Words that should be banned: Panties
Cats: banned words|Because Tanya Espanya brought up the subject of panties and her graduation into smaller sizes post-baby, I thought it was time to drag out of the archives one of GT’s early banned words: Panties.
By “Panties,” I mean those undergarments worn on the bottom by members of female sex.
I’m not calling for a universal moratorium on the use of the word “Panties.” I don’t object to its use when deployed to describe the undergarment worn by a girl child between the ages of 2-12.
“Panties” is a perfectly acceptable description for an undergarment worn by this age group. But when you advance the age of the female wearer to, say, 30, 48, or 73, you have to ask yourself if it is entirely appropriate to refer to the undergarment in question as “Panties?”
“Panties” infantilizes its wearer, reduces her to a juvenile status. “Panties” lacks the authority and confidence of an undergarment that should be worn by the grown woman. “Panties” are worn by little girls, some of whom have very recently graduated from diapers.
It’s not that we lack a choice of words for the undergarment worn by the mature woman. We have the muscular “underpants” and the less strident “underwear” and the slightly mysterious “underthings.”
Common slang parlance includes “undies” or if you’re British “knickers” or “knick knicks” although the latter term might be creeping back into the territory of juvenile. Sensible undergarment retailers refer to them as “briefs.”
Romantics might define the undergarment as “lingerie” although it’s unlikely “lingerie” would be worn by a woman going out to play a game of rugby, for instance. But “lingerie” while not universally appropriate is, at least, mature and dignified.
More descriptive terms might include “thongs” or “boy shorts.” I’m sure there are plenty of other descriptions for the undergarment, but it is the age-appropriateness that concerns me.
Let us embrace an appropriate term for this undergarment of bottom regions and leave “panties” to the children. If you have other suggestions please offer.

July 8th, 2007 at 11:48 am
I ranted about this many moons ago when I was a mere commenter on RTK and not yet part of the RTK team. My objections are very similar to yours, and as mentioned on Tanya’s blog, I also find there to be something vaguely porny about the term when used by or about grown women.
If you watch porn, as I sadly occasionally do given the present self-imposed drought, you will see that it is quite often used by porn stars male and female.
July 8th, 2007 at 12:01 pm
Do you recall the link to that rant Jacy?
July 8th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
I am going now to look … please stand by …
I guess I over-estimated. Not exactly a rant. But I could have sworn I did tee off later at some point, but could not find the post when I searched RTK for “panties” or “underwear”
http://byekoolaidmoms.blogspot.com/2006/06/burka-vs-thong-underwear.html
July 8th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Thank you Jacy - a rant well worth the read there.
I love the “bum floss” description of the thong.
It’s a strange cultural phenomenon, the thong. Traditionally women have worn underthings to hold it all in, lift it all up, or squeeze it tight.
But the thong, just lets it all hang out, everywhere.
I can’t think of anything more unappealing than a dimpled butt - big or small - split in two by a thong. Ugh!
July 8th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
As I commented on my own post:
Q “Hey, what do you have under there?”
A “Under where?”
Underwear in Spanish is BRAGAS. But if you’re a little girl you would wear smaller Bragas, and they would be BRAGITAS. Do we want to start using that? I’m okay with it.
July 8th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
What about la pantaleta for panties
is thata correcto en espanol, Espanya?
July 8th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Have never, ever understood the thong. I’d rather just go commando if i have to. I mean why not? A thong is decorative more than functional, is it not?
July 9th, 2007 at 2:45 am
I had the “pleasure” of shopping at a local store last week where, as soon as I walked in, I saw the female clerk leaning over the counter, away from me, with her strings showing, not peeking out, obvious for all to see. I was accompanied by YA#1 who was traumatized. We expect he’ll be finished with therapy when he’s in his 30’s or so
July 9th, 2007 at 3:48 am
Just some random thoughts:
1) I like nice cotton “undies” that cover my bum in its entirety.
2) An exposed thong is incredibly skanky, NOT sexy.
3) I also like the term “underpantaloons”.
July 9th, 2007 at 3:51 am
I hate “panty lines”. Sorry, is there another term for that? Would anyone understand what I’m talking about if I said I hate “knicker lines” or “underpantaloons lines”?
July 9th, 2007 at 5:03 am
I should have spelled it: BRAGUITAS.
And I love underpantaloons, Deepti! Love it! So excellent! hahahaha!
July 9th, 2007 at 5:32 am
Thanks Tanya! (I’m a bit juvenile at heart, I confess.) While we’re at it, can we come up with a new name for pantiliners?
July 9th, 2007 at 7:42 am
YAM, a good term for pantylines is VPL. It sounds like a computer application but alas it is Visible Panty Lines.
Deepti, while you’re on a roll, how about pantaloonliners. You are a hoot.
July 9th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Ah, pantaloonliners…the word is music to my ears. I shall be using this word often.
July 9th, 2007 at 10:08 am
Or even pantalooners?
July 9th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Haha, sounds like an 18th century term for young boys’ shorts…
July 9th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
I have to admit, I love the word “panties.” Around men. It always makes them uncomfortable, which gives me a giggle. I especially love using “panties” when referring to a man’s undergarments.
July 9th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Pantalooners: a 19th-century British infantry division headed for the Crimea.
Beth, I think you have cracked it. If it’s an uncomfortable word, then we should use it to disarm the enemy… I just may..
July 9th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Pants (that’s not trousers over here) has become a great word for shouting in quiet places like the library. Sitting there silently reading the condensed history of the modern loincloth and suddenly “PANTS” as two mischievous youths scamper out the exit as the librarian volts over the desk after them to a chorus of sniggers. I suppose panties is just that extra syllable too long to make the prefect getaway.
July 9th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Well, well…just look at the discussion that you and Tanya Espanya have started! 19 comments about panties…that’s awesome
July 17th, 2007 at 10:12 am
The word I’m most fond of is ‘gaunch’. I have also recently heard the word ‘gotch’ used, both of which can be found in the Urban Dictionary on-line.
I use gaunch (both the word and the garment) to simply mean that cloth material that goes between the discharge holes and the trousers / over garment.
According to the urban dictionary the term applies to soiled under garments, but one could argue that they are soiled after they are put on anyway (verified by tepid sniff tests).
I say we just call them all diapers, with exception to the thong, which will always be ass floss.
July 17th, 2007 at 10:51 am
Dick…I’ve never had a comment make me feel a little nauseous before…
July 17th, 2007 at 11:55 am
:LOL:
Deepti: It seems you have been lead astray by those who wish you to believe that their farticles don’t stink.
July 17th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
I find the term ‘panties’ for adult womens’ undergarments patronising - in the UK mens’ ‘undercarriagecovers’ are often referred to as ‘Y-fronts’ (named after an actual type of ‘brief’ alleged to be a comfortable design for the appendages - not generally referred to as ‘Y-fronties’)!!
While on the subject - Knickerboxers?
July 17th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Oh and I love the terms Bum Floss and Arse Floss for thongs!! I wear them in the summer months but don’t let them peek above the waistband!
July 17th, 2007 at 7:15 pm
Lucy, did you know that Dick is your blood relative….
it’s true
July 18th, 2007 at 12:19 am
Help! Now it’s clear why I had such an immediate affinity with his sense of humour (though could be as much due to life with Austin)!
July 18th, 2007 at 4:04 am
Dick, no doubt that everyone’s farticles stink, but I think it’s seeing the words “tepid sniff tests” that’s really churning my stomach
July 18th, 2007 at 6:57 am
It’s Lucy, my bloody relative!
My days of gaunch sniffing (as a measure of wearability) have long since passed now that I have a partner, a washing machine, and more than enough gaunch.
Perhaps, Deepti, you misunderstood tepid to mean ‘warm’, but it was meant to mean ‘an absense of enthusiasm’. Hope this helps with your discomfort
July 18th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Hi Dick, I’m glad ‘washing machine’ and ‘more than enough gaunch’ were mentioned alongside ‘partner’ or I would have feared that my esteemed cousin was hinting that someone else now does his gaunch sniffing on his behalf!!
Hope life’s going well, gaunch et al.
July 18th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Howdy Ho cousin Lucy, my partner was responsible for raising the bar by encouraging regular laundering. Not one to be forced into a weekly laundry regime, I acquired 15 pairs of gaunch. It was the environmentally responsible thing to do. Do they sell organic gaunch?
July 18th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
I would imagine that gaunch-sniffing is carried out unenthusiastically by most people…I really hope so anyway. Starting. To. Feel. Nauseous. Again!
July 18th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
OMFG, I’ve never had so many comments on one post in my entire blogging life! And you’re right Deepti, it’s nauseating, but then, considering the family connections of some of the commentators…. not surprising.
July 18th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Oh GT you are not so sophisticated, more mephiticated.
July 21st, 2007 at 4:56 am
Yee ha cousin Dick! I’m so relieved by your clarification. Organic Gaunch CAN be procured from a range of websites merchandising specimens in various fabrics to satisfy the most environmentally aware (possibly not creating much excitement in the love department - although I believe organic thongs are now available). Fabrics-wise the most comfortable must be hemp, with organic cotton coming a close second and I’m sure for the more puritanical/masochistic, stout hessian must be out there somewhere! Google Hemp Union and/or Green Fibres for more info. Hope forest life going well & love to Chris.
July 21st, 2007 at 5:05 am
GT, apologies for helping to lower the tone of your blog!
Deepti, I’m afraid GT is right about the family connections!
July 23rd, 2007 at 7:18 am
All is good. Keeping the mosquitos, blackflies, horseflies, deerflies, mooseflies, and noseeums well fed.
As an apparent expert on organic gaunch I was wondering if you could field this question for me:
Is there a risk that organic gaunch will compost on the wearer?
FYI: Cedar bark is resistant to decay, and has been used for clothing in the pacific NW by first nations (Indians).
July 25th, 2007 at 11:55 pm
Glad to hear you are contributing to the biodiversity of the forest.
Yes, I guess organic gaunch can compost on the wearer if the wearer wears it for long enough!
Cedar bark makes sense - the essential oil is widely used for preventing moth infestation and to preserve ……….