More fashion weirdness
Sep. 28th, 2008 09:29 amAs I was putting my purchases away last night, I noticed for the first time that the pants were labeled 'SHORT -- styled for fit and fashion for 5'4" and under.'
I'm 5'8", and those pants, with a 29" inseam, fit me just fine and are about the same length as most of my others. I do like to wear them a shade shorter than the conventional length, 'hitting' at my ankle bone rather than flopping over my shoes, but that's certainly not a 4" difference, and in any case I don't remember ever rejecting a pair in a store because they were too long, so that's as much a necessity as a preference. So, either the label is wrong, or there's some sartorial subtlety I've been missing for the last thirteen years. (I started buying trousers in 1995.)
I'm 5'8", and those pants, with a 29" inseam, fit me just fine and are about the same length as most of my others. I do like to wear them a shade shorter than the conventional length, 'hitting' at my ankle bone rather than flopping over my shoes, but that's certainly not a 4" difference, and in any case I don't remember ever rejecting a pair in a store because they were too long, so that's as much a necessity as a preference. So, either the label is wrong, or there's some sartorial subtlety I've been missing for the last thirteen years. (I started buying trousers in 1995.)
