These trousers are pants.

Er, actually, it was a play on words.

“Pants” as we (North Americans) know them are synonymous with trousers. In The UK however, “pants” refer not to outerwear, but to underwear – i.e. knickers. From this is derived the slang derogatory expression to refer to something as being crap or of piss-poor quality (e.g. “That movie was pants!”)

That’s what I meant, yes, sorry if it didn’t come out right.

Makes me wonder where the word pants came from. I don’t think Shakespeare would have used it for outerwear, he’d probably have said ‘hose’, or something like that, as I believe Chaucer did. In one restricted sense Americans do use the word pants to refer to underwear, that of ‘getting into (a woman’s) pants’.

I feel your pain. I wear anything from a 30 to a 33 waist, though I prefer to buy the ones that say I’m a 30. :slight_smile: Where are you finding these 28-29 inseams?? I would kill for them, I’m 5’7" but have short legs so a 30 inseam is too long but it’s all I can ever find.

I hate shopping for pants, mostly because the clothing industry has decided that if you are fat, you must absolutely be tall, because short fat people would be unsightly to look at and therefore must not exist.

I’m 5’5". When I was in high school I was a 12 regular. End of high school, 14 regular. Doing stagework, varying between a 14 regular and a 16 regular. So the other day I go to get some pants and I’ve gained a few pounds, so I grab a pair of 18 regular pants. I’m in a hurry and don’t try them on.

Mistake! Apparently people with a size 16 regular are about 5’5", but people with a size 18 regular are nearly six feet tall. I had to wear platform heels to work that day, and I had to get my boyfriend to help me take the pants up that night.


I didn’t say I was finding, only that this is what fits best. Finding a 28 inseam in the men’s section apparently involves black magic and virgin sacrifices. I find plenty of 30 and above, but (as Tashabot pointed out) the bigger in waist you are, the taller you are supposed to be, with room only for a few variations in waist/inseam disparity, none of which exceed about 4 points in either direction, nor are to be lower than 30. Like, ever. Unless there’s a “short 'n squat” outlet nearby.

Drat, I was hoping you meant you’d actually seen them. And it’s not like I’m that big, a 30 to 32 waist isn’t freaking big. Big and tall gets their own stores, we need a store for the short.

You know…that sounds like a really good business idea. I bet anyone that started a short’n’fat store would stand to make a lot of money. And if they named it humorously enough, I’d go just because. Cuz seriously, there’s some good potential there.


Size control in jeans has been poor for a long time; I bought my first pair in 1963. The clerk advised me to try on several in the same size, then buy the one that fits best. Some were baggy, and some were too tight. Like Goldilocks, I found one that was just right.

The “why” is a combination of things. Denim is stiff, and it’s hard to handle precisely. Also, the garment industry often pays by piecework, so the worker is under pressure to work as fast as possible. Where speed is the rule, work gets sloppy, and the sizes aren’t right.

Then there’s the Wal*Mart/China thing, and that’s a whole 'nother essay.

Yeah, but if you name it humorously you’d invariably get the mortally offended walking in and complaining. “I object to the idea that your store is calling me a shrimp round! Get me the owner.”

However, given that the number of really tall and/or large people is statistically similar to the number of short and/or roundish people, it’s probably not a bad idea. On the other hand, tall people are usually the subject of awe. Short people, not so much.

It’s not just jeans though. This seems to occur with every type of fabric from cotton to cordeuroy. The piecework probably explains much of it, particularly for those companies who are in the habit of looking for outsources that can pay their employees in Gerber coupons. That just makes it all worse though.

I sort of wonder if this happens with all garments though, and we just notice more in pants because an ill-fit is far more noticeable when they either won’t clasp without a corset or won’t stay up without superglue.

Indeed! Let me be the first to say, then: UP WITH SKIRTS!!!1!

Man here.

My Wife and I usually buy some clothes for each other for birthdays and Christmas and such. Good thing too, or all my underware would be ‘Dust in the Wind’.

But, what in the HELL is a size ZERO?

(I guess this is just before junior sizes) But really, size ZERO? That’s not a size, that’s non-existance. What are they gonna send me? A box of packing material?

Yes, yes, up with skirts!

And down with panties.

I think it is the point at which the upper torso tapers until it disappears into a singularity, coming out the other end as legs. A bit like Kate Moss.

I started writing a post earlier but the computer froze so it disappeared… then while browsing I saw this - VANITY SIZING! They *are *making the sizes bigger in the waist!

This nearly sums up what I was going to say:,2933,200347,00.html

I’ve experienced the brand’s expanding waists over the years. I still have some jeans I can fit since 8th grade (I’m 20). The same brands size 0’s now are about 2 inches bigger in the waist.

I’ve heard over and over “Why don’t you shop in the kid’s section?” It doesn’t work for me. I’m a tiny chick but I’m blessed with Puerto Rican curves. Little girls jeans aren’t made for women with little waists and big butts.
I wont even start on shorts. :stuck_out_tongue:
It’s a no win situation!

But does that apply to men’s pants, too? I can’t see vanity sizing being as much of an issue with the male persuasion, given that men tend to be far less concerned with their body type than women – or at least are better at joking the topic away. (“It’s not a beer belly, it’s the gas tank for my sex drive!” and other such mulletisms)

But you can get away with elastic waistbands in shorts, thus making it far easier to get something that is maybe only approximately your size, but fits anyway. Pants, not so much. (Well, maybe women’s jeans – but then they have a tendancy to look like “mom jeans”)

For those looking for odd sizes, I have two words: Eddie Bauer. Eddie Bauer jeans come in every single size, odd and even, both waist and length. This is a very good thing for women like me–I’m tall, have a 34" - 36" inseam depending on the style of leg and my waist can go as low as 28" at the end of summer, but goes up to a 32" in the winter when I have my nice coat of fat for hibernating. I have a short waist, too, so I buy man pants because they have a shorter distance from crotch to waist and don’t end up curling under three times and giving me pressure sores on my floating ribs. Have you ever tried finding a pair of 28/36 wide leg jeans? It’s a bitch, I tellya!

What the hell is up with women’s pants, anyway? Junior sizes tend to come in long enough leg lengths although they’re also made for girls who measure 10" circumference in the thigh, but women’s sizes are all uniformly too damned short–are they telling us that when we stop being teenagers we lose three inches off our leg length or something? The sizing is retarded, and even the women’s pants that have started actually giving a waist measurement don’t have a length size–it’s all “regular” (which means “too short”) or “long” (which also means “too short,” except that sometimes it actually means “so freakishly long that Maasai men will have to roll them up fifty times to make them fit.”) I hate shopping for pants!

I noticed this problem the last time I was back in the States and wanted to buy some jeans. I expect stuff not to fit here, where everyone has shorter limbs and longer torsos on average than your typical American mutt, but I thought that surely I’d be able to find jeans that fit in the US. Wrong.

I tried on at least 6 different pairs of jeans at 3 or 4 stores and couldn’t find anything that fit decently. I don’t like tight jeans, I like them a bit loose in the legs and hips, and I want the waist to fit. I’d measured myself, with an actual tape measure, before leaving Japan and found that I was back down to an 80 cm (31-32) inch waist due to losing some weight.

Except that 32s were so big that I could pull them off without undoing the waist. I actually tried on some 29s. Well, tried to try them on, since I couldn’t even get my damn leg in the leg holes. Waist, no problem, but legs were made for stick figures. In a baggy. WTF? Some of the shirts are too big in the torso yet too tight in the shoulders to fit properly. I guess they’re making clothes for fat people with no muscles.

Hey, same here! I’ve been lucky to find some pants that work - the problem is finding shirts long enough to wear with them.
Sitting, I’m taller then my 6’ father.
Trousers nothing, these shirts are pants!