then it must be a duck, right? Well, in this case, no, it isn't. This morning, as I was driving back from dropping John off at work, I spotted a young man walking down the sidewalk. He made me smile, only not in a happy way, more out of puzzlement.
His arms swayed from side to side in fluid movements and his legs were spread apart as far as they could be spread and still allow the young man to walk. Why? To hold his pants up, that's why.
Thank goodness I was in the school zone because it allowed me to drive slowly enough to watch him waddling down the sidewalk trying to look as cool as he possibly could to impress passers-by. I'm pretty sure he was hoping that one of the cars driving by would contain a young woman who would certainly be instantly infatuated by the sight of such a fine specimen.
The only problem with his plan was that it was failing miserably. As he walked his pants slid further down his behind and he had to resort to the tactic I refer to as "crotch-grasping." Instead of looking cool, he took on the appearance of a three year-old who, ten minutes ago thought that he might need to go potty, finds that he has waited too long and has to hold on for dear life so that he does not pee his pants. Okay, that made me smile in a rather "I-could-have-told-you-that-was-going-to-happen!" kind of way.
It is a mystery to me why boys would want to wear their pants in this manner at all. It is not attractive, they look ridiculous "hanging on" and it would seem to be a hazard for their well-being. How many have fallen on their faces because their pants have fallen off their bottoms?
I may start a campaign to eradicate low-slung pants and crotch-grasping. I think this will be my slogan, "Do you have to wee? No? Then pull up your pants and wear a belt!"
Do you think I will be successful?