Are all leggings that are made intended to be worn under clothes or covered by them if manufactured with pockets?

Some leggings are not meant to be covered up, or at minimun can be worn either way. Some leggings are thicker or more sturdy fabric. I have a pair that have a seem down the front of each leg with a top stitch and almost give the look of ski pants. That’s how I think of it anyway. I wear them with flat heeled boots and a top that basically falls to my hip, so you can see my butt when I wear them, I am not all covered up.

Nope. the buckskin leggings I make are intended to be worn with a breechclout in cold weather. Nothing over them.

Lots of women wear them like jeans or any other pants. Mostly, thank goodness, thin women.

Some leggings are now being made to be worn on their own. Just because an article of clothing exits doesn’t mean they should be worn. I mean, a lot of hideous things exist that we’d be better off without. Bermuda shorts, for instance. Or Birkenstocks.

I’ve actually never seen leggings, either being sold at a store or worn on a person, with pockets. People have no problem wearing the pocket-less ones as pants, so what’s the point of putting them on there?

The fact that certain clothing articles are manufactured does not make them appropriate to wear.

We depend on society in general to vote with their wallets in order to send this message to gravely misguided designers.

@livelaughlove21 No birkenstocks, did you miss your hippie stage? hahahaha, I think I still have mine and all my hemp necklaces!

What the heck are birkenstocks? Do anyone have a link or do I have to go Google it?

@Hypocrisy_Central Comfortable shoes that most people would consider ugly, here is a link to Birkenstocks. People usually think of tree huggers when they think of birkenstocks.

High-priced FLOP-FLOPS!?!? Surely you jest. $110 for something you can buy from the dollar store? Wow…..

Plenty of people think of sore, aching feet when they think of Birkenstocks.

The design of the contoured footbed was considered revolutionary at the time; the original had the straps. There were no flip-flops.

https://www.birkenstockusa.com/birkenstock-benefits

One pair would probably last a decade.

Some of the hype is horse pucky, of course, but they are very comfortable.

I have a couple pairs made by Hue that are a stretchy denim fabric and have functional back pockets with a fake fly. It’s always handy having pockets!

Fashion is fashion… and how you interpret it.

My take is that leggings with back pockets can be worn stand alone.

(IMHO) High-low shirts with an elongated back hem and higher front hem are very flattering with leggings.

@mcbealer ”(IMHO) High-low shirts with an elongated back hem and higher front hem are very flattering with leggings.”

Yeah, really good for showcasing that camel toe.

@mcbealer @livelaughlove21

I like them too, and it makes me really glad that I’m short enough that they are still modest when I wear them. ^_^

@Seek_Kolinahr My comment was meant to be sarcastic. Camel toes should not be showcased.

I wholeheartedly agree.

@KNOWITALL oh good, fat shaming. Fat people do not have to dress to make you feel comfortable.

To each their own discretion. Knowing this, designers will make garments meant to be worn a certain way, useful also to those who would likely do otherwise.

@livelaughlove21 if you shop around you’ll find some high-low shirts are available to discreetly camo your camel toe. Thanks for reminding me why I hardly ever bother visiting fluther anymore.

@mcbealer You’re welcome. Way to not know how to take a joke.

@shrubbery said to @KNOWITALL oh good, fat shaming. Fat people do not have to dress to make you feel comfortable.
How is people wearing things that fit them fat shaming any more than a thin person wearing ill-fitting clothes they can swim in? Are you suggesting metabolically challenged people purposely wear clothes ill-fitting for them, and if they do, no one is to say anything about it? If someone was wearing their gown backwards, I am sure someone would eventually mention it to them.

@livelaughlove21 My comment was meant to be sarcastic. Camel toes should not be showcased.
They do have products out there that eliminates camel toe, you know.

Would that be the same for showcasing cellulite?

@Hypocrisy_Central You shouldn’t need a special contraption to hide your genitals. That’s what clothes are made for. If your clothes don’t hide it, then you should wear something that does.

Can we please not make this about fat women and clothes that they should and should not wear, for once?

^ I wasn’t the one to bring up fat shaming, no one said anything about that until it was injected into the conversation.

Clothes aside, if a woman ca n wear something to hide cellulite, should they, or do they get to wear what shows every ripple, and if so, if a woman wears something that shows camel toe, a little, a lot, or not at all, I think they have the same leeway.

@Hypocrisy_Central I think women should wear clothes that are flattering to their body type. Some women are overweight and some are not. All women have vaginas, however, and all women should refrain from displaying theirs to the world. How on earth is a camel toe comparable to cellulite? Cellulite is not genitalia.

@livelaughlove21 How on earth is a camel toe comparable to cellulite? Cellulite is not genitalia.
They are as different as six pack abs to moobs (man boobs), they are however the same in the fact that some find them unpleasant to look at. Just because one is more unpleasant to look at by most, many, a few, etc. doesn’t mean it should get more validity than the other. Camel toe is not the actual vagina regardless how meticulous outlined. Because it is prominent with some women wearing leggings, (and it is not limited to that), and some do not like it, doesn’t mean they would enjoy cellulite gracing their view any better. That make the point of what is showing pretty moot to manufactures designing leggings as stand-alone pants, slacks, etc.

@Hypocrisy_Central Of course it’s not the vagina – the vagina is internal, which is why I used the word genitalia. And it’s incredibly inappropriate to show the outline of your genitalia through your clothes. If a guy is walking around wearing pants in which you could see his genitalia bouncing around in them, I’d feel the same way. It’s not that I find it “unpleasant,” it’s that it’s inappropriate. You may find cellulite unpleasant (and I know you do), but it’s not necessarily inappropriate or indecent.

^ You may find cellulite unpleasant (and I know you do), but it’s not necessarily inappropriate or indecent.
Certainly a difference of opinion on that.

@Hypocrisy_Central What a shocker.

Those who manufacture leggings that has to know that with some women, the condition known as camel toe will happen. If they did not believe it to be the responsibility of the wearer they would have manufactured something to combat it. They haven’t, yet they still place pockets on them to be worn uncovered if that is what the wearer chooses, even with any danger of camel toe being prevalent.

@Hypocrisy_Central Your point being…?

Like I said in my very first answer, “Just because an article of clothing exits doesn’t mean they should be worn.”

@Hypocrisy_Central you don’t get to decide what clothes fit someone else. It is not about you and what you want to see. People do not dress to please you. How do you know whether the clothes fit someone else if you’re not in their body and wearing them? They could be super comfortable on the other person. Eg people often wear clothes that are too big on them because it makes them feel safe. Besides, I wasn’t even talking about “fitting” with that comment. @KNOWITALL was implying that she doesn’t like to see not-thin women in leggings. I’m sure there are leggings that fit fat people but @KNOWITALL probably doesn’t want to see them in leggings anyway because it makes her uncomfortable. That is fat shaming. Dictating what fat people should wear based on what you want to see them wearing.

Also, the “plus size” clothing out there is more often than not limited in range and style, and only specific types of clothing, deemed appropriate for fat people to wear are available in bigger sizes. It is actually really hard to get fun, fashionable clothes in bigger sizes. Fat people should be able to wear whatever they want, to go shopping and see something they like and to be able to get it in their size instead of it being reserved for more societally acceptable smaller sizes. And, when they do find something that fits they should not be shamed for wearing something that you deem “unflattering to their body type” or “not slimming” or “not appropriate for their size”. Fuck that noise.

Also also, ~__oh my gosh, SOMEONE HAS GENITALS????__~
Wow. Seriously, what is the difference between a camel toe and cellulite? They’re just parts of the human body, parts that many people have. (HOWEVER, @livelaughlove21 please note that all women do not have vaginas.) People get to wear clothes that show every ripple if they want, they get to wear clothes that shows a camel toe if they want, it’s just a vulva, you don’t have to be scared of it, or call it indecent. It’s just society that has this weird thing about calling natural body parts indecent. Again, fuck that noise.

Let me just put it this way. YOU DO NOT GET TO DICTATE HOW PEOPLE DRESS BASED ON WHAT YOU FIND UNPLEASANT TO LOOK AT. THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND YOU AND YOUR TASTES. WOMEN DO NOT DRESS FOR YOU.

@shrubbery Let me just put it this way. YOU DO NOT GET TO DICTATE HOW PEOPLE DRESS BASED ON WHAT YOU FIND UNPLEASANT TO LOOK AT. THE WORLD DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND YOU AND YOUR TASTES. WOMEN DO NOT DRESS FOR YOU.
Let me put it this way; putting a comment in bold and CAPs don’t make it any truer. I never said I was the czar of women’s clothes or they had to adhere to my standards. If you think I said that, please point it out so I can show you how you misread it. The world doesn’t evolve around my taste, and I can bet my donuts to anyone’s dollars they don’t evolve around yours either.

you don’t get to decide what clothes fit someone else.
I don’t have to, physics will decide that, same as I can’t decide a square peg will fit in a round hole, just because I want it to don’t mean it will, it will fit when the peg is round like the hole. You can concoct a correct fit from any woman but it won’t fit simply because you say or wish it does.

It is not about you and what you want to see. People do not dress to please you.
Just to be clear, I-never-said-it-did. It certainly isn’t what you care to see or not either; just to be clear.

How do you know whether the clothes fit someone else if you’re not in their body and wearing them?
Wha-wha-what? I can see that the same way I can see dirt or stains on their clothes. If you can’t figure what is a good fit and what isn’t, I would get a second or maybe third opinion before I stepped out of the house.

Also, the “plus size” clothing out there is more often than not limited in range and style, and only specific types of clothing, deemed appropriate for fat people to wear are available in bigger sizes. It is actually really hard to get fun, fashionable clothes in bigger sizes.
If they have leggings for people who are metabolically challenged (since we have to be so PC to spare feelings), or super metabolically challenged that would be something to talk about but has nothing to do with this question.

Fat people should be able to wear whatever they want, to go shopping and see something they like and to be able to get it in their size instead of it being reserved for more societally acceptable smaller sizes.
Right, they should. I can wear my clothes backwards and inside out, but that doesn’t mean it will .look like the designer intended it to appear or that people will not notice, much less say how well it looks on me; but I can wear it incorrectly if I choose.