The Mathematical Women's Underwear Classification

Apr 30, 2010 22:36

As I was walking around downtown this afternoon, I was contemplating the "big deal" it is when celebs don't wear underwear.
But exactly how big of a deal is it, really, since a lot of people wear thongs as underwear of choice--and a thong isn't that much material, right?
As my aunt fondly called them, "floss."

So I think the degrees of underwear can be easily classified. If a bikini is a 1.0, a thong is something like a .25, or .27(?) depending on lace/frill amounts.
I would put "granny panties" at 1.5. Hipster is maybe 1.2, depending on how high-cut it is.
String bikini would be...let's say... a .75.

So, let's put this in organized order:
0 = no underwear, "commando"
.25 - .27 = thong
.75 = string bikini
1.0 = bikini cut
1.1-1.2 = hipster
1.3 = boy short
1.5 = granny panty

(so overall a 0-1.5 scale, with room for exaggerations)

does that sound accurate? So next time someone asks what kind of underwear you're wearing, think about it and answer with the number, up to two decimal places if you want to be verry exact.

And if you're not wearing any, then don't just say "zero."...maybe say sth clever that means the same thing, like "love" in tennis.
So I guess that means you wear your heart on your sleeve, but "love" is lacking in anything material under there.

cheers,

Brit
Previous post Next post
Up