Opinion: Pants on fire

Commentary by Dick Wolfsie

Right now, I think I’m wearing the last pair of 35×31 pants in America. Where have all the 35x31s gone?

Every Saturday morning, I head out the door to look for pants that fit me. I’m either wearing old 35x31s, or I’m scrunched into 34x28s. Sometimes I waddle around in a pair of 36x32s.

First, I go to Macy’s to shop. Man, do they have pants. And they have some really great sizes: 38 x 34, 42 x 28, 42 x 36, 40×34, 36×28. Then I try Kohl’s, JCPenney and Sears. I look through all the shelves and racks, hoping there’s a 35×31 hidden between the 44x30s and the 32x28s. That’s where I once tried to hide a pair of 35x31s when I forgot my credit card. I went back the next day to retrieve them, but no luck. You can hide some of your income from the IRS in a bank in Switzerland, but you can’t hide a pair of 35×31 pants. Trust me.

So, what is the explanation for this size shortage?  Why would manufacturers not make 35x31s? To have a 36-inch waist, you have to be a 35 for at least a couple of weeks, even if it all changed after that cruise to the Bahamas. You can’t skip a size. You have to grow through it.  Think about it: At some point in time, even 7-foot-4 former Pacers center Rik Smits had a 31-inch inseam. Okay, maybe just for one week in the third grade. But still, he needed pants, didn’t he?

None of the clothing-makers care about us 35-31s, or 33-27s or 37-35s.  They think that our waists and legs are always an even number of inches. I know God works in mysterious ways, but that’s a little too mysterious for me.

I am going to start a support group for men who have waists and inseams that are not even numbers. Share your stories, explain your frustrations. Admit you are odd. I’ll call it Alterations Anonymous.

Of course, if you are a perfect 40×30, or a 36×30 (the most common size), you probably read this entire humor column and didn’t find any of it very funny.

Well, neither do I.