[Pemps]

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:17 pm  

1980s baggy jeans with tight ankles and Flinstones characters printed on the thighs.

Any Jean made by Joe Bloggs or anything at all bought from 'Stolen from Ivor'.

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:21 pm  

Pemps wrote:

1980s baggy jeans with tight ankles and Flinstones characters printed on the thighs.

Any Jean made by Joe Bloggs or anything at all bought from 'Stolen from Ivor'.

As accompanied by Cica trainers? It's like a view into early 90s Chorley fashion!

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:26 pm  

Ski wrote:

My issue with jeans is when they go all new fangled and start putting elasticated cuffs on the ankle. What the hell is that about. They just look ridiculous

My particular favourites are the ones where the crotch sags down to the knee area, and a good 60-odd percent of the wearer's underpants are on show. No, you don't look cool, you look an absolute tit.

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:27 pm  

I do wear jeans occasionally and, like Mr McField, have several pairs for painting etc (as in DIY, not as in Rembrandt).
I do have one pair that I would go outside in.
They have a nice slim cut and are still agood dark indigo in colour.
Once they fade beyond that colour, they must (for those of my advanced years) be redesignated as slobbing-around-at-home wear.

Jeremy-Clarkson-in-faded-denim is never a good look for we oldies.
And even worse on Jeremy Clarkson.

Oh, and double-denim (e.g. jeans and shirt) ... definite no-no, unless you're a genuine cowboy

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:29 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

My particular favourites are the ones where the crotch sags down to the knee area, and a good 60-odd percent of the wearer's underpants are on show. No, you don't look cool, you look an absolute tit.

Thats me when I'm doing the gardening

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:30 pm  

I like jeans but I find theres definitely an optimum point.

Cheap jeans invariably look awful and after a few washes get tatty and just make you look like a tramp.

More expensive ones like Levis last for ages and are virtually indestructible.

The top end super expensive Japanese ones need to be handled with kid gloves and you probably need to be gay or Japanese to really look cool in them.

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:35 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

My particular favourites are the ones where the crotch sags down to the knee area, and a good 60-odd percent of the wearer's underpants are on show. No, you don't look cool, you look an absolute tit.

I was behind a couple of lads the other day and one was "dressed" the way you describe.
As he walked they drooped lower and lower until he had to hoik 'em up again... but only back to a level below the widest part of his hips.
So, of course, they immediately started to drift South again.

The pattern on the boxer shorts he was so keen to expose looked like the sort of patterm you find on a romper suit or a babygro, little red teddy bears.

Cool?



Anyway.
Off topic.
My bad this time.

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:45 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

I was behind a couple of lads the other day and one was "dressed" the way you describe.
As he walked they drooped lower and lower until he had to hoik 'em up again... but only back to a level below the widest part of his hips.
So, of course, they immediately started to drift South again.

The pattern on the boxer shorts he was so keen to expose looked like the sort of patterm you find on a romper suit or a babygro, little red teddy bears.

Cool?



Anyway.
Off topic.
My bad this time.

I used to teach guitar to a young man who thought this was a good look. I assured him it wasn't more or less every time I saw him, but it made little difference. I think he thought I was joking.

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:50 pm  

McLaren_Field wrote:

Thats me when I'm doing the gardening

At least it's only your underwear on show. Being a chap of a certain age, it would be more usual for the greater proportion of your arsecrack to be proudly displayed.

Re: Jeans - who doesn't? : Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:59 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

My particular favourites are the ones where the crotch sags down to the knee area, and a good 60-odd percent of the wearer's underpants are on show. No, you don't look cool, you look an absolute tit.

Even worse if they are that sh** brown colour or worn with nasty canvas shoes. You have to admire the salesmanship of whoever managed to convince so many that this is the 'look'.


P.S. I like my jeans but it's s*ds law that only one pair in 6 will keep their look and only reach the optimum level of fit and comfort either just before they fall apart or look totally out of fashion.