Latest Moan From You and Me 2025

You laugh, but it's the truth! That's why men need braces and most women don't - hips are very handy for keeping the trousers up. We tend to need a longer zip fly length though so that the waist of the trousers can be pulled up over the hips. A lot of women suffer from gappy waistbands because their waist to hip ratio is different to what the designers think is right.

 

I wish that was true. I've bought trousers based on waist size and leg length. The leg length always seems consistent but some fit comfortably at the waist and others don't. The biggest waist gap I've had has been 4"! This is with trousers purchased at the same time and in the same shop. Style makes a big difference.

 

Yes, it's probably to do with where on the body waist band is designed to sit. And the fashion for that changes all the time, from Simon Cowell high waists down to extreme hipsters. Also different amounts of wearing ease will be added.

 

Do many men actually wear their trousers on their waist, I don't think I've ever had a pair that are long enough in the body for it to be comfortable.


9

 

They can be bought in standard sizes as well and usually they are accurate to the measurements stated.

 

The problem is that the waist is somewhere above the belly, so we may not have hips but the belly serves the same purpose if you could find a pair that would go up that high without affecting your voice.

 

But with clothes, it's greatly complicated by both style and wearing ease. And what seems like the correct wearing ease on one person will be uncomfortably tight on another.

 

Now don't get me started on bra sizing!

Re trousers, I would just like consistent re length. If I am ordering from M&S, I have to buy both regular and long and then take one back. Often the R turns out longer than the L. Their quality control is so rubbish, it shows an absolute contempt for their customers, IMV.

 

And then they have the cheek to complain about the number of returns!
I have extra short legs so a few times I bought a cropped style and wore them as full length trousers.

 

The thing I hate about clothes is that no matter how big they are, they are generally the same cost. I used to work in retail when I was going to uni and a small cost the same as xxxxxxl, where you could probably have made ten smalls out of the same material. I've never understood why, since everything else costs more due to the amount we buy. It wouldn't be discrimination to charge more because it isn't a fat tax, it's paying a fair amount for the material used.

 

It does seem unfair, but I don't think it would be practical to put a different price on each size. Imagine the arguments at the till - and the poor shop assistant would get all the blame. It would also lead to an increase in people trying to squeeze themselves into a smaller size, and no-one needs to see that.

 

I also suspect that the fabric is such a small proportion of the overall cost of making, shipping and marketing a garment that it wouldn't be a substantial saving anyway. And smaller garments take less fabric but can be more fiddly to sew.

 

I don't know if it's still the case but the shop I worked in had different prices for different sized children's clothes and it worked fine. I can't remember the split but say 3-5 years was one price, 6-8 years another and then they had a large boys/girls before you moved to adult. It was always funny because mothers wanted their kids in the children's sizes because you didn't pay vat but the kids always wanted to be classed as adults.

I think, even with mass production that there would be a fair bit of difference between each sizes cost when considering materials and scale. It's isn't much more fiddly to sow an adult male sized small than a medium or large.