Trousers, for men, for women.

[fastfreddy2]

I've yet to wear a pair of mens 'dress' trousers with heels, so I may have unintentionally excluded them when I thought to create this thread. As a general remark, I tend to wear more casual <but smart> jeans. Always dark, with indigo blue being the usual colour.

To get the 33"/34" leg length I need, I've had to buy some jeans/trousers that have had a slightly larger waist than I want. 32 or more often 34 being typical. I can buy some styles of girls jeans with smaller waist sizes, but these are often described as "bootcut". This means slim thigh with varying size of flare leg.

I got two pairs of stretch jeans from M+S at the weekend both in black and size 12 Long. [30W 33L I think.] Could do with 1/2" longer leg, but otherwise a perfect fit. One pair feel a little thinner [lower in material quality], but are only £12. The seemingly better quality pair, come in at £19-50 and have a stay-press crease down the legs. The benefit of this, is that it helps the leg of the jean keep its shape. Both pairs share an identical shape/cut. Not sure I would want people I knew to see me wearing them though, as the flare is fairly obvious, especially with the more expensive pair. Though they both look good, and feel even better. Both fit to the waist. Many similar "bootcut" jeans have a low waist or 'low-rise' . Or put another way, short front zips!

To my surprise, I found that Sainsbury do 'bootcut' for men. Slimmer thigh, but with straight lower leg section. These have a good look, but only come in two unattractive colours. Slate [aka grey] and some ginger-looking colour? [sand? Camel?] These were a good fit too, and came in at £15. Neither colour looked good though.

I'm fed up with wearing casual trousers that look like a pair of sacks sewn together. Slimmer trousers, seem to come with slimmer legs, often known as 'skinny' fit. Not much use for hiding my heels, and don't look that good with any dress shoe IMO.

A reasonable compromise seems to be the Primark trouser. Available in dark blue cotton (not jean material, though still quite thick) at £8 a pair, which includes a material belt. I've bought a couple of pairs in 34/34 as they come up a bit small on the waist anyway. They hold their shape, and hide my heels very well. Fitted to the waist too. Not that I have a pierced navel I want to show off.

So at present I own any number of budget priced mens trouser jean with 30/32/34 inc waists, with 31/33/34 inch leg lengths. I now have two pairs of girls jeans with 30/33 waist/leg lengths. Not that wearing girls jeans for me is new. When young and slim, my preferred jean was Pepe "Betty".

Currently I'm looking to buy (from the US) "Aura" by Wrangler, or what appears to be the UK equivalent; "Lucy". Available in a number of waist sizes, and gazzillions of leg lengths. Under £30 delivered too.

Anyone got any experience of a smart casual trouser men or women, that might be flattering yet not overly feminine in appearance? I'm looking towards slim rather than baggy, but not skinny. Flared? Something with slightly wider bottoms possibly? I'm keen to have anything suggested.

...

[Stilettoscot]

Great post/thread, and a nice start for when I go shop for some pants for myself. It'd interesting to see how the cut/styles go with my larger frame, but will surely post here when I am successful in purchasing. Thank you.

[billyb]

Hey FF2 I read your post and was interested in the AURA by Wrangler so I went to the Wrangler web site and those are some awsome looking pants I think I am going to make a trip to the local VF corp store and check them out.

[shyguy]

Like stilettoscot I have a larger build, but short too, so suggestions for short and fat guys too?

[fastfreddy2]

Like stilettoscot I have a larger build, but short too, so suggestions for short and fat guys too?

Honestly?

Shape:

Read this ..... and get down to your 'worked' size, not comfort size. No point in buying clothes that (hopefully) wouldn't fit in a couple of months.

I've found a short walk with/without heels [15-30 minutes] most or even some days will make a big difference to size. Cutting down on dairy is good too. [Do without milk if possible? Even semi-skimmed milk has fats in it.]

Do without take-aways. Avoid 'energy food' like pasta and sugar. Eat some fruit. All simple stuff. And cheap too, though some fruit is getting ridiculously expensive.

P.S.

I've also stopped eating cake. Completely. None since July 2007.

Trouser/Look:

Higher the heel the better, within reason obviously. Avoid black trousers if possible, they will make your legs look invisible. The slate coloured trousers in Sainsbury might look better on you because of your colouring, then add a white <collared> shirt worn outside your trousers? Might be worth having a look if there's a large store near you? Don't be tempted to get the shirt too 'oversize', it doesn't want to look like a tent. If the trousers are still too loud, try Primark and the 'bootcut' style I mentioned before. They come in dark blue, and I think some browns. I'm used to wearing dark blue so didn't give the browns a second look. I'm thinking your legs want a slight 'lift' (in colour) to make them more obvious? Plenty of khaki about too.

This is 'advice' to any man...

If you start taking an interest in your appearance for no obvious reason, your S/O is automatically going to think there's someone you've met you want to impress. To counter that, take her and if it applies, take the children out walking too. Great family activity, and cheap too.

Mention someone at work/internet said cholesterol levels are reduced with exercise, and you want to keep yours low. Trust me on this, anyone over 35 years old who doesn't exercise, and eats dairy, is going to have an unnecessarily high cholesterol level. It may not be a dangerous level, or anywhere near it, but it will be higher than it need be. Reducing fats, taking some gentle exercise will reduce it, whatever the level starts at. Even if (remarkably) the overall level does stay the same, good fats will rise, and bad fats reduce.

.....

[shyguy]

You're right, cholesterol is a problem, and I need to exercise. I think someone once started a thread encouraging each other to lose weight, and stick to it. Maybe we can resurrect it? Tried khaki in 3/4 lengths, and looks ok so maybe the way to go. Shirt outside jeans feels odd to me after years of "tuck yourself in" from parents lol.

[fastfreddy2]

You're right, cholesterol is a problem,

I'm not your doctor, so how would I know?

You fitted the description. [As so many of us do. ]

Don't underestimate the 'power' of a walk. Increased heart rate for 20 minutes is good. You don't have to run a 4 minute mile. Moderate exercise, and as frequently as you can manage. You'll also be surprised at what it'll do to your energy levels.

Oats are a natural sponge for bad cholesterol. Porridge or museli as a start to the day, with rice milk or soya milk obviously.

....

[fastfreddy2]

I have been 'mad' for buying casual trousers this year. So far, I've bought (and kept) 14 pairs. I've taken at least 10 pairs back. [New Look and Marks predominantly.]

Possibly half are girls jeans or trousers. Thinking about it, I may have returned as many pairs as I've kept. [Forgot about girls formal trousers I've returned. Loads of Tesco/ASDA/New Look/Marks.]

Today I returned the two black pairs of M+S waist-high bootleg jeans, [add £31-50] only to replace them an hour later with two other pairs [minus £12-50]. The M+S ones went back because I decided they were a bit obvious.

Tried EVERY pair of trouser with just about every pair of boots I have. I'm beginning to know what boot works (is hidden) by which trouser. So far, the Primark mens 'bootcut' jean work with everything. Not bad for £8.

Big surprise was the purchases made last Monday. One of them was detailed as straight-leg 'comfort fit' girls stretch jean from an Outlet Store. Size 12L and very very comfortable. The bottom of the leg stretches over my heels, with no effort from me! Gives me a very pleasing profile, for the princely sum of £2-50.

The 14 pairs of jeans/trousers, have set me back a total of £86. How? I have 2 pairs of trousers, 1 pair of jeans costing £2-50 each for a start. All from M+S Outlet, all originally circa £20 each. I also have 4 pairs of mens dark indigo straight leg jeans normally £17 each (Officers Club), bought for £5 each. That's 7 pairs for £27-50. Aren't "Sales" wonderful?

Must do some piccies.

.....

[kneehighs]

Like stilettoscot I have a larger build, but short too, so suggestions for short and fat guys too?

One of the first things you want to look at is the proportion of the length of your legs in comparison to the length of your torso. This will help you determine if you are Short or Long Waisted and once you figure this out, you can apply it to your purchases for the rest of your life.

If your legs are long in comparison to your torso, then you are SHORT WAISTED. You want pants with a lower rise and want to wear thin belts in a different color to your pants, which will balance your proportions.

If your legs are short in comparison to your torso, then you are LONG WAISTED. You want pants with a higher rise and want to wear wide belts in the same color as your pants, which will balance your proportions.

Hope this helps some.

[fastfreddy2]

In February this year, New Look announced some of their 'standard' range would have a larger variety of leg sizes. They've had a 'tall' range for a while, but these are REALLY long. 36" if I remember.

I trawled their stores, on and off for over a month in and after April, having been told by their Customer Services, that's when they would be available. None were on sale.

Weather here wasn't very pleasant today, despite yesterdays forecast. Plan "B" involved visiting Hemel Hempstead shops, which for some reason were practically empty by late afternoon. [Herself wanted to look around Coast in Debenhams, who have a sale and she likes Coast clothes.]

New Look offer really good discounts on sale goods, so I always visit. No heels on today, so we got around unusually quickly .... Almost literally walked into a rail of the jeans promised some time ago with 34" leg! Bought a blue pair size 10 (which I expect to be a bit tight) and a black pair in 12. At least one pair will go back, maybe both. Had a bit of a 'fat-boy' dinner tonight, so I'll try them on tomorrow.

Herself couldn't believe I bought another two pairs, and frankly, neither could I. And 'we' thought I had a shoe problem....

These purchases were made only minutes after I had 'fessed up how many pairs I'd bought during the last few months while looking at trousers in Debenhams, which had her immediately telling me to to "stop looking!" [This in contrast to what actually seemed like encouragement over some Jasper Conran MJ's I've been looking at for months that been reduced from £35 to £11. Apparently I'll only go back another day, "so why not buy them now?" ~ Women! ]

So why did I buy the N/L jeans? I have one other 'slim' pair with the longer 34" leg and they make my legs look much longer than they are when I wear heels. They hide the heels better than most of the other stretch 33" versions I have, and at £10 a pair, why shouldn't I buy them?

Men:

Many womens styles look identical to mens unless you look inside them at the sizing label. They have a bias cut to accomodate hips we don't have, so make for a very 'comfortable' fitting where it counts. Add stretch material, and going back to mens styles afterward will seem unattractive, if not uncomfortable.

...

[Thighboots2]

I have long been a fan of women or as call them, left handed trousers. I find the cuff to be larger then the equivalent in a men trouser this has the benefit of fitting a heeled shoe better. My straight leg womens trousers are 2" bigger than my mens bootcut trousers, and the bootcut womens are 4" bigger than the mens bootcut. I suspect its to do with the semiconcealled shoe look because a tighter cuff doesn't hang so nicely. Small detail, but one I notice on many women who try to wear slim leg trousers to cover the shoe, looks untidy.

I use them for work, so they are the formal type with a front and back crease. Another benefit is the material is much lighter than a mans trouser and so is far more comfortable to wear. Pockets if they exist are next to useless, hence why I am a devoted bag carrier.

I would disagree with FF's earlier suggestion to avoid black is possible, as long as they are clean and well pressed, then they blend to the shoe, and we mostly wear black shoes anyway, so do not create a contrast that draws the eye. Easier with formal wear of course where black trousers are almost a standard.

Freddy, haven't you heard? flares are back. One of my trousers are boot-cut and have a big cuff, but the flare is very well done. Big advantage is you get lots of air round your legs so they are really comfortable in warm weather.

I would heartily recommend the wearing of womens cut trousers, if they fit you. THe Aura jeans by Wrangler are really nice. They are just like guy jeans with a bit of stretch and useful pockets and right handed as well. IMHO, Wrangler have always made the best jeans.

Everyone should listen to Kneehighs advice, he is the man who knows. Our own personal style guru. Heels or not, you should be critical about how you look. Compared to the ladies, the effort required for men is minimal yet the benefit is unmeasurable.

Simon.

[fastfreddy2]

I would disagree with FF's earlier suggestion to avoid black is possible, as long as they are clean and well pressed, then they blend to the shoe, and we mostly wear black shoes anyway, so do not create a contrast that draws the eye. Easier with formal wear of course where black trousers are almost a standard.

Simon,

"out of context" again fella. I've met shyguy, have you? That advise was tilted directly at him?

Freddy, haven't you heard? flares are back. One of my trousers are boot-cut and have a big cuff, but the flare is very well done. Big advantage is you get lots of air round your legs so they are really comfortable in warm weather.

I would heartily recommend the wearing of womens cut trousers, if they fit you. The Aura jeans by Wrangler are really nice. They are just like guy jeans with a bit of stretch and useful pockets and right handed as well. IMHO, Wrangler have always made the best jeans.

Context (yet again ) .... Where did I say I don't wear flares? In fact, of the [currently 16 pairs] I think only 4 or 5 are straight legged. And I mentioned Wrangler Aura jeans myself, some time ago? [From the US?]

It'll be back to 14 by the end of today. The jeans claim to be 34" long, but are actually 33". I've several pairs this size, with much better fitting waist. The N/L Hula's are claimed as 'Regular' waist, but seem a tad lower to me, so while their cost is attractive, the fit isn't. In fact the 12's fitted well to loose. But I don't have a pierced belly-button to justify the slightly lower waist-band and the problem this brings in keeping the ankle hem at the right height. [Low enough to hide a heel, but not so low I'm walking on them. ]

Glad to see some positive input on this matter from some members who are interested in dressing well.

P.S.

Just read this post, which is pertinent because of this picture.

Notice that Johnieheel has a slightly flared jean on. [Look at his right leg in the background, which has not been raised to show his shoe style.] This cut of jean produces a flattering look, and enables more discreet use of HH when out and about.

....

[Puma]

For many years now I've been wearing trousers and jeans that were purchased from 'womens' stores and shops. I always get either the bootcut or flared leg versions, and I buy them in a variety of lengths to suit all occasions, ie some are longer length for complete stealth mode when wearing heels, and some are a suitable length for when I'm wearing trainers/flat shoes etc. I do find the cut and fit much more comfortable, and often the prices are more reasonable too. One thing that sometimes bothers me, is which side the zip closure is on. Mostly womens trousers close to the left, which obviously defines them as 'womens', but even when I have worn such trousers in formal situations, no one has ever noticed, but sometimes I still feel conscious about it. However, there are also some manufacturers/stores that sell 'womens' trousers/jeans with the closure to the right, Miss Sixty and GAP spring to mind. Some of the 'flared' trousers and jeans are wide enough to cover the whole shoe, which makes them also obviously 'womens' as it's virtually impossible to find such trousers in 'mens' stores. But like our choice in footwear, why should trousers etc be gender specific? Oh one other thing, I never ever get that certain disapproving look from my wife when I have even the most obviously looking 'womens' trousers on! Wish it was the same when I wear heels!

[heelma]

What do you guys think of boot cut pants from Banana Republic? They have a "long/tall" version of many styles, which means an inseam of 36". I never tried those, but I am kind of tempted.

Example:

http://www.bananarepublic.com/browse/product.do?cid=37576&pid=587836

[fastfreddy2]

What do you guys think of boot cut pants from Banana Republic? They have a "long/tall" version of many styles, which means an inseam of 36". I never tried those, but I am kind of tempted.

Example:

http://www.bananarepublic.com/browse/product.do?cid=37576&pid=587836

36" inseam is long, and probably needs quite a platform unless you have unusually long legs?

The sewn in cuff/turn-up at the bottom of the trouser has been seen by myself over a here a number of times and looks good, especially with longer pointed-shoe styles. The material must be lightweight for this 'cuff' to work, and might be there because the material is lightweight. [The cuff making sure the lower part of the trouser keeps its shape?] A spring/summer style then? Or 'office' wear?

If your chosen shoe to wear with the trousers would be those in your avatar, I could see them working very well.

....

[heelma]

36" inseam is long, and probably needs quite a platform unless you have unusually long legs?

The sewn in cuff/turn-up at the bottom of the trouser has been seen by myself over a here a number of times and looks good, especially with longer pointed-shoe styles. The material must be lightweight for this 'cuff' to work, and might be there because the material is lightweight. [The cuff making sure the lower part of the trouser keeps its shape?] A spring/summer style then? Or 'office' wear?

If your chosen shoe to wear with the trousers would be those in your avatar, I could see them working very well.

....

When I wear 5 1/2" heels with a platform, I can just cover them with 38"(!) jeans. I posted pictures how that looks somewhere here (need to find it, then I'll post a link).

I'm not going to wear 8" on the streets anymore. I wore the ones in my avatar maybe 2 years ago, and they broke when I tripped with them

[Booted]

What do you guys think of boot cut pants from Banana Republic? They have a "long/tall" version of many styles, which means an inseam of 36". I never tried those, but I am kind of tempted.

Example:

http://www.bananarepublic.com/browse/product.do?cid=37576&pid=587836

I've a pair of these jeans. They are great, stylish, not too tight, and very comfortable. The 36" inseam is overstated. In realaty they are more like 34" to 35" inseam.

[Mr. X]

I was browsing through one of the local thrift shops here today. I have always been looking for a pair of womens trousers that might serve well on a guy. Not only do I think I found a pair, but because it was thrift I ended up paying 10 bucks for them. The pants themselves are just a basic black stretch type trouser with a bit of a belted waist. They fit perfect, and are perfect length for wearing with heels. I posted a couple of pics in the guys section under the freestyle picture thread. Check em out.

[HappyFeat]

I am a 6'2", 225 pound guy with a 32" inseam and 34"-36" waist. I have tried many different styles of men's trousers and jeans with heels> Even going with a longer inseam didn't seem to really make the grade. I have had luck with Polo, Banana Republic, and the GAP, but nothing that really met my satisfaction.

Recently, I discovered a line of jeans and trousers from Lane Bryant stores in the US called "Right Fit." I went to the store, the clerk took my measurements and gave me some pants to try. The jeans fit me amazingly well so I tried the trousers and loved those too. I have never had better fitting pants that just look great with heels. (At least in my opinion, since I am still learning about fashion)

Both the pants and the jeans look to be of very nice quality and I know Lane Bryant was a solid label for plus size women when they were still part of Limited brands. But they have been spun off and are now part of the same company that owns the Fashion Bug chain (or as my GF calls it 'Fashion Slug') which is not known for quality.

I am not sure if they have Lane Bryant outside the US, but for those in the US, I suggest getting measured and finding your fit. The "Right Fit" line does not use the traditional sizing system, but rater a scale from 1-7 with inseams in short, average, and tall. A 3T fits me wonderfully with heels and a 3 Average is great for low heels or flats (or men's shoes.) Here is the link to Lane Bryant's site, specifically about the "Right Fit" bottoms:

http://www.lanebryant.com/pagebuilder/right_fit_landing_page

I have heard that the calculator is less than accurate, but I know that there is a link to a sizing chart somewhere in the site. Also, Lane Bryant offers free shipping and runs pretty descent sales from time to time. The jeans cost about $40 US and the trousers about $50.

If there are other brands that do a similar thing, in bottoms for either gender, please post it.