First, let me preface what I'm going to say (or I guess write) by stating that I love "the tight black pants" and all the accentuating features they provide to an attractive female body, in addition to the comfort and flexibility they provide for all. (Yes, I've worn a pair.)

For those of you who are unfamiliar with this recent phenomenon, the tight black pants I'm referring to are simply black, gray, white or any other colored tights that a majority of the University of Richmond's female student body enjoys wearing three or four days a week (sadly I've seen no professors sporting the look), often complementing the tights with stylish boots (see Maura Bogue's column) around Richmond's campus.

But that is besides the point, because this article is not some perverse cry for attention (although submitting to The Collegian was on my college bucket list), but instead attempts to answer one of college's biggest mysteries: Why do women, as a majority, graduate with higher GPAs than their male counterparts? Many in academia (although debatable in my mind) would explain this trend as deriving from women's stronger work ethic, greater attention to detail and superior organizational skills relative to males. But I offer a different explanation - the tight black pants theory.

My basis for this hypothesis all started on a gloomy Tuesday night a week before finals last semester, a time when studying spots are scarce and time is even harder to find. Luckily, I was able to find a spot in the first-floor computer lab of Gottwald Science Center, tucked away in a corner with a book by my side and the aid of a computer screen in front of me.

But this distraction-free studying was short-lived because about an hour into my brain cram, a girl who was easy on the eyes, to say the least, emerged through the entrance wearing, as you probably have already guessed, the tight black pants, a flashy coat and UGGs. Now, the latter two I was unconcerned with (and I'm sure you didn't predict those), but when this girl sat down in the seat next to me, I was immediately unable to fully devote my attention to the topic of price elasticity, because my peripheral vision saw what looked like a naked female body to my right.

Now girls, I know this clothing is comfortable and convenient, but when guys are visibly able to notice a birthmark on your hamstring or an ingrown hair, do you not see an issue?

Continuing with this little anecdote, after a persistent half hour of unproductive studying, I was forced to relocate. After searching through the dungeon that is Gottwald, I was unable to locate another suitable location to study.

Putting my head down in defeat, I walked home to my apartment in the rain (a perfect symbol for my mood). Now I know you ladies will say this is my problem, and I am the sole person to blame for my inability to study next to a girl wearing these pants.

But I disagree, because you have not lived a day in the life of an 18- to 24-year-old male! There is no comparable attire a guy can wear to create the same measured distraction these tight black pants cause. You ladies have an unfair advantage that you are exploiting, and for what? Comfort? Sexiness? Convience?

No, I postulate you girls are actually wearing these pants to lower the GPAs of my fellow males here at Richmond, and this is an overall female conspiracy theory at its finest (no different than ignoring that girl ya don't like). I may be easily distracted at times, and I do not want to speak on behalf of all males, but I think these pants pose an extreme problem to us collegiate males' higher learning.

Now, I'm not saying they should be outlawed at Richmond, because I love them as much as the next guy. All I am asking is for you ladies to just think, "Hey maybe the next time I take a test, head to the library, go to class or study, I'll consider wearing jeans, sweatpants or khakis instead of those tight black pants." Is that so hard to ask ... ?