16 Answers | Add Yours
A public dress code that deals in clothing type, as opposed to clothing amount, seems destined to fail. It would just be too invasive and too hard to define as well.
What are pajamas?
Are pajamas defined by thickness/thinness of fabric? If SpongeBob appears on a pair of pants, are those automatically pj's? If a pair of pants have feet attached, can I wear them in public if I wear shoes too?
And what about babies and toddlers? Will they be disallowed if public pj's are banned?
I wish people had better taste than to wear pajamas in public places, but I can't imagine that a law banning this would be upheld as constitutional. Much would depend, of course, on the precise appearance of the pajamas. I can imagine some that might indeed cause a person to get arrested!
I cannot say that they should be. The questions which people have regarding what items would be considered pajamas is far too vast (as seen by the questions posted above). I feel if a person wishes to walk out of their house looking like they just rolled out of bed, so be it.
More than once I have seen women and children in the local Wal-Mart wearing pajamas. Sadly, there's no accounting for taste, but issuing dress codes for public places (aside from schools) would be just another way for governmental control to dictate yet another facet of our lives. Pajamas are certainly not as distasteful as seeing boys (and men!) with their pants below the knees and underwear in full view; and, though they need lessons in how to dress in a public place, we should not enact laws concerning dress codes. We might have to build new jails to house the offenders!
I just don't see that it's a problem. In my mom's generation we had rules prohibiting things like women wearing pants on the campuses of public universities. I think that we need to stay out of legislating fashion or "decency" (obviously, that can only be true up to a point) because we end up looking stupid when we do stuff like that. Let's just stick to laws that are really necessary
I agree with above posters who say that it would be entirely too difficult to enforce a law like this and draw guidelines. Additionally, it would infringe on rights and privacy. Wearing pajamas does not harm others in any way, as distasteful as it may be.
I could see, however, making a law about wearing lingerie. I wonder if this is where this debate came about. People should be properly covered in public, and maybe there are people who think lingerie is considered appropriate attire.
I think a ban on pajamas would depend upon where they were worn. In a court of law, I think it would be inappropriate. Personally, outside the court system, it would probably depend on personal preference, such as how a restaurant, for example, wants to be perceived, or a theater. I would not want to see them in a place of worship, but rules in houses of worship are not generally governed in the same way as other places. And as mentioned, it seems a little foolish to believe that we can control everything—especially in large cities like New York or Los Angeles, etc. It gives new meaning to the phrase "fashion police." What police person in his/her right mind would not feel totally degraded by trying to enforce such a law. PJ's? At the drugstore, at 9:30 pm, on a "NyQuil" run.
As others have said, what does it matter? At the public university where I now study and teach, students come to class all the time in pajamas. I can't say that it has affected my teaching, or their learning, one way or another. The problem with dress codes (like the baggy pants issue) is that they are often fraught with generational, cultural, and gender biases. Regulations governing pajamas seem just silly to me.
There are too many laws as it stand. We do not need more legislation. In light of this, I say that we let people dress the way they want. In addition, we will have to define what pajamas are. This will be a hard thing to do. Moreover, we are dealing with public spaces. As long as the clothing is not indecent, we should allow it. Finally, think of the extra money we will need to spend on law enforcement.
Pajamas are OK but adult onesies are definitely a crime of fashion (try www.funzee.com)
That's just silly. Pajamas are not defined by style or fabric, they are defined by function. If you sleep in sweatpants, then are sweatpants pajamas? If you have a jacket that is made of a pastel fleecy material, or a flannel shirt, are those no longer to be worn in public because they could be construed as pajamas?
Frankly I'd rather have everybody wearing pj's than have to look at people with too much buttock or cleavage hanging out. Americans have so lowered their standards of decency in dress that I cannot imagine pajamas could possibly be more offensive than what passes for stylish.
This is a very good question. While I don't like the practice of wearing pjs outside of the bedroom, I'm afraid a public law creating a dress code isn't feasible. As long as the pajamas aren't in poor taste (showing too much skin) then there is nothing we can really do to stop them. I do think the businesses have the right to dictate what they want their patrons to wear in their establishments, so if they do not want pajamas worn, they can say so. Many schools have added provisos in their rules stating that students cannot wear pajama bottoms to school.
While Americans grow accustomed to almost anything, other countries still have public decency laws that dictate public attire. America once had similar strict public clothing codes. It is worth considering if a lax public decency code is the partner of lax morality, which is the partner of teenage drinking, drug use, and pregnancy.
What an interesting topic! No, I don't believe PJ's should be banned from public places! We literally would have a fashion police! It's peoples right's to wear what they wish, and why shouldn't people be charged for wearing the wrong type of clothes? But there are very little cases, I would assume where people would actually go out and wear their full Cinderella PJ set out in public! How embarrasing!
no . it should not bann
I think that people areallowed to wear what they want, but at their own risk of being rediculised.
We’ve answered 396,420 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question