One More Reason Granny Panties Are a Must

June 19th, 2008 • Related • Filed Under

A Los Angeles woman claims she was injured by her Victoria’s Secret thong, prompting her to sue the underwear manufacturer.

Obviously the plaintiff has not been stocking blogs. If she had been, she’d know the smartest women gave up wearing underwear adorned with trinkets in favor of the sexier granny panties a long time ago.

The plaintiff in the case, Macrida Patterson, 52, attributed the May 2007 injury to a Victoria’s Secret “low-rise v-string, from the Victoria’s Secret “Sexy Little Thing” line, according to a court document.

Patterson’s lawyer told The Smoking Gun that a “design problem” caused a decorative metallic piece on the underwear to fly up and hit Patterson in the eye while she was putting the underwear on.

We of course hope that this poor Sexy Little Thing didn’t receive a serious, deforming or blinding injury and that she has learned her lesson—Those panties, the kind that attacked her, those are just for show. You’re not actually supposed to wear them. And if Patterson just got a little eyeball sore, well then we say shame, shame for bringing yet another frivolous law suit.

The big question on my mind is what kind of warning will Victoria Secret now put on all their under garments? McDonalds warns their coffee is too hot to drink, GE had to put a consumer warning on oven doors to remind all short people it’s a really stupid idea to stand on the oven door. What kind of a warning will the underwear giant now start printing on all their sexy little things?

Share and Enjoy:

If you also think life's too short to be quiet, you can subscribe for your daily dose of Shout here.

8 people have an opinion. »

Comment by Jan on 19 June 2008:

I heard this happened while she was trying them on in the store.

Ew. Ew. Ewwwwwww.

I can’t even begin to express how much that grosses me out. I will never again buy underwear that isn’t hermetically sealed in Kryptonite.

Just…ew.

Jans last blog post..Cornbread
Comment by Amy on 19 June 2008:

I can only imagine the warning! And I have to say that it is so infuriating to me that our court systems are bogged down with craziness … there are so many other, more important issues in this world!

Amys last blog post..What? Where? Why?
Comment by Mrs. G. on 19 June 2008:

I should be the granny panty spokeswoman…I couldn’t love them more!

Mrs. G.s last blog post..Slow Cook Thursday
Comment by Brad on 19 June 2008:

Ah, a whole new avenue for this pro se plaintiff to pursue! I’m off to the mall for “research”. If only I had a law license…then I could recruit the customers!
Comment by T on 20 June 2008:

This is so freakin’ crazy. If this happened to me I’d be 1) embarrased to tell people I wear a thong and paint that visual in their head and 2) have people judge me on not being able to put on underwear properly. But maybe for a million dollars…..

Ts last blog post..Friday Foto Finish
Comment by stepping over the junk on 21 June 2008:

this stuff is crazy. she shouldn’t have been trying on a thong. That’s disgusting. i think about it whenever I get a “to go” cup of coffee and in bold it says “Careful, contents may be hot”. I mean, DOH, if you order a coffee, it will be flippin’ hot, dummies. (I recall someone suing over spilling coffee on their lap from a to go cup)

stepping over the junks last blog post..Unsettled transition
Comment by donna on 23 June 2008:

It would probably read something like this
Flying objects may occur whiling putting on underwear.
Safety glasses required.
And did you hear about the law suit in Canada
A teenager took her parents to court and won because they grounded her and she could not go on a class trip.
The judge overturned their decesion and she got to go.
Comment by Beth on 26 June 2008:

I just found you via blog-hopping. Here’s my response to the thong kafuffle….

http://hottublizzy.blogspot.com/2008/06/im-not-size-4-and-i-wear-thong.html