Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hemming Shorts

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Here's a crazy thought. Maybe different people have different comfort zones about what they are comfortable wearing, and that's ok.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Eric S View Post
      Here's a crazy thought. Maybe different people have different comfort zones about what they are comfortable wearing, and that's ok.
      Wrong. There are strict protocols about wearing shorts that all must follow. And while we're on the topic ...

      Could one of you so called "style experts" explain to me why everyone on this forum is failing in the "how to wear shorts" department? If you need any guidance, please refer to the photo below:



      T-shirt: Wal-mart
      Shorts: Dockers
      Socks: Calvin Klein
      Shoes: Birkenstock

      Comment


      • #48
        I am going to side with Charlie Kelly on this one and say "Cover your knees up if you're going to be walking around everywhere" .......really though short length is one of the those things in fashion that is cyclical, short shorts are what is being pushed right now, if you don't like the look there are still plenty of longer options on the market....eventually longer ones will be back "in". Hell, its just a matter of time before cargo shorts make a comeback, I've even started to see versions of them pop up in some companies newer lines. I usually tend to stay more middle of the road rather then jump to the far end of trends, but if you like the short short look by all means ride the hell out of that bandwagon

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by connersw View Post
          How old are you?







          Both shorts are J.Crew Club.



          That's quite an inflated sense of self-worth you have there. It's not about who looks better than who. I was merely pointing out that the idea of 5" or 7" inseam shorts is not currently the norm that I see in public, despite what is posted on this forum or what marketers would like you to buy (so that you can get all new shorts). If you like wearing shorter shorts, then by all means, wear shorter shorts.



          Sorry, but I'm not self-conscious about my body. I work hard to stay in shape, and I'm quite confident with myself naked considering I'm in my mid-40's. I wear a swim suit like this one when I lap swim:

          I have no problem wearing something that short, when it is appropriate for the occasion. Walking around on US beaches is not such an occasion.



          Again, it's not about being self-conscious. Personally, I just think it looks weird. Like you are trying to show something off or you have something to prove. Peacocky maybe? Call it anecdotal, but I'm with [MENTION=13934]hockeysc23[/MENTION] that most women I know don't like it and think it looks creepy. I've always been one to dress in what makes me comfortable and women find attractive, but that's just me.
          Connersw bringing the heat!

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by connersw View Post
            How old are you?
            Old enough to know that anyone who accuses others of pushing an "agenda" when it comes to shorts length is probably someone whose opinion I'm going to take with a grain or two of salt.

            [...]

            Both shorts are J.Crew Club.
            These frankly aren't the most useful pics because they are taken from a close distance and high angle that is distorting the image: Your upper body is elongated by the image distortion of these photos, which makes the shorts look shorter (and more proportionate) than they likely are in reality. Even so, these shorts would look perfectly fine with 2-3 inches chopped off the length.

            That's quite an inflated sense of self-worth you have there.
            Sorry my comfort in my own skin is somehow bothersome to you.



            It's not about who looks better than who. I was merely pointing out that the idea of 5" or 7" inseam shorts is not currently the norm that I see in public, despite what is posted on this forum or what marketers would like you to buy (so that you can get all new shorts).
            If it's not about who looks better than who, why are you getting your feathers ruffled that other people dare express self-confidence in how they look in shorter shorts?

            In any case, it doesn't bother me one way or another if 5-7" shorts are the norm or not. Other things that are not the norm: Wearing tailored menswear. Wearing Goodyear welted, American-made dress shoes. Wearing casual clothes that fit properly. Wearing a watch. Maintaining a healthy bodyweight. Eating 25+ grams of fiber every day. Tipping your waiter more than 20%. Getting 9 hours of sleep. Just because something is common or "normal" does not make it good; just because something is uncommon or "abnormal" does not make it bad. This is a menswear forum. Forums like this exist because "normal" guys dress like slobs and one of the few ways to learn how to dress properly as a man in America is to find niche communities like this one. Most American men certainly aren't going to learn good style just from observing and replicating whatever is the "norm" in their community.

            Sorry, but I'm not self-conscious about my body. I work hard to stay in shape, and I'm quite confident with myself naked considering I'm in my mid-40's. I wear a swim suit like this one when I lap swim:

            I have no problem wearing something that short, when it is appropriate for the occasion. Walking around on US beaches is not such an occasion.
            My "beaches" are the lakes and rivers here in the redneck rural Western US. I've worn mid-length shorts and mid-length swim trunks here for years. Never once has anyone, male or female, young or old, batted an eyelash. Never once have I felt uncomfortable or inappropriate or out-of-place for showing a couple inches of thigh while swimming or grabbing a beer at the nearest fishing guide's dive bar afterward. In fact, the style of swim trunk I wear is basically one of two options you can even find in stores around here - the mid-length, elastic waistband, slightly baggy leg with mesh liner, side pockets, and back pocket (the other style, of course, being the knee-length boardshort).

            The idea that because you would be uncomfortable wearing a square leg swimming brief on the beach, that somehow proves that mid-length shorts are less appropriate for wear in the United States, is not an argument I can follow. Mid-length trunks are not, I repeat, not the same thing as teeny tiny Euro-style swim briefs.



            I have a lot of gay friends who own spandexy, Euro-style, square-cut swim briefs and jump at any opportunity to wear them (which usually involves travel to an LGBT-friendly destination, or at the least, a private pool). Wearing a standard swim trunk with a 5" or 6" inseam is not remotely in the same category of daring.

            Again, it's not about being self-conscious. Personally, I just think it looks weird. Like you are trying to show something off or you have something to prove. Peacocky maybe? Call it anecdotal, but I'm with [MENTION=13934]hockeysc23[/MENTION] that most women I know don't like it and think it looks creepy. I've always been one to dress in what makes me comfortable and women find attractive, but that's just me.
            We can play the confirmation bias, anecdotal evidence game all day long. All the feedback I've gotten from the women I've dated and my platonic ladyfriends is that they like seeing a little more of a guy's leg, and they like when I wear shorts and swim trunks that hit mid-thigh. More than that, they like that I don't give a rip what the "popular" style is and that I am confident and happy dressing to a different standard than the average joe: I frankly don't dress to impress women or anyone else. I dress for myself. I like the way shorter shorts look, and I like the way they look on me. But even if I were dressing to impress women, the women whose opinions I trust and value have been unanimous in their approval, not only of the clothes I wear but the attitude that leads me to wear them.
            Ben

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Eric S View Post
              Here's a crazy thought. Maybe different people have different comfort zones about what they are comfortable wearing, and that's ok.
              This, I can agree with. I lurves me a mid-length short and a swim trunk that's maybe even slightly shorter. I don't really care what other people wear or why. (I mean. I once came pretty close to marrying a woman whose "style" she self-described as "pirate lumberjack.") But I know my reasons for preferring mid-length shorts are solid, and I'm not too impressed so far with the arguments that 5-7" shorts are "too short."
              Ben

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by LesserBlackDog View Post
                Old enough to know that anyone who accuses others of pushing an "agenda" when it comes to shorts length is probably someone whose opinion I'm going to take with a grain or two of salt.
                You're exhausting and laughable at the same time. Obviously agenda was said with tongue in cheek. We're discussing short length, not some socio-economic coup.

                My feathers are not ruffled. You are the one that appears defensive. I really don't care what length shorts you wear. If you like them, by all means wear them.

                However, you posted that your fancy-dancy stick figure proves that longer shorts are unflattering and make people look dumpy and bottom heavy. I'm nearly stating that I don't think that is the case. You seem to be of the opinion that short shorts are the definitive style, and I disagree. It has nothing to do with self-confidence or looks or if showing skin is bothersome. It simply is just not the norm from what I have seen on both coasts.

                You wanted to call people out for not posting fit pics, so I posted two from different angles including straight on full body shots, but apparently they don't meet your high photographic standards. I'll try to schedule something at the local mall Glamour Shots for you later this summer. FWIW, I happen to just have a long torso. I'm almost 3" taller than you, and my inseam is almost 2" shorter than yours. So maybe, just maybe, people have different body types, like different styles, and look different in different styles?

                You're right, we can play the confirmation bias, anecdotal evidence game all day long, but well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by connersw View Post
                  You're exhausting and laughable at the same time.
                  And I also have no interest in engaging with dudes who wanna get defensive and attack others ("inflated sense of self-worth"? very classy) and then accuse others of being defensive, exhausting, or laughable.

                  Ben

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Shots fired in the "Hemming Shorts" thread!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by connersw View Post




                      Both shorts are J.Crew Club.
                      I think you look fine in these, but I also think this looks very 2005 southern frat boy. This looks very appropriate for a college football game a decade ago. You look perfectly fine, better than most guys by quite a bit, but I'd definitely choose lesserblackdog's mid thigh shorts.

                      If you think the balcony shot looks "70s", it makes me think you don't know what 70s shorts looked like. Plug "men's 70s shorts" into your search engine of choice and marvel at the 2.5" inseams.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Not to add fuel to the fire, but I've had both large and small quadriceps and would agree that bigger legs make a shorter hem better to avoid the whole "flapping" situation.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by dpark View Post
                          I think you look fine in these, but I also think this looks very 2005 southern frat boy. This looks very appropriate for a college football game a decade ago. You look perfectly fine, better than most guys by quite a bit, but I'd definitely choose lesserblackdog's mid thigh shorts.

                          If you think the balcony shot looks "70s", it makes me think you don't know what 70s shorts looked like. Plug "men's 70s shorts" into your search engine of choice and marvel at the 2.5" inseams.
                          But I see Chubbies and that looks very much 2014 frat boy to me.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by dpark View Post
                            If you think the balcony shot looks "70s", it makes me think you don't know what 70s shorts looked like. Plug "men's 70s shorts" into your search engine of choice and marvel at the 2.5" inseams.
                            Sorry, but your comments are off base. I don't need to do a google search for 70's shorts; I lived it myself. The 70's is an entire decade. Yes, as mentioned, there were the 2-3" inseam split side dolphin gym shorts. Yes, as mentioned, there was the cut off just below the pockets (or even pockets hanging out) jorts. There was also a 4-5" inseam casual short along the way. I have pictures of my brother and I in similar looking shorts. Now, if you would like to say that fashion is cyclical, and the 70's are cool again, then maybe I could see that. However, there are certain trends from that area, that I'm not going adopt regardless of how cool they get. I'll go with a boot cut jean, but I'm never going full bell-bottom and butterfly collar again (or at least I hope).

                            Originally posted by dpark View Post
                            I think you look fine in these, but I also think this looks very 2005 southern frat boy. This looks very appropriate for a college football game a decade ago.
                            This makes me think that you've never been to a college football game in the south. The real southern frat boys don't wear shorts to football games--they wear pants with a shirt and tie. You do see some guys wearing shorts and school polo a little bit more these days, but I'm not seeing a lot of 5" inseams shorts in here.


                            If you'd like to say that my look is a little "older," I'm comfortable with that. I'm not trying to dress like today's college kids--I'm in my mid-40's. But to say it is a decade out of style is hyperbole. Take a look at the J.Crew website. You can buy shorts in 10.5", 9", 7" and 5" today. If a 10" short is a decade out of style, why do they offer more option in the 9-10" range than the 5" range? BR doesn't even offer anything shorter than 10". Even Bonobos, a brand that really advertises the shorter length still offers 9" and 11" options. It's not like I'm combing thrift stores to find decade old shorts that I can still wear.

                            Look, I'm not trying to say that my look is the best way or that I look better than [MENTION=2341]LesserBlackDog[/MENTION]. All I am saying is that despite a lot of what you read on this forum, longer shorts are still very common and in style today. If you like wearing shorter inseams shorts, go ahead and rock them. But to say that longer shorts make you look dumpy or lack the intestinal fortitude to bare your thighs or are a decade out of style is nonsense.
                            Last edited by connersw; July 17, 2016, 01:03 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              To be honest, I think that we're arguing over a small difference in shorts length that isn't that significant. When I look at the two photos that were posted here, I think that both looks are perfectly acceptable:




                              It seems to me that as long as you avoid something that is so short that it might be compared to Daisy Duke's shorts or something so long that they start to look like women's capri's, you should be fine. Similarly, they shouldn't be so tight that there is a noticeable crotch bulge, but neither should they be so loose that they're flapping around in the breeze.

                              And as for the original question about tailoring, it is very easy to both hem a pair of cotton shorts to achieve the length that you're after AND to have them taken in slightly if they're too baggy on your legs. I sew and routinely do both of these things to get my shorts to fit better.

                              One of the easy things about wearing shorts is that so many men are dressed even worse than usual when the weather warms up. If you look even halfway put together, you'll stand out all the more at your typical American mall.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Pepetito View Post
                                But I see Chubbies and that looks very much 2014 frat boy to me.
                                If I were going to look like a frat boy, I'd rather look like a frat boy from today than from a decade ago. However, I've not seen anyone that I'd identify as "frat boy" wearing chubbies or similar shorts. But I also live in Seattle now and so my exposure to groups of frat boys is minimal. Given the rest of this thread, though, I kind of doubt that frat boys have started wearing fashion-forward shorts en masse. Connersw seems to agree frat boys are not wearing 5" inseams.

                                Originally posted by connersw View Post
                                Sorry, but your comments are off base. I don't need to do a google search for 70's shorts; I lived it myself.
                                So then you know that the 5" short does not actually represent the 70s. Claiming that mid-thigh shorts is "70s" because some people wore them then is unreasonable. This is like the people who claim any brown suit is "70s". Sure, some people wore brown suits then. That doesn't mean a brown suit is automatically "70s". Some guys wore brown suits, and some guys wore 5" shorts. That doesn't mean you should abandon mid-thigh shorts or browns in an attempt to avoid "looking 70s".

                                Originally posted by connersw View Post
                                This makes me think that you've never been to a college football game in the south. The real southern frat boys don't wear shorts to football games--they wear pants with a shirt and tie. You do see some guys wearing shorts and school polo a little bit more these days, but I'm not seeing a lot of 5" inseams shorts in here.
                                I went to Ole Miss for undergrad and grad school. I've been to a lot of games. I completely agree that the "uniform" is chinos, white shirt, and tie (plus optional blazer). But the guys who go a step down are wearing the polo and knee-length shorts exactly as in your frat picture.

                                As for them not wearing 5" inseams, I agree, and consider that a great reason (for me) to wear shorter shorts. "Looks like a frat guy" is not on my list of style goals.

                                [QUOTE=connersw;248447]But to say it is a decade out of style is hyperbole. Take a look at the J.Crew website. You can buy shorts in 10.5", 9", 7" and 5" today. If a 10" short is a decade out of style, why do they offer more option in the 9-10" range than the 5" range? BR doesn't even offer anything shorter than 10". Even Bonobos, a brand that really advertises the shorter length still offers 9" and 11" options. It's not like I'm combing thrift stores to find decade old shorts that I can still wear.

                                It's not hyperbole. The well dressed frat guys I knew a decade or more ago at Ole Miss wore exactly what you're wearing in your pictures. The shorts were maybe a little less slim, but otherwise it's the same outfit. And again, there's nothing wrong with this look. But it's not fashion forward, nor is it in any way classic just because looked good a decade ago. It's put together and it's better looking than most people. And if it's what you like, you should absolutely wear it.

                                Being able to buy 10" shorts at J Crew/Banana/Bonobos is not compelling. You can still buy boot cut jeans from Bonobos and Banana Republic. You could buy boot cut jeans at J Crew a year ago (and maybe they're back this fall?). I think if you like boot cut jeans, that's great and you should wear them happily. But they, like knee-length shorts, are neither classic nor fashion forward. They're perfectly fine if you like them, though.

                                Originally posted by connersw View Post
                                Look, I'm not trying to say that my look is the best way or that I look better than [MENTION=2341]LesserBlackDog[/MENTION]. All I am saying is that despite a lot of what you read on this forum, longer shorts are still very common and in style today. If you like wearing shorter inseams shorts, go ahead and rock them. But to say that longer shorts make you look dumpy or lack the intestinal fortitude to bare your thighs or are a decade out of style is nonsense.
                                No disagreements from me, and I did not intend to sound like I was insulting your choice of shorts. I wear 3/4(ish) shorts because I think they look good on me and I find them comfortable. Lots of people are wearing longer shorts and looking good. Some people are wearing shorter shorts and looking good. If someone asked me what length shorts to buy in order to look stylish, though, I'd tend toward shorter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X