It may be a constitutional right for someone to wear their pants way below their waistline, but how about those that have no choice but to see this? It could be offensive for some to see someone sagging. It could also be called indecent exposure, especially to a child or a woman.

Just recently my sister and her daughter were standing in the checkout line when my niece pointed at the guy standing in front of them and said quite loudly, “Mommy, his pants are falling down! I can see his underwear!”

Just the other day I was standing in the bookstore line at my school, Pulaski Technical College, when I noticed the guy in front of me wearing his pants below his behind, he didn’t bother to wear a long enough t-shirt to cover up his underwear. And should he decide to stretch or raise his arms I would’ve seen more than I wanted to…actually I didn’t want to see that at all. I’m also sure if that did happen, whoever was standing in front of him, or walking by would get an eye full as well. There should be a dress code at all schools and colleges.

When I was in high school there were dress codes for the females. We couldn’t wear tank tops or short shorts or skirts because it would show too much skin. So where would sagging be placed in the dress code?

You see, it isn’t just the underwear peeking out from behind that we should be looking at, no pun intended, but we should also think about what can be seen from the front. It would be considered indecent exposure. What if the intended sagger were to choose not to wear underwear? Would you like a flash of near frontal nudity? I know I wouldn’t and I would specifically dislike it should my daughter see anything as obscene. But still, if the sagger wore underwear, even boxers, there would still be the opportunity of seeing the member’s sex.

It may be the sagger’s freedom of expression and their right to choose how they wear their clothing, but think outside the box and see how it may be considered offensive to others.