This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Pants that fit

RymRym
edited September 2007 in Everything Else
It's a little scary that, in any given Kohls, the odds of a particular style of pants existing in a size even close to my own is almost zero.  I used to shop in the boys section, but even there they're getting too big for me...
I bought every single pair of khakis in the store that fit me (not counting the terribly ugly and useless grey ones), which was a grand total of two.
What really frightens me isn't so much that they don't have my size; I can't pretend that it's terribly common.  It's that the vast majority of the pants there, both in the adults and the kids sections, are large enough to fashion reasonably effective SAILS with.  I actually wrote down the contents of an entire rack of one style I wanted to buy.  (Forgot about it, and found it in my car this morning).   I'll omit the inseams, but suffice to say they were primarily 32, with a couple of 34s and nothing longer than that.
30 x 1  (30" inseam)

32 x 1 (30" inseam)

34 x 4

36 x 6

38 x 12

40 x 9

42 x 11

44 x 9

48 x 4
I imagine that's the distribution of average Kohls customers.  I didn't fare much better at some other stores.
I'm seriously considering just buying clothes online from now on. -_-
«13

Comments

  • I'm seriously considering just buying clothes online from now on. -_-
    I'm thinking about doing this also. I bought one pair of jeans last year, and they're really comfortable. I'm wearing them today, and on the train this morning I thought to myself that I should just go online and buy more pairs of these exact same jeans in the exact same size. I just might do that.
  • I thought to myself that I should just go online and buy more pairs of these exact same jeans in the exact same size.
    That's what I do now.  If pants fit, I buy ALL of them that the store has.  Going online is just the next logical step.
  • Is a belt and hemming the bottoms out of the question? Granted the hemming part is a bit of an annoyance.
  • RymRym
    edited September 2007
    Is a belt and hemming the bottoms out of the question?
    The bottoms are barely long enough as it is.  Most 30" waist pants have a 30" inseam, which is way too short.  It's hell to find 30x32s or, ideally, 30x33s.  People aren't taller than me, they're fatter than me. =P  The gigantic pants are the same inseam as the small ones.
    For the waist, belts are certainly not a solution.  Too-large pants tend to bunch up and crease incorrectly if you just tighten them up with a belt.  They thus don't sit right, and tend to look sloppy.  Ideally, your pants should be about a half-inch larger than your beltline.  You tighten that last half-inch with a belt, but have the option of loosening it after a large meal.
    Post edited by Rym on
  • I have a similar problem. See, I'm too frakin' tall to find the size I need. It's a tragedy really. I go to the big/tall section and they're too big/tall. Buying online is the only option. See, companies used to keep our sizes on hand, but it just isn't worth while so they keep them in the warehouse. You can usually get them shipped to your store (which is nice because you can try it on and "return" it right there). Even if they won't deliver to a store you can usually return them to the store if they don't fit right.

    There are a lot of places that will send you return postage in case it doesn't hit. I recommend getting an 'internet only' credit card with a lower credit limit (you can usually get these through your bank). This makes it easier to track your bills if you return things a lot as sometimes it takes a while to get reimbursed. My $0.02!
  • Hm I actually see a lot of smaller waist pants that are rather long. a lot of 30x34 or 30x36. Granted I don't particularly go out of my way to buy nicer pants for my minimum wage. I've never even been in a Kohls. Target ftw

    I realize that doesn't actually help any, but that's the reason why I was thought of the belt or the hemming.
  • edited September 2007
    30x 1 (30" inseam)
    32x 1 (30" inseam)
    34x 4
    36x 6
    38x 12
    40x 9
    42
    x 11
    44x 9
    48x 4
    9 pairs of 40 waist pants? I think I'm far to big (waist wise) at a 38, and most of the pants there are my size or larger...
    That's just sad.
    Post edited by Neito on
  • I do hope we are talking about trousers here as otherwise American underwear is frankly scary.
    The situation in england isn't too bad though trying to find trousers that have a medium waist, really long leg and can cover my 32cm long feet to any extent it nigh on impossible.
  • My inseam is less than 30", and that makes my trouser search tough.  I can sometimes find pants with a 29" inseam, but I would prefer 28 if possible.  Hemming is annoying, so I generally leave jeans long and only go through the process with dress pants.
  • SEMPRINI

    This will probably make Rym laugh, I just wanted to put it somewhere he would see it unexpectedly.
  • edited September 2007

    SEMPRINI

    This will probably make Rym laugh, I just wanted to put it somewhere he would see it unexpectedly.
    care to explain?

    Semprini's surname was later immortalized as a fictional profanity in an episode of Monty Python's Flying Circus, where it referred to an unspecified body part (likely part of the male sexual anatomy, given its context in a sketch about an extremely indiscreet pharmacist). Later in the same episode it was refered to as a body rub.
    Youtube Video
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • edited September 2007
    It's funny, the lack of appropriate pants has plagued me as well. I figure it's one of two things:

    1. Lots of people wear the same pants as I do and therefore there are very few of them to be found, meaning the supply is lacking.

    or

    2. America's majority of pants-wearers are fatasses and that's why there is a seemingly endless supply of pants to fit afformentioned asses of fat. 48" waist and 32" leg? AYFKM?!
    Post edited by GreatTeacherMacRoss on
  • I guess it's good to know that women aren't alone in their "augh, these clothes don't fit" misery. Why are men's pants are measured by waist and leg, yet women's pants are measured by an obtuse numbering system with sizes like "7" and "10" that sometimes vary from brand to brand? Isn't this antithetical to being able to walk into a store and grab up pants that you know fit? >_> I suppose it has to do with cultural factors like women not wanting to divulge their measurements, or women being expected to have standardized bodies. In either case, it's not quite practical, is it? :|

    I recently had an experience in going to the "petite" section for pants (I think the "normal" pants must be made for women who are 7 feet tall or something) and *still* having them be too long. Uuuhhh? That's kind of ridiculous.

    Poor Rym, I wish you luck in pants hunting.
  • edited September 2007
    Hmm. I didn't think guys would have this problem versus girls, but I guess it happens to both.

    For myself, I hate looking for pants. When I do find that perfect pair, I will buy them and wear them until they are no longer wearable. Because of fashion trends, finding pants that fit just below the waist, is pretty hard. Most jeans are ultra low waist fitting pants, and I'll admit it, I have a tummy. " Muffin-topping" is not cool. It looks horrible when you see girls wearing ultra low waist fitting pants and the "muffin top" is just ridiculous.

    Also, I have a short inseam, I really don't know the measurements, because with women it's different. It's either "Petite/Short", Regular, or Long. Once I find jeans that fit me in the waisting, having to find the small inseam is even harder. I normally have to buy the regular and get them hemmed, which annoys me because I'm paying even more money for the jeans than I wanted to.

    I'm almost to the point where I'll just resort to buying things online, but I'm cheap and don't care to pay for shipping, but since it's pretty much the same price of getting regular jeans hemmed, I might just as well buy them online. I plan on buying a new pair of jeans this Friday, maybe I'll share how that goes.

    Edit: I agree with Uglyfred. I really hate how pant sizes for women vary in stores and how they give them "sizes" versus the actually measurement. It's amazing how one store I'll fit into one size, and then you go into another store and you only fit into a pair of pants that are 2 sizes larger than the other. >.<
    Post edited by Rochelle on
  • I guess it's good to know that women aren't alone in their "augh, these clothes don't fit" misery. Why are men's pants are measured by waist and leg, yet women's pants are measured by an obtuse numbering system with sizes like "7" and "10" that sometimesvary from brand to brand?It's the patriarchy.  Women's fashion is complicated in order to keep them busy trying to decipher it, thus preventing them from taking over the world.  Or something...  I agree that it's total BS, and I know it would frustrate me to no end if -I- had to deal with it.
    The other problem is that, even when I find the right size, the actual fitting varies wildly, since there aren't numbers to describe the subtle distinctions, and they tend to make pants that will fit everyone OK, but no one well.  Sadly, the only solution to that problem is...  MONEY!
    Still, at least those distinctions are subtle.  If I had to figure out if a 32 was really a 32 every time I bought pants, I'd burn something down.
  • Hey, I have two pairs of 34x34 pants, one of them fits perfectly and one is a bit tight in the waist. Neither has adjustable anything on the waist either. Still trying to figure that one out.
  • It's the patriarchy.  Women's fashion is complicated in order to keep them busy trying to decipher it, thus preventing them from taking over the world. 
    I knew it! Those tricky tricksters making me waste my time shopping for pants. >.
  • I wonder where humanity would be if we didn't have to expend so much effort on such things.
    [Trousers ----> The state of humanity]

    Also, what do you define as trousers in the US?
  • Also, what do you define as trousers in the US?
    Most Americans have never heard that word.
  • I guess it's good to know that women aren't alone in their "augh, these clothes don't fit" misery. Why are men's pants are measured by waist and leg, yet women's pants are measured by an obtuse numbering system with sizes like "7" and "10" that sometimesvary from brand to brand?Isn't this antithetical to being able to walk into a store and grab up pants that you know fit? >_> I suppose it has to do with cultural factors like women not wanting to divulge their measurements, or women being expected to have standardized bodies. In either case, it's not quite practical, is it? :|

    I recently had an experience in going to the "petite" section for pants (I think the "normal" pants must be made for women who are 7 feet tall or something) and *still* having them be too long. Uuuhhh? That's kind of ridiculous.

    Poor Rym, I wish you luck in pants hunting.
    The whole of women's fashion seems incredibly obtuse and frustrating. It's most likely part of the entire culture around making women feel ridiculously insecure about themselves, so that they feel like they have to pay way more attention to this bullshit than is entirely necessary. Having the size numbers, and seeing them vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, is an excellent way to force you to think about what the number means, which in turn makes you think about how much you, say, hate your waistline or your butt or something. It's along the same lines as destroying a woman's ego, so that she thinks she isn't attractive, so that she buys a bunch of makeup and goes through a bunch of unnecessary crap to rebuild her self-esteem.

    Yeah. I deal with this with Cathy a lot; at least she recognizes it, and fights it on occasion. But seriously, it's all crap.

    And what's with the lack of pockets on women's pants? Seriously.
  • Also, what do you define as trousers in the US?
    Generally, at least here, we use "trousers" to mean dress pants. At least, that's what it's meant every time I've seen it.
  • SEMPRINI

    This will probably make Rym laugh, I just wanted to put it somewhere he would see it unexpectedly.
    Awwwwww! You two are so cute!
  • HAHA! Rym, I have inherited all of your luck.

    Whereas you had difficulty, I went to Kohl's this weekend looking for some new work pants and found a shitload that fit me perfectly. I bought two pairs of coduroys and a pair of khakis, all on sale for 80 percent off! Normally, I can never find pants that are wide enough in the legs without riding uncomfortably in the... uh, middle.

    Viva la Kohl's!
  • They don't make pants for the tall gentleman either. I was in a Gap the other day and found an exciting total of one 34 inseam. I hope I don't have to wear them that often... who knows when we'll find the next pair out in the wild.
  • They don't make pants for the tall gentleman either. I was in a Gap the other day and found an exciting total of one 34 inseam. I hope I don't have to wear them that often... who knows when we'll find the next pair out in the wild.
    Gap sells taller pants online and they're pretty decent about letting you return it to the store if necessary. You can buy them in the store if you like to shop the old fashioned way and they'll deliver it to the store for pick up later.
  • who knows when we'll find the next pair out in the wild.
    I always carry a few Quick Balls just for that purpose.
  • I have one pair of pants that I wear. I've been wearing them for the past year, and they show no signs of letting up anytime soon.
  • It's hell to find 30x32s or, ideally, 30x33s.
    You have a 30" waist?!! The pants aren't the problem. You need to gain some weight. There's such a thing as being too skinny. Eat some cake.
  • As someone who considers himself a fatass at 36", I'm somewhat amazed that I'm apparently on the lower end of the scales.  Ohhhhhh, America...
  • Wait, is this pants as in jeans, or pants as in "Niiiiice" dress pants?
Sign In or Register to comment.