You know what I find really sexist?

Men's pant sizes. Why are they so much simpler than women's pants? Are men too stupid to understand that a Size 1 is smaller than a Size 6? It would make a lot more sense to standardize the pants sizing system to use numbers, thus opening up the pants market to more men than just "smalls," "mediums," "larges," and "extra larges." DOWN WITH WORDS, UP WITH NUMBERS!

 

I think it's just because girls don't like to be called fat. Or in this case, "extra large".

 

so we counter sexism with sexism

 

And men do like to be called inadequate? Or in this case, "small?"

 

It is the way of our people.

 

I wish I was small. ;_;

(yes I got the joke, im just saying)

 

But my pants do have numbers on them. .-. One for the waist and another for the inseam. A lot of women I know have said that they would prefer the measuring to be that way too instead of size *insert random number here*.

 

I wear L shirts but I don' t have a clue what my pants size is. I just ask an employee if they have my size and they pick it up for me.

 

...I'm not sure if I should make a serious response or what.

 

When in doubt, or what.

 

wow this thread reeks

 

h&m now sells women's pants by waist/leg length lord bless their souls

 

women are more self conscience about their weight

 

See, that's sexist. Not all women are more self conscious about their weight. Don't go generalizing like that.

 

but why
there's more pressure for men to be big tall and handsome.

 

I know what I find sexist; I find sexism sexist.

 

IS ANYONE ELSE CONCERNED WITH HOW RVR JUST DOUBLE POSTED?!?!

thread winner[DOUBLEPOST=1386448381][/DOUBLEPOST]

And you're not any of them... Short, stout, sexy and bitchy :B

 

He only said three things...you said fo-four...

 

It's always a struggle, my friend.

 

I've bought pants in both USA and Germay and they all had waist length and leg length as numbers. Never had medium, large etc.