Are Baggy Pants Really Indecent Exposure?

This style just isn't going away! The baggy pants that droop down below the boxers are popular among teenage boys and even young men into the 20's and 30's. Styles come and go and repeat themselves after decades of being out of style, but this style seems to have everybody's panties in a bunch. Politicians across the county have entered bills and ordinances' banning the low slung baggy style claiming it is indecent exposure. Some have actually passed, and anyone caught have been arrested, fined and even jail time for some. Is this against the constitution? Does the first amendment protect these boys from punishment for wanting to wear the low slung style?

It is a hot debate in many counties and townships across the United States. The low slung style does reveal undergarments; however, the undergarments are designed to be shown. So does that make a difference? Should it make a difference? People wear regular shorts that show more skin, and shouldn't that be that point that constitutes indecent exposure. I've been more offended by the obese plumber who's backside crack I have to look at when he's fixing my pipes under my sink.

Politicians in the past have attempted to ban miniskirts and halter tops in the 60's, and had to face civic opposition claiming it is an act of freedom of speech or expression, which is covered by the first amendment. So where did this style rise from? Styles cycle every 20 or 30 years. I've never seen this low slung baggy style worn by any youth in the past. It actually was inspired by the belt less pants that are passed to inmates in prison. It became a popular among the rising hip hop culture and spread like wild fire through the urban and suburban neighborhoods.

The stereotypes of the baggies are urban black males who belong to gangs and do poorly in school, if they even attend school. Truth is if you really take a good look around, people of all races and socioeconomic backgrounds are wearing the style. Some store employers are taking advantage of the style and advertising their place of business on the elastic band of the boxers worn by their employees.

The ACLU claims the ordinances that have passed are targeting black youth and are warning counties and townships that there may be lawsuits coming down the pike claiming racial profiling. In Riviera Beach, FL a 29 year old man was arrested under the new ordinance charged with "exposure of undergarments in public." The ordinance claims any low slung pants more than 2 inches is a chargeable offense with consequences. First offenders are fined, up to $150.00, but repeat offenders could face up to 30 days in jail. Within 2 weeks of the 29 year old offender there had been 11 more arrests ranging in ages from 18 to 36 years old. All had low slung baggy pants that measured between 2 and 5 inches.

While everyone is disgusted by the style, parents hate it, politicians hate it, comedians have fun with it, but should it be illegal? This is America after all, not to say indecent exposure is right, but is this really indecent exposure? What about women who wear sheer tops with their bra exposed underneath, or straps showing on the shoulders? Should fashion be a crime? What is really exposed anyway? I think I'd rather have my politicians thinking about creating jobs and improving the economy. State Senator Robert Ford was quoted as saying "The whole culture's deviant. We have lost control of our young people. I think men should be made to look like gentlemen." This statement concerns me; does he want the country to dress in uniform? I believe it is not indecent exposure and we have better things to address in our legislature then banning low-slung pants.