WORKING FOR YOU
New York is taking action.
(Thanks again to Mac)
« Previous | Main | Next »
New York is taking action.
(Thanks again to Mac)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Worn Women's Underwear wbagnfarb.
Hey, there's a Barenaked Ladies...
Posted by: Blogchik | May 27, 2004 at 04:51 AM
Guys buy underwear in bulk in sealed packages. We don't have this problem.
Posted by: John | May 27, 2004 at 04:52 AM
"...because women care more about such issues more than men."
What'd they do, take a poll?
Posted by: MOTW | May 27, 2004 at 04:58 AM
There are sooo many jokes I could make right here, but since they are juvenile and disgusting and would make a Navy SEAL blush, I won't tell them.
BTW -- It takes a LOT to make a SEAL blush...
Posted by: cheese_ball839 | May 27, 2004 at 05:03 AM
I sent this in this morning LTTG, because I knew Dave would appreciate it.
Used Thongs wbagnfarb.
John, the article didn't mention all the idiotic details (the City Council definitely doesn't have enough of importance to do, like pass a budget): the way the law is written it would ban returning even UNOPENED packages of underwear. Huh?
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | May 27, 2004 at 05:07 AM
Ewww!
Posted by: Boo Augustus | May 27, 2004 at 05:11 AM
Damn! Now where am I gonna get used panties?
Did I say that out loud?
Posted by: mudstuffin | May 27, 2004 at 05:22 AM
Anyone else remember a link on this Blog some time ago about pervs in Japan who buy used girls' underwear from vending machines? I think we may have a way to correct that trade deficit, people! Let's get cracking!
Posted by: Chris Lucas | May 27, 2004 at 05:23 AM
MDSTFN: My feelings, exactly, although at least I didn't type it out loud. Boy, YOUR face must be red.
But seriously, various flea markets and sidewalk vendors are the next best source for all your (and I do mean YOUR) previously worn panties needs.
Posted by: Lairbo | May 27, 2004 at 05:28 AM
"We train our associates to inspect the merchandise upon return and if in salable condition, return it to the sales floor," she said. "Any items that are soiled ... are not returned to the floor."
People have to be TRAINED to see 'soiled merchandize? ok. i guess you have to define 'soiled' ... maybe they should just use that blue light thing that forensic guys use in all the crime shows - you know to check for 'biological material....'
EWWW anyway.
Posted by: queensbee | May 27, 2004 at 05:29 AM
So much for my next Penguin thong purchase...
And so true ....
"Donald Halperin of the New York Metropolitan Retailers Association said the issue was mainly about women's undergarments because women care more about such issues more than men."
Besides, I make it a practice to stay away from the SALE undies bin. There's a reason they're reduced.
Posted by: Kibby F5 | May 27, 2004 at 05:45 AM
"When you talk about it people start to giggle as it is a tough subject to discuss."
my reaction exactly
Posted by: philintexas | May 27, 2004 at 05:52 AM
U know, if this is happening in top stores such as saks and Macys, then what about the underwear where WE shop!?!?
Posted by: Andygirl | May 27, 2004 at 06:06 AM
Following afurrica's link there this memorable comment, "I support all measures that improve the health of New Yorkers," McMahon said.
I've one word, MOVE!
that's all
Posted by: Kibby F5 | May 27, 2004 at 06:16 AM
Reminds me of an Army joke:
"Men, I have good news and bad news. The good news is: Today, you all get a change of underwear! The bad news is: Mueller, you change with Schwartz, Mason, you change with..."
The Skidmark, North Dakota, National Guard
Posted by: Stash | May 27, 2004 at 06:33 AM
I'm glad this meritted legistlative action!
Posted by: crash | May 27, 2004 at 06:34 AM
Acouple of years ago a coworker and I had to walk through the Sears lingerie department to get to Radio Shack. My coworker was carrying a clipboard. They were having a panty sale and had a huge table of panties right there in front of us. I picked one up, sniffed it, said "pass", he made a mark on the clipboard. We did this for about ten pairs and walked out. The looks on the salespeople's faces were priceless.
Posted by: steve | May 27, 2004 at 06:37 AM
Steve, that must have been almost impossible to keep a straight face for that long. I'd have moistened my Munsingwear by the second pair!
Posted by: Stash | May 27, 2004 at 06:42 AM
Andygirl: The store salespeople of other 'low-class' stores must actually pre-wear the undergarments before putting it on sale.
At least in these places, you could imagine the clothes you're wearing were once soiled by some top executive or major CEO.
Posted by: Tetsu | May 27, 2004 at 06:43 AM
I think the 'Ewww' goes to the one that has to investigate and press charges.
But then I'm sure there's lots of us out there that would volunteer for the job.
Resume material?
Professional Pantie Sniffer
10 years experience
Saks, Macy's, NYC District Attorney's office
Looking for a position that I can really get my nose into.
Posted by: Kibby F5 | May 27, 2004 at 06:44 AM
Position desired: diesel fitter. "Yah, diesel fitter... you betcha..."
Posted by: Stash | May 27, 2004 at 06:46 AM
afurrica: "The reports, which aired in November and February..."
In other words, Sweeps Months! I guess they ran out of Killer Wires and Killer Manholes stories, so now it's Killer Panties. Incredible.
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | May 27, 2004 at 06:50 AM
Steve, I'm surprised security didn't take an interest in your research.
Posted by: John | May 27, 2004 at 07:11 AM
Moral: Always use Woolite on your new panties before putting them on the kitten.
Posted by: Lisa | May 27, 2004 at 07:31 AM
Whoy would you put panties on a......
OH.
I get it.
Posted by: John | May 27, 2004 at 07:41 AM
Whew, at least the crackdown doesn't affect sales of used socks. I love buying used socks. In New York especially.
Posted by: D'Artagnan | May 27, 2004 at 08:16 AM
Jeff: Back in High School a bunch of friends and I (drunk)decided to put on our band uniforms and go to the mall. We marched into the women's lingerie department of one of the stores there and played our fight song. No-one reacted, so we played another, and another. The only reaction we got was vague smiles from passers-by, so we left. Very surreal.
Posted by: mudstuffin | May 27, 2004 at 08:18 AM
Sorry that post should have been addresses to Steve. Late night last night.
Posted by: mudstuffin | May 27, 2004 at 08:19 AM
My sister once found a pair of underwear on a rack at Victoria Secret that had a bloodstain on them for cryin' out loud. Clearly some employees DO need to be trained to look for "soiled merchandise". I'm not sure which person was worse, the woman who tried them on, or the person who put them back on the rack like that. Ick.
Posted by: skoo51 | May 27, 2004 at 08:29 AM
It does stand to reason that women buy dresses for an event and return them the day after when they don't need it anymore. Why not return the entire ensemble.
Posted by: Graz | May 27, 2004 at 09:02 AM
Skoo51: Ick is right. And let me add, Ick!
Graz, good point. My sister in law does that (with "event" dresses) all the time.
Rita, my brother was another who loved to "go commando" until he started (ahem) drooping too much and was told to get some underwear. (And of course he had the need to share that with me, so now I can pass it on to you.)
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | May 27, 2004 at 09:25 AM
This guy still might be able to sell these on ebay
Posted by: Mahatma Kane Jeeves | May 27, 2004 at 10:30 AM
What's the return policy on
these , I wonder?
Posted by: Lairbo | May 27, 2004 at 11:26 AM
Been to London
Been to France.
I nicked Cameron's underpants!
Posted by: Stash | May 27, 2004 at 11:26 AM
Okay, I screwed up the link, there. But, believe me, it's worth the effort to cut and paste in the url.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=63862&item=4152523076&rd=1
Posted by: Lairbo | May 27, 2004 at 11:28 AM
MKJ: Another great celebrity-related job. So far we have:
1. J.Lo's Nipple Tweaker
2. Russell Crowe's (Human) Cigarette Holder
and
3. Cameron Diaz's Panty Protector (so to speak)
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | May 27, 2004 at 11:40 AM
4. Janet's Tit-Tazzler shiner and cleaner.
Posted by: crash | May 27, 2004 at 12:31 PM
This is the most Japanese thing I've ever heard, and it's not even from Germany.
Everything sounds more delightfull in Britishian:
Panties, eh - Knickers, yum
Slut, ick - Tart, Mm tangy
I thought I could think of more examples than that.
Posted by: Dave Munger | May 27, 2004 at 01:18 PM
I like how the Fur Boxers on ebay have a Layaway Plan - wish my undies were that organized.
Posted by: igwanna | May 27, 2004 at 02:18 PM
". . . the issue was mainly about women's undergarments because women care more about such issues more than men."
Dave USED to write so many articles about broad, irresponsible generalizations on the differences between men and women. Yet I've NEVER seen an article in his columns about THIS ISSUE.
Hopefully, he will make up for this by incorporating it into the movie.
P.S. affurica: You shoulda saved that "Scourge of Skeevy Skivvies" for one of Dave's "A Good Name for a Rock Band Would Be . . ." blogs.
Posted by: Ry | May 27, 2004 at 10:26 PM
Rita, one ex? What's the current tally?
We looking for volunteers for Cameron Diaz's Panty Protector.
Posted by: Kibby F5 | May 27, 2004 at 10:56 PM
I love how that article called it her "smalls drawer." Sounds so much better than 'undies' or 'panties' or the even-more-plebian 'underpants.'
Of course the word 'lingerie' has a touch of class to it...
Posted by: Blogchik | May 28, 2004 at 05:32 AM
Diaz, [...]was furious when a male crew member was caught leaving her trailer with a pair of her knickers in his pocket, following a spate of thefts from her smalls drawer
Don't you just hate it when spates of theft happen in your smalls drawer?
Posted by: Mahatma Kane Jeeves | May 28, 2004 at 07:07 AM