No more low rise trousers!

[ridgerider]

Lowrise trousers wear comfortably on obese men with short legs and big bellies.

This is true. I find my mid rise trousers sometimes become low rise trousers as life happens. It also tells me its time to cut back on some things or go to the tailor.

I have found, for me, low rise works only with super casual clothing and even then it doesn't work always.

 

[Phileas Fogg]

This is not an attempt to poke fun at larger or obese men, but am I to understand that having one’s belly hanging over the front of your pants is more aesthetically pleasing than a pair of pants that rises to your natural waist line?

In what upside down, bizzaro menswear world can this be considered preferable.

I realize that much of what we discuss and debate is inherently subjective, E.g. oxfords with chinos, but there have to be a few things that are objective truths.

 

[Stylewords]

This is not an attempt to poke fun at larger or obese men, but am I to understand that having one’s belly hanging over the front of your pants is more aesthetically pleasing than a pair of pants that rises to your natural waist line?

In what upside down, bizzaro menswear world can this be considered preferable.

I realize that much of what we discuss and debate is inherently subjective, E.g. oxfords with chinos, but there have to be a few things that are objective truths.

Probably because wearing braces/suspenders looks stupid.

 

[Calanon]

I have a bit of a beer belly, not a particularly large one but one nevertheless, and anything mid rise always, always slides down at the front.

 

[TheSartorialPunjabi]

Probably because wearing braces/suspenders looks stupid.

What? He’s not even talking about suspenders

 

[TheSartorialPunjabi]

I have a bit of a beer belly, not a particularly large one but one nevertheless, and anything mid rise always, always slides down at the front.

I don’t have a beer belly, but I’ve had that problem a few times with mid rise and I believe the reason is because it sits in between your waist and and your natural waist line. So there’s no support at the middle

 

[Phileas Fogg]

Suspenders are an option but not a necessity. A pair of probably fitted slacks and a belt should suffice.

Will the gentleman have to now and then adjust or pull up? Perhaps.

but tell me having your belly hanging over your pants is preferable to that.

 

[TheSartorialPunjabi]

Suspenders are an option but not a necessity. A pair of probably fitted slacks and a belt should suffice.

Will the gentleman have to now and then adjust or pull up? Perhaps.

but tell me having your belly hanging over your pants is preferable to that.

100% suspenders are an option, but having your gut hanging out is not appealing at all. Case closed

 

[Goofy]

Suspenders are an option but not a necessity. A pair of probably fitted slacks and a belt should suffice.

Will the gentleman have to now and then adjust or pull up? Perhaps.

but tell me having your belly hanging over your pants is preferable to that.

To many men it’s preferable. Besides that, the girth of ones abdomen can greatly vary over time, whereas the circumference of a mature male’s pelvis remains constant, requiring less trouser alterations or purchases over time.

 

[otterhound]

Man, this thread deteriorated into vitriol in post #2 . Quick descent.

 

[TheSartorialPunjabi]

Man, this thread deteriorated into vitriol in post #2 . Quick descent.

Tell me about it and I just became a new member and also this is my first post, I had no idea it was going to turn out like this, ?

 

[Dennis T.]

Picture from GG makes a true point. I have much longer legs, and I am 6.3, so I thank this trend for having lower rise in pants - my legs are absolutely proportional with the body. The next question is the jacket (if suit) - most makers cut the fastening button too high (except for Tom Ford and Albert Clothing from UK), so I almost never have success with RTW suit. But, at the end, lower rise with those jackets look much better on me than pants fastened to armpits

What? You obviously don’t understand clothing at all.
1. You’re blind
2. In the picture that I put up, he is clearly wearing high rise trousers
3. Dress trousers have an elastic around the waist of the trouser so it stays in place
4. Even though he has side adjusters, the suspenders do help keep them up and suspenders are an optional choice
5. Those green dress trousers are part slim, not tapered to suffocation
6. You only gave me a picture of a big guy wearing jeans not dress trousers or chinos
7. It doesn’t matter about which pair of trousers you wear, we’re not talking about fabric either, low rise trousers (dress, chinos, jeans, etc…) they car all cut the same because a low rise puts stress on the waist and puts pressure on the gentleman’s area
8. Low rise also pushes out the gut because low rise sits below the gut and at the waist
View attachment 1671473

 

[TheChihuahua]

Bring back the high rise!!

anyway, according to the 1979 JC Penney catalogue (aka, “The Bible”), this is how pants should be worn…

back to real talk:
Isn’t this highly dependent on one’s body shape? A low rise on some people looks much better than a high rise, and for others the high rise looks better? Not really a universal look that fits for everyone.

 

[JLibourel]

As best I recall, low-rise trousers were the norm back in the 1970s. Awful things they were (like most 1970s fashions). Back when I lived in Los Angeles and chanced to drive down Santa Monica Boulevard, I would quite commonly see many young men, usually shirtless, in very low-rise trousers. They were hustlers, of course, and I am quite content to leave low-rise trousers to "men" of that ilk. (They can look cute on girls, though!)

 

[Phileas Fogg]

They were hustlers, of course, and I am quite content to leave low-rise trousers to "men" of that ilk.