A week of international pajama drama from around the world. Yes we bring you the pajama stories other websites are afraid to print.
Firstly we noticed this story from the Connecticut Post where seniors at a Cathedral High School were sent home after turning up for lessons in their pajamas. Part of a senior prank day which seems quite mild by some standards. Then we saw a story from over the border aboot our friends in the North. Next time you are wondering where can I get a Pikachu adult onesie, 424 lbs. worth of mannequin parts, a harry potter robe, and some tuxedo morph suits, instead of coming straight to the funzee site you might like to try the Canadian government site GC surplus. These items have been “seized property” forfeited to the Crown during police investigations or court proceedings. So if the Queen of England (and Canada) doesn’t want these items she has her own dedicated ebay type site to auction them off. According to Public Services and Procurement Canada, seized property can be “any asset acquired as proceeds of crime, or any object used to commit a crime.” Should be some bargains on that site.
Then we travel way down to South Africa where there is more international pajama drama and this story has a familiar ring to it. We have seen much discussion about whether it is acceptable to wear pajamas in public and it seems the same debate is happening elsewhere. There was much social media comment from Johannesburg about a notice put up by grocery chain store the Spar Group. If genuine it bans customers from wearing pajamas to its outlets. Pictures of the notice began circulating on both Facebook and Twitter recently. It reads: “To avoid causing embarrassment to others, we ask that our customers are appropriately dressed when visiting the store.” People generally took exception to the ban but Spar later insisted that it has no such policy. A company spokesman implied the poster was a fake, “In terms of group policy, you can wear whatever you want when shopping in a Spar store. We will never dictate what you can and cannot wear, within the bounds of decency obviously.” A sound policy maybe but I doubt we have heard the last of this international pajama drama.