Skip

Tights Are Not Pants
May 31, 2008 11:17 AM   Subscribe

Tights Are Not Pants. It's time to stop the madness.
posted by Pater Aletheias (109 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
How about manpris? Are they OK? I'm thinking that this post may not survive.
posted by fixedgear at 11:23 AM on May 31, 2008


If only there were a few important problems left for people to develop manifestos and call-to-action press kits about.
posted by nanojath at 11:24 AM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


Tights Are Not Pants.

They are, however, helpful for figuring out a man's religion.
posted by jonmc at 11:26 AM on May 31, 2008


I suppose tautology is better than hypocrisy when it comes to manifestos.

Coming next: "Dolphins Are Not Fish" and "Hey, What Are You Up To? I'm Just Chilling" the Manifestos.
posted by GuyZero at 11:28 AM on May 31, 2008 [2 favorites]


I don't understand what I'm supposed to click on to "stop the madness."
posted by desjardins at 11:29 AM on May 31, 2008


Don't you

GET IT, desjardins?

they're DOING     something

by creating pointless and

   faux-quirky

webpages. It's

ACTION in the
new millenium
.

Hippies, eat your hearts out.
posted by TheNewWazoo at 11:32 AM on May 31, 2008 [7 favorites]


Shouldn't that website have, like, a petition or something? Get a million signatures, send them to Lindsay Lohan. Otherwise, it's all meaningless. Lindsay doesn't web-surf. She will never find out that tights are not pants unless we TELL her. Same goes for the other folks who have stopped wearing pants.

And let's face it: all of this was inspired by Go Fug Yourself. The first folks to come out with a strong stance on the tights as pants issue.
posted by brina at 11:33 AM on May 31, 2008


You know, the SCA has done a lot of research on this subject and found that the phrase "insufficient clothing for body type" is a lot more to the point. It also won't force the "web pages that suck" guy to come up with a term that kluges together the concepts "cascading style sheets" and "annoying as hell".

Ignoring the giant novelty version (Black Adder, et al) the purpose of the codpiece is to shield your neighbors from the intimate details of your body. It also allows you to go to the bathroom without having to untie 40 little knots. This is important when you're in the dark and on beer number six.

Particularly if your mug holds more than a pint.

Don't ask me how I know this.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 11:34 AM on May 31, 2008


I was thinking about this just the other day! I was tempted to register LeggingsAreNotPants.com and take surreptitious photos of women not wearing pants in an attempt to shame the general populace.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 11:43 AM on May 31, 2008 [2 favorites]


What, now?
posted by Fuzzy Skinner at 11:43 AM on May 31, 2008


Speaking as a person who has a fetish for women in hosiery, I am completely in favor of this tights-as-pants trend that I have never actually seen in real life. When and if I do see it, there is going to be an accident.

Meanwhile, I have to go register www.tightsarepants.com. Like right now.
posted by flarbuse at 11:45 AM on May 31, 2008


I support this campaign. I have never seen a person wear tights in a non-ballet environment actually pull of wearing just pants.

And don't get me started on women who wear leggings as pants and then include some 1920 retro blue shoe in the mix.
posted by Stynxno at 11:45 AM on May 31, 2008


I've looked and looked and looked, but I couldn't find any pictures of women wearing tights with no pants.

There's a name for posters like the OP, and it isn't a very nice name.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 11:46 AM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


What the hell? Faran Krentcil, a girl from my high school drama clique, has become a demi-famous fashionista Youtube new media person? I wanted to come in here and snark about how leggings died in 1991, not feel incredibly old and boring.

Ask not for whom the wacky new meme tolls, Countess, it tolls for thee.
posted by Countess Elena at 11:50 AM on May 31, 2008


I can't say that I've been struck by this problem. I have, however, been tempted to register the WhyNotJustBuyALargerShirtInTheFirstPlace.com.
posted by DU at 11:50 AM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


tell your douche friends: NOT EVERYONE HAS A WIDESCREEN MONITOR
posted by chrominance at 11:50 AM on May 31, 2008 [4 favorites]


You didn't look very hard, Peter: the third link has some right at the top.
posted by Justinian at 11:50 AM on May 31, 2008


I totally support the tights are not pants movement!

If you have ever had to ride the up escalator behind a 200 lb. woman (or man for that matter) wearing tights you will understand my passion.

I don't care what celebrities wear. Celebrities are not people. People should not go out in public wearing just their underwear.

Thank you.
posted by charlesminus at 11:51 AM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


I ranted on this topic myself back in April. Very glad to see others are taking up the cause.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 11:56 AM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


I'm not sure I can disagree strongly enough with the message of this website.
posted by generichuman at 11:59 AM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


You didn't look very hard, Peter: the third link has some right at the top.

Those women are all wearing pants over (or under) their tights. No pants means no pants.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:05 PM on May 31, 2008


Hell, there's a lot of things that aren't pants. But you don't see me goin' and paying for a daggone web site about it.
posted by netbros at 12:07 PM on May 31, 2008


Odd, the only people I have seen wearing tights/leggings as pants are... not ones I can complain about doing so.

So long as I remain so sheltered, I will resist this movement!
posted by flaterik at 12:07 PM on May 31, 2008


Of all of the things to care about...?

I mean, clothing is one of those things that most people accept as having many, many different forms of rightness anyway.

stoptryingtoexactyourvisualpreferencesonothers.com
posted by setanor at 12:09 PM on May 31, 2008


I am not convinced that web pages should ever need to scroll sideways.

If that was how god meant the internet to be navigated, I would have a scroll nipple, not a scroll wheel.
posted by Lord_Pall at 12:10 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


I saw an older lady running yesterday wearing tights without running shorts over them. I don't know which was worse, the front or the back.
posted by sciurus at 12:11 PM on May 31, 2008


Also: David Bowie in Labyrinth.
posted by sciurus at 12:14 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


The "tights are not pants" might have a different meaning on the east side of the Atlantic but as someone who works in an American cubicle farm I totally get it. Tights and leggings are almost exclusively worn by suburban woman that flirt with the far side of the body mass index. Nothing like going to lunch and standing in line behind a couple behemoths in white leggings that reveal each and every crater or skin with the consistency of cottage cheese. It's enough to keep me watching my weight. Oh.The.Horror.
posted by Ber at 12:14 PM on May 31, 2008


Tights as pants are an affront to those of us who PREFER NOT TO KNOW the most intimate details of their neighbors' bodies.

Oh, poor Taliban.
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 12:17 PM on May 31, 2008 [2 favorites]


I love the Go Fug Yourself girls, but I think they're wrong in their anti-leggings stance. Leggings can work on the right figure and with the right footwear and top. I have a dark brown velvet pair I wear with knee boots and sweaters.

Stirrup pants, now, are an abomination. They're horribly unflattering on anyone. But I can't remember the last time I saw them on sale anywhere, so I can rest easy on that one.
posted by orange swan at 12:18 PM on May 31, 2008




stoptryingtoexactyourvisualpreferencesonothers.com

iwillwhenyouquittellingwhattodo.org
posted by YoBananaBoy at 12:29 PM on May 31, 2008


Tights-Are-Not-Trousers
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 12:30 PM on May 31, 2008


Yeah, there is a English english vs American english thing here, pants, trousers, knickers, fanny pack, etc.
posted by fixedgear at 12:36 PM on May 31, 2008


I don't care what celebrities wear. Celebrities are not people.

This may be true. But alas, some people tend to take their cues from celebrities, particularly their fashion cues.

Celebs are always talking about being "role models," though I really don't think anyone in his or her right mind modifies his/her general behavior to mimic that of celebrities. It's just in the fashion department that people listen to celebrities.

Which is why someone must kidnap Lindsay Lohan et. al, and force them to buy and wear pants. We need someone really good at brainwashing to get on this. Do you know of any such organization that has that sort of influence over celebrities? It's too bad there's no, like, organized religion or something that celebs like to join ...
posted by brina at 12:37 PM on May 31, 2008


This is funny. My friend Alex & I were just saying this last night. And he brought it up... and he's A GUY.... a straight guy who never talks about fashion yet has become appalled by skin-tight leggings on women. Things have reached a breaking point, people.
posted by miss lynnster at 12:43 PM on May 31, 2008


My name is Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America, and I approve of tights as pants.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 12:43 PM on May 31, 2008


Capitalized Statements Are Not Facts
posted by Bokononist at 12:45 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


While we're at it, what's up with people who wear flip-flops to the office? Why do you think I want to see your feet?
posted by desjardins at 12:50 PM on May 31, 2008


My name is Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America, and I approve of tights as pants.
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America


Yes. Just because some people who wear tights happen to look like they're wearing a bag of kittens fighting a bag of potatoes does not mean other people shouldn't wear and, with little effort, look phenomenal in them.

Some people wear different clothes than you do. Some people look good in those clothes. Have a couple of whiskeys and find something else to worry about.
posted by Science! at 12:54 PM on May 31, 2008


I have a dark brown velvet pair I wear with knee boots and sweaters.

Orange swan?

I have a "friend" who wants to know where you got your yummy sounding dark brown velvet leggings?
xxxx
posted by Jody Tresidder at 12:55 PM on May 31, 2008


I think that there's no way tights are more obscene than bare skin, and that in the majority of pictures I see of offending parties they are wearing either a long t-shirt or short-shorts over said tights. That being said, who the fuck cares?

I've heard the fashion police railing against anyone over a size "00" wearing tights UNDER dresses/skirts. And you know what? Fashion people can kiss my grits - their only function is to continue the red alert policing of women's bodies and extoll rabid consumerism. If wearing tights as pants is a fashion crime, I will wholeheartedly support it as a means of saying fuck you to the fashion nazis. I love seeing someone in a well thought out, crafted outfit with clean lines, but honestly, people can wear whatever the fuck they want. If that means spandex body suit with pasties over top of it, so be it. You don't have to look, you know.

Now having said that, I will tell you for damn certain that I am never wearing any tights as pants.
posted by SassHat at 12:57 PM on May 31, 2008 [14 favorites]


I bought them for $4 in a thrift store some years ago. Yeah, I know, the "bought them in a thrift store" answer is always crushing when you hoped to be able to buy some for yourself.... When they wear out I have every intention of taking them apart and using the pieces as a pattern so I can make new ones.
posted by orange swan at 1:02 PM on May 31, 2008


If you have ever had to ride the up escalator behind a 200 lb. woman (or man for that matter) wearing tights you will understand my passion.

understand it? hell, i can SEE it!!
posted by pyramid termite at 1:02 PM on May 31, 2008


I've noticed this horribly offensive thing about going out in public: other people are there, visible, for me to ::have:: to see! In bodies!! It's ridic!!1lol
posted by Ambrosia Voyeur at 1:10 PM on May 31, 2008 [5 favorites]


Actually, I am currently wearing a plaid flannel shirt and Wranglers, so I guess I have nothing to say about fashion.
posted by desjardins at 1:13 PM on May 31, 2008


I wish I had a pair of tights after my hernial operation. My boys grew to the size of grapefruits.
posted by doctorschlock at 1:16 PM on May 31, 2008


Don't I have vague memories of this tights thing being some minor trend in the 1980s?
posted by maxwelton at 1:18 PM on May 31, 2008


Grmph. US-Centric "pants" usage.
posted by Artw at 1:19 PM on May 31, 2008


It's shocking that we allow ugly women (and men) to expose their faces in public. We have the veil, people!
posted by Mr. President Dr. Steve Elvis America at 1:20 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


I can't believe it's not butter!
posted by owhydididoit at 1:28 PM on May 31, 2008


While we're at it, what's up with people who wear flip-flops to the office? Why do you think I want to see your feet?

My feet are friggin' works of ART. You would be privileged to share the same office space with them, much less be allowed to gaze upon their glory.

Also it's a known fact that all the good software gets written by shoeless people. Witness the fact that Unix came out of Berkeley. You think Bill Gates walks around in sandals?
posted by tkolar at 1:32 PM on May 31, 2008


I bought them for $4 in a thrift store some years ago...crushing...

Duly crushed (but thanks!)
posted by Jody Tresidder at 1:43 PM on May 31, 2008


I was thinking about this just the other day! I was tempted to register LeggingsAreNotPants.com and take surreptitious photos of women not wearing pants in an attempt to shame the general populace.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero

I support this campaign. I have never seen a person wear tights in a non-ballet environment actually pull of wearing just pants.

And don't get me started on women who wear leggings as pants and then include some 1920 retro blue shoe in the mix.
posted by Stynxno


Its getting tougher everyday to tell you two apart. ThePinkStynxno.
posted by Dennis Murphy at 1:44 PM on May 31, 2008 [2 favorites]


I'm not sure whether I'm more appalled by the pointlessness of this thread or the fact that I read every comment.

So I guess "amused" would be better word choice than "appalled."
posted by Caduceus at 1:49 PM on May 31, 2008


Stirrup pants, now, are an abomination. They're horribly unflattering on anyone.

Major League Baseball would like a word with you.
posted by jonmc at 1:50 PM on May 31, 2008


Seriously, I'm laughing as much as I have all day today, just picturing myself in a pair of tights. Thank goodness it's cocktail time.

Sweet Jesus.
posted by SteveInMaine at 1:53 PM on May 31, 2008


Damn straight I wear leggings and tights, people. I live in Michigan! Oh, wait, I'm supposed to freeze for fashion, okay then.
posted by bettafish at 1:55 PM on May 31, 2008


"Its getting tougher everyday to tell you two apart. ThePinkStynxno."

I would have gone with "TheStynxPuperhero", but that's just me.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 1:57 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


Really? Not the ThePuperStynxhero?
posted by tkolar at 2:00 PM on May 31, 2008


Skirts are not pants either! Down with skirts!
posted by moonbiter at 2:01 PM on May 31, 2008


I wouldn't mind seeing a woman with Popeye Legs in tights.
posted by doctorschlock at 2:01 PM on May 31, 2008


While we're at it, what's up with people who wear flip-flops to the office? Why do you think I want to see your feet?

I'll stay agnostic on the tights issue but if anyone wants to start MenShouldNotWearPeeptoes.com I'm all for it. The vileness of the male foot is probably 90% of the reason I'm straight despite my inherent fagginess.
posted by bunnytricks at 2:01 PM on May 31, 2008


No. Up with skirts.
posted by jonmc at 2:02 PM on May 31, 2008 [6 favorites]


I see where this is all going. First, we talk about the camel toe face brought on by the tights.
Then, we talk about man's ugly toes. Hmmmm! Camel toe sucking.
posted by doctorschlock at 2:09 PM on May 31, 2008


Spandex is a privilege, not a right.

That is all.
posted by Falling_Saint at 2:10 PM on May 31, 2008


I have to go eponysterical myself now. BRB.
posted by tighttrousers at 2:20 PM on May 31, 2008




Let's not kid ourselves.
ManFeet are an ABOMINATION.
posted by Dizzy at 2:21 PM on May 31, 2008


People. If only they were better looking, they wouldn't need to wear anything*.






*Provided they live somewhere it's warm.
posted by tommasz at 2:24 PM on May 31, 2008


This is silly. MYOB.

On the other hand, flip-flops make a very irritating slap-slap-slap noise. I'd approve of a campaign to ban them, at least indoors in places (like an office) where quiet is desirable.
posted by aeschenkarnos at 2:26 PM on May 31, 2008


People wearing tights as pants? In public?
Where Leon Kass might see them?
posted by AsYouKnow Bob at 2:30 PM on May 31, 2008


I approve of 'tights as pants' on Jonathan Rhys Meyers.
posted by ericb at 2:31 PM on May 31, 2008 [3 favorites]


I approve of an unspoken social contract where I don't tell you what I really think about your clothes because I don't want you to tell me what you really think about mine.
posted by box at 2:40 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


I'm not sure what you are objecting to - the outline of my massive genitals or the shapely imprint of my beautiful buttocks.

alas, it's kinda funny to get fashion advice from an american. you know, 'cause you guys have the style thing all figured out with yet knee-long boxershorts in your pools chugging gourmet bud.
posted by krautland at 2:41 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


There's a name for posters like the OP, and it isn't a very nice name.

What's the name for commenters who make wild assumptions about an OP who posts a few trivial but potentially amusing links with no particular agenda beyond "it's kind of funny that someone did this." And is that a nice name?
posted by Pater Aletheias at 2:44 PM on May 31, 2008


As my public service to all of you:

MY PANTS ARE NOT TIGHT.

In college, playing a minor role in a stage production (Hermia's Father in "Midsummer Night's Dream") I had to wear tights, on stage, in front of an audience. Me with the worst-shaped body in the cast, male or female. Fortunately, the student actor playing Theseus the Duke wasn't pretty either and his character strutted around the stage while I was on. Not a pleasant memory, for me OR the audience.
posted by wendell at 2:46 PM on May 31, 2008


I think it depends on body weight. I'd still rather see tights than muffin tops.

Can we have a rant about mom jeans or sweats next?
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:51 PM on May 31, 2008


Although I don't believe tights and superheros are a strictly necessary combination (the Spirit got through all his adventures in a suit, and looked dapper what's more) I propose exemptions from this phony law be made for anyone who claims ability in breathing underwater, flight, human echolocation, etc., and can demonstrate such.

Also, LEGGINGS ARE NOT TIGHTS GUYZ. kthx.
posted by eponymouse at 2:59 PM on May 31, 2008


Oh, thank you eric b.
posted by Space Kitty at 3:09 PM on May 31, 2008


I approve of 'tights as pants' on Jonathan Rhys Meyers.

For a second, I was expecting gratuitous ass-shots of Gimli.
posted by CKmtl at 3:12 PM on May 31, 2008 [2 favorites]


MetaFilter: Limited bunching.
posted by loquacious at 3:25 PM on May 31, 2008


Wait, what are tights? Aren't they stockings? And are leggings the footless kind of tights? In the picture in the third link, I'd consider the first one tights and the second two pairs of stockings. I'm so confused!

Anyway, I wear tights/leggings/stockings all the time with long sweaters and short dresses and if that's wrong, I don't wanna be right!
posted by liquorice at 4:12 PM on May 31, 2008


We have tired of tolerating attempts to force tights into this non-native garment category, and have decided to do something about it

Wow, what a big twat.
posted by dhartung at 4:25 PM on May 31, 2008


For a second, I was expecting gratuitous ass-shots of Gimli.

Butt, of course you would. We all know that "Bears" prefer John Rhys-Davies over Twinks*.
posted by ericb at 4:27 PM on May 31, 2008 [2 favorites]


Hyperventilation is not pants!
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:33 PM on May 31, 2008


Andrew Clark: You don't have any goals.
John Bender: Oh but I do.
Andrew Clark: Yeah?
John Bender: I wanna be just like you. I figure all I need, is a lobotomy and some tights.
Brian Johnson: You wear tights?
Andrew Clark: No I don't wear tights. I wear the required uniform.
Brian Johnson: Tights.
Andrew Clark: Shut up.
posted by blaneyphoto at 4:37 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


I agree with the sentiment, but not with the statement that they are "doing something about it." A website is probably the bottom rung of "something."
posted by Grimp0teuthis at 4:53 PM on May 31, 2008


What's the name for commenters who make wild assumptions about an OP who posts a few trivial but potentially amusing links with no particular agenda beyond "it's kind of funny that someone did this."

That name would be 'moaning bastard'. And nice or not, it kind of suits me.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:05 PM on May 31, 2008 [1 favorite]


Cross cultural question: what's the difference between a 'moaning bastard' and a 'whinging bastard'?
posted by tkolar at 5:07 PM on May 31, 2008


No Capes!
posted by bwg at 5:25 PM on May 31, 2008


Go Fug Yourself is awesome. From the front page I just read, the critic is right on more often than not. Some of those outfits are hideous, and I'm very surprised that the celebs are so... well, either so tasteless or so easily persuaded to wear them. Especially when they know there's going to be a fashion shoot.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:29 PM on May 31, 2008


tkolar: voice pitch.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:32 PM on May 31, 2008


That's it. If I have to spend weekend in Rome observing this travesty, I will spend a weekend in Rome observing this travesty. If I fail, then I fail hard! Hope you're all happy now. La-di-daa.
posted by Free word order! at 5:41 PM on May 31, 2008


FFF, you can get into the tabloids far more easily by wearing a bad outfit than a nice one. That's why you see people like Bai Ling in Us Weekly, People, etc whereas she never really seems to have done all that much to get the attention other than, say, wearing a rubber coated badger as a hat with the rest of her body completely unclothed.
posted by SassHat at 6:38 PM on May 31, 2008


Did anyone else read that as Tight are Pants? Because I can support a website that is anti-tight-pants.

Speaking of fashion: Socks + Sandals = Epic Win, in my opinion.
posted by blue_beetle at 7:43 PM on May 31, 2008


SassHat - Well, she is completely fucking crazy to go with it. That helps.
posted by Artw at 8:23 PM on May 31, 2008


Is this one of those things I'd need to interact with people to give a damn about?
posted by unmake at 8:54 PM on May 31, 2008


I demand to know what Leslie Hall has to say about all this.
posted by Eideteker at 9:15 PM on May 31, 2008


I demand to know what Leslie Nielsen has to say about all this.
posted by tkolar at 12:09 AM on June 1, 2008


I used to wear leggings as pants, with big, baggy, be-holed, bits-blocking jumpers. Beau Brummel I wasn't, but with my long hair I looked quite boho/pixie. My flatmate wore his shirtless with a towel tied around his neck, to show off his chest tattoo. This was around the house, and not at gigs or anything, but we'd cruise to the neighbourhood shops or the video store like that occasionally. It was just that kind of neighbourhood.
posted by Sparx at 7:02 AM on June 1, 2008


I used to wear diapers.
Then I stopped.
But I'm pretty certain that I'll be wearing diapers again in a couple of years.
posted by Dizzy at 7:56 AM on June 1, 2008


I will be referring to this post in MeTa whenever I need to compare it to a post that I kinda liked that got deleted. Thank You Pater!
posted by telstar at 9:18 AM on June 1, 2008


How do you ppl feel about loose tights, instead of pants?

You could call them looses.
posted by dollyknot at 9:30 AM on June 1, 2008


Jodhpurs, mmmm....
posted by DenOfSizer at 9:42 AM on June 1, 2008


The opinion of a college student who has to see too many goddamn tights every day:

Some tights are designed to be worn solo. The ones you can get at Target, etc nowadays are not that kind of tights. Their purpose is to be worn under skirts to provide extra warmth/security. They're like opaque stockings with no feet. So when you buy a pair of those and wear them out, it's like wearing a bra as a shirt. Even if it's a pretty bra... it's still not appropriate.

(If you wear stockings with a shirt that covers your ass/crotch situation, that's ok, afaik. That's just like wearing a short dress.)
posted by showbiz_liz at 9:49 AM on June 1, 2008


So when you buy a pair of those and wear them out, it's like wearing a bra as a shirt. Even if it's a pretty bra... it's still not appropriate.

A good summary of the situation.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 10:22 AM on June 1, 2008 [1 favorite]


Wait, what are tights? Aren't they stockings? And are leggings the footless kind of tights? In the picture in the third link, I'd consider the first one tights and the second two pairs of stockings. I'm so confused!

Here are my definitions:

tights: are essentially thick, opaque or semi-opaque stockings, are made out of lycra, can have feet or not, and if not, are called "footless tights".

leggings: are made out of actual fabric, albeit one containing spandex, and are designed to be worn as trousers
posted by orange swan at 2:57 PM on June 1, 2008


Leggings may not be pants, but they are darned comfortably way to wear something that is both sleepable, early morning dog walking okay, and then right back to sleep able. Ditto bike shorts in warm weather.

I have no idea what leggings were designed for - wasn't everyone on the cocoa leaf when they were designed? - but that's what I use them for.
posted by Lesser Shrew at 4:19 PM on June 1, 2008


« Older Literary Interviews from The Atlantic Monthly   |   Don't play with your food - well, OK, go ahead. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post