![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
j4Today I went on a quest for work-smart trousers. The sort of trousers I can wear with any of my plain skinny-tops or neat three-quarter-sleeve jumpers, and it will immediately look moderately smart and not unsexy. Comfortable trousers which don't make any particular statement about my identity.
You see, the tops were easy enough to find; on Saturday I spent £15 in charity shops and came away with six assorted tops, mostly from well-known high street shops (as if I cared), in black, purple and navy. All machine-washable, all sufficiently unmemorable that nobody will notice if I wear them on a 6-day rotation. I hoped that the trousers would be equally simple; and besides, one needs fewer pairs of trousers than tops. Not being able to face another trawl through charity shops, I thought I'd have a look through the sales in Miss Selfridge, New Look, et al.
Big mistake.
I'm sure I remember a time, not so long ago, when trousers covered one's knickers. When one pulled on a pair of trousers and the waistband settled, as its name would suggest, around one's waist. You see, I am not a flat-stomached 17-year-old, I do not wear hot pink thongs, and I do not particularly want to reveal my comfortable Big Pants to the world at large -- both for my sake and the world's.
What I want should be simple enough: black trousers. Just plain black, with pockets, covering the area from waist to ankles. Beyond that I don't care whether they're button-fly, zip-fly, side-zip, drawstring, elastic-waisted, clasp-fastened, cotton, polycotton, wool, synthetic, faux moleskin, crimplene, combats, cords, boot-cut, stretch-fit, straight-cut, or even bloody bell-bottoms.
What I do not want is distressed-satin hipster pedal-pushers with gathered or ruched turn-ups. I do not want shiny PVC plus-fours -- at least, not for work. I do not particularly want my trousers pre-faded: the washing machine does that for me quite nicely, thank you. I do not want my trousers ripped, frayed, coming apart at the seams, with unfinished edges: time and wear will deal with all of that. I do not want the trousers to be made of four different types of material, all of which will inevitably shrink at slightly different rates. I do not want every seam to be embellished with smocking, studs, patches, gauze, ribbons, buttons, press-studs, chains, strings, D-rings, and all manner of other trailing bits and bobs; and above all I do not want the word "angel" emblazoned in rhinestones across my goddamned ARSE.
In the end, I resorted to charity-shop sifting again, and eventually bought two skirts: one straight-sided, charcoal grey, almost-fleecy mostly-cotton Pepe Jeans skirt (£6); and one slightly more full and flowing Laura Ashley skirt, in soft black synthetic material (£5). Both fulfil all my criteria of sensibleness, leg-covering, and washability (though whether I can cycle in them remains to be seen). The only point where they fall down is the regrettable absence of pockets; but having moved from trousers to skirts, perhaps the next logical step is (whisper it!) a handbag. That should be easy enough, though: I just want something black and sensible...
You see, the tops were easy enough to find; on Saturday I spent £15 in charity shops and came away with six assorted tops, mostly from well-known high street shops (as if I cared), in black, purple and navy. All machine-washable, all sufficiently unmemorable that nobody will notice if I wear them on a 6-day rotation. I hoped that the trousers would be equally simple; and besides, one needs fewer pairs of trousers than tops. Not being able to face another trawl through charity shops, I thought I'd have a look through the sales in Miss Selfridge, New Look, et al.
Big mistake.
I'm sure I remember a time, not so long ago, when trousers covered one's knickers. When one pulled on a pair of trousers and the waistband settled, as its name would suggest, around one's waist. You see, I am not a flat-stomached 17-year-old, I do not wear hot pink thongs, and I do not particularly want to reveal my comfortable Big Pants to the world at large -- both for my sake and the world's.
What I want should be simple enough: black trousers. Just plain black, with pockets, covering the area from waist to ankles. Beyond that I don't care whether they're button-fly, zip-fly, side-zip, drawstring, elastic-waisted, clasp-fastened, cotton, polycotton, wool, synthetic, faux moleskin, crimplene, combats, cords, boot-cut, stretch-fit, straight-cut, or even bloody bell-bottoms.
What I do not want is distressed-satin hipster pedal-pushers with gathered or ruched turn-ups. I do not want shiny PVC plus-fours -- at least, not for work. I do not particularly want my trousers pre-faded: the washing machine does that for me quite nicely, thank you. I do not want my trousers ripped, frayed, coming apart at the seams, with unfinished edges: time and wear will deal with all of that. I do not want the trousers to be made of four different types of material, all of which will inevitably shrink at slightly different rates. I do not want every seam to be embellished with smocking, studs, patches, gauze, ribbons, buttons, press-studs, chains, strings, D-rings, and all manner of other trailing bits and bobs; and above all I do not want the word "angel" emblazoned in rhinestones across my goddamned ARSE.
In the end, I resorted to charity-shop sifting again, and eventually bought two skirts: one straight-sided, charcoal grey, almost-fleecy mostly-cotton Pepe Jeans skirt (£6); and one slightly more full and flowing Laura Ashley skirt, in soft black synthetic material (£5). Both fulfil all my criteria of sensibleness, leg-covering, and washability (though whether I can cycle in them remains to be seen). The only point where they fall down is the regrettable absence of pockets; but having moved from trousers to skirts, perhaps the next logical step is (whisper it!) a handbag. That should be easy enough, though: I just want something black and sensible...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-05 10:22 am (UTC)As for handbags, M&S did a decent shoulder bag a couple of years ago - big enough for my normal pocket gubbins plus book plus nappy changing kit - black and sensible. Or how about a small black rucksack?
I do not want the word "angel" emblazoned in rhinestones across my goddamned ARSE.
Well, no, you don't need it spelling out.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-05 04:12 pm (UTC)Slightly tapered? How peculiar. Reminds me of that 80s craze for ski-pants or whatever you call those trousers with the bit that goes under your foot. I've always tried to avoid things like that -- I find they emphasise the thickness of my legs too much. And make me look shorter, though that could be just paranoia on my part (most things make me look short, because, er, I'm short).
Or how about a small black rucksack?
A rucksack would be more the thing than a handbag or shoulder-bag, really, yes; I find it hard to cycle with things slung over one shoulder. I have a little black shiny bag with two straps (so it can be worn in the style of a rucksack) but it's a bit evening-ish, and very small -- ideally I want something that's big enough to contain wallet, phone, keys, Palm, Swiss Army knife, camera, gloves, and at least one book. And sticking-plasters. And sweets. And string. And all the other things a girl should never be without.
[me:] I do not want the word "angel" emblazoned in rhinestones across my goddamned ARSE.
Well, no, you don't need it spelling out.
Hah! I'm no angel. Say halo, wave goodbye.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 12:21 am (UTC)Yes, well, I can't deny that, but I don't like trousers flapping around my ankles! And anyway, I was an 80s teenager, and wore ski-pants (and pedal-pushers) and liked them. They're better than flares!
Hah! I'm no angel. Say halo, wave goodbye./i
:-)
no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 02:44 am (UTC)Also, leggings have no pockets.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 05:18 am (UTC)The lack of pockets is sometimes a problem but I carry a reasonable amount of crap... uh, useful everyday stuff... in the pockets of my fleece. And I also, may the gods take mercy on me, have a handbag, which was mostly bought so I could shove books in it and also manage to get another piece of hand luggage on aeroplanes.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 09:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 09:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 10:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 02:41 am (UTC)Very few of my trousers flap, but then I often have to turn them up because they're always too long for me, and the turnup probably stops them flapping. Maybe some of my trousers are slightly tapered, I probably wouldn't have noticed if it's only very slight. I will have to go and measure the diameter of all my trousers now, dammit!
I was an 80s teenager, and wore ski-pants (and pedal-pushers) and liked them.
I was an 80s child (didn't get to teenage until 1991), and hated having straps under my feet. They irritated me. I have flat feet, though, so maybe people with proper insteps don't even notice the strap.
They're better than flares!
Hmmm. I'm not over-keen on flares, but I'd definitely rather have flares than leggings any day. And I'd rather have some trousers which were flared but otherwise quite plain, than non-flared with lots of buttons and bows.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-06 09:53 am (UTC)Hey, it's a hobby!
hated having straps under my feet
I didn't love that, but judicious positioning of straps and socks helped.
Right now I'll take just about anything that fits and will do so for a few weeks - all the maternity trousers were too big about two weeks after YoungBloke arrived and I'm intending losing a bit more of the belly before I go back to work. At which point I'll need new trousers anyway, so I'm not spending lots on an in-between wardrobe.