This whole blouse thing opened up a whole new can of worms.
So I was confused about what a blouse was, and it turns out so is the rest of the universe. I think that’s astonishing.
In the comments, people reminded me of the term, slacks, which, to me has a much more straightforward definition. Slacks are basically dress pants. But further investigation into this has turned bizarre.
If you search for “slacks” on Wikipedia, you get sent to a disambiguation page. On said disambiguation page, it states
Slacks is a colloquial term referring to trousers.
My head is spinning.
So you’re telling me more people refer to pants everyday as slacks AND trousers? [I’m talking to you, wikipedia. You transient being, you.]
First things first, are the words slacks and trousers even required in the modern vernacular? We should all agree that slacks and trousers refer to pants. Right?
Perhaps I’m missing the geographic factor. Maybe these words are used in other English speaking nations. Perhaps someone from the UK can clarify. <wink> <wink> The Exile.
Back to slacks
My impression of this word is that it’s specific to less casual pants for either men or women. For example, jeans are not considered slacks. Can we agree on this?
Not that I want to confuse the matter or that we should even care, but I think it’s important to examine the language for these little idiosyncracies. You’d be surprised at the sociological effects there are on words, not that I know anything about sociology or anything, but I still enjoy these little debates.