Where I don't care what others think


November 26th, 2007 Posted in Problems

I’m adding pants to my frustration list. Currently I own approximately 10 pairs of pants which I wear regularly, most of them are sized 30×32. Well since you can’t see me via this blog, you might not have noticed that I have grown at least 1 inch over the past year. What does that mean? The 30×32 pants no longer fit. Okay thats a lie. They fit, and I don’t really have any problems with them, but everyone else comments they are short and look small on me. Stupid ankles. While my legs have grown a few inches, my waist has no. Here come the problem, all the stupid pants have longer lengths but they come with a larger waist. My waist did not grow, I do not require larger pants to accommodate it.

Logically I require pants with the same waist size (30) and the next length size (32+2 = 34), so 30×34. Unfortunately such a pant is not made for mass distribution. I will not see on these on the shelves at any stores at the mall, and even online is hard to come buy. They have special stores for large people, special stores for “big and tall” people, even special stores dedicated just to underwear.. but they do not have a store that cannot carry a pant sized 30×34? I am sorry I am not larger in the waist, I am sorry I do not have an extra 2 inches of fat around me, but would you please make a pair of pants for me?

Yes, I could wear a belt with them, but the second I loosen the belt the pants fall down. If my butt was larger than my waist I would not have this problem, but I have no butt… which creates mucho problems when trying to wear a weight belt while scuba diving. I do not want to tailor cargo pants or jeans. If these were fancy pants I would consider it, but they are not so I shall not. Also I assume they would have to tailor a 32×34 to fit, because there is no spare fabric on a 30×32, and they don’t make a 30 waist in anything extra long.. tailoring the pants width is not something I view as easy.. height is simple but width is not.

This brings me to the topic of underwear. I was at the mall this past weekend (not on black friday) and looking at potential gift ideas for Christmas. As I strolled through the various stores I think kept frustrating me. Underwear. I expect a store like Victoria’s Secret to have undergarments on display everywhere possible, that is what they sell. I do not expect every other store to do the same. What I found strange was all the plastic models were wearing tops like sweaters, nice shirts, t-shirts, etc, and just underwear. What gives? Can the model not also attempt to sell a pair of pants? I understand most of these models were upper torso models, meaning they had small thighs for legs, but I would very much like to see a small chunk of pant on there. Not some pair of underwear poorly matched to the top.

I also have a problem with certain phrases on underwear. Call it my rant against sexually display, but I do not support underwear that says just about any verb. Also, I see no need to print sexual terms on undergarments. I would wager some statistics on the fact that if someone is at a point where they can read your underpants, you are most likely already in situation that can quickly intimately escalate. I would argue that same escalation would occur regardless of undergarments verbiage, but I lack any test cases to prove this.

  1. One Response to “Pants”

  2. By katie on Nov 26, 2007


    i am sorry u have grown, and i think that yes u could use a nice pair of 30×34 pants.

    i am sorry that i went to the mall with u to look around and that the stores i went into had the infamous ‘undergarments’ all over the place, however it’s not like i was looking at them.

    so i do not know.

    i guess that’s just a part of life, we all wear ‘undergarments’ of some type so it’s normal to see, nothing wierd there, just an everyday kinda thing.

Post a Comment