| During the November 1, 2011 Transformation Conversation, Joe Simmons and guests looked at our reactions about people wearing their pants below the butt, and considered whether our preconceived notions rob us of opportunities to see objectively, which could inhibit our ability to find more opportunities for fulfillment and happiness.This blog is a summary and lessons learned from that conversation. ~Joe Simmons |
 Preconceived Notions | Actually, there is an explanation for this. The issue of wearing the pants below the butt is dynamic. There is the choice to do it, and there are the reactions to seeing it done. Since we cannot control what others do, we can look at our reaction to seeing it done. First, if we look closely, we will notice that the people in these pics are covered from the waste down. Two of the gents in the photo are fully clothed. The problem is our relationship to the labels we put on clothing, and our relationship to the contexts of those labels. In this case, we have a label called "underwear" and the meanings and connotations that we attach to the term underwear. Additionally, we have opinions about |
appropriate locations for clothing features.
I saw this very clearly while at work a couple of weeks ago. A client was wearing his pants down below his butt, and he walked like a duck. I thought to myself, “This guy is a complete idiot.” Then, I looked more closely. “Hmm…,” I thought, “That’s not underwear. Those are sports pants… like basketball shorts… the mesh kind.” To confirm, I asked the client about it. The client confirmed, “Yeah, they’re basketball shorts.” I thanked him and he waddled away like a duck.
We have opinions about the composition and/or style of clothing that is appropriate to cover the body. We are accustomed to a look that includes attaching the top of the pants at or above the waste. We are talking about the location of a particular feature of a particular article of clothing, which is one piece of the composition/design of attire that clothes or covers the body.
Is it underwear or is it a bathing suit, or is it shorts, etc.? What difference does it make? My waddling client friend was fully clothed. Notwithstanding the labels and the connotations/expectations/meanings that I attach to them, I saw very clearly that I was the idiot.
Of course, the consequences of the design choice are another and separate dynamic of the pants-below-the-butt style.
Namaste,
I saw this very clearly while at work a couple of weeks ago. A client was wearing his pants down below his butt, and he walked like a duck. I thought to myself, “This guy is a complete idiot.” Then, I looked more closely. “Hmm…,” I thought, “That’s not underwear. Those are sports pants… like basketball shorts… the mesh kind.” To confirm, I asked the client about it. The client confirmed, “Yeah, they’re basketball shorts.” I thanked him and he waddled away like a duck.
We have opinions about the composition and/or style of clothing that is appropriate to cover the body. We are accustomed to a look that includes attaching the top of the pants at or above the waste. We are talking about the location of a particular feature of a particular article of clothing, which is one piece of the composition/design of attire that clothes or covers the body.
Is it underwear or is it a bathing suit, or is it shorts, etc.? What difference does it make? My waddling client friend was fully clothed. Notwithstanding the labels and the connotations/expectations/meanings that I attach to them, I saw very clearly that I was the idiot.
Of course, the consequences of the design choice are another and separate dynamic of the pants-below-the-butt style.
Namaste,
Joe Simmons
Metaphysical Visionary
Metaphysical Visionary
RSS Feed
