ugly pants: vote for your favorite
February 23, 2010 
4 Comments
They just won’t go away. And it’s extremely frustrating to see these pants coming around for another season. Didn’t the designers learn from last seasons RTV’s (Return to Vendor requests)? Didn’t women learn that this is not a flattering look on any body type? I mean, they don’t even look good on the models!
Instead of joining them, lets have some fun and pick the ugliest pant.
It was truly difficult to narrow it down but here I present the three worst this season so far:
1) Rag + Bone Long John Trousers. Something about ‘long john’ and ‘trousers’ being put together for a name makes me giggle. $290 includes the inside inset of black fabric to protect you against chaffing.
2) Blue Life Dancing Queen Pants. For those moments when you want to feel like a Victoria’s Secret model on the dance floor, these sheer lace pant-ies will make you the most popular gal. $97.
3) Ports 1961 Lounge Trousers. With an elasticized waist plus satin fabric to show all the lumps and bumps, this is all yours for a measly $450.
[poll id="8"]
About the Author
Oh why can I not choose all 3. I am sorry but they are all so horrible. My sister showed up for a visit last year wearing pair number 1 and my 3 yr old asked her why she was wearing poopy pants!
I hope your daughter never loses her honesty Maegan — you made me laugh out loud!
Ow! My eyes! Number one is lumberjack gone terribly wrong, and number two says “I’m putting myself through law school by pole dancing.” And $450 for something you could pick up at Walmart? (Except they’d be in a ditsy little print, with lots of pink and green.) I vote for Lumberjack as the worst offender.
I wanted to vote for all three, until I saw the price tag on the third. Even though the price on all of them is outrageous, that was what tipped the scales for me.