OT: Cargo Shorts...
- Thread starter RU_Planning
- Start date
I would imagine lots of cargo guys are finishing the look with an Under Armor tee.
This is basically the crux of it. I like to be able to sit without having my boys crushed. I accidentally tried on a pair of Mark Anthony pants at the store last year, marked as a 'regular' cut. I couldn't get them up past my knees. They were the correct waist size and length, but holy hell, there is no point in my life when those would have fit, and I'm not that big of a guy. 6' 180.
the official Rutgers tuxedo is cargo shorts and a sleeveless scarlet Rutgers t shirt so that trumps everything
I love cargoes..but my biggest problem is that they run way too long, sorry I dont need cargos to my ankles and they dont have to look like balloons on people. Being short I get screwed because they make them for hip hoppers and fat people. On the other hand, the newer style shorts have awful colors, are a bit too short and they are way too tight especially for somone who does squats in the gym like me..must be made for guys with birdy legs. So I think a compromise between the two would be best. I bought a couple of shorts other than cargoes this year...a nautica pair in particular I like, they are shorter but still at the knwww which I like which probably scares guys because they afraid to show leg like it makes them gay or something. Then I think I pair made by Polo which is not quite as long as cargo but no pockets but that one is a little tight in the quads but its still better than those ridiculous salmon and mauve shorts that the fashionistas/hipsters seem to be pushing for
I love cargoes..but my biggest problem is that they run way too long, sorry I dont need cargos to my ankles and they dont have to look like balloons on people. Being short I get screwed because they make them for hip hoppers and fat people. On the other hand, the newer style shorts have awful colors, are a bit too short and they are way too tight especially for somone who does squats in the gym like me..must be made for guys with birdy legs. So I think a compromise between the two would be best. I bought a couple of shorts other than cargoes this year...a nautica pair in particular I like, they are shorter but still at the knwww which I like which probably scares guys because they afraid to show leg like it makes them gay or something. Then I think I pair made by Polo which is not quite as long as cargo but no pockets but that one is a little tight in the quads but its still better than those ridiculous salmon and mauve shorts that the fashionistas/hipsters seem to be pushing for
To sum up what I think is the feeling of many, go ahead and keep buying and wearing cargo shorts, unless they come up with a decent fitting and functional useful alternative..... And even if there was an alternative, buy them if you want.
We have seen women pretty much forced over the years (platform shoes,eg) to wear stuff that was a bit unreasonable.... We can ignore this type of thinking.
If enough men keep buying cargo shorts, the manufacturers will keep producing, fashion be dammed.
We have seen women pretty much forced over the years (platform shoes,eg) to wear stuff that was a bit unreasonable.... We can ignore this type of thinking.
If enough men keep buying cargo shorts, the manufacturers will keep producing, fashion be dammed.
Cargo shorts are a necessity at theme parks like Disney World or amusement parks where you're going on rides.
people who carry cell phones and wallets in their tight fighting salmon skinny shorts have bulges on their ass and an outline of both items worn into their pockets, even when you remove them.
people who carry cell phones and wallets in their tight fighting salmon skinny shorts have bulges on their ass and an outline of both items worn into their pockets, even when you remove them.
That "official" includes a red Rutgers t-shirt. And for those of us who are fair-skinned it could also be a Rutgers shirt with a collar.
What you do with the sleeves afterwards is a personal choice.
Both my boys have to wear cargo shorts if they go to one now after my older guy's iPhone flew out of his pocket at Great Adventure last year.
Luckily we got it back with no damage. Thank you Otterbox (and the built in GPS)...
if they are made by this guy....
I "get" it. I get it a few times. And might even have a pair in that color.
But I don't get your anti-cotton t shirt thing?
I think you have that backwards.Cargo shorts are useful, if not amazing-looking.
I think the more streamlined ones are tolerable, whereas the ones with bulky pockets look pretty bad.
On the left: OK. On the right: Ugly.
if they are made by this guy....
I "get" it. I get it a few times. And might even have a pair in that color.
But I don't get your anti-cotton t shirt thing?
I've got a bathing suit made by that whale. Very nice. Shorts above? not for me.
Most get it. They just reject it. And I have a pair of salmon colored cargo shorts somewhere.
I'm wearing my salmon colored Nike golf shorts right now, playing at 1:45 today.
I'll leave me wallet, keys and cell phone in my locker.
Very important I play to my 5 handicap today!
I'll leave me wallet, keys and cell phone in my locker.
Very important I play to my 5 handicap today!
Cracker Barrel, Denny's, Friday's, Charlie Browns, Olive Garden and if we get extravagant, Tommy Bahama...lol
Is LUMS still around?
Old joke: You don't pay hookers for sex. You pay them to go away right after the sex.
Damn wish I had better than HS Baseball talent. I'd be living the exact Zappa lifestyle.
Why do people keep posting that non-cargo shorts (aka "skinny shorts" to you) are somehow tighter fitting than cargo shorts?
Both of these are from the Gap. One has cargo pockets and one doesn't.
Why do people keep posting that non-cargo shorts (aka "skinny shorts" to you) are somehow tighter fitting than cargo shorts?
Both of these are from the Gap. One has cargo pockets and one doesn't.
The first pair is much tighter fitting. Look at the space around the legs at the bottom of the shorts. The first pair also is tighter around the waist and hips.
For the women who hate cargo shorts - I'll quit buying them when women quit buying skin tight jeans with bling all over the butt. Because so many women who think they're being fashionable have more than ample real estate to display the bling, it sometimes looks like a full scale map of the constellations on their hind ends. And how comfortable can that be to sit on?
[roll]They're different people wearing different sizes. They are literally the same shorts without the pockets. Go on their website if you wish, you can see plenty of nice flowing leg room on the pocket-less shorts, even in video form.
Does this help?
[roll]They're different people wearing different sizes. They are literally the same shorts without the pockets. Go on their website if you wish, you can see plenty of nice flowing leg room on the pocket-less shorts, even in video form.
Does this help?
Agree, I think some posters are getting confused. They are confusing the usual twill or khaki type with the tight 2" above the knee type.
Definitely not out of business... I go to the one in Scotch Plains a few times a year. They probably just downsized the amount of branches.
[roll]They're different people wearing different sizes. They are literally the same shorts without the pockets. Go on their website if you wish, you can see plenty of nice flowing leg room on the pocket-less shorts, even in video form.
Does this help?
Your first picture made the opposite point of what you thought. Should have used this above photo to begin with - unless you were trying to make the opposite point.
Correct - the one in Scotch Plains and the one in Metuchen/Edison (right on the border by the country club) are still open, but the P-way and HP ones closed. I know there were more, but don't know their fate.
So let me get this straight. By adding functional pockets on the side, all of a sudden it becomes "uncool" and unfashionable?
So stupid.
So stupid.
Let's put it this way: I'm a regular Yelper and we eat out at least 4-5 nights per week (and at least one of those is typically a high end meal, i.e., over $150 per couple without liquor, as my wife doesn't drink and I drink sparingly), including at least once a month in NYC, i.e., I'm pretty sure I know what high end is. Eating well is my biggest vice, if you consider it a vice. And >95% of the places we go have no issue with cargo shorts. I'll comply with the small % that have dress codes if the food warrants it. Restaurants are way less snooty than country clubs about attire. If you really want a list (I don't think you do, based on your snooty comments in this thread), I'm sure I can provide one.
Higher-end dining these days has become very casual, so I don't doubt this at all. The days of jacket-required, or the like, are almost entirely over. Even NYC is pretty casual. Sure, there are a handful of places - e.g., Daniel or 11 Madison Park - where you would need to dress up. But that is definitely the exception, even among expensive restaurants.
Absolutely. And Daniel or the Four Seasons are worth dressing up a little bit for...
Agree as well - living in NYC most of the restaurants I go to have no issues with cargo shorts at all (heck basketball shorts neither, but just for some properness I don't wear basketball shorts unless its a hole in the wall). Obviously the fancy places won't accept cargo shorts, but they wouldn't accept those pink shorts either from the beginning of the thread.
Right- no place is going to say OK pink shorts but no cargos.
Only time I have ever been hassled about shorts was outside the US.
Only time I have ever been hassled about shorts was outside the US.
