Dear Lindsay Lohan: I know tights seem like pants. They’re practically sisters! (Okay, cousins). But when it comes down to it, tights are not, in fact, pants. And now, a founding member of Tights Are Not Pants has a few words of wisdom for you on the subject…

La Lohan took her hosiery show on the road this past weekend, popping up all over London in looks that raised both eyebrows and hemlines, according to The New York Daily News (click to check out not one, not two, but four pantsless looks!). She was back in Los Angeles yesterday, sporting yet another thigh-grazing T with a pair of tights. Is her leggings line selling so well that there isn’t a pair left over for her to cover her own tush with? What say the experts?

A founding member of Tights Are Not Pants (who prefers to remain anonymous because, “We’re not in this for personal gain but for the good of mankind…”) has never seen anyone so flagrantly defy the site’s credo.

“When we at TANP set out to fight the scourge of pantlessness, we’d never actually seen a girl go about in unaccompanied tights,” she says. “Back then, a legging-clad crotch was still appalling, so we used the word ‘tights’ for hyperbolic effect. We wanted to drive home the point that leggings are a subset of tights, and should be worn as such. And we thought the slogan had a pithier ring with ‘tights.’ Also, the logo looked better. Those were the salad days.”

She goes on to tell us, “How callow we were, how reckless with those ideas! Seeing Lindsay now, I feel a twinge of guilt — like somehow I willed this into being…It’s so cosmically horrifying that I see no other explanation.”

There you have it, Lindsay. Tights Are Not Pants are sorry, okay? They really don’t want to be responsible for pushing you over the edge, into “Isn’t this bedazzled thong pants?” territory, for the sake of you and I and everyone we know.