pair o’ pants

Jump to Comments

Why do we call pants, pants? Why is it plural? Why do we say “a pair of pants” or “a pair of panties”? I don’t say “a pair of bras” or “a pair of t-shirts”. Isn’t that implying there are two? There are different opinions of course, like we have two legs so, it’s a pair of pants or a pair of panties, but that’s rather lame. The word pants stems from pantaloons - a man’s close-fitting garment for the hips and legs, worn in the 19th century, but varying in form from period to period; also known as trousers. Panties comes from pants, but it more closely resembles the definition of knickers - bloomers formerly worn as underwear by women and girls.

Still, none of this information answers my original question. After tireless research on our ever-expanding and totally dependable internet, I found that women’s panties or knickers in the early 19th century consisted of two seperate legs joined at the waist, leaving an opening for the pink parts. Ah, two seperate legs - thus the plural. It also made it easy for relieving oneself or other things…ahem…back then. I always wondered how those women dealt with all those layers of skirts. It’s making a little sense, but it is all so wrong for our modern usage. No wonder the English language is so hard to learn. Pants, panties…sheesh. I’m just going to call it pant and panty. That’s right. I’m rebelling.

3 Comments

Filed under Life, Strange Days, Useless Facts

Tags: knicker, pantaloon, panties, pants, trouser