High Rise Jeans

[Cyber Lip]

Will someone please explain something to me? I read on a lot of jeans forums and threads, and sometimes on here, people talking about higher rise jeans and wearing their jeans up high. I've never really gotten this as my jeans, no matter how high, low, or medium the rise measurement is, want to rest at the same spot on my waist, which is just below my little paunch. I can't pull them up any higher than that because of my fat shelf/muffin top/love handles. If I wanted to pull them up over that I'd need a size 50 LOL. Are the guys telling people to wear them up higher 0% body fat guys or something, with no chub around the middle whatsoever? btw - I'm a relatively slim guy but with just a little jelly roll under my navel that goes all the way around (spare tire), like most guys.

I just read a post from someone on another site, schooling people that the way to buy jeans online is to take the 'rise' measurement and measure that on your body to determine where the waist of that particular pair will hit you, and then measure around that part of your body to determine what waist size you need in that particular pair. To me this seems nuts because I'm not wearing any pants with the waist up over the navel. It would be impossible, they'd just slide off, regardless of how tight my belt is. It would only work with suspenders, or with a rise so high that it would need to be at my rib cage (like Fred Mertz on I love Lucy) lol. And like I said, I'd need a crazy large size like a 50 to wear them like that anyway, at the thickest spot on my body, even if they could somehow magically stay up.

I always buy the same waist measurement and wear them all at the same spot on my waist, and if they're higher rise jeans then they fit me with a little more room at my undercarriage than a lower rise pair. But apparently this is the wrong way to wear higher-rise pants according to some people, and I'm a rube and doing it all wrong. What am I missing?

 

[dudewuttheheck]

I think it depends on how heavy you are and where your weight is.

I used to be much heavier and higher rise trousers and jeans definitely sat higher on me than low rise jeans.

For example:
In this first photo you can see my belly pretty easily due to the lower rise chinos.

In this next photo, the belly is a bit less visible thanks to the higher rise trousers. Additionally, I found higher rise trousers to be much more comfortable. In fairness, even when I was obese here, my weight was quite evenly distributed throughout my body which probably helped. They also definitely did not sit at the same spot even when I was bigger.

Even now after getting in shape, I'm certainly not at 0% body fat and I find higher rises to be more comfortable and much more flattering.

I'm not saying you have to, but maybe give the larger size a shot in a store and see how they look and feel. They may look and feel great.

 

[MrProper]

Will someone please explain something to me? I read on a lot of jeans forums and threads, and sometimes on here, people talking about higher rise jeans and wearing their jeans up high. I've never really gotten this as my jeans, no matter how high, low, or medium the rise measurement is, want to rest at the same spot on my waist, which is just below my little paunch. I can't pull them up any higher than that because of my fat shelf/muffin top/love handles. If I wanted to pull them up over that I'd need a size 50 LOL. Are the guys telling people to wear them up higher 0% body fat guys or something, with no chub around the middle whatsoever? btw - I'm a relatively slim guy but with just a little jelly roll under my navel that goes all the way around (spare tire), like most guys.

I just read a post from someone on another site, schooling people that the way to buy jeans online is to take the 'rise' measurement and measure that on your body to determine where the waist of that particular pair will hit you, and then measure around that part of your body to determine what waist size you need in that particular pair. To me this seems nuts because I'm not wearing any pants with the waist up over the navel. It would be impossible, they'd just slide off, regardless of how tight my belt is. It would only work with suspenders, or with a rise so high that it would need to be at my rib cage (like Fred Mertz on I love Lucy) lol. And like I said, I'd need a crazy large size like a 50 to wear them like that anyway, at the thickest spot on my body, even if they could somehow magically stay up.

I always buy the same waist measurement and wear them all at the same spot on my waist, and if they're higher rise jeans then they fit me with a little more room at my undercarriage than a lower rise pair. But apparently this is the wrong way to wear higher-rise pants according to some people, and I'm a rube and doing it all wrong. What am I missing?

That's something I always ask myself. For me, it's always the same place where the trousers hang. It's on the hip bone well below the navel. My only explanation as to how this could work with highrise is that it hangs so high up that I tighten the belt above the hip bone, i.e. the natural waist, so tightly that it can no longer slip. But then I would feel like I was wearing a corset.
Fortunately, I like low- or normalrise trousers better anyway. I think they proportion the body better. The only exception might be if someone has extremely short legs/long torso.

 

[Bennarion]

Indeed, jeans always sit in one place at the waist, regardless of the physique. High-rise jeans are more comfortable in the groin area.

 

[Cyber Lip]

Indeed, jeans always sit in one place at the waist, regardless of the physique. High-rise jeans are more comfortable in the groin area.

yeah, that's the reason I just recently switched from low-ish rise jeans, because I really started to hate how tight they were in the crotch when sitting lol. So I've gotten a few pairs of vintage-cut style jeans with like a 12 inch rise and really like the extra room in the undercarriage. But according to some denim heads I'm wearing them wrong, because I don't pull them up over my speedbump.

 

[Cyber Lip]

I think it depends on how heavy you are and where your weight is.

I used to be much heavier and higher rise trousers and jeans definitely sat higher on me than low rise jeans.

For example:
In this first photo you can see my belly pretty easily due to the lower rise chinos.

In this next photo, the belly is a bit less visible thanks to the higher rise trousers. Additionally, I found higher rise trousers to be much more comfortable. In fairness, even when I was obese here, my weight was quite evenly distributed throughout my body which probably helped. They also definitely did not sit at the same spot even when I was bigger.

Even now after getting in shape, I'm certainly not at 0% body fat and I find higher rises to be more comfortable and much more flattering

I'm not saying you have to, but maybe give the larger size a shot in a store and see how they look and feel. They may look and feel great.

Looks like in some of those shots you have them pulled up over your navel?

 

[Bennarion]

Wear jeans as you feel comfortable and don't listen to anyone. I only wear high-rise jeans and I'm very comfortable in them, it's important to me.

 

[Marc mndt]

For me, it's always the same place where the trousers hang.

Then I guess you've never worn proper (pun intended) high rise pants.

 

[Bennarion]

I don't know how you guys can wear it like that. No matter how hard I tried to keep my jeans at navel level, the jeans slipped lower. Of course, it depends on the physique, but as it was correctly noted, jeans can only be held with suspenders

 

[MrProper]

Then I guess you've never worn proper (pun intended) high rise pants.

View attachment 643556 View attachment 643557

In the 80s/90s I wore higher-waisted trousers, but it wasn't really my thing. They hold up naturally when I fix them at the height of my natural waist. They make the lower body look far too bulky for my taste. But as always, it's just a question of personal taste.

 

[jchance]

Asides from comfort, high rise pants/jeans works really well in the rule of thirds (2:1 proportion for bottom:top), especially when paired with relatively short-length leather jacket. 2:1 looks very flattering

 

[Bennarion]

You're right, you can always wear the shortest jacket

 

[TartuWolf]

I can understand how rise can be tricky when you have more of a \/ at the hips area and your waist/belly is wider than your hips. No matter the rise the denim just keeps ending up at the same location (unless you use suspenders?) and the main thing that changes is how much extra space you have at the crotch.

In my case my waist is narrower than my hips so I have to get lower rise denim with wider waist width and higher rise denim with narrower waist width.

 

[navetsea]

its about body type, my waistline is narrow 176cm 56kilos I'm built like concentration camp victim, if I were to get a highrise pants I need size 26 perhaps, but it will not pass though my pelvic bone, so I will stay with 28 or 29, and then the waistline will sag to where it usually sits because there is nothing to keep them higher on my waist unless I wear suspender perhaps, and beside I have a somewhat short torso, wearing highrise pants would look like I wear it up to my chest, so prefer mid rise 4 buttons fly on jeans not the 5 buttons.

 

[Jasonissm]

Maybe it's the cut of your pants? I was size 36-38 when I wore high rise jeans they sat at my belly button, but because my waist to hip bone area was around same width I needed a belt to keep them up. Now at size 30-32, it's pretty much the same but because my waist is narrower, they won't fall down even without a belt. I have short legs so high rise pants give better proportions and make my legs look a bit longer.

In my case, even when I was 3-4 sizes larger, high rise still worked for me although a belt was necessary.

 

[Bennarion]

Yes, jeans with a high fit can have a different cut. But mostly they are shaped like a bottleneck at the waist

 

[Monitor]

I just read a post from someone on another site, schooling people that the way to buy jeans online is to take the 'rise' measurement and measure that on your body to determine where the waist of that particular pair will hit you, and then measure around that part of your body to determine what waist size you need in that particular pair.

Absolutely demented & malevolent advice. Pants do not work that way. Regardless of the height of the rise, any half-decent pair of pants will be tailored to its equivalent size number and size number is the only factor you should be basing their purchase on.

To me this seems nuts because I'm not wearing any pants with the waist up over the navel. It would be impossible, they'd just slide off, regardless of how tight my belt is. It would only work with suspenders, or with a rise so high that it would need to be at my rib cage (like Fred Mertz on I love Lucy) lol. And like I said, I'd need a crazy large size like a 50 to wear them like that anyway, at the thickest spot on my body, even if they could somehow magically stay up.

It wouldn't be impossible but the thing is, classically tailored trousers used to have a number of neat features to deal exactly with this sort of thing you are describing - Features like a hidden gusset or an elastic band with a button on the inside, so on and so forth - but obviously, all of this got lost on jeans.
Jeans are too basic and primitive to even be expected to fit "correctly" or to have any hard rules that apply to them, that's why there are so many ways one can wear them.

 

[4444Design]

"High Rise" depends on the cut of your pants? At least that is what i had in my mind ...

"Standard" rise - kind of ...

"high rise" - well that's a pretty extreme example maybe

inbetween ...

Other than the cut i wear all Jeans on the same "spot" sotosay - and even if i'd pull 'em higher when getting dressed they always find their way to the same height right on my hip-bones