I have never, in my entire life worn a pair of jeans.

They just don't feel right to me.

I pretty much live in cargo pants and khakis.

Posted by David Dong I have never, in my entire life worn a pair of jeans. They just don't feel right to me. I pretty much live in cargo pants and khakis.

I've stopped wearing jeans 9 years ago when I hurt my back and started wearing track pants when not working. Very comfortable for me.

Posted by monster yoga pants don't have many pockets.

Exactly.

Posted by MutantMandias But it leads one to wonder why it is that pants, trousers, and their ilk are always plural. Consider: Pants. Trousers. Leggings. Breeches. Britches. Jeans. Corduroys. Pyjama bottoms. Joggers. Longjohns. Slacks. Jodhpurs. Khakis. Bellbottoms. Chinos. Is this trivial or is it deep? Maybe in our cognitive representation of pants, we have the conception of each leg. That's why they're all 'a pair of' pants, trousers, or whatever. It sure seems intuitive. But it's not so simple. If a pair of pants indicates a pair of leg tubes, why do we do plurals for: Shorts. Underpants. Knickers. Briefs. Boxers. Trunks. Speedos. Underoos. Bloomers. Drawers. Panties. Jockeys. So maybe it's the pair of legholes. It's true that things with just one leg-egress are singular: Skirt. Kilt. Dress. Slip. Toga. Muumuu. Sarong. Though there's an exception. There's one article of clothing with two legholes, but is nevertheless singular. But its name's focus is really not on the whole garment, as on one particular part of it. What's the word? http://www.open-yo...articles/Pants.asp

I'm happy to see the shipment of weed I sent has arrived.