Robert Cohen / Associated Press
Alex Lindsey’s comfort is the main reason that his black shorts sag a little more than an inch below his boxers – only noticeable if he were to lift his T-shirt.
“Sagging a little bit is just more comfortable than having your pants pulled up like Steve Urkel,â€Â Lindsey, a junior electronic media production major, said over lunch in the student union.
“I sag a little bit, but not to where it’s noticeable,â€Â he said. “I don’t have my whole butt hangin’ out.â€Â
But people who sag more than a little bit – favoring the boxers-showing, butt-hanging-out style – could end up in jail or with a hefty fine in a growing number of cities in the South and the East Coast.
The trend started in June in Louisiana, where lawmakers enacted indecency ordinances against sagging pants. Delcambre, La., a town of 2,231 just southwest of the state’s capital, deemed sagging pants against the law – a crime that carries a fine of up to $500 or up to six months in jail.
Alicia Sanchez, a senior recreation and Chicano studies major, said she thinks the indecency level should depend on how far men sag.
“If it’s down to their thighs, it’s somewhat indecent, but sagging just below their hips is just being comfortable,” Sanchez said.
She believes sagging should be up to an individual̢۪s personal preference, but isn̢۪t totally against the indecency ordinances.
“I think it’s good to fine them if their pants are completely falling off and their underwear is showing,â€Â she said.
A similar ordinance in Mansfield, La. took effect in September, promising a fine of up to $150 or up to 15 days in jail for saggers.
Lawmakers and law enforcement officials there say that the new laws against the “offensiveâ€Â style will “set a good civic image,â€Â the New York Times reported.
But when lawmakers in Virginia and Louisiana attempted to make sagging illegal statewide, legislation failed because opponents invoked the right to self-expression. Now, legislators who label the legislation as “indecency lawsâ€Â are becoming more successful in getting the laws passed, the New York Times reported.
Aram Yousif, a junior criminal law major, said he thinks sagging should not be allowed at all.
“It’s indecent,â€Â he said. “We should have those laws here too. When guys sag below their hips – to where you can see their boxers and they’re trying to pull on their pants to keep them up – that’s bad and we should have a law against it.â€Â
But so far, no such law is being proposed in any West Coast cities.
In Trenton, N.J., Councilwoman Annette Lartigue is drafting legislation to enforce a fine or mandate community service for those who sag, calling it a problem of “publicly exposing private parts,â€Â the New York Times reported.
“It’s a fad like hot pants; however, I think it crosses the line when a person shows their backside,â€Â Lartigue told the New York Times. “You can’t legislate how people dress, but you can legislate when people begin to become indecent by exposing their body parts.â€Â
Atlanta may be the next city to follow suit, with Councilman C. T. Martin sponsoring an amendment to the city̢۪s indecency laws to ban sagging.
But Lindsey, the student who sags “a little bit,â€Â said making sagging a crime is “going way too far.â€Â
“They shouldn’t be allowed to just come up with this all of a sudden, when people have been sagging for a long time,â€Â Lindsey said.
What is really behind these new indecency laws? And how long has the style been around?
Some say hip-hop critics are behind the laws, trying to find a way to crush the genre by starting with the clothing style. Critics say sagging pants come with a “thuggish swagger and disrespect for authority,â€Â the New York Times reported.
Sam Hansen, co-owner of the urban clothing store FTK – Fits Tunes Kicks – said he has heard many different rumors about the origin of sagging.
“Some say it originated in the prisons or in the ghetto,â€Â he said. “But I also heard that people couldn’t afford properly fitting pants, so they bought them big so that they would never grow out of them.â€Â
Sagging is believed to have begun in prison, where oversized uniforms were issued without belts to prevent hangings and beatings.
“The look really started in the very late ‘80s when hip-hop and rap singers started to wear them,â€Â said marketing advisor and professor Susan Geringer.
Manufacturers actually stopped making baggy pants in 1994 and switched to a slimmer, capri-style pants, Geringer said.
“But fans of baggy pants weren’t buying them, so manufacturers had to start making the baggy pants again so they wouldn’t lose money,â€Â she said.
The style turned mainstream and has become commonplace in both ghettos and suburbs around the nation, but it is still widely believed that they are primarily worn by gangs, Geringer said.
“It’s believed that gang members wear their pants baggy so they can hide their guns,â€Â she said. “That’s why so many school districts ban them, for safety and to avoid that affiliation.â€Â
Although Hansen said he believes sagging and the baggy look are never going to go away, urban clothing manufacturers are coming out with different pants styles that have been embraced by various hip-hop artists.
“Grimy hood cats are going to stick to that look,â€Â he said. “But urban fashionistas are actually gravitating toward the Pharrell or Kanye look – the skater look with the tapered leg pants. I’ve seen that a lot more now than I saw through the ‘90s.â€Â
Hansen considers sagging to be part of a person’s “freedom of expressionâ€Â and is against the idea of a fine or jail time for sagging.
“Unless it’s really inappropriate, I don’t think it’s offending anybody,â€Â he said. “I could care less.â€Â
Michele • Jul 29, 2008 at 9:35 pm
“Stop worrying about saggy pants and try banning more important things that affect our society such as guns, drugs and alcohol!” – stephanie on January 28th, 2008 10:24 pm
Okay, what would banning guns do for those of us who choose to own a gun for collection, protection or sport? Guns are not the reason for gun crimes. People who are involved in crimes are the reason for crimes that may involve the use of guns. These people even get these guns illegally, so if they were banned, they would still have them, and those of us who want to protect our families if one of these thugs breaks in to our house, won’t be able to use lethal force to end the threat against someone who is threatening our lives? It doesnt make sense to punish everyone for violence caused by those offenders.
As for the realy topic here: I agree that people have the right to freedom of speech (expression) HOWEVER, when people cross the line and other people are exposed to a person who is sagging/wearing low cut jeans in which boxer shorts, thong underwear, or bare butt is seen, it is offensive. I don’t particularly LIKE the style, but I would not condemn the style for that reason alone. I think it is appropriate to protect society from certain behaviors, and showing private parts (which a butt certainly is) or underwear, is just inappropriate.
Michele • Jul 30, 2008 at 4:35 am
“Stop worrying about saggy pants and try banning more important things that affect our society such as guns, drugs and alcohol!” – stephanie on January 28th, 2008 10:24 pm
Okay, what would banning guns do for those of us who choose to own a gun for collection, protection or sport? Guns are not the reason for gun crimes. People who are involved in crimes are the reason for crimes that may involve the use of guns. These people even get these guns illegally, so if they were banned, they would still have them, and those of us who want to protect our families if one of these thugs breaks in to our house, won’t be able to use lethal force to end the threat against someone who is threatening our lives? It doesnt make sense to punish everyone for violence caused by those offenders.
As for the realy topic here: I agree that people have the right to freedom of speech (expression) HOWEVER, when people cross the line and other people are exposed to a person who is sagging/wearing low cut jeans in which boxer shorts, thong underwear, or bare butt is seen, it is offensive. I don’t particularly LIKE the style, but I would not condemn the style for that reason alone. I think it is appropriate to protect society from certain behaviors, and showing private parts (which a butt certainly is) or underwear, is just inappropriate.
Adam Thomson • Feb 5, 2008 at 3:05 am
I think this is a load of crap…i mean they say baggy pants are offensive…to old people they are…but i think old people are offensive to me!!! they smell, they got on the bus for free, they dont work and yet they still want every1 to act like they did 40 years ago, go ahead and catch ur bus to heaven. If they ban saggy pants then they will have to ban every gil showing clevage, every bra strap, every thong..do u think that will happen…not bloody likely. They will even have to make bikinis and swimshorts illegal or this bill wud be seen as discrimination to a particular party a mean u go to the beach and every1 is wearing just there underpants…its a public place so why can u wear basically nuttin in sum public places but not others..grown ups just dont like us and will do anything to crush us…gud luck…ur gonna die b4 me..then al just change the law
Adam Thomson • Feb 5, 2008 at 10:05 am
I think this is a load of crap…i mean they say baggy pants are offensive…to old people they are…but i think old people are offensive to me!!! they smell, they got on the bus for free, they dont work and yet they still want every1 to act like they did 40 years ago, go ahead and catch ur bus to heaven. If they ban saggy pants then they will have to ban every gil showing clevage, every bra strap, every thong..do u think that will happen…not bloody likely. They will even have to make bikinis and swimshorts illegal or this bill wud be seen as discrimination to a particular party a mean u go to the beach and every1 is wearing just there underpants…its a public place so why can u wear basically nuttin in sum public places but not others..grown ups just dont like us and will do anything to crush us…gud luck…ur gonna die b4 me..then al just change the law
Dcubean • Jan 30, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Looks like some more whitebread bull sh*t, a law that is suppose to treat all offendeers the same(yeah right) everybody knowns who will suffer for this b. s. and harassing nosense law i. e., the black and the brown, oh and lets not forget all the yellow and red so called ganstas. Lets give a unrealistic scenirio of what should happen with this law ;but ,probably won’t, a group of all black cops begin to use this law to stop mostly white suburbon kids charging, fining and arresting the wigger want to be’s, how long do you think this law would last? Not long right ,the parents in the burbs would see to that , and yes the cops should be black( just like most of the cops harassing black youths are white)
Dcubean • Jan 30, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Looks like some more whitebread bull sh*t, a law that is suppose to treat all offendeers the same(yeah right) everybody knowns who will suffer for this b. s. and harassing nosense law i. e., the black and the brown, oh and lets not forget all the yellow and red so called ganstas. Lets give a unrealistic scenirio of what should happen with this law ;but ,probably won’t, a group of all black cops begin to use this law to stop mostly white suburbon kids charging, fining and arresting the wigger want to be’s, how long do you think this law would last? Not long right ,the parents in the burbs would see to that , and yes the cops should be black( just like most of the cops harassing black youths are white)
stephanie • Jan 28, 2008 at 10:24 pm
Reading this article is ludacris. I understand people may think it is indecent but what happened to self-expression? People have the right to express themselves such as gay or lesbians,men who wear eyeliner,men who sag their pants and men who wear pants tighter than girls.I think it is absolutley wrong for cities to ban sagging pants. People say criminals or thugs wear them to hide their guns or drugs. Well, that’s what the government needs to work on. Stop worrying about saggy pants and try banning more important things that affect our society such as guns, drugs and alcohol!
stephanie • Jan 29, 2008 at 5:24 am
Reading this article is ludacris. I understand people may think it is indecent but what happened to self-expression? People have the right to express themselves such as gay or lesbians,men who wear eyeliner,men who sag their pants and men who wear pants tighter than girls.I think it is absolutley wrong for cities to ban sagging pants. People say criminals or thugs wear them to hide their guns or drugs. Well, that’s what the government needs to work on. Stop worrying about saggy pants and try banning more important things that affect our society such as guns, drugs and alcohol!
shaaronie • Nov 29, 2007 at 6:21 pm
This trend has come and gone. I first saw it in the early 70’s here in Baltimore in the inner city. Boys wore baggy jeans (three sizes two small) with “silk” boxer shorts, really polyester. and the material was see thru. Todays look is much more decent, you can’t see anything but material. Old people leave the young ones alone. How did you try to separate your selves from your parents generation. Hot pants? Just a few years ago, dread locs were uh dreaded!
shaaronie • Nov 30, 2007 at 1:21 am
This trend has come and gone. I first saw it in the early 70’s here in Baltimore in the inner city. Boys wore baggy jeans (three sizes two small) with “silk” boxer shorts, really polyester. and the material was see thru. Todays look is much more decent, you can’t see anything but material. Old people leave the young ones alone. How did you try to separate your selves from your parents generation. Hot pants? Just a few years ago, dread locs were uh dreaded!
Whatever • Nov 16, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Seems like a sort of racist law. Some of us whiteys, who, as Chris Rock has said, “Don’t got no butts,” unintentionally sag all the time. Just below the hips? Mine won’t go anywhere near the hips! Let’s make plumber’s crack illegal then.
Jail time? Geez, hard time for DRESSING like someone’s interpretation of a criminal.
It seems that basically, some people don’t like this style, which they see as challenging to authority. Exposing yourself has nothing to do with it, or bikinis might be illegal.
I think dressing up like a bank robber should become part of popular culture.
Whatever • Nov 17, 2007 at 1:28 am
Seems like a sort of racist law. Some of us whiteys, who, as Chris Rock has said, “Don’t got no butts,” unintentionally sag all the time. Just below the hips? Mine won’t go anywhere near the hips! Let’s make plumber’s crack illegal then.
Jail time? Geez, hard time for DRESSING like someone’s interpretation of a criminal.
It seems that basically, some people don’t like this style, which they see as challenging to authority. Exposing yourself has nothing to do with it, or bikinis might be illegal.
I think dressing up like a bank robber should become part of popular culture.
Pac-Man Gomes • Nov 16, 2007 at 1:10 pm
A junior crim major at Fresno State who thinks these kind of opportunistic and predjudicial laws serve a real puropose for society? Wow, the justice system is going to really benefit from this guy.
If a crim major thinks saggy pants are “indecent,” he or she should go back and read their constitutional law textbooks and revisit US Supreme Court rulings.
Yes, the style is tasteless. In a system of limited government, it is the last thing a jurisdiction should be trying to regulate. The principle of “harm” must be looked at. If a school wants to regulate——more power to them—-on security and safety grounds.
Pac-Man Gomes • Nov 16, 2007 at 8:10 pm
A junior crim major at Fresno State who thinks these kind of opportunistic and predjudicial laws serve a real puropose for society? Wow, the justice system is going to really benefit from this guy.
If a crim major thinks saggy pants are “indecent,” he or she should go back and read their constitutional law textbooks and revisit US Supreme Court rulings.
Yes, the style is tasteless. In a system of limited government, it is the last thing a jurisdiction should be trying to regulate. The principle of “harm” must be looked at. If a school wants to regulate——more power to them—-on security and safety grounds.