First Rule Of Boyfriend Jeans: Have A Boyfriend. With Jeans.

<-- These are boyfriend jeans.

In fact these particular boyfriend jeans are a close-up of the ones Katie Holmes has been known to strut around town wearing.

Though I can only assume this is not a pair of her actual real-life "boyfriend's" jeans because Tom Cruise would be swimming in those suckers.

First hint that these aren't Tommy's: they are rolled up. Oh, Tommy, there is no way that Katie would ever need to roll-up a pair of your jeans -- unless of course she is rolling down those jeans because they haven't been hemmed yet but something tells me you probably have a tailor on call 24/7 in your house. Quite possibly in a box or perhaps locked in a dungeon with an even smaller guy who keeps spinning gold out of straw.

But obviously I'm getting off track.

Those jeans pictured above are boyfriend jeans. The concept is: jeans you stole from your boyfriend.

Hello Gap? Here's something you might not know: babies and toddlers don't have boyfriends. Girl babies and even boy babies don't have boyfriends. None of them have boyfriends because (wait for it) they are babies and toddlers.

Ergo, babies don't need boyfriend jeans. Nor do toddlers. They just need jeans that allow for easy access to shit and... shit.

Understood? Excellent. That will be it for now. Resume regular foolishness.

source via Jezebel

Comments

[Corinne]

I feel the same way about toddlers in skinny jeans. Even though it's infinitely unfair that my daughter would look better in them than I ever would. Or could.

[motherbumper]

@Corinne - Skinny Jeans!?! Thats another one that doesnt belong in baby couture. And double damn straight its wrong when the baby looks better in them than adults. Not to mention how does one make chubby baby thighs look good in jeans BUT YET IT DOESNT WORK FOR ADULTS? RIddle me that GAP fashionistas? I scream TRAVESTY OF FASHION JUSTICE!

[Her Bad Mother]

*coughs*

My daughter wears skinny jeans. And she has a boyfriend.

*ducksheadinshame*

[Maria]

Ha. I've seen this on Twitter a bit over the past few weeks. I honestly don't understand what the fuss is about. I mean, I get that they're called "boyfriend" jeans because it's kind of like you borrowed them from your boyfriend but all it means is that it's a baggy, not so fitted cut. And hell, that's way more appropriate on a baby girl than tight jeans or bell bottom jeans or whatever other random woman-shaped shrunken jeans people think it's cute to put tiny infants in.

[motherbumper]

@herbadmother -- You get a yellow card on this one. Just a warning because she does rock those skinny jeans and my daughter and her boyfriend are planning a double date. I dont want to appear to be a fuddy-duddy or something.

[brittany]

This bugs me equally, if not more than little girls who were thongs.

There is PLENTY of time to have boyfriends and put out, let's just wait until we are out of diapers, for christ sakes.

[Carrie Kirby]

the real shocker to me is that anyone would pay $25 for a pair of pants for their baby.

[motherbumper]

@Carrie Kirby -- I was so wrapped up in the boyfriend aspect that I totally didnt notice the price tag. *smacks forehead* I agree Carrie!

[mamatulip]

I'm with Carrie Kirby. I don't spend more than ten dollars on pants for my kids, and, uh...I rarely buy my kids new clothes. They wear flour sacs and sandwich boards to school mostly.

[motherbumper]

@mamatulip -- Flour sacs? Well arent we fancy. We are just simple folk and stick to our potato sacs round here ;)

[Her Bad Mother]

Skinny jeans are the only kind that they sell at H&M, which is the cheapest source ever for wee kid clothes. Also, the black ones look awesome on Jasper.

Yes, I think this stuff through.

[motherbumper]

@herbadmother -- You do realize that I just christened him Jasper Jonas after that last comment, right?