Am I Wearing Pants? Or Slacks?

[jholz]

So, I'm sitting here at work late in the afternoon, (IN AMERICA) and I'm looking at my legs, and I'm thinking to myself...

"I'm presently wearing pants." 

I mean, it's abundantly clear.

 

The article of clothing covering my legs, etc. is generally referred to - colloquially and in my local culture - as "pants." (Again, I'm in AMERICA. Limey jokes about underwear are not appreciated...)

In any event, pondering the subject of "pants"....

 

I eventually began to wonder...could it be that sometimes, or perhaps under certain conditions, that I'm not actually wearing "pants?"

 

It seems theoretically possible that in some occasions (or situations) I could, in fact, be wearing "slacks"?

 

If that is the case...how could I even tell the difference? This will keep me up tonight. 

Any thoughts on the subject are greatly appreciated...

[bscinstnct]

Trousers yo!

[tatertot]

Many a day at the office I've been startled awake and wondered the same thing ... 

[aenemated]

They're only "slacks" if you have an AARP membership. 

[shankasaurus rex]

I think all slacks are pants but not all pants are slacks.....

 

[kiwigolf72]

pants here in NZ, never slacks, sometimes trousers. 

[TiScape]

3 hours ago, jholz said:

So, I'm sitting here at work late in the afternoon, (IN AMERICA) and I'm looking at my legs, and I'm thinking to myself...

"I'm presently wearing pants." 

I mean, it's abundantly clear.

 

The article of clothing covering my legs, etc. is generally referred to - colloquially and in my local culture - as "pants." (Again, I'm in AMERICA. Limey jokes about underwear are not appreciated...)

In any event, pondering the subject of "pants"....

 

I eventually began to wonder...could it be that sometimes, or perhaps under certain conditions, that I'm not actually wearing "pants?"

 

It seems theoretically possible that in some occasions (or situations) I could, in fact, be wearing "slacks"?

 

If that is the case...how could I even tell the difference? This will keep me up tonight. 

Any thoughts on the subject are greatly appreciated...

Do you by any chance live in a state where cannabis is legal???

 

 

😂

[NJBigFish22]

My granddaddy and my daddy called them pants, I call them pants.  And until you posted never gave it a second thought! 😂😂

[rooski]

All slacks are pants, but not all pants are slacks

[getair23]

You have officially offended the dungaree crowd. 

[jholz]

1 hour ago, TiScape said:

Do you by any chance live in a state where cannabis is legal???

 

 

😂

 

Very much so sir.

[touch]

What about down here in the south? Many people here in the Carolinas call pants britches. I howl when I hear it being that I was raised in the Midwest.

 

I think if they are of better quality and more costly and you wear them to nice dressy events then they are called slacks. For everyday wear they are pants. 

 

 

Edited October 12, 2023 by touch

[touch]

10 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Very much so sir.

 

Lucky bastxxx. 😁

[touch]

Slacks it is. 

 

 

 

[dashanks]

15 hours ago, jholz said:

So, I'm sitting here at work late in the afternoon, (IN AMERICA) and I'm looking at my legs, and I'm thinking to myself...

"I'm presently wearing pants." 

I mean, it's abundantly clear.

 

The article of clothing covering my legs, etc. is generally referred to - colloquially and in my local culture - as "pants." (Again, I'm in AMERICA. Limey jokes about underwear are not appreciated...)

In any event, pondering the subject of "pants"....

 

I eventually began to wonder...could it be that sometimes, or perhaps under certain conditions, that I'm not actually wearing "pants?"

 

It seems theoretically possible that in some occasions (or situations) I could, in fact, be wearing "slacks"?

 

If that is the case...how could I even tell the difference? This will keep me up tonight. 

Any thoughts on the subject are greatly appreciated...

Neither.  The wife wears them, unfortunately.

[deadsolid...shank]

15 hours ago, aenemated said:

They're only "slacks" if you have an AARP membership. 

Uh oh. I have that membership. But I don’t think I’ve ever worn “slacks”!  
 

to me, they’re just annoying pants that I have to wear til I get home from work and can get back into my shorts. 
 

The Mrs laughs at me, because that is the first thing I do when I get home. 

[j.b.newton]

a buddy owns a clothing store in the south, so I asked.

 

The people that say all slacks are pants but not all pants are slacks fit what he says.  His analogy was:  An orange is a fruit but not all fruits are oranges.

 

Anything in this category are pants.  Ones used for "dressier" occasions can be called slacks or trousers (depending on the clientele, region, age).  Appropriate material/fit suggest slacks with coat/tie or similar, but pants with polo/more casual.

[jholz]

2 hours ago, j.b.newton said:

a buddy owns a clothing store in the south, so I asked.

 

The people that say all slacks are pants but not all pants are slacks fit what he says.  His analogy was:  An orange is a fruit but not all fruits are oranges.

 

Anything in this category are pants.  Ones used for "dressier" occasions can be called slacks or trousers (depending on the clientele, region, age).  Appropriate material/fit suggest slacks with coat/tie or similar, but pants with polo/more casual.

 

Well done sir! We are approaching a definitive answer here. WRX always comes through. 

 

The only thing I might add to your friend's considerations is the ratio of cotton to wool/silk/polyester - tying into the "dressiness" or "formality" idea. The higher the cotton content - the more into the realm of "pants" we descend - at least in my opinion. 

 

At this point, armed with this thinking, I'm feeling like I can make a good argument on the "pants" side for yesterday's garment. Those were pants. 

 

I think that I can also say with relative certainty that I'm wearing "pants" again today. 

 

Or at least let's hope so....

Edited October 12, 2023 by jholz

[TiScape]

7 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Well done sir! We are approaching a definitive answer here. WRX always comes through. 

 

The only thing I might add to your friend's considerations is the ratio of cotton to wool/silk/polyester - tying into the "dressiness" or "formality" idea. The higher the cotton content - the more into the realm of "pants" we descend - at least in my opinion. 

 

At this point, armed with this thinking, I'm feeling like I can make a good argument on the "pants" side for yesterday's garment. Those were pants. 

 

I think that I can also say with relative certainty that I'm wearing "pants" again today. 

 

Or at least let's hope so....

It really is awfully confusing and reason to have sleepless nights… It’s why I just wear shorts 360 days a year! 😊
Pants AND slacks are for suckers!!

Edited October 12, 2023 by TiScape

[jholz]

18 hours ago, kiwigolf72 said:

pants here in NZ, never slacks, sometimes trousers. 

 

You kiwis are indeed the most linguistically interesting (aka weird) of all the British Commonweal dialects - IMHO - and I'm totally ignoring south asia and the Caribbean when I say that.

 

But the UK itself remains the biggest linguistic puzzle. When I lived there, I was constantly worried that I might look down at my legs one day and find I was wearing knickers...oh the ignominy!!!!

[jholz]

15 hours ago, touch said:

 

Lucky bastxxx. 😁

 

Believe me, it's been a long time coming...

 

I was the idiot who moved from Colorado to Alabama almost a year to the day before Colorado legalized it.

 

Then, I suffered through bricked up dirt for 10 years in Bama. Then moved to Maryland. 

 

When I first got to the mid-Atlantic you could get quasi legal in D.C., but way too much hassle to get down there regularly.

 

So I went back to the black market for several years. Always takes time to build solid connects. I finally had a great, diverse, and reliable stream - then July 1st happened.

 

I must say, it's pretty awesome to just walk into a store during business hours and be able to buy a quarter of decent weed. They don't even ask me to play X-Box with them for half-an-hour. Worth it.  

 

But, I am still waiting for the market to mature. Rec users are limited in terms of the products we can buy. Concentrates - for example - can only be purchased with a medical license. Rec users are limited to vapes and flower...and that mildly sucks.

[j.b.newton]

27 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Well done sir! We are approaching a definitive answer here. WRX always comes through. 

 

The only thing I might add to your friend's considerations is the ratio of cotton to wool/silk/polyester - tying into the "dressiness" or "formality" idea. The higher the cotton content - the more into the realm of "pants" we descend - at least in my opinion. 

 

At this point, armed with this thinking, I'm feeling like I can make a good argument on the "pants" side for yesterday's garment. Those were pants. 

 

I think that I can also say with relative certainty that I'm wearing "pants" again today. 

 

Or at least let's hope so....

I think he would agree with your thoughts.  The higher percentage of cotton and polyester/spandex - the more they lean into the pants side.  I do believe this is would be a nice example of continuous variable and not a true categorical variable as the natural fiber/synthetic plus "formality" variable would be rather difficult to differentiate.   

 

For safety, I would suggest: When in doubt - you are wearing pants.  

[TiScape]

10 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Believe me, it's been a long time coming...

 

I was the idiot who moved from Colorado to Alabama almost a year to the day before Colorado legalized it.

 

Then, I suffered through bricked up dirt for 10 years in Bama. Then moved to Maryland. 

 

When I first got to the mid-Atlantic you could get quasi legal in D.C., but way too much hassle to get down there regularly.

 

So I went back to the black market for several years. Always takes time to build solid connects. I finally had a great, diverse, and reliable stream - then July 1st happened.

 

I must say, it's pretty awesome to just walk into a store during business hours and be able to buy a quarter of decent weed. They don't even ask me to play X-Box with them for half-an-hour. Worth it.  

 

But, I am still waiting for the market to mature. Rec users are limited in terms of the products we can buy. Concentrates - for example - can only be purchased with a medical license. Rec users are limited to vapes and flower...and that mildly sucks.

I live in CA and couldn’t care less about weed. What a waste huh 🤷🏼‍♂️ 

[kiwigolf72]

36 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

You kiwis are indeed the most linguistically interesting (aka weird) of all the British Commonweal dialects - IMHO - and I'm totally ignoring south asia and the Caribbean when I say that.

 

But the UK itself remains the biggest linguistic puzzle. When I lived there, I was constantly worried that I might look down at my legs one day and find I was wearing knickers...oh the ignominy!!!!

Knickers here refers to a woman's under garments, I was shocked when I learned the late great Payne Stewart wore knickers.

[TiScape]

1 minute ago, kiwigolf72 said:

Knickers here refers to a woman's under garments, I was shocked when I learned the late great Payne Stewart wore knickers.

 

[jholz]

10 minutes ago, TiScape said:

I live in CA and couldn’t care less about weed. What a waste huh 🤷🏼‍♂️ 

 

Different strokes mon frer - and of course, one could say the same thing about golf.

 

I used to get hung up on crap like that. I mean yeah, weed is kind of a waste. But, by that logic we could say the same thing about 15 year old scotch or a bottle of fine wine.

 

Rather than get all bunged up with Nancy Reagan's morality, I simply embraced who I was and stopped judging myself for finding things that help keep me happy.

 

In the meantime, I've somehow managed to stay out of both jail and the trailer park. 

Edited October 12, 2023 by jholz

[TiScape]

9 minutes ago, jholz said:

 

Different strokes mon frer - and of course, one could say the same thing about golf.

 

I used to get hung up on crap like that. I mean yeah, weed is kind of a waste. But, by that logic we could say the same thing about 15 year old scotch or a bottle of fine wine.

 

Rather than get all bunged up Nancy Reagan's morality, I simply embraced who I was and stopped judging myself for finding things that help keep me happy.

 

In the meantime, I've somehow managed to stay out of both jail and the trailer park. 

Oh I have partaken numerous times as a young man and have no problem w/it or anyone who is into it. Just wasn’t my thing. I was more into the uppers and booze. And like you, I miraculously somehow managed to stay out of prison. Notice I couldn’t say jail! 😂 

 

*IMO, if you haven’t been to jail at least once, you ain’t livin’! 😜

Edited October 12, 2023 by TiScape

[jholz]

9 minutes ago, TiScape said:

Oh I have partaken numerous times as a young man and have no problem w/it or anyone who is into it. Just wasn’t my thing. I was more into the uppers and booze. And like you, I miraculously somehow managed to stay out of prison. Notice I couldn’t say jail! 😂 

 

*IMO, if you haven’t been to jail at least once, you ain’t livin’! 😜

 

The distinction between prison and jail is obviously a crucial one. I always assumed if it did happen, I'd end up in jail. You gotta be working at it to get to prison. 

 

The closest I've ever been was in handcuffs in the back of a cruiser once - dude was laying it on thick for 2nd degree criminal trespassing - i.e. "skateboarding."

 

Thankfully he backed down before taking me to the station. 

 

I pled "nolo contendere" and paid $125 in fines + court costs. 

[TiScape]

1 minute ago, jholz said:

 

The distinction between prison and jail is obviously a crucial one. I always assumed if it did happen, I'd end up in jail. You gotta be working at it to get to prison. 

 

The closest I've ever been was in handcuffs in the back of a cruiser once - dude was laying it on thick for 2nd degree criminal trespassing - i.e. "skateboarding."

 

Thankfully he backed down before taking me to the station. 

 

I pled "nolo contendere" and paid $125 in fines + court costs. 

Oh yeah, huge distinction. Back in the day when you could get into a good fight w/o gettin shot or sued, were the days. I’d go thru my various arrests, but it would tarnish my stellar reputation amongst WRXers 😊

[jholz]

1 hour ago, TiScape said:

Oh yeah, huge distinction. Back in the day when you could get into a good fight w/o gettin shot or sued, were the days. I’d go thru my various arrests, but it would tarnish my stellar reputation amongst WRXers 😊

 

Your rep is stellar as far as I'm concerned. Really appreciate you dude!