1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Trousers at the Waist

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by J. Cogburn, Jul 20, 2010.

  1. amplifiedheat

    amplifiedheat Senior member

    Messages:
    1,419
    Joined:
    May 16, 2009
    my legs are short. i have often thought that they could be about 2 inches longer
    to be in proportion with my torso.
    so do you think wearing trousers down on my hips is a good idea?


    It is a bad idea.
     
  2. a tailor

    a tailor Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    2,852
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Location:
    chicago suburbs
    Well, not all tailors. A few weeks ago I visited Elio at English-American, the Westminster, Maryland company that manufacturers H. Freeman and Tom James made-to-measure suits. Elio is a older Sicilian tailor who is both the company's head tailor and the fellow who trains the Tom James sales associates who, beyond ginning-up sales, also do the measuring. I told him I wanted to wear the trousers I was ordering at the natural waist and he said, "no - too high," and suggested I wear them an inch or so below the navel. "But it's not my natural waist" I said. "No - but they look clownish up there." I went with his advice because these were odd trousers that will only ocassionally be worn with a sport coat or blazer.


    we are talking natural waist not style waist.

    you said thats not your natural waist. and he said no that it was not your natural waist.
    he knows the difference.

    Elio was telling you where he thought you should wear your trousers.

    he was not telling you where "your" bodys natural waist is at.
     
  3. Chookwah Murgle

    Chookwah Murgle New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    The higher your waist, sartorially speaking, the shorter your torso. What's uglier than a short, squat torso? Not many things. I think the ideal male silhouette is a fairly slim one these days, not Hedi Slimanish I wouldn't say but certainly no lumberjack; so in keeping with that lean ideal I prefer a lower trowser that lengthens the shirt/torso, thereby slimming it proportionally. (When you look at old movies and the men take off their suit jackets, the bright white of the shirt forms a square, bisected by the tie; today's silhouette is a taller, thinner rectangle because the waist has dropped and I'm a lot happier with it that way.) What do high-waist-wearers say to that? Do you think a short torso is attractive?
    No, short torsos are not attractive, neither are ridiculously long ones with short little legs. Not everyone who sees a high waist, sees a shortened torso. Some people see a torso the length it is, bisected in a proportional and elegant way by the height of the trousers. This picture below of a witless caricature does not make a case against high waists. It merely shows that a high waist is just as capable as a low one, of contributing to a look of abject stupidity.
     
  4. a tailor

    a tailor Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    2,852
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2006
    Location:
    chicago suburbs
    Have you considered high heels or platform shoes?

    Would also shape your calves and ass.


    - B


    if i do that will i be even more stunningly handsome than i am already?
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by