWAYS be underneath something.

 

Her hair was about the same color combination as those socks.

 

When the hell did this event become a father/son bonding moment?!?!

 

Oh not to worry...Mom came out too. Get the whole family involved.

 

There goes the flock...

Who’s to Blame?

Posted January 2, 2012 by Kelly
Categories: Sans Pants

Ever since the dawn of retail, when stores like Gap and Bloomingdale’s came into existence, and were kept alive and kicking with the invention of the credit card, there has been a close and dependent relationship between retail designers and consumers. For the most part, this relationship is symbiotic, much like those found in nature. Designers consult their constituents to learn what types of clothing they’re interested in, and consumers provide monetary compensation to perpetuate fashion trends and keep the industry rolling. It’s the stuff of economic textbooks. However, when a mistake is made that disrupts this balanced relationship, who is to blame?

The mistake to which I am referring is nude-colored leggings. By mistake, I more accurately mean EGREGIOUS ERROR IN JUDGMENT. But is this the fault of the pants makers or the pants buyers? Who has become the parasite in this once symbiotic relationship? I’m not sure I have an answer at the moment, so to keep with the “balance” theme I have going here, I shall present both sides of the argument.

The designers of nude leggings are the devil!

Ultimately it is the designers that create a fashion trend, so it seems natural to blame them for creating leggings that give the illusion that you have LITERALLY forgotten your pants. There are so few occasions I can think of that require the illusion of nakedness. Anything that does come to mind seems to revolve around the arts in some form (plays, dance, etc.). And even that is a stretch. In addition, I feel that one major benefit of pants is that they tend to hide all those fun little imperfections we all have and love: cellulite, little pockets of extra fat, spider veins, all that good stuff. But if the designers have created a piece that A. glues itself to your legs since spandex is very good at that and B. contours to all the bumps and lumps you have, they have given you no fighting chance at looking good. If it was possible to look anti-sexy, they have helped you achieve that. Designers wrote your sex appeal its death sentence when they created nude-colored leggings.

But wait! It’s the consumers’ fault!

Can we lay all the burden upon the creators of this atrocity? Perhaps those who spend actual money on a product that gives the opposite effect of clothing should take some of the fall. Listen, I know each and every one of you has had at least one encounter with a mirror in your lifetime. If you’re special, maybe even a full-length mirror. So if you plan on using the argument that you didn’t realize you looked naked walking out of the house, I’m not buying it for a second. Furthermore, I KNOW that every dressing room in every retail store contains at least one full length mirror, so any excuse that you didn’t know what you were buying is irrelevant. No one blindfolded you, put a gun to your head, and forced you to acquire a pair of naked pants without your knowledge. So in a culture where we tend to preach that the “customer is always right”, we need to consider that in many instances, specifically of the nude legging variety, the customer may very well just be dumb.

What’s the answer, oh pants guru?!

Sadly, I don’t have one. Both arguments are valid, but if I have to make a conclusion, my instinct is to condemn the consumer. Listen, you have to have some semblance of what your body looks like at this point in your life. You have to be able to discern what looks good on you and what doesn’t. It’s a very basic human tool. Therefore, when I see you prancing around in nude-colored non-pants, I’m going to assume either dementia or blindness has most unfortunately befallen you. Unfortunately for you, your current medical condition does nothing to save us, the unsuspecting public, from seeing your very naked-looking ass. So I beg you to be a smart consumer. Save us all.

Photo courtesy of Karen and Meredith, via Cosmo. Upon first glance, you are probably in shock that this woman has actually completely forgotten her pants. Upon further investigation, you'll realize she is African American...yet her legs, thanks to nude-colored leggings, are now Caucasian.

No Pants Sighting of the Day

Posted November 23, 2011 by Kelly
Categories: No Pants Sightings

Location: Somewhere along BU’s campus, which is proving to be the second most pantsless place in New England. The first is Mohegan Sun in Uncasville, CT. A post describing this no pants purgatory will be forthcoming.

Offense: Must I review the rules of tights AGAIN?! They are not now, nor will they ever be, pants. This young woman fits the “stereotypical college girl” profile perfectly. North Face fleece, Vera Bradley clutch, leggings/tights, Uggs. It’s just too predictable. But on this clear, crisp, fall day, your panties, my dear, are on display.

Verdict: Listen, ladies, I realize you’re supposedly living on a student’s budget (which, let’s face it, I don’t believe for a second. You go to BU, and Mommy and Daddy drove their Range Rover up from the Cape to move you into your dorm.). But being a “poor” student doesn’t mean you have to skimp on pants. You were somehow accepted into a prestigious university, meaning you possess some level of intelligence. So take those smarts and instead of hitting the books to calculate EBIT and ROA, study up on pants. Instead of getting a fancy new piece of technology, get a full-length mirror. Then look in that mirror. Look at your ass specifically. If you cannot see a full view of your ass, recruit your roommate. That’s what college roommates are for. These four years will be some of the best of your life. Experience all BU has to offer…in pants.

Image

Image

Photo courtesy of Emma, a pants-wearing BU student who can effectively distinguish between pants and this atrocity. Grade for this no-pants spy work = A+. Nice underwear pattern though...did you get that at Vicki's?

 


%d bloggers like this: