when fashion designers realized that there are some women out there with inseams longer than 32'', you know back in the late 90's, i went buck wild. that whole process just irked me. why would it take so long for stores like banana, j.crew, for the freaking love- gap- to make pants... jeans in long? it really hurt a small group of the female population, such as myself. so, like i said, i went crazy when they started making jeans in long. before abercrombie made all their jeans come just above the no-no area, i was able to buy their 36'' inseam jeans... and i did, because they fit really well and they were much cheaper than j.crew. i remember my 6'5'' cousin commenting that his pants weren't even a 36 inch inseam. odd. it took me a few years to realize the crotch doesn't start in the exact same spot on a boy and a girl.
i have since toned down the length issue as more stores are having pants in longer lengths. i am now a 35'', and yes that inch does make a huge difference. my peeve now is with the crotch being longer on pants marked "long". i mean really. do they think girls who are 5'7''-5'11'' have an insanely... i don't even need to finish. you get the idea. it just makes me a little annoyed.
all this to say... having gone to covenant, lived on the mountain post-graduation and been friends/roommates with a pettit, i feel the need to purchase a pair of carhartt overalls... or coveralls as they call them. yes i look ridiculous in them. yes i feel somewhat self-conscious in them. yes i can think of several things i should rather spend my money on than this... but i earned it by golly. and so it is with this attitude and the attitude in paragraph #1 that i got online and purchased a pair. they arrived today and they will be exchanged tomorrow... for obvious reasons. i did not learn my lesson, or at least, i doubted the 32'' and 34'' would be long enough for me. i think i was wrong.