Buttoning up my dress pants has always seemed oddly complex to me. First, I have an internal button to button up the triangular piece of cloth that goes over the dickhole on the inside (what’s that cloth for, anyway? To cover up my unmentionables if I forget to zip up?). Next, I have this metal slide thingy that requires superhuman strength and dexterity to latch if I’ve gained a few pounds, then finally, an outside button that ties everything together, along with the zipper. Why so much buttoning, sliding, and zippering for a pair of pants? Can’t two buttons do the job of all that?
My theory, which is mine: Anti-Semitism.*
Seriously. A major industrial/mercantile nation - the USA - had an immigration wave of disproportionately intelligent, ambitious and clever people - the Jews - who were forced by centuries of tradition and discrimination into a narrow field of trades, one of which was the making of clothing. What are they going to do but make all kinds of incremental improvements on a basic product - and wherever possible, involve specialized machinery, techniques, and trademark and patent protection? Read up on Mr. Levi Strauss of San Francisco and use your imagination from there.
Also: Dudes need our clothes to move with us when we do dude stuff, not rip or fall off, and stay somewhat neat-looking all the while. Including retaining some localized waist blubber.
*Two Monty Python references on a topic that isn’t even Python-related. Cites: Anne Elk and Raymond Luxury-Yacht. Heh.
All that fastening keeps everything looking smooth and neat, plus it keeps any one bit from being too load-bearing and getting loose. You know how pants that just have a zipper and button sometimes have the top corner by the button sticking out? Yeah, that sucks.
And that cloth is there a) to keep you from zipping your dick up, b) to protect us from seeing it if you left your fly down, and c) ever put your pants on right out of the dryer?
All of these only seem relevant to someone who’s going commando.
Being a Leah, I’m guessing you don’t have first-person experience with the fly in men’s underwear. (Men’s? Hell, they can’t even fit him in boys’! Hardeeharhar. :D)
Especially boxers, which is what most pants fly hardware was designed around. (Pants technology plateaud a while ago. I think the last big innovation was Ban-rol, which helps hold the line against belly flab.)
The boxer fly classically had tiny buttons or snaps, which tended to chafe, fail, or just get left undone. Nowadays there’s just the unsecured fly, or as Foxy quaintly but descriptively calls it, the dickhole.
Having to go through a multi-step process to secure the old wang is highly supportive of the “I better lock this monster up good” self image thing.
That sells pants.
Tris
I go with Zsofia’s first paragraph. As an overweight person, it often happens that one or two pieces of this puzzle are tortured more than they ought to be, and having more of them spreads the load more evenly. I’d imagine that even for normal people, actions like bending over put more stress on the belt area than they’d like.
I fully endorse this message.
Ever had a cheap pair of pants (no tab, no flap) where the waist button comes off when stressed? It doesn’t just fall off, it actually pops. So, yes, you need to spread that stress around.
But the obvious question is, what order are we supposed to secure all these fasteners? I personally prefer inside button/outside button/zipper/tab, but I know men who go inside button/zipper/outside button/flap, others who zip first and still others who ignore the inside button entirely.
And for those who don’t know, if you make sure to fold the little pull tab on the zipper down, it’s supposedly less likely to let the zipper work its way open during the course of the day.
And you would be wrong in that guess…
I guess I just didn’t realize there were still people who wore the olde-timey underwear. I haven’t bought a pair that any vents at all in years.
What you’re describing is called a Flat-Front-Fly. That flappy bit that you button on the inside keeps the crotch of you pants from tenting when you sit.
Hell if it does! I have polterwang all the time (note: I do not have actual wang.)
Now here is someone who understands men’s fashion!
Tris
They’re so complicated because they’re not your pants. They belong to what’s-his-name.
Oh shit. I just now spelled your handle backwards. Sorry!
Wait, you’re expecting dress clothes to be practical and/or efficient?
Still, I think the theory that all the extraneous fasteners keep everything smooth and relatively untented has merit. Dress pants are generally of thinner material than, say, a pair of jeans, so keeping everything shaped correctly is important. And I suppose it does prevent wardrobe malfunctions during Nobel Prize acceptance speeches and other common activities.
You mean Mr. Fancy Pants.
A reasonable ask in the '30s or '40s, when a suit was “street clothes” for many walks of men and one might be expected to last a decade of semi-daily wear. Not so much in our more casual age, when tailored clothes are costumes donned for sedentary jobs and taken off right after.
? My (ladies’ dress) pants right now have an inner button, two outer buttons, and a zipper. Same thing. Plus, who do you think buys clothes for dads?