What is this? Not the leggings. The leggings, for sure, are well worth the $10.90-$12 per pair (and you can pick them up on this Alibaba affiliate site). The craftsmanship. The lack of pockets. The incredible range of colors made most popular several seasons ago are all fantastic. So much potential for camel toe.
We're talking about the product shot for these pants: one thin woman wedged into half a pair of leggings.
It only raises a ton of questions: Is it to show how elastic these pants are, so you can wear them on the bloatiest day of your period? Maybe they're making the quiet sell to hipsters organizing three-legged races for summer barbecues. Or is it to show you can cheaply find a base for the mermaid Halloween costume you've always dreamed of, but didn't quite know how to DIY?
But the real question is, who on Earth would think this photo is a smart way to sell anything to larger women? Stretchy pants are, well, stretchy. And if you know anything about buying women's clothing, you know that whether buying clothing on the Internet and in real life, one size does not fit all — even if multiple women claim to be the same size. So a thin model's two legs are supposed to somehow equal one big leg? It wasn't enough to just show this larger model wearing these pants?
If the photo featuring the thin model was supposed to clarify whose legs will fit into those pants, all it clarifies is that one woman can indeed fit her legs into this pair of leggings. So congrats to her?