Sucker Jeans

[back30]

Hello to all. I have been a viewer of this forum for some time, and finally decided to join and get everyone's opinion. My wife saw a write up for Sucker Jeans (http://www.suckerjeans.com/) in a recent magazine, and thought I might like to have a pair. Before she decides to order a pair, I thought I would see if any of you had any experience with this brand. (They seem like they would be rather comfortable in the steamy nights of Charleston SC.) Thanks to all back30

 

[wEstSidE]

have you actually had the chance to check it out? i like non-denim jeans (and i am the proud owner of a seersucker suit) but a lot of the time they have a shortcoming.
edit: apparently they sell these in richmond. next time i am there i will "write a review" of the product.

 

[MIKE_JE]

Jeans are trousers or pants made from denim. If it's not denim, they're not jeans. They may call them jeans, but they are technically not.

 

[Makeshift_Robot]

Originally Posted by MSSneaker

Jeans are trousers or pants made from denim. If it's not denim, they're not jeans. They may call them jeans, but they are technically not.

I think this is pretty dubious. If I saw a pair of corduroys with rivets, pentagonal back patch pockets, horizontal front pockets with inlaid coin pocket, broad belt loops, and an additional fabric piece between the yoke and the back, I'd call them jeans, because, you know, they'd be constructed exactly like a pair of jeans. Obviously there's grey area.

At some point you have to step back from what Wikipedia tells you and think about what terminology conveys information in the best way.

And if you have a finicky terminology response to a thread, the best course of action might be to repeat it to yourself a few times, feel a warm glow of smugness, and then go make a sandwich without posting anything.

 

[cioni2k]

Originally Posted by Makeshift_Robot

I think this is pretty dubious. If I saw a pair of corduroys with rivets, pentagonal back patch pockets, horizontal front pockets with inlaid coin pocket, broad belt loops, and an additional fabric piece between the yoke and the back, I'd call them jeans, because, you know, they'd be constructed exactly like a pair of jeans. Obviously there's grey area.

At some point you have to step back from what Wikipedia tells you and think about what terminology conveys information in the best way.

And if you have a finicky terminology response to a thread, the best course of action might be to repeat it to yourself a few times, feel a warm glow of smugness, and then go make a sandwich without posting anything.

Hmmm.... I have a pair of Mabitex constructed exactly like this (w/ exception for the back pockets) with even a button fly in 100% Flannel Wool. Would you call these jeans? Whatever they are I think theyre pretty sweet

 

[notwithit]

I'd probably call them five-pockets. Maybe that's splitting hairs.

 

[Master-Classter]

there are 5 pocket styles and 4 pocket with a slanted side styles.
There's denim, curdoruy, khakie, etc...

there are many 5 pocket (jean STLYE) pants not made with denim, and then (for example rag and bone) there are denim pants in a khaki style.

 

[Makeshift_Robot]

^ Exactly. There's a lot of grey area. I'm not trying to impose my own definition to replace the other guy's, I'm just saying that it's dumb to jump in and try to correct someone when the "right" answer is ambiguous or unimportant.

Those sucker jeans though... hmmm... I wouldn't buy without handling them in person first. If they don't fall the way jeans fall, they won't really be a good replacement for jeans. If they do look good in person, that's awesome.

 

[Prada_Ferragamo]

Made by suckers for suckers.

 

[MIKE_JE]

Originally Posted by Makeshift_Robot

^ Exactly. There's a lot of grey area. I'm not trying to impose my own definition to replace the other guy's, I'm just saying that it's dumb to jump in and try to correct someone when the "right" answer is ambiguous or unimportant.

Those sucker jeans though... hmmm... I wouldn't buy without handling them in person first. If they don't fall the way jeans fall, they won't really be a good replacement for jeans. If they do look good in person, that's awesome.

Hmm...I'd say it's possible you overreacted as well and took my response as smugness when I was just trying to add my two cents to the conversation. Look, I personally think it is dumb to make pants without denim and call them jeans. If they are not denim just call them what they are, trousers or pants. That's not a grey area to me.

I stated it because the other guy said "non-denim jeans." To me that is a non sequitur. So maybe instead of telling me to stop and go make a sandwich before I add a definition which is truth, and take my addition of logic to the conversation as smugness, you should go make a sandwich. Or maybe we should both go make sandwiches.

I'm sorry I said anything at all. The Sucker "jeans" look ******* horrible anyway.

 

[wEstSidE]

Originally Posted by MSSneaker

Hmm...I'd say it's possible you overreacted as well and took my response as smugness when I was just trying to add my two cents to the conversation. Look, I personally think it is dumb to make pants without denim and call them jeans. If they are not denim just call them what they are, trousers or pants. That's not a grey area to me.

I stated it because the other guy said "non-denim jeans." To me that is a non sequitur. So maybe instead of telling me to stop and go make a sandwich before I add a definition which is truth, and take my addition of logic to the conversation as smugness, you should go make a sandwich. Or maybe we should both go make sandwiches.

I'm sorry I said anything at all. The Sucker "jeans" look ******* horrible anyway.

what i mean by "non-denim jeans" are pants made with the same pattern and similar or same hardware as jeans but using different fabric. if you have a better term to use for such things, please tell me it so that i can avoid having this type of blowup occur in the future. i'm sorry that you're mad.