Hosed!

Thursday’s Wall Street Journal featured an On Style article about pantyhose in the workplace. The article is titled “Bare-Legged Ladies: Hosiery Reveals Office Divide.” Story and video here.

The story describes the generational divide between hose-wearers (hosers?) and non-hose-wearers. Second graf: “For women who entered the work force before the 1990s, hose were considered as necessary as underwear. But many twentysomethings have never worn panty hose at all.”

I’m in my late 20s. I’ve worn hose. They blow.

The extent of pantyhose’s usefulness is to keep your legs warm in winter, and a more effective way to do that is just to wear pants. The rest of the year, hose serve one purpose: to annoy.

Don’t believe me? Try wearing them. Even you, boys. From mid-way through the article: “As for fairness, it's hard to say whether (neckties) or panty hose are more uncomfortable. One male reader of this newspaper, after making a bet with a female co-worker, attempted to discover the answer by secretly wearing panty hose under his business suit for several weeks. He claims ties are worse.”

Now, that’s self-sacrifice in the name of research. Too bad his findings were way off the mark.

I’ve heard the argument that pantyhose smooth the legs and make them look tan. True, until:

• They slip down
  
• They bunch up

... or ...

• They snag – the worst of all offenses, because everybody then knows you’re wearing hose and you have to shell out dough to buy another pair.

Also, they kind of lose their “I just tanned” efficacy when your legs are three shades darker than your face and hands.

I say we abolish pantyhose (hose the hose?) from workplace dress codes – heck, all dress codes – and keep them where they belong: Over the faces of bank robbers.