New Yorkish brought this story to my attention, and, because it's about women's soiled undergarments, I feel very much obliged.

Apparently, officials in New York are working to pass legislation that will require stores to inform consumers if underwear that's for sale has been previously purchased and returned. I know what you're thinking: Somebody else might have worn my red tag Calvins before me? That's kind of hot. I concur, but the awesomeness doesn't stop there. Those days of paying top dollar for previously worn panties off of porn star websites are over, amigo. Just stop by Macy's and nose through the sale bin until you find the unmistakable scent of... how shall I put this? Feminine wiles. Like I've always said, one man's treasure is another man's skidmark.

But as I am a sensitive man, there's also something about the article that I find disturbing. Consider this passage:

Under current law, stores do not have to state whether undergarments on sale, including women's panties and thongs, have been bought and returned....

I don't know about you, but something about the inclusion of that third bit, "...including women's panties and thongs..." smells fishy to me. Read between the lines and it sure seems as though, by calling out women's panties specifically, the author is trying to rile indignation based on the unspoken precept that women's genitals are far dirtier than men's. The resulting returned garments, therefore, are sure to be caked with poon knows what.

Of course, we all know it's true -- that women are cursed with great gaping, seeping, toothless maws while men have nothing below the waist but waxed and polished columns of pleasure and antiseptic satchels of delight -- but do we mention it in a Reuters article? Of course we don't, because that would be sexist.

Analogcabin @ 10:59 AM
Permalink |