Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kaylar
This sort of nonsense may fool all the under 5'5" women who're convinced that their legs "are long in proportion to my torso length", but it simply irritates those of us who know the manufacturers are playing dumb games.

I agree. I rarely if ever wear women's slacks, because I just can't find ones that fit properly. Years ago I just gave up wearing slack for business reasons.

And I only buy men's jeans - those sizes make sense - length and wist - very simple.

24 posted on 09/27/2003 2:04:54 PM PDT by Gabz (Smoke-gnatzies - small minds buzzing in your business - SWAT'EM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: Gabz
At least the catalog people are doing one thing right : They are getting rid of that petite/regular/tall bullcrap and just listing the actual inseam length. That is a huge step in the right direction (even if the garments don't fit because the inseams are bizarre in the first place). Back in the 1980s, they never told what the inseams were, and you were expected to take on trust that the same garment would fit size 8s who were 5 3 1/2", 5'5", and 5'8". Yeah, right!
28 posted on 09/27/2003 2:15:55 PM PDT by kaylar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson