Skip to comments.
Fashion Emergency: How to FixThe Downside of Low-Rise Pants
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ^
| Friday, July 25, 2003
| SUEIN L. HWANG
Posted on 07/25/2003 1:18:40 PM PDT by presidio9
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:49:30 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Los Angeles wardrobe stylist Jeanne Yang calls in a tailor to put in darts at the hip. Advertising executive Paula Mangin of San Francisco is choosy about the chairs she sits in and, when she stoops, she takes care to bend at the knees. Web publicist Karen Bard, also of San Francisco, leans on her boyfriend.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: Paul Atreides
On a well-proportioned woman they accentuate the figure, making the waist look smaller and the overall torso curvier. But they should not make these pants for anything above a size 4. The sight of a beer-gut hanging over lowriders is repellant.
21
posted on
07/25/2003 1:39:29 PM PDT
by
presidio9
(RUN AL, RUN!!!)
To: Paul Atreides
I'll agree with you there. I don't know who designs jeans these days. I read somewhere that 30 and 40-something women spend more money and are more brand loyal than younger women and girls, but who do they design and market for? Sigh. As for the shoe thing, don't go there :) I have huge feet. Have a rotten time finding footware (unless I wear guy's), and when I do find something that fits, sure enough it's got stacked heels. Why do manufacturers think that people with big feet (who are oftentimes tall) automatically want elevator shoes? Aaaaaargh!!!!
22
posted on
07/25/2003 1:39:43 PM PDT
by
mewzilla
To: L.N. Smithee
You should walk around on a college campus and see all of the thongs prominently sticking out of the top of low-riding pants.
To: Incorrigible
Very nice, but I like this one better:
To: Howlin; justshe; Southflanknorthpawsis; DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Back in the day, when we called them 'hip-huggers' and wore them with halter or tube tops, it seems to me we worried more about our tops falling out than about our bottoms falling out?
Of course, I'm getting old, that was about 30 years ago, and I might not be remembering clearly....
25
posted on
07/25/2003 1:40:30 PM PDT
by
Amelia
(It's better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness)
To: Timesink
And laughably airbrushed. Where's her navel?! As worn by Kim Catrall in an early dramatic role...
26
posted on
07/25/2003 1:40:37 PM PDT
by
presidio9
(RUN AL, RUN!!!)
To: CatoRenasci
I remember hiphuggers. But those were low-rise, not no-rise, which is a better term I think for the current fashion fad.
27
posted on
07/25/2003 1:41:11 PM PDT
by
mewzilla
To: presidio9
I hate these refrigerater-repairman jeans these women are wearing. Can't they come up with something better?
28
posted on
07/25/2003 1:43:26 PM PDT
by
#3Fan
To: CatoRenasci
When I was a kid, before dental-floss bikinis, it was fashionable for the young French and Swedish nannies who worked the summers in my area to wear their bikini bottoms low at the beach, so the top half of their butt cleavege showed. I don't remember any of the fathers complaining.
29
posted on
07/25/2003 1:44:23 PM PDT
by
presidio9
(RUN AL, RUN!!!)
To: presidio9
I like my BDU's--plenty of pocket room so I can go out and not have to carry a purse. I can't stand jeans. The pockets (if they have them, are useless).
30
posted on
07/25/2003 1:45:26 PM PDT
by
two23
To: presidio9
I don't find these things sexy in the least. I find them gross. There's nothing quite so sexy as that which requires a bit of imagination.
MM
To: MississippiMan
Now, these look good...
To: Incorrigible; Constitution Day
I was about to issue an inspiring diatribe about the demise of American values and the coming Fall of Western Civilization.
After viewing the photos you've posted, I recant in advance!
To: presidio9
As worn by Kim Catrall in an early dramatic role...
Kim Ca-TRAAAAAAL! Kim Ca-TRAAAAAAL!
34
posted on
07/25/2003 1:55:35 PM PDT
by
Timesink
To: mewzilla
I remember some of the zippers being quite short, 3-4", and, based on some of the photos in old college yearbooks from around 1970, some of those jeans were as low as anything I've seen recently. Often, they were well below the hip bones.
35
posted on
07/25/2003 1:55:49 PM PDT
by
CatoRenasci
(Ceterum Censeo [Gallia][Germania][Arabia] Esse Delendam --- Select One or More as needed)
To: presidio9
Web publicist Karen Bard, also of San Francisco...Translation: Unemployed.
36
posted on
07/25/2003 1:56:50 PM PDT
by
Timesink
To: Hillary's Lovely Legs
How to fix the down-side of low rise pants?
A match and some lighter fuild spring to mind.
37
posted on
07/25/2003 2:00:29 PM PDT
by
BigWaveBetty
(If you keep your pants zipped golddiggers can't sue/entrap/accuse. Funny how that works!)
To: presidio9
Can low-rise get
any lower? Can mid-riff tops get any higher? What's next, just leg warmers, a bolero jacket and a belt???
Maybe it's all just a ploy by the hair removal industry...
38
posted on
07/25/2003 2:00:39 PM PDT
by
fortunecookie
(longtime lurker and new poster)
To: finnman69
The bottom one is exposing a "plumber's crack". My 17 year old daughter is NOT allowed to wear this style. I have seen some girls at her HS wearing these.
39
posted on
07/25/2003 2:07:02 PM PDT
by
Arrowhead1952
(Clone Ann Coulter, the woman sent by God)
To: presidio9
Low cut pants are a great way to quickly weed out dumb sluts.
Quite the timesaver.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson