b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 51474 (Thread)

# heres a question thats been bothering me for ages
When did the word 'pants' suddenly become a reference to underwear and not another name for trousers?
It has happened within the last 6/7 years or so and it was started by some comedian or tv entertainer but I cant remember who it was.
It's been bugging me for ages... can anyone help me ?

EDIT - I'm referring to the UK here, being a resident of blackpool - EDIT
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:02, archived)
# in the UK, pants have always been underwear.
In the US, pants have always been trousers. There's some crossover, but it aint a new situation... certainly not a new phenomenon.
(I helped save b3ta! chaotic_illuminator proud spacehopperist, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:09, archived)
# are you absolutly sure
its always been underwear ?
im so sure that it was never used until some years ago. or at least was never adopted by tv people as a general derogatory term.
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:13, archived)
# the word 'pants'
is a shortened version of the original 'underpants' which were long shorts, or longjohns, which, at the turn of the century were all the rage.
The word 'pants' is also used as a derogitory term for something that is crap, or useless. This term was invented about 15 years ago by a 13 year old schoolboy and his friends, which was in turn used in a school play, and in true 'woo yay' style, is was adopted by thousands a few years later.

use this information recklessly.
(I helped save b3ta! pickledpizza Older, nicer, fluffier., Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:09, archived)
# is that true pickled ?
where did you find that info ?
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:29, archived)
# i am being deadly serious about this...
when pants was first used as a derogatory term, the phrase was 'utter pants' which was usually said in a posh 'rik from the young ones' voice.
within a few weeks of it being bantered around, it became well used. whether it being uk-wide being viral or coincidence, that will remain unanswered, i s'pose.
(I helped save b3ta! pickledpizza Older, nicer, fluffier., Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:35, archived)
# I guess its just me...
things like this tend to happen to me (see post about sandwhiches further down this thread)
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:37, archived)
# *interlude*
(I helped save b3ta! pickledpizza Older, nicer, fluffier., Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:53, archived)
# i always thought
that stephen fry coined the term pants as a derogatory term ages ago.
as for pants == trousers, that's true where I'm from too, St.Helens, it's definitely regional. A north(west) south thing.
(I helped save b3ta! limpfish, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 21:22, archived)
# see the thing is
it's not a referent to trousers at all in (most of)britain. This means that our slang is infecting your part of the world, wherever that may be. Trust me, I'm a cunning linguist.
(pygmy giraffe, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:11, archived)
# i am in the uk
i should have mentioned that in my post, but still.. i really dont remember it being used as a word for underwear or used as a derogatory term years ago...
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:17, archived)
# derogatory term has only crept in in the last few years (see pizza's post),
but pants has ALWAYS meant underpants in this country as far as I know. I've never in my 32 years known anyone in the uk use the term to mean trousers... any use of "pants" to indicate trousers is likely a side-effect of consumiong too much imported US telly.
(I helped save b3ta! chaotic_illuminator proud spacehopperist, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:22, archived)
# where are you from??
until a few years ago i never knew you posh people called your underpants pants. it's very odd. pants will always be trousers as far as i'm concerned.
(I helped save b3ta! limpfish, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 21:27, archived)
# serious?
Whereabouts in the UK? I've only ever heard it used to mean underwear.
(pygmy giraffe, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:23, archived)
# I always understood it thus:
if(( now > dawn_of_time ) && ( location == UK )) pants = underwear;
(I helped save b3ta! Lumpbucket tekcubpmuL, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:35, archived)
# perhaps it needs revising:
if (( now > dawn_of_time ) && ( location == UK ) && ( name <> "Darren Wolfe") pants = underwear
else if (( now > dawn_of_time ) && ( location == UK ) && ( name = "Darren Wolfe") pants.usage.confusion = yes;
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:42, archived)
# Mr. Pedantic says


You've missed some brackets, and used the BASIC non-equals operator in a C program. I think you really meant:

if(( now > dawn_of_time ) && ( location == UK ))
{
  if( name != "Darren Wolfe" ) pants = underwear; else pants.usage.confusion = yes;
}
(I helped save b3ta! Lumpbucket tekcubpmuL, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:03, archived)
# mmm
i thought it was javascript you were writing in :)
I get so confused over programing syntax these days - too may languages around...
asp, vb, delphi, c++, java, javascript, php..
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:09, archived)
# Heh
I can program in more languages than I can even think of in one go, but not getting confused between them is a knack that you pick up eventually...
(I helped save b3ta! Lumpbucket tekcubpmuL, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:13, archived)
# surely you mean
(strcmp(name,"Darren Wolfe")==0)
(I helped save b3ta! pHile, Mon 15 Apr 2002, 1:07, archived)
# well im in blackpool
but i dont know if its a regional thing, but I have always referred to trousers as pants and underwear as, well, underwear..
It could be due to my parents, or rather it's my brain interpreting things differently than most people because i miss a vital piece of information.

For example, I have always made a sandwhich by buttering one piece of bread only (the other being dry). It is the way I have ALWAYS done it for as long as I can remember.
One day, I was in the kitchen making a sandwhich and I was talking to a friend, he saw me butter only one piece of bread and commented "why?". I said "what do you mean why?".
He explained that no one butters one piece of bread. I said "well my parents must do it".
When I asked my parents, they said that they always buttered both pieces. I asked my grandparents... they did the same.
In fact, there is no one I know, family or otherwise, who butters one piece of bread only.
It is something I have done on my own. I assume that when I was being "taught" to make a sandwhich (or watched a sandwhiches construction) in my very early years, I got distracted and didnt see the second piece being buttered..

Use this information as you see fit.....
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:35, archived)
# TBH
I never used the term pants to refer to anything.
Trousers were kex, underwear was gruds, jeans were jeans.
Pants came into the vocabulary as a derogatory term about the same time as the desperatly unfunny trev and simon made the 'swing your pants' song.
It must be Sunday. Here I am, pissed as a pissed thing parping on about pants...
(I helped save b3ta! moonbadger Doesn't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:44, archived)
# Now this is interesting...
because I thought kecks were underpants...
(I helped save b3ta! Lumpbucket tekcubpmuL, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:47, archived)
# me too...
hence the becks in his kecks, etc photoshop I did some time ago...
(I helped save b3ta! chaotic_illuminator proud spacehopperist, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:49, archived)
# ahh
now this bit of confusion im not familar with :)
kecks have been trousers for me...
Never heard of gruds before....
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:49, archived)
# I never realised this country
had such a crisis in underpant/trouser naming conventions...
(I helped save b3ta! Lumpbucket tekcubpmuL, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:56, archived)
# pants
have always been grundies to me... short for grundipants. I'm such a sexy girl.
(dr phil can't be arsed to log in, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:01, archived)
# Is all this confusion
geographic?
I'm on the northern edge of the East Midlands, which may explain the webbed fingers, if not the pants/{kex|kecks}/gruds disparity
(I helped save b3ta! moonbadger Doesn't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:05, archived)
# someone needs to setup a site
that has these little niggly questions and problems listed, and people can fill in questionnaires and results can be shown statistically broken down by county.
there must be a lot more things like this
(I helped save b3ta! DaWolfey, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:03, archived)
# Can't you tell it's sunday
We're having an in depth discussion about pants.
(pygmy giraffe, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:24, archived)
# yay for pants
and woo for trousers.

(crazymum, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 18:38, archived)
# Hell, if you're gonna repost
Then so shall I!

Woo for trousers, Yay for underwear.
(I helped save b3ta! moonbadger Doesn't judge a fish by its ability to climb trees, Sun 14 Apr 2002, 19:02, archived)