Pairs of underpants

Itís easy to conceive of socks as being members of a pair, since we have two feet and each sock is its own separate entity. Meanwhile, I canít say Iíve ever encountered an underpant as detached from its pair. Iím not even sure what underpants are supposed to be pairs of. Are you seriously telling me a single underpant would just be one leg hole? Iím not even going to attempt to visualize such a retarded garment.

As a rule of thumb, if you canít separate something, itís not a pair. I donít really care how many sides of your ass it covers. Like we donít call a hat a ďpair of hatsĒ just because itís placed above both your ears. Nor should we should call a pair of underpants anything but an underpant. From now on, if you say youíre wearing a pair of underpants, youíre wearing two separate underpants, one over the other, like a little baby afraid of making an accident. Also, if you say youíre wearing a pair of hats, youíre only wearing one hat. Iím pleased to announce that hats will now be called pairs of hats.

22 thoughts on “Pairs of underpants

  1. what about regular pants? i think this is a much harder enemy to face, because it is more commonly accepted as a pair than underpants.

  2. thank you, thank you. i’ve been concerned about the self seteem of my hats. they’ve wanted to be pairs for several years. the other day i caught one of them unraveling a seam. but now that they are truly pairs of hats, they can rejoice!

  3. Eric,

    I stumbled across your site awhile back and I must say, good sir, that it is f*cking hilarious.

    Keep up the good work.

  4. I can buy that for pants, underpants, shorts, etc. (even maybe binoculars, given that the nature of the word already includes that it has two things) but what about glasses, tongs, or tweezers?

  5. Historically, many thousands of years ago, men wore “leggings” as a pair. These individual leg coverings were then laced together with a sinew or piece of leather. In modern times these leggings began to be manufactured as a unit but retained the ‘pair’ description. The ‘pants’ is derived from the French ‘pantaloon’ which was the effect most often encounterd by French women when confronted by the new invention.
    But if there are 2 involved, why ain’t it a pair of Bras?

  6. Even more perplexing is why those “pairs” of socks come in resealable ziplock style packaging now. Seriously men, take a look the next time you’re buying a six pack of Hanes or Fruit of the Loom socks. Those suckers are fresh.

  7. You can’t separate a pair (as in fruit)either so why don’t we call it an tumoured apple instead.


  8. OK, it’s now clear to me that I can’t read your blog at work without making it abundantly obvious that I’m not working. A) I’m laughing B) I’m at my desk for minutes at a time.


  9. Superman
    Wonder Woman…

    Actually, I wonder if in fact they are wearing underwear paired, one in, one out… I hate to think not, that could be unsanitary.



  10. I agree a hat is not called a pair of hats even though placed above our eyes. Why then are things put over our eyes called glasses and not glass. And, why is it called a bra? shouldn’t there be some sort of plural ending as it supports two objects?

  11. I don’t think I have ever seen the word underpants used so many times in one blog. It’s just to funny. Additionaly I don’t think I know anyone who still uses the word underpants.

  12. For centuries, women wore nothing under their petticoats and smocks: their lady parts flapped in the wind. It was very practical: no UTIs or yeast infections. When the hoop skirt was invented — wind blowing our skirts up over our faces, oops — we started wearing “pants,” which were in two pieces. You put on one pant, tied a bow at your waist, then put on the other opposite pant, etc. In essence, you were wearing crotchless panties. So you could be standing there peeing under your hoop skirts with an innocent expression on your face and no one any the wiser.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.