Moms Find Solution To 'Plumber's Crack'

Posted by Algonkin in Everything Else, Fashion on December 12, 2007 at 7:54 am


Two Central Coast moms say they have come up with a solution to the old problem of “plumber’s crack,” the revealing and often embarrassing problem of exposed backsides resulting from poorly fitting pants.

Christine Meeks and Kelley DeSerpa have come up with the Hip-T an invention designed to keep your assets covered.

Meeks and DeSerpa, who have patented their idea, said they came up with the idea when one of their daughters complained about the problem.

About a year ago, Meeks and DeSerpa converted a bedroom into an office and business with about $15,000 saved between them.

Most sales take place through their Web site and they have already shipped their product to addresses in all 50 states. The hip-T runs $19.95.

Via: KBSW
Video: Youtube


Previous post
this post? Please Email this               
Next post

Tags: , ,


FUN PRODUCTS FROM THE NEATORAMA SHOP:


COMMENT

25 comments to "Moms Find Solution To 'Plumber's Crack'"

  1. Claire
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:10 am

    This idea has already been around in Canada for about 3 years - it's called the Bella Band.

  2. algonkin
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:30 am

    Funny... I'm Canadian and I've never seen it. Thanks Claire.

  3. Crumbs
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:32 am

    Those news men were covering their assets by stretching that "news" into three and a half minutes!
    I could almost see the shadow of the camera man signing "keep it rolling - I need 2:45 more!"

  4. Luke
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:45 am

    So... it makes all pants look like maternity pants?

  5. Greg
    December 12th, 2007 at 9:14 am

    The Deluth Trading Company has been selling "Longtail T's " for years, at about 12 bucks a pop.

    They also sell a lot of "blue collar" tech stuff for manly men.

  6. AI_Joe
    December 12th, 2007 at 9:35 am

    *OR* moms can stop buying their children low-rise jeans preventing both crack-exposure and muffin-tops.

  7. Lisa
    December 12th, 2007 at 9:36 am

    This is nothing new. This type of belly band has been marketed to pregnant women for years. All these women did was decide to target a different market.

  8. Jason
    December 12th, 2007 at 9:52 am

    It was obvious that the anchorman did NOT want to do this story. I love it.

  9. just a guy
    December 12th, 2007 at 10:45 am

    Yeah, the anchorman's pride fell and shattered right before our eyes! LOL.

  10. Nemo
    December 12th, 2007 at 10:53 am

    It's about time somebody cracked down on this problem.

  11. Tom
    December 12th, 2007 at 10:58 am

    Another good solution I've heard of is sew a little lace along the bottom of the shirt.

    Only works for boys, but you can be sure that the shirt will stay tucked in.

  12. K!P
    December 12th, 2007 at 10:58 am

    so why doesnt it need to be shared? i mena...you don't HAVE to look. also the extra 20 might just be enough to buy a fitting pants

  13. Emily
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:47 am

    did anyone think of just wearing longer shirts?

  14. Eric
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:48 am

    "New at 11... *SIGH*"

    Classic.

  15. Jason
    December 12th, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    Does anyone else think it's strange that they cite wikipedia?

  16. Emmers
    December 12th, 2007 at 12:59 pm

    ...Or you could, you know, get a long tank top to wear under your shirts. I'm dong that right now!

  17. twintigress
    December 12th, 2007 at 3:34 pm

    Jason, I'm with you. When did wikipedia become a credible source?

  18. brain
    December 12th, 2007 at 4:44 pm

    This strikes me as prudish. These ladies must be a barrel of fun in the sack, surely the type to always turn the lights off and talk about their day.
    At the same time, I agree with covering up a tween's bits and pieces.

  19. c-dub
    December 12th, 2007 at 7:09 pm

    Wikipedia is generally reliable: the journal Nature recently published a study that showed Wikipedia to be about as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica.

  20. arnie
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:27 pm

    Those stupid broads are trying take away my God-given right to see a little lace when I ask for the girl behind the counter at the gym to bend over and get me a towel.

    Next they will try and hid the worlds clevage.

  21. Jacki
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:50 pm

    c-dub: Generally reliable but not everything gets filtered and since anyone could submit into the database, small things get missed.

    I could see where they're getting at this. I'm a fan of long t-shirts/shirts myself being slightly taller than norm (relative to my schoolmates) but sometimes I find it a little problematic to shop with this restriction.

  22. c-dub
    December 13th, 2007 at 9:11 am

    @Jacki,

    Yes, small things get missed, but small things get missed in every reference. The brilliance of Wikipedia is that while there may be a few people adding erroneous information, there are thousands more seeking it out and removing it.

    Again, it's been proved to be about as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica, so questioning its value as a reference is a little disingenuous.

  23. L.T.
    December 13th, 2007 at 9:50 am

    What kind of wanna-be academic bothers to complain about the use of Wikipedia to reference a pop-culture term for a fluff news story?

  24. algonkin
    December 13th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

    LOL!!! @ arnie

  25. c-dub
    December 14th, 2007 at 12:52 am

    @L.T., a better response than I could have come up with (obviously).


PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT

Neatorama Comment Policy
You don't have to register or login to comment, but it's easier if you do so. Comments aren't censored, but those that are abusive or off-topic may be edited or deleted.


Stay updated on the comments with Comment RSS