High-waisted casual pants options?
I've been considering something like the wide-fit pleated pants from Uniqlo to get into some wider styles, but I'm having second thoughts.
I'm a veteran of the uniform era, and while I've long since exchanged slim for straight or relaxed cuts, I haven't really tried anything properly wide, especially with a higher waist. I'm more worried about the position of the waist than the leg width. I have a hard time imagining how it would work for my body type.
In order to pull off high-waisted casual styles without a jacket, it seems like you have to be either sub 15% body fat or, if you're significantly heavier, build your entire wardrobe around looking like a 1950s dad.
I'm kind of stuck in between, having gained weight recently due to an injury that prevented me from running, but not gaining quite enough for the distinguished rotund vintage guy look. Most of my wardrobe is pretty casual, workwear-oriented stuff at this point, so I don't really have the other pieces to support that vibe anyway, and suspenders wouldn't be an option.
Is it possible to pull off properly high-waisted pants if you're in skinny fat / dad bod territory, or will you constantly struggle to keep them up and look ridiculous in the process? What are some alternatives?
69 Replies
Your body shape really has no bearing on what you're allowed to wear. I say this as someone that's a size 38-40.
If uniqlo has your size, try em out. If they don't, there are def other places that will carry your size. If you're unsure how you feel or want some styling suggestions, post some pics wearing em here. You definitely don't need to prescribe to "1950s dad" tho, wide fit/high rise are super easy to style in a variety of fits.
Man I wish there was a Uniqlo in NZ
I generally agree, and maybe 50s dad was too narrow, but often the other options still involve a lot of layering or mixing in more advanced elements that would go beyond just wearing pants and a t-shirt and looking decent as one with a different physique might be able to do.
I also think in this particular case, it's not just a matter of style but of objective geometry, no? Is it not significantly harder to get high-rise pants to stay in place if the traditional natural waist closer to the navel isn't approximately the narrowest part of your torso?
I mean, no? Belts are enough for me, drawstrings on other pants work too. I kinda think you should just try it out tbh.
my weight has fluctuated a lot during the last 4 years, i find high-rise pants tend to stay in place than mid-rise, even without a belt
You just need to size accordingly, meausre your waist and look at the garment's meausrements as well, don't just go with the tagged size
i am someone for whom the natural waist isn't the narrowest part of me and belts work just fine (as does wearing properly sized pants)
so approximately where are you guys wearing them relative to the navel? I feel like if you pull them way up they will be more likely to stay in place, but if they're just a bit lower, maybe more than an inch or so beneath the navel, then they want to slide down closer to the hips where I normally wear them
and how do you wear shirts tucked into them that high and not look like this guy:
it depends on the fit (fit meaning 'outfit' not of the pants) but i've had no problem wearing high rise above the navel belted
i'm no expert here, but i think this all kind of depends on the cut of the pants and the intended rise? i've got pants ranging from size 28-32 in various cuts and rises and they all fit perfectly. where they sit on my waist (or somewhere around my midsection) just depends on how the pants were actually designed to be worn
above navel for me and no issues. mid rise does tend to ride down
so is the consensus that you want to wear them above the furthest point your stomach extends to in the front?
because I can see how that is better for fit, but if your stomach protrudes even moderately, it tends to look weird to me
how do you avoid the fred mertz fupa like in the pic? I see lots of good fit pics of mid to larger size guys in high waisted pants but they rarely show profile without any layers
that might be a skill issue? i personally dont like how the super high waist thing looks but i can almost guarantee there are probably some people here that can make it look good regardless of body type or shape
when i first started wearing high-waisted it felt weird as well. i think you just need to experiment a bit and see what works for you.
not to bring everything back to body type, but I guess height is a factor also. If you're taller, the extra overall length of the pants will make that area less pronounced, even if the diameter and shape are the same.
I definitely am not one to believe in hard and fast rules, but it does seem much harder to pull off if you're shorter, heavier, or both.
but I guess even if a higher mid rise might look slightly better, it would be much harder to keep in place than just properly high waist
part of it is a matter of fit (not just waist but inseam and rise length) and part of it is trial and error
I guess I'll have to try on a few options and see, unfortunately the uniqlos are OOS rn in navy
but the main thing is that I need to be measuring and wearing them basically right above the widest part of the stomach, usually right above the navel?
I guess I was thinking it was a bit more below that since even in suiting I've been wearing pants slightly below the navel
that would be a good way to start imo; if you're thinking uniqlo as a guide i think their size charts online also include the rises so that may help
also if you have a uniqlo nearby, try to go and try them on in person. and if they are too long, didn't uniqlo hem pants for free?
and in terms of 'not looking like a 50s guy' uh...i took that personally :xd: but all seriousness check #waywt; there's plenty of people wearing higher rise pants (even seemingly formal ones like PRL andrews) in casual fits
unfortunately I'm not near a location. Are there any other brands with similar offerings I could try until these come back in stock?
I think 50s dadcore is generally appealing btw, I just think you have to build your entire wardrobe around it and it's easy to look like charlie sheen if you don't get it right
my point was that I don't have much else in that direction to pair with high-waisted trousers
j. crew is a good option, especially since they have their (so named) giant chinos back in rotation if you want to see what a high rise feels like; i think their wallace & barnes stuff includes pleated trousers
I saw those, and I could at least try them on in person which would be good
still somewhat unsure if I want to just go moderately wide or with something as wide as these though
I'm not the kind of person commenting on reddit about how wide looks bad and we should pretend it's 2012 forever, but at the same time, I can acknowledge that the're a limit to what I can pull of at almost 40 and given the constraints of my existing wardrobe
counterpoint: maybe you have a higher ceiling than you realize?
ultimately my budget provides its own ceiling
I kind of just want to try some things out and see what works not build an entirely new wardrobe around it
that's fair
there tends to be an all or nothing view on things especially with the recent discourse on slim fit vs wide fit on the internet but ultimately you should wear what you feel good about wearing
the fact that you have an open mind about it is a good sign and even if you conclude 'no actually i prefer what i have', the important part is having the tangible experience to make that judgment
this thread today kinda intersects with that https://discord.com/channels/1116793467654381685/1219649599434920026
that's an interesting conversation, I'll definitely have to read the rest later
the idea of maintaining a profile and posting fit pics definitely complicates things, I guess I'm lucky that I don't feel the need to do that anymore and try to avoid posting on social media in general lately
I'm also lucky that none of the fit pics I posted in the past are still hosted anywhere
i'm in a similar position, though once in a while i do post out of sheer boredom. i will say as someone who just turned 40, a lot of the new stuff ive tried over the years just makes me feel like i come off as an old guy trying desperately to cling to his youth and trying to fit in with teens and 20-somethings. doesnt stop me from trying something new every now and then, mostly out of curiosity, but i find myself just reverting back to the stuff that feels most 'me' - which is what my style (or lack thereof) has been for the past 10+ years
there was a good quote in the recent NYT pants article about that experience
“Whatever style pants look like shit to you are the pants you’re supposed to wear, and as soon as they start to look normal to you, those are not the right pants anymore. You should always be wearing pants you think look stupid.
this was a fun discussion of that article:
https://discord.com/channels/1116793467654381685/1213994829164585010
I don't necessarily agree, but I think there's something there as it relates to all culture
I'll have to check that out too, I only saw the discussion on reddit which was... not great
I think if you're constantly chasing trends you're always going to feel a bit silly. Old dudes have been wearing big pants forever. They've also been wearing skinny pants forever lmao.
I guess that's one take, but it's mostly context and other cultural signifiers when you come down to it
like Ted Cruz wearing skinny chinos is not the same as the slp guy from the other post
but now that Ted Cruz wears skinny chinos, they're decidedly uncool for sure
another interesting article: https://www.blackbirdspyplane.com/p/theres-no-such-thing-as-too-big-pants
If your pants look "too big," wear even bigger pants
Jawn Dysmorphic Perceptual Shifts, plus sick shoes, the coolest graphic tee to drop in a minute, handmade jeans & more
but if they are uncool, does that mean they look stupid, and then does that mean they're cool again? 🙃
I picked up these uniqlo trousers and they weren't wide enough so I put em back tbh. Evergreen article.
also, people usually don't care that much about what you are wearing. yes there are cultural signifiers, but i dont think someone in his 40s wearing high-rise pants won't raise any eyebrows
brb gonna go shopping for these
yes, but basically not if you're old, unattractive, or both. the cutting edge of fashion is always attractive people stealing the ugliest possible styles from people who have become unattractive and doing so in a way that only they could get away with without ridicule
just get a barrel and some suspenders at that point, bring back great depressioncore
seriously though i do feel like a lot of it is just in our heads
that's society for you, and if i could change it that would be low on the priority list tbh
people always say 'just dress how you want to, whatever makes you happy' as if the fact that someone has found their way to these kinds of spaces doesn't mean it's already too late for that
wdym "too late"
that sounded ominous, but I mean it's too late for them to just do what they want because they are already aware of the opinions that are out there and any decision they make about their own style will be inflected by that knowledge
on a more practical note, are there any wider, higher-waisted options that are a bit more rugged?
I mostly wear taylor stitch boss duck canvas pants. Any recommendations that are similar but with a more generous cut?
or would thicker materials make things like pleats and the overall level of flowiness needed impossible?
The easy answer is OG-107’s for a more rugged workwear look. They are high waisted and depending on what type you get, vary from wide taper to a straight leg. As always i recommend seeking out vintage but orslow and stan ray make good repros as well
I was also looking into the Uniqlo high-waisted pants
I am very similar. My pants are mostly slim or straight cuts so idk what a wide fit would look
I tried a few Carhart jeans recently and found them too wide and slouchy for me
did you also look at the women's version? I've seen people recommend getting those instead because they're supposed to fit better, although I think they just mean even wider, which isn't exactly what I might be looking to start with
Fair
Depends on what shape you personally feel comfortable with
Naturally modern women's pants will be better for a high-waisted wider cut as that is more common today
Womens will probably just have a wider cut for the hips
One recommendation I have gotten is to slowly shift between different cuts instead of rushing to one end
For example, if you always wear a slim fit, try a straight cut for a bit, then a relaxed fit, and then once you're comfortable with those move onto a wide fit. Otherwise, it might feel a bit extreme for you
I wear mostly straight with a few relaxed, just nothing high-waisted
I like the look of these, is there anything specific to look out for when trying to find vintage ones?
When searching for vintage you always want to go off actual measurements and not tagged size. If they only offer tagged size id pass. These shrink quite a bit so the tagged size is never trustworthy.
There is another varient called the OG-507 which is poly cotton blend and a bit darker, 107 is slightly lighter and 100% cotton so be careful not to confuse the two. 507’s are also good pants but will look different so its gonna be personal preference
Very plentiful on ebay, type in og-107 fatigues and just search for your size!
thanks
do the originals typically come only in olive drab?
Originals are almost exclusively olive drab (hence the model name olive green shade 107) but there are rarer varients in khaki. The cut is reproed often in other colors though
that makes sense, any tips for styling them?
looking at pics it seems like they're primarily worn cuffed or rolled
also, should they be worn properly high around the navel like we were discussing earlier?
Here are some examples of mine. They are pretty easy to style and can be worked into a lot of different outfits
Yes they are typically a 13in rise and will sit right at about your naval.
For details i’m a 40 waist and 28ish inseam
so are you measuring that at where these would be waisted?
if I wear a 33 or 34 in pants with a lower rise, should I get that size, or measure around my navel and go with that number instead?
Measure around your naval thats your “true waist size”
ok, that's what I thought but wanted to be sure
love the pics btw, these are super versatile
are yours the vintage ones?
Thank you! Yes mine are both vintage vietnam era ones
nice, thanks again, I'll definitely have to cop these
these have the tags ripped out, but do they look like they might be actual vintage?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/176291850818
eBay
Vintage OG-107 US Army Fatigue Pants Size 36x31 Military
Vintage US Army OG-107 military fatigue pants. They are in excellent condition. No flaws at all. No stains, rips, or holes. The tag is missing but they measure out to 36x31. Very high waisted pair of pants. Arguably the perfect summer pants. Please feel free to message me if you have any questions or offers.
also, without tags or feeling the material, is there any other way to tell if it's a 107 or 507?
Dickies 874!
The easiest tell is the color and and 507’s have a permanent crease. These look like 507’s to me
thanks, I'll check those out too
@Diggs I think you're right, they just look like 107s because they're more faded than most 507s.
is the fit significantly different on the 507?
No fit and cut is essentially the same, only difference is material and permanent crease
fair enough, thanks again