steve cebalt

I hate wearing pants.

Phil Persinger


Imagine how friendly things get during rush hour…

Many Disney characters are similarly un-pantsed, but I think they all drive to work.


You had a post earlier today about the "Undercover Economist." This, then, would be the Underwear Freakonomist?


Harm. The vast majority of people in this world have absolutely no business appearing in public not fully clothed.


Freakonomics has a series of blog posts touting the benefits of urbanism. This is not one of those posts.

Voice of Reason he even wearing boxers, or just letting it all hang out?


He's almost certainly legally attired. However, sparing you the sight of his underwear is having the effect of making it seem that he's not, a prime example of censorship adding obscenity to previously innocent things.


However silly it may look, a no-pants subway ride, is a scheme that provides a sence of unity; a practice of a civil movement if I may say for urban settlers. People participate in a minimum cause that carries the agreement of a majotiry, and it's basically harmless (you may provide an study that proves otherwise though).
It's just a reminder that there still exist enough of a certain phenotype of people that keeps the hope up for a change if a serious civil movement was needed. It this sence you may give yourself credit that your ideas are recognized by perhaps a representative of this civil movement as worthy. So, enjoy the credit.


If there's one common denominator to all the societies now carrying the label "civil", it is that people in those societies wear pants.


I do hope you know it isn't actually anti-pants activists that organize this, but Improv Everywhere. Used to be much smaller and kind of a lark, this just took off... They do a number of other interesting activities (MP3 Experiment is another one of their long-running ones, most of them are one-offs).


"Does tho help or harm our reputation?"



Sorry, meant to say 'this'