Originally Posted by mlyngard
It was basically the rocker fit, with the legs made skinny as an afterthought. Awkward taper (they were literally straight from the mid-thigh down, drainpipe-like), so the top block was roomy, hips bulge out like women's jeans, and the leg hadan almost bootcut flare at the bottom due to knee and l.o. being close to the same. This was when tried on new. KMW Rocker skinnys had the same poor interpretation. Basically took the1980 pattern and just make the leg narrower. Top block to leg proportions were all haywire. Neither were a successful fit on me, but may work nicely on others.
work nicely on others. It's not the rocker fit as the skinny is a unisex
slim model: IIRC, the rise is lower by about an inch while the thighs and knees are skinnier. Of course the top block is going to be roomy, (warning: anatomy lesson) women have wider hips than men and the jeans are cut accordingly. But all isn't lost in Denimville as some
men would take this as a clue to wear them with a bit of an anti-fit instead of an across-the-board slim fit. You might have also heard this of cut used with other brands as a "carrot": roomy top block, skinny/tapered legs. Assuming you tried on the regular length, I don't see what you mean by a "bootcut flare." Not only have I not experienced that on my long-length pair, but a cursory search on the internet comes up with nothing looking similar to your description:
I've said before that had I sized down one more, I would think these are some of the best fitting jeans I own aside from my RRLs. JS hit the rise just where I like it while leaving the legs slim but not activity-reducing. The top block has an oddly universal
feel to it in the sense that I can either wear them high or low and then dress around it accordingly. Yes, there is a potential for hip flare (which you can see in both pics of male
models) but it either softens up from wear or you treat these jeans like you would a pair of boxy LVCs and man the fuck up.