Dear bum bag manufacturers

[nineveh_uk]

I wish to purchase a bum bag. I grant that these are unattractive items with a silly name, but they are also useful for e.g. a relatively short hike when not needing to carry a rucksack, or avoiding putting weight on the shoulders or upper back.

Yet brands persist in denying reality:

* calling it something other than a bum bag will not make it not a bum bag. You may think that "belt bag" or sounds trendier, or that "waist pack" or "hip pack" sounds more rugged and outdoorsy, but it is still a bum bag.

* it is still a bum bag when your adverts model it slung around the neck/shoulder like a highly uncomfortable bra. You know it, your customers know it, it is a bum bag.

Look, just be grateful the UK doesn't call them fanny packs and call it a day.

PS If that is 3 litres in capacity, then I can only assume you are measuring on the kind of scale more usually reserved for highly insecure men.

Comments

*laugh*

[ysabetwordsmith]

Well said!

Some of those alternate names are actually different products. The bum bag is meant to put the cargo in the back. A hip pack often has a pair of saddlebags on either side. A belt bag is another term for a pocket belt with many pouches along it. And I've seen waist pack used for items with one or two pouches in front. At least bum bag tells you specifically where the cargo is meant to rest.

Re: *laugh*

[nineveh_uk]

Exactly! It's a silly name, but it endures for a reason.