emperor | (no subject)

Socks are hosiery, no?
I think this is similar to the "Are fish seafood" discussion I started on my LJ a few years ago. It's a matter of definition.

Edited 2010-09-21 13:02 (UTC)

Hosiery, like lingerie, is a subcategory of underwear...

;)

I beg to differ but not in an arsey way :D

Differ all you like! I am not sold to the concept, but it just seems logical since my hosiery is frequently attached to my lingerie... but I am giving too much away ;)

They aren't in the sense that I'm much more relaxed about people seeing my socks than I am them seeing my bra or knickers.

They are in the sense that you usually need a fresh set every day (but then I also want a fresh shirt or tshirt most days).

So no, they are not underwear.

What, you need fresh socks every day? Why did no one tell me this earlier!

They aren't worn under other clothes unless you count long trousers. They are outer garments in their own right when worn with short clothes, eg shorts, skirts, kilts.

clothes unless you count long trousers

Long trousers are very widely considered clothes!

possibly they are smalls, though.

This.

It's not entirely logical -- though I suppose one wears them 'under' shoes -- but they are underwear as they're in the same category as pants/knickers.

They aren't in the default meaning of "underwear" but are in the implicit penumbra of metaphorical usage around the word "underwear" (along with detachable shirt collars, hosiery, and other similar garments) that may possibly be used more often than the literal usage.

I wish I were a sufficient grammarian to have a name for that concept, it would make online meaning debates much more succinct.

They are underwear because that's where you find them in the shop, and that's the only reason it could possibly matter what you call them.

S.

Have you been spying on us? The hotel laundry people don't list a charge for socks, so we debated what box to tick for them when we wanted them washed, and settled on 'underwear'.

:-)

No, someone else did the "what you wore today, in detail" bit of a 30-day meme, and after commenting that surely no-one needed to know about their underwear in detail, mentioned what socks they were wearing.

No, on the grounds that underwear is clothing I wouldn't show off to the world, but I don't mind who sees my socks.

Underwear goes on pink bits! Socks don't go on pink bits!

Do you never wash your feet or something? Mine are pink... ;-)

I meant that in the euphemistic sense of erotic tissue aka genitals and nipples. I suppose feet are erotic tissue to some people though!

Sorry, couldn't resist the "funny" :)

"" indeed ;)

Socks don't go on pink bits

Were it not for the internet, I'd have probably agreed with you about that.

Now I'm better informed (but squicked) ...

I would argue that a male vest is underwear, but male nipples aren't generally considered "pink" in that there is much less taboo about showing them off in public.

Socks are visible, therefore outerware.

This is why the word smalls exists.

I would say yes, they are generally underwear. If you think about the equivalent items it becomes much clearer - stockings and suspenders are definitely underwear these days and are part of the 'sock' family when it comes to types of clothing. However, there are socks designed to be seen as outerwear.

I keep them in my underwear drawer. Ergo, underwear.

Interesting. Well, tights are underwear. Therefore stockings are underwear. And socks are just short stockings. Unless ankle socks fall into a different category, while their sisters, knee-high and thigh-high socks, are classed as underwear; and that would just be silly.

And although they are sometimes 'on display', as people have pointed out, they do spend most of their time 'under': under shoes, under trousers, under long skirts. If they appear under shorts and with sandals, people joke about them. In fact, the only item of clothing I wear them over is leggings, and then I am generally wearing them under boots.

Yup. Underwear. Goodnight.