They’re more comfortable, still form fitting, and best of all: THE POCKETS. THEY HAVE ACTUAL POCKETS.
don’t believe me? look:
these are boys pants, and they look just as good on me as any other skinny jeans I own
See that phone? I’m going to put it in the pocket. Must be so small right??
Ah yes, girl pants length. Probably can’t fit any further than that-
what? what’s this?
Good god. Oh good lord in heaven. This is blasphemous.
Look at how much room is still there. There’s chaos in the streets. Babies are crying. Fashion designers are screaming out of fear of the unknown.
Buy your pants in the boys section, girls. Live in the beautiful world you deserve where you can fit shit in your pocket.
Curvy ladies: Men’s dress pants have more room in the butt. I don’t know why, I only know that all my dress pants for work are off the rack in the men’s department in Target. Literally nobody has noticed, except a couple of my younger coworkers who’ve asked me–you guessed it–”oh my god, where did you find pants with pockets?”
Tall ladies: men’s pants are easier to find in longer lengths than women’s pants are.
Trans ladies: Wanna get on this gravy train, but afraid people will misgender you for wearing clothes off the men’s racks? Step one: tell me who these people are and I will punch them in the face. Step two: if it doesn’t make you dysphoric, please don’t feel obligated to wear pants off the women’s racks if pants off the men’s racks are more comfy/useful to you. I’m a cis woman who’s been wearing pants from the boys’ section and, later, the men’s section, ever since I hit puberty and in thirteen years maybe, maybe half a dozen people have noticed. And it’s always women asking the oh-my-god-pockets question. You’re all good. ❤
Fat ladies: you will pay the same for a pair of 42×32 jeans as for a pair of 34×32 jeans, instead of having to pay some kind of Fat Penance Tax by way of being in the “plus size” section. Also, did I mention more room in the butt?
Ladies concerned about modesty: For obvious reasons, there is more crotch space in men’s pants. Embrace it and enjoy a life free from cameltoe worries and spontaneous labia-wedgies when you squat down.
All ladies: I swear to god the waists in women’s pants these days are made specifically to fit exactly nobody so that no matter what you do, your underwear will show. Men’s pants do not do this. The waists sit where they’re supposed to and will actually lay flat against the small of your back instead of flopping open to show your unmentionables to the world. If you want hiphugger jeans, buy one leg-length too small and one waist-size too large and let them hang, and they still won’t accidentally show your undies. Men’s pants will last longer. They cost less, in a lot of cases. Embrace the men’s jeans. Buy the men’s jeans. Stop buying shitty flimsy women’s jeans that wear out in six months.
AND FINALLY: to determine your size in men’s pants, take a tape measure around your waist at its smallest point. This is your waist size and will be the first number in a pair of men’s pants. Next, take the tape measure from about an inch below your no-no squares parts, and run it to your ankle. (You may need a friend or parent to help with this.) This is your inseam length, and will be the second number on a pair of men’s pants. Men’s and boys’ pants are tailored the same way, so if you have trouble finding your waist size in men’s, hop over to the boys’ section. Feel no shame. If they’d give us decent fucking pants we wouldn’t have to steal theirs, right?
Listen you guys, I am SO MAD ABOUT THIS. I’ve seen this first post before, and recently my mom said, “Hey, did you see that post on Tumblr about shopping for jeans in the men’s department?”
And I said yeah, I’d seen it, I’ve been through the Trying To Fit Clothes On My Stupid Body wars, and this post really only applied to skinny jeans because they’re so stretchy. It couldn’t possibly work for regular jeans! I have TRIED SO MANY TIMES. I’ve always shopped in the men’s department because women’s clothes are like 90% bullshit and 10% fake pockets.
But I hadn’t seen the second addition, which gave me more hope, and I decided to just try on a few pairs when I was at Old Navy the other day. They have some “classic” jeans with no give to them at all, which is what I was trying on years ago that convinced me it just wasn’t possible. (Jeans in my price range didn’t really come with any form of stretch back then, as I recall. Textile technology is bad-ass.) But these days they mostly have “flex” jeans that have some give to them. (Women’s jeans are usually labeled “stretch” but apparently men’s have to be “flex” like they need stretchy garments so their HUGE MUSCLES don’t just TEAR THEIR CLOTHES!)
This was totally an impulse decision so I couldn’t measure myself, but I grabbed a few sizes based on what I vaguely thought my measurements probably were and decided it couldn’t possibly be worse than the endless cycle of regret, dissatisfaction, and recrimination that is trying on women’s clothing.
The first pair I tried on fit like a DREAM. I’ve been gaining weight lately which is a whole separate nightmare (mainly centered around “but I don’t WANT to buy new bras, this is bullshit!”) and the reason I need to buy new jeans because nothing freaking fits me, and I was sure these wouldn’t either, but DAMN. They’re the best pair of jeans I own. Twice as thick, pockets twice as big, legs nice and loose (they don’t even sell women’s jeans with a cut remotely similar to this), and contrary to my super dumb opinion from before this experience, they’ve got my plenty of room for all my womanly curvey bits. AND because they’re actually a relaxed fit instead of trying to cling to every inch of me, they don’t show my weight nearly as much as my women’s jeans do, they’re easier to move in, they’re not constantly inching down my hips with every move I make, and overall they just make me feel GOOD about how I look which is a strange new sensation I could definitely get used to.
It’s like a miracle. I want to cry both out of joy and because of all the shitty jeans now filling my closet when I could have been buying comfortable, relaxed, pocket-having men’s jeans all these years. Many blessings to the posters above, may your crops grow and your cows give milk and your jeans hold all the gadgets you desire.
Also: men’s pants have constant sizes that are based off of actual measurements instead of the women’s whatever-the-company-wants-to-make-the-size sizes. They’re far more reliable and your size will translate to other brands.
@get-dunkd-on help me remember this for our next Goodwill run lmao
Big boobed people, you know how when we try to zip up a sweater or button a flanel we fucking can’t? Because it gaps? GET THEM IN THE MEN’S SECTION. GO. THEY ARE THICK AND WARM AND THEY ACTUALLY SHUT.
The HR manager tried to convince me that the offer was competitive. She told me that she couldn’t offer more because it would be unfair to
other paralegals. She said that if we did not agree to a salary that
day, then she would have to suspend me because I would be working past
the allowed temp phase. I insisted that she look into a higher offer and
she agreed that we could meet again later. Before I left, she had
something to add.
“Make sure you don’t talk about your salary with anyone,” she said
sweetly, as if she was giving advice to her own son. “It causes conflict
and people can be let go for doing it.” (This is to the best of my
recollection, not verbatim.)
It wasn’t all that surprising to hear this from a corporate HR manager. What was surprising was the déjà vu.
Just three months earlier, some of my coworkers at the coffee shop
told me that our bosses, who worked in the office on salaries, and even
the owner, got a higher cut of the tips than we did. One barista told me
that when she complained about it, the managers reduced her hours.
When you make minimum wage and have to fight for more than 30 hours
per week, tips are pretty important, so I sat down with my managers to
discuss the controversy. That’s when they told me not to talk about it
with the other baristas. The owner “hates it when people talk about
money,” my manager added, and “would fire people for it if he could.” I
sulked back to the espresso machine, making my lattes at half speed and
failing to do side work.
In both workplaces, my bosses were breaking the law.
Under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA), all workers
have the right to engage “concerted activity for mutual aid or
protection” and “organize a union to negotiate with [their] employer
concerning [their] wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment.” In six states, including my home state of Illinois, the law even more explicitly protects the rights of workers to discuss their pay.
This is true whether the employers make their threats verbally or on
paper and whether the consequences are firing or merely some sort of
cold shoulder from management. My managers at the coffee
shop seemed to understand that they weren’t allowed to fire me solely
for talking about pay, but they may not have known that it is also
illegal to discourage employees from discussing their pay with each
other. As NYU law professor Cynthia Estlund explained to NPR,
the law “means that you and your co-workers get to talk together about
things that matter to you at work.” Even “a nudge from the boss saying
‘we don’t do that around here’ … is also unlawful under the National
Labor Relations Act,” Estlund added.
And yet, gag rules thrive in workplaces across the country. In a
report updated this year, the Institute for Women’s Policy Research
found that about half of American employees in all sectors are
either explicitly prohibited or strongly discouraged from discussing
pay with their coworkers. In the private sector, the number is higher,
at 61 percent.
Damn managers have definitely told me this before
Always reblog
adding to this on the subject of medical/family leave:
a coworker of mine (and integral part of a voluntary team he and I are the sole members of) had to have foot surgery and was told he’d need six weeks to recuperate. when he went to HR they told him his best option was to resign and then reapply for his same job after his 6 week recovery time.
he originally asked them if he could take those weeks as unpaid time off, and was about to take their “quit and come back” offer because they made it sound like the only option. this would have cancelled the very same healthcare he was using to pay for the treatment in the first place.
this is a fairly common tactic HR managers will try to use to scare workers out of taking any leave at all, or force you to reduce the amount of time you are “unproductive.”
you are entitled to twelve full weeks of (unpaid) time off to care for a family member or to recuperate from medical conditions. the explicit qualifying scenarios are listed on the website above.
you are entitled to keep your job and return to your position on completion. any repercussion/dismissal from your company is illegal. do not get bullied out of your job for medical treatments you or a family member needs. if you are in a situation where you are being forced to quit for a situation that qualifies under FMLA you should contact a lawyer.
TO REITERATE:
IT IS ILLEGAL TO BE FIRED FOR DISCUSSING PAY WITH FELLOW EMPLOYEES. IT IS A TYPE OF WORKER/UNION SUPPRESSION.
Tweet 1: I can see a lot of people either avoiding Plan B & ending up pregnant or attempting to take multiple doses & getting sick.
Tweet 2: anyone w a credit card (not everyone, I know) can/should use ella ella-rx.com they’ll ship it overnight $45
SIGNAL BOOST. Ella is another form of emergency contraception/the morning-after pill. It’s more effective than Plan B and can be taken up to FIVE DAYS after your mishap, rather than three days. Please spread this around; with all of the anti-choice legislation flying about and how difficult it can be for some people to get Plan B even OTC (like minors, people living in small towns, etc.), this might be the only way a lot of people can get their hands on the morning-after pill.
Boooooost
I’ve also read that Ella is more effective for plus size people.
This is important. Ella works for everyone. Plan B is not effective for people over 176 pounds. Protect yourself
Everyone?
Boosting the shit outta this.
Plan B is not effective for people over 176 pounds.
Plan B is not effective for people over 176 pounds.
Plan B is not effective for people over 176 pounds.
Plan B is not effective for people over 176 pounds.
Plan B is not effective for people over 176 pounds.
At least that’s the verdict of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which today struck down a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) order from 2010 that forced Internet service providers (ISPs) like Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and Time Warner Cable to abide by the principles of network neutrality. These principles broadly stipulate that ISP network management must be transparent, and that ISPs can’t engage in practices that block, stifle or discriminate against (lawful) websites or traffic types on the Internet.
That’s the bare bones story, wrapped in ugly acronyms (FCC, ISP, etc.). But why should you care that network neutrality (“net neutrality”) may be gone for good?
1. No more net neutrality means ISPs can now discriminate against content they dislike.
Everyone gets their Internet from an Internet service provider — an ISP like AT&T, Verizon, Comcast or Time Warner Cable. Under net neutrality rules, these ISPs have to treat all content you access over the Internet “roughly the same way“ — they can’t speed up traffic from websites they like or delay competitor’s traffic.
Now, with net neutrality gone, ISPs can discriminate, favoring their business partners while delaying or blocking websites they don’t like. Think your cable CEO hates free online porn? Now you’ll know for sure!
2. No more net neutrality means ISPs can now force websites to PAY for faster content delivery.
3. Destroying net neutrality is bad for small businesses.
Put together items one and two and it becomes clear — negating net neutrality is bad for small businesses. If ISPs force website owners pay for faster load times, tiny retailers and personal websites will be the ones to suffer from slower content delivery.
Alternately — or additionally — ISPs will have no reason not to favor partner sites: Time Warner Cable, for instance, might favor the website of CNN (owned by the Time Warner Corporation) over the websites of competing cable news networks MSNBC and Fox News. Still, it’s the indies again that will lose out here. While Time Warner Cable might favor CNN and Comcast MSNBC, independent news networks almost certainly won’t get special treatment from any ISPs. Expand this out to music sites, web publishing, etc., and you begin to see the problem.
4. Without net neutrality, entire types of online traffic (like Netflix) may be in jeopardy.
Netflix watchers and BitTorrent users might want to beware — soon your beloved services may not work like they used to. Now that net neutrality’s down for the count, ISPs can discriminate against entire types of traffic: For instance, an ISP could slow or block all peer-to-peer file sharing, or all online video streaming.
Think it sounds unbelievably stupid for an ISP to stifle a certain traffic types indiscriminately? Comcast has seen reason to stifle both streaming video and peer-to-peer in the past.
From an ISP’s perspective, discriminating against some traffic types makes business sense: Many ISPs are also cable television providers, which means the “cord-cutting” enabled by peer-to-peer and streaming online video isn’t good for their bottom line.
5. Without net neutrality, your ISPs can make even more money without actually improving the Internet.
Right now, America’s broadband is slow. It’s slow because ISPs can already make gobs of money by charging the rich a ton for high-quality Internet while leaving the rest of America with subpar (or no) service.
SIGNAL BOOST THE FUCK OUT OF THIS SHIT AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE AIN’T HAVIN’ IT!
SIGN IT
Yeah, I’m beating this horse because IT AIN’T DEAD ENOUGH.
Look, here is the deal. The FCC has different categories of stuff it regulates. Level 1 is ‘telecommunications.’ I.e. services that provide the fundamental building blocks of communications in this country.
Level 2 is ‘information services.’ This is stuff that is useful, yes, but if somebody fucks with it a bit then you’re not fundamentally disrupting, redefining, or controlling life as American citizens live it.
Back in 2002, the FCC (for reasons unknown to God or man) decided to label The Internet, as ‘information services.’
So now, when people tried to pass a big ol’ law through Congress that says, “ISPs aren’t allowed to fuck with internet traffic or play favorites,” the courts said, “That’s not allowed, if you’re going to label the Internet as a category 2 service. However, we really highly advise the FCC to change the Internet to category 1 service, because we don’t know what you guys are smoking over there but even WE can tell that’s what it should be. In which case we’ll give this bill the stamp of approval so hard that the paper’ll smoke afterwards.”
So BASICALLY this is SUPER-EASY TO FIX, and all it needs is for the FCC to get off its apparently addled duff and make the change.
a paper mache bucket ... tumblr mirror 
