It's one of the vexing questions of our time: why do some cartoon characters choose to cover their animated privates while others go pantsless? Both sides have their supporters; even amongst friends, the split of bottoms is present.
Why, exactly does Mickey Mouse sport red shorts -- even tuxedo pants, sometimes! -- while his ill-tempered buddy Donald Duck never slips on a pair of slacks? Actually, what's with the total lack of pants in his flock? Huey, Dewey, Louie and Uncle Scrooge: none of the above ever step, one webbed foot at a time, into bottoms. Does it mean that Minnie Mouse, who has long donned a polka dot dress, can't shop with Daisy?
It doesn't end there. Winnie the Pooh has ignored the bottom half of his wardrobe for years. Porky Pig has a jacket but no pants -- unless he's hunting, that is. Why does he wear them then? Afraid of poison ivy? If so, why don't Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck wear them? The Smurfs: topless but with pantaloons. Yogi Bear? Somehow, a collar and tie, but that's all. Spongebob, on the other hand, is a formal anomaly, donning a shirt and tie and somehow keeping khakis upon his hip-less body at all times.
On and on it goes, pants vs. no pants, seemingly without an answer. Until now. A brave cat has stepped forth to provide his reasoning for going bare, and, well, it's pretty convincing: