How old is your waistline?

[MrBern]

1960's men's trousers, not to be confused with young ladies clothing had a very decent rise to them.
I believe those hip-huggers were a young ladies style. Not for older women to be falling out of the top of..

Probably up until only the last decade men's trousers had a decent amount of rise. A dress shirt would stay mostly tucked in the course of a workday. Jeans fit better too. You could bend over to tie a boot and not show the world your backside.
This modern fad for low rise men's trouser and denim is for the birds..

Ive heard or hiphuggers for men & boys in the `60s. Im not sure if that term referred to the rise, more likely that the pants were cut snug at the hips. The term waspopular in the 70s too. And lowrise pants were trendy in the `70s as well. But today its hard to find pants that arent low rise.
Not Robert Plant's jeans at far right, that rise must be 4 or 5 inches below his navel

 

[GBR]

It would be interesting to see a navel added to that diagram but I prefer mine to be 1" above the navel for most trousers although I do have two recently made pairs 2" above for formal occasions. I am thinking of making that standard because they are very comfortable.

 

[jswindle2]

I believe the waist should be at or just below the navel. I know depending on the cut of the pants, they may be made to rest at the hips, but I only buy pants that allow me to wear them at my navel. This article is stupid and was written by someone trying to appear young and hip. Levi's were however made to rest at the hips

 

[Matt_the_chap]

I find this surprising - I'm eighteen and want my (eventual) Magnoli custom trousers (Oxford Bag) style to sit up to 2" above my navel. It also reminds me of a conversation I had with my best friend - he had no idea where his waist was, and refused to believe me when I informed him it was on the navel, or, more generally, where the body curves inwards around the mid-section.

 

[Widebrim]

Ive heard or hiphuggers for men & boys in the `60s. Im not sure if that term referred to the rise, more likely that the pants were cut snug at the hips. The term waspopular in the 70s too. And lowrise pants were trendy in the `70s as well.

Hiphuggers were the thing in the '70s, and the term referred to the rise, although we usually didn't show our boxers (would have been kicked out of school for that)...

I'm over 35, and my waistsize is 33", and I often wear modern trousers at the waist (as has been said, it's rather hard not to). But when I wear vintage, the pants go up.

 

[Feraud]

Not Robert Plant's jeans at far right, that rise must be 4 or 5 inches below his navel

This is a good pic because it shows both ends of the spectrum. Plant (on the right) with his hiphuggers and JPJones (on the left) in a more manly rise pant.

 

[Tenorclef]

Where do you wear your trousers (Pants to you American guys)?

As I fast approach 40 i'm endeavoring to come to some sort of concord with suit et body. I must confess this had me worried-

Article by the BBC found here-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8487106.stm

 

[Edward]

Their idea of "natural waist" looks decidedly too low to my eye. On that silhoette, I would have placed the natural waist as being closer to where they have "Age 45" marked. I don't feel comfortable in trousers with a waistband significantly lower than my navel - never have done, no matter what age I was or how wide the legs. When I still wore drainpipe jeans, I was damned fussy about making sure they sat comfortably at my bellybutton.

 

[Fifty150]

I like my jeans a little baggy. A bit loose. More room to move in. And they just feel good at the hips. I've been wearing them that way since I was a kid. I guess my parents always bought them bigger so that we can grow into them.

But dress pants should be worn at the waist. Or you'll just look like an idiot with your suit pants falling off your ass.

 

[Edward]

I had a pair of Lee jeans years ago. They had a factory shop in the Six Counties, not far from my folks' place. Seconds where you could hardly find even the tiniest flaw for buttons. Unfortunately, they were all cut to sit on the hips - damn things always felt exactly two inches too shallow in the rise for me (this was waaayyyy pre-vintage Marlowe). Had to get shot of them in the end - never comfortable. Couldn't live with 501s either, for exactly the same reason.

 

[Yeps]

I had a pair of Lee jeans years ago. They had a factory shop in the Six Counties, not far from my folks' place. Seconds where you could hardly find even the tiniest flaw for buttons. Unfortunately, they were all cut to sit on the hips - damn things always felt exactly two inches too shallow in the rise for me (this was waaayyyy pre-vintage Marlowe). Had to get shot of them in the end - never comfortable. Couldn't live with 501s either, for exactly the same reason.

505s have a higher waist. Still not full rise, but a bit further off the hips than 501s.

 

[LoveMyHats2]

How old is my waistline? Have had the same size pants for so long, can't recall how long...33 waist, 32 length...

 

[Mr slick]

Their idea of "natural waist" looks decidedly too low to my eye. On that silhoette, I would have placed the natural waist as being closer to where they have "Age 45" marked. I don't feel comfortable in trousers with a waistband significantly lower than my navel - never have done, no matter what age I was or how wide the legs. When I still wore drainpipe jeans, I was damned fussy about making sure they sat comfortably at my bellybutton.

I totally agree with you. All of my trousers sit at the naval or above...to my eye, around the naval is the natural waistline.