Actual Fashion Question
 

I have a question about pleats in pants. Yes, I know that pleated pants have fallen out of fashion in a NASDAQesque drop. But I have an observation. At the beginning of the 90's, I worked in a department store. Most trousers were pleated, and the only customers who bought plain-front pants were men over 50. To be exact, the only customers who bought them were the wives of men over 50. Those men didn't actually shop for clothes.

Now, 10 or so years later, flat-front pants (good marketing, no one wants plain anything) are sleek and stylish. Pleated pants have a reputation for drawing attention to the middle area of a man's body and making him look dowdy. I seem to recall a dozen years ago, we told men that pleats were slimming.

What gives? I have a few theories, hopefully the fashionistas can agree on one of them.

1) It's all marketing/fashion. Men tend to buy pants only when they gain/lose weight. In order to get men to buy more, retailers need to convince men that they need an entirely new wardrobe.

2) We're being lied to now. Plain-front/Flat-front pants will be the acid-washed jeans of the early millenum, and one day tastemakers will wake up, shake off the fog of the decade's activities, and shudder at the thought of wearing pants without a pleat.

3) We were being lied to then. Pleated pants were always a bad idea, never looked good on any man, and we should pray they die a certain death.

4) Plain-front pants are cut differently than they used to be, so you can't compare today's pants with yesterday's pants. Today's pants are objectively more flattering.

5) It's all body-type dependent. Some men look good with pleats, others sans. Men should find out which is the case for them and dress accordingly, heedless of fashion. Pleats only exascerbate a dowdy look if their wearer is trying to squeeze into too small a size, and flat-fronts don't objectively look better on all men.

Is the correct answer one (or more) of the above? Is BRC the only one who can resolve such a Gordian knot of a problem with one slash of her rapier wit?

Tailer Dane
 

Oh goodie. Now we can look forward to a tale of languishing in the hospital losing weight and commentary on how offensive it is of you to mock the ill. Even though you weren't. I just love these tales; I find them sexy. Be still my heart.

Because Penske and Bilmore Asked
 

are you my sister? If you are, you liked the cheese of the month club, and they have a wine of the month club too.

Problem with these clubs: if you like the wine, you may not be able to find it in stores. If you buy at your local store, they usually have (or can get) more.

Because Penske and Bilmore Asked
 

If I am your sister, I suggest you make an arrangement with my local wine merchant to send me a couple bottles a month. It would make an excellent holiday gift.

Actual Fashion Question
 

I say it's this one. In the early 90s, men, while heavy, weren't fat, so there was some hope that pleats could slim. Now they're so fat that pleats just bulge (especially since they're buying the same size pants). So flat is in.

Or the marketing one. Like three-button jackets.

Actual Fashion Question
 

Holy shit, the whole country? I must be hallucinating the actual fat people I remember from as far back as the 80s. Or they've put a chip in my brain to alter my memories.

Actual Fashion Question
 

I thought the 2-button jacket was a 30-year fad started by JKF and that 3-button was the norm?

Actual Fashion Question
 

Wrong: That man is fat.

Right: That man is a fat.

Carry on.

Actual Fashion Question
 

Yes, or at least 3 buttons are more traditional than 2 buttons. Not sure about the JFK attribution, I think it was a bit earlier, but 2 buttons are defintely a post WWII thing on regular suits.

Because Penske and Bilmore Asked
 

Not anymore!! Fifth Circuit struck it down in Dickerson v. Texas Alcohol Beverage Commission as interfering with the commerce clause.

We (the DD and I, not the DP, because she's never been to Napa) are pleased we no longer have to sign petitions in Napa.

Edited to add: Scroll, then post. Scroll, then post. I also note that neither the DD nor the DP had anything to do with my inability to catch up before posting. Though the DP did make me late for work this morning so we can blame her for something.

Why the FB sucks
 

In my experience, stuff from goodvibes is hardcore. Just don't get anything they produced themselves.

Actual Fashion Question
 

I think it is all marketing, combining in new and interesting ways with (i) the fact that about 70-80% of all American men buy their trousers too tight in the waist and (ii) the fact that men are increasingly being marketed to directly as vanity consumers.

Either pleated or plain-front trousers will look fine on just about any figure - IF THEY FIT PROPERLY. Obviously, that is a big "IF". If the trou are properly fitted, the real question is how the wearer wants them to drape - which depends on fabric, cut of the leg, etc., in addition to how the wearer moves.

I think the current fashion for flat fronts is really driven by the greater interest in mens clothing as "fashion," and therefore something widely shown on svelt beautiful people rather than something your father wears. Given that men are incapable of wearing the right size without serious intervention, we must assume that our prospective pant-wearer is going to get trousers too small. On fit, skinny people, flat-fronts look better when worn too small, because pleats worn too tight do that "flare out" thing. Men see this in ads, and they think that this is the more flattering way to go. (On fatter people, the pleated trousers flaring out in the front are counterballanced by the fact that they don't pull as much in the back - something your fathers might remember.)

It seems to me that the general fattening of America will lead to a pleating backlash, but who knows - American men may prove as susceptible to marketing as the women who think size 16 spandex is fashionable because the stick-figure model looks so good in it.

Actual Fashion Question
 

True, but the traditional 3 button suit (as worn by, say, Dean Acheson in 1951) is not the same 3 button suit as worn by you* young hipsters today.

Secretary Acheson's suit had a third button, but it didn't have those ridiculous high lapels that make today's 3 button suits look so silly. (Speaking of silly, thankfully I have yet to see a lawyer in one of those Michael Irvin-esque 4 button suits.)

* uh, not you B_R_C -- though given the Marlene Dietrich vibe you had when you discussed menswear for women, I bet that one of them 3 button suits would work for you.

Actual Fashion Question
 

How much larger should trouser waist size be than FB Man waist size?

Actual Fashion Question
 

The Rat Pack suits don't look that much different than today's suits, do they?