Wow. That's not even close!

Okay here's what I reckon.

5 years of skinny jeans have trained us to dress to "show off the shoe" (hence the abundance of ridiculously high heels).

Now with a different cut of pant leg, the shoe-showing-off is still lodged in people's psyches and they don't know that an adjustment is needed.

I predict we will see a lot of this on the streets - all as a consequence of the skinny leg jean.

Either that or the model was just too tall which is good for me cos if I bought these, I wouldn't have to shorten them and lose most of the flare!

Really, really bad! Who on earth would look at that pic and decide to actually *buy* those pants?

Yeah Rae -- those have a chance of being the perfect length on me too! LOL

Honestly, LOFT/ Ann Taylor's website does this too.

Not always to this extent...but I see it.

http://www.loft.com/loft/catal.....dId=255444

A girl from work wears this length all the time with the formal shirts, wide-legged black trousers and mary janes or booties. And she does not have the issues I have with the pants lengths, she's regular height.

Every time I see that I wonder if I am becoming an arrogant know-it-all for thinking it looks stomach-churning.

Well, I'm the outlier. I first noticed this length on a man on Sartorialist. True, he wore
grey sweatpants and aged chestnut oxfords, so that's like a skinny. And then started
getting used to Thom Browne and, yes, that's kind of skinny, too. Next started looking
at the Italian women mentioned in a comment above - though I wasn't, alas, in Italy,

Started thinking back to retro days when ankle length pants seemed ordinary. I confess,
I never have liked the cover-your-shoe bootcut length as it reminds me of Mr. Natural keepin' on truckin'.

Have on right now a pair of cargo pants almost exactly the same as the dreaded ones in the illustration. Bought 'em yesterday in the thrift store. No, they're not from the fifties and don't look to be altered to this length. I wear them proudly

Just thought you needed at least one opinion from Team high water..

Heavens... I know I don't have many pairs of ppl yet but this is worse than what I feel awful wearing now...

The description that these are high-waisted seems a bit off, also. To me, it seems her hands are resting below her waist, on her hips, and the waistline is clearly no higher.

Vildy, to be fair men's fashion follows fairly different "rules" than women's! (My husband reminds me of this all the time, heh.) Shorter lengths of pants is desirable for several styles for men, but they are usually much slimmer. With this much flare at the hem, on women it's generally far more flattering when worn longer. Rules can always be broken, but in general I don't think this is something most women would look best in

My reaction to that picture was an inadvertent, audible Bill the Cat "ACK" -- my husband looked at me quizzically until I showed him the picture, and even he can spot the problem immediately.

Several years ago, the Pottery Barn catalog featured a room with sheet music stuck to the walls. It was then that I started thinking that "stylemakers" are constantly engaged in some sort of inter-industry competition to see what ridiculous trend(s) they can foist on society. For every two legitimate trends, they throw in a wackadoodle prank trend and see what sticks. I envision brainstorming sessions that involve lots of bongs and pizza.

I'm adding these pictures to my growing mound of evidence.

I simply don't have the words

Wahoo I'm in style!!! LOL

@taylor - Yeesh, those pants don't look much better from the back end either! I wonder why there isn't more care taken with website pictures. No one wants high waters or pants that look they are smuggling diapers, and that is what a lot of online photos suggest.