OK I was hoping the ladies at here could explain this to me... so how should a mans butt look in jeans/pants.

What qualities of the fit/style flatter said rear?  Are they tighter? smaller pockets? do they lay a certain way? baggy? etc

Granted I am asking Ns here, mabye I should go find some SPs or SJs?

It's all in the look - I'm a pseudo-professional shopper for men - I have brothers and lots of guy friends.

Another thing this girl liked was for me to not have anything in my back pockets. She liked to see that smooth curve. Not a weird wallet-bulge.

Posted By sbalbom on 16 Oct 2009 11:01 PM

 See, it is all a mystery. I think think this is a girl secret.

It's not a mystery - it's just that different type of butts look good or bad in different types of pants.  My hubby's butt doesn't look all that special in Dockers (what he wears to work every day), but in jeans it's looks pretty damn good.  

Another guy I knew, his butt only looked good in OP shorts (he had a pair from 100 years ago) - there wasn't another type of pants that his butt looked good in.

It truly all depends on the butt and the fit of the pants.  And I'm sure 10 girls would have 10 different comments about the same guy in 10 different style of pants.  

I've been told my "ass looks amazing" in my newest pair of Lucky brand jeans. They were pricey though... like $60, and that is cheap for a pair of Lucky jeans. They feel like they actually fit me too. My levis are too long.. so are my pair of Guess jeans, but they're still my second favorite. I don't know what girls find attractive in a butt though. I mean I can perfectly describe the ideal female butt, but I've never heard a girl describe the ideal male-butt.

I don't know what girls find attractive in a butt though. I mean I can perfectly describe the ideal female butt, but I've never heard a girl describe the ideal male-butt.

And here's where my INTJness can truly shine.

In one of my body language books it says that the "cute butt" that women look for is lean and muscular without being overly so. No jiggliness, not too round, but not flat either. Fit and trim, with small hips, and preferrably under a slightly tapered torso, and above lean, strong legs. visible musculature is not mandatory, and is in some cases unattractive. The key is the balance between fit/lean and also well fed, but not flabby.

So the perfect pants/jeans would graze/hug in such a way to give the appearance of long, lean muscles, and the right curvature, much the same way a good wrap dress either shows off or gives the illusion of an hourglass figure on a woman. The particular cut/style that will accomplish that varies with the body type/build, just like any garment on any other frame.

Whether or not this even matters depends on whether the woman in quesiton is a chest girl, a leg girl or a butt girl, which interestingly enough is just the same with men (and women rarely talk about mens legs, but they are a factor, even if subconsciously).

Clinical questions for the win.

Posted By coralaisly on 08 Nov 2009 11:11 PM

And here's where my INTJness can truly shine.

In one of my body language books it says that the "cute butt" that women look for is lean and muscular without being overly so. No jiggliness, not too round, but not flat either. Fit and trim, with small hips, and preferrably under a slightly tapered torso, and above lean, strong legs. visible musculature is not mandatory, and is in some cases unattractive. The key is the balance between fit/lean and also well fed, but not flabby.

So the perfect pants/jeans would graze/hug in such a way to give the appearance of long, lean muscles, and the right curvature, much the same way a good wrap dress either shows off or gives the illusion of an hourglass figure on a woman. The particular cut/style that will accomplish that varies with the body type/build, just like any garment on any other frame.

Whether or not this even matters depends on whether the woman in quesiton is a chest girl, a leg girl or a butt girl, which interestingly enough is just the same with men (and women rarely talk about mens legs, but they are a factor, even if subconsciously).

Clinical questions for the win.

That's a very good description.  Personally, I'm a "whole body" girl.  I got into the "V" of men in high school when my BFF pointed it out to me.  Then a few years ago when I was single, I noticed that I did like men with long legs.  But I'm also a chest girl, a butt girl, an eye girl and even teeth play a part in it all.  I'm more of how's the whole package (yes, including the southern package) go together.  

I'm a whole package girl myself, too. I tend to like a tall, thinner frame, but with mild definition if I'm looking solely for appearance. However, because I'm more drawn to intellectuals for the long term, I tend to disregard physical appearance entirely because looks fade over time, but experiences and knowlege only grow. Now, if I were to find someone I found physically and mentally irresistable... get the smelling salts, 'cuz I just might pass out  That's rare, though. Lucky for me because I rather enjoy being conscious lol

Posted By sbalbom on 09 Nov 2009 10:15 PM
Coralaisly, Wow best explanation I've ever read...

Why, thank you! *takes small, humble bow* Happy to clear some of that up for ya. I love clinical questoins

Posted By coralaisly on 13 Nov 2009 06:29 PM

Posted By sbalbom on 09 Nov 2009 10:15 PM
Coralaisly, Wow best explanation I've ever read...

Why, thank you! *takes small, humble bow* Happy to clear some of that up for ya. I love clinical questoins

It was a pretty good explanation, but could I ask that you rewrite to give it more of an angle in favour of short stocky guys? There seem to be some minor points on the merits of proper padding that have been overlooked in your analysis

Posted By thedeepestblue on 13 Nov 2009 07:28 PM

Posted By coralaisly on 13 Nov 2009 06:29 PM

Posted By sbalbom on 09 Nov 2009 10:15 PM
Coralaisly, Wow best explanation I've ever read...

Why, thank you! *takes small, humble bow* Happy to clear some of that up for ya. I love clinical questoins

It was a pretty good explanation, but could I ask that you rewrite to give it more of an angle in favour of short stocky guys? There seem to be some minor points on the merits of proper padding that have been overlooked in your analysis

The height of the male in question was unspecified on purpose. I personally like taller, narrower men because I'm 5 foot 6 and like to wear my 4-6 inch heels and still feel short/small. A stockier guy can by far have the edge in the chest/arm category, and could also meet all the definitions of an attractive build if he plays up his... assets. It's all about playing to your strengths.