Jeans with no rear pockets

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (39 of them)
It's not that I'm against tight pants. I love them! But, girls need to realize that there is such a thing as TOO tight.

Walter Cronkite, Friday, 8 November 2002 15:24 (twenty-one years ago) link

Too tight as in white transparent enough to see the coulour of the underwear, now thats too tight.

Ed (dali), Friday, 8 November 2002 15:35 (twenty-one years ago) link

They look best on skinny Japanese girls, the no pockets streamlines and makes them look even more skinny than they already are...This was an interesting development at first, but now a bit played out I think...bring back the pockets!

Mary (Mary), Friday, 8 November 2002 15:41 (twenty-one years ago) link

Jeans on females need to be tight, but not so tight as to emphasize on the little crevices which need not be seen, just tight enough to get a jist of the basic shape, countour, and roundness of the backside. If you ask me, the pockets on the FRONT side of girls' jeans are the ones that need to be removed. At least you can fit your hands into the back pockets. I don't know why front pockets are even there. It can't be for looks. Who looks at that spot anyway? If you ask me, the entire fashion industry has got the whole pocket-removal thing backwards...

Andy, Friday, 8 November 2002 17:11 (twenty-one years ago) link

What's going on with false pockets too? I have a pair of trousers with utter useless tiny slits in them where pockets could have been, for no apparent reason other to irritate me.

alix (alix), Friday, 8 November 2002 17:25 (twenty-one years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.