I can’t kill my Lululemon pants no matter what I do

That headline may seem like hyperbole, but it is what went through my mind last week when I was sorting my clean yoga clothes.

There, among non-branded shorts and T-shirts, like some sort of harsh rebuke, were one red T-shirt, a pair of shorts and a pair of pants. Both of those, of course, black.

This is Lululemon after all.

So, yes. I own a few. But, in my defense — we’ll get to why I again need to defend myself in a second — all were bought extremely early in the yoga practicing “career.” We’ve, Bobbie and I both, have moved on, far on, since then.

Here’s the thing. Those early Lululemon clothes? They’re nigh-on indestructible. And when you don’t wear them often — I pull them out either when everything else is dirty or, in the case of the pants, when I’m expecting the morning to be extra chilly — that nigh-on because nigh-on “entirely.” (As in “entirely indestructible,” from which any grammarian readers are sure to recoil.)

Now, the more recent Lululemon clothes? They might not be as hardy, as we all know. But, as I said in my defense, we don’t own any from later than 2009, probably.

Now, to needing to defend myself for owning any. We’ve got another Lululemon-gate:

Eight months after the company he founded had a big public relations problem because too much of some women’s backsides could be seen through its yoga pants, Lululemon founder Chip Wilson has put the story back in the news.

“Quite frankly, some women’s bodies just actually don’t work” in Lululemon’s pants, Wilson said this week on Bloomberg Television’s Street Smart.

“It’s about the rubbing through the thighs,” he added, and “how much pressure is there.”

Asked by Bloomberg’s rather surprised looking Trish Regan if he’s saying that “not every woman can wear a Lululemon yoga pant,” Wilson recovered somewhat, saying, “No, I think they can, I just think it’s how you use them.”

And oh, is the Interweb having its fun with that. Rightfully so. I’ll let you find them, if you so desire.

But I bring things back to the, I hope, implicit question at the heart — the bitter, Randian heart, I guess — of this post: Do we have to toss out our perfectly good (and let’s face it, the early Lululemon stuff is better than “perfectly good”), but old, Lululemon wear?

As we always say: Ashtanga is hard. So is figuring out what to wear.

Posted by Steve


Published by


Two Ashtangis write about their practice and their teachers.

7 thoughts on “I can’t kill my Lululemon pants no matter what I do”

  1. Chip (founder of lulu lemon) is a master marketer. Bad/controversial news is the biggest news and you get the most coverage. Free advertising nothing like it. I don’t think he’s finished building his 40 million dollar home on point grey road in Vancouver yet. It’s all about staying in the media like those pop stars.

  2. Two years ago, posted this relevant piece on my e-Sutra blog: http://www.yogaanatomy.org/2011/who-is-john-galt-rtfn/

    I’m particularly fond of it because I was able to incorporate the phrase “well-ventilated nutsack” when referring to the indestructibility of a pair of Lulu underwear I bought 10 years ago, and am still wearing.

    Lulu’s quality has gone way downhill, as a newer pair of the same type failed this year after only a few wearings.

    1. That certainly has more flair than my “entirely indestructible” phrase.

      I also maybe should have noted the last, LA-local “Lululemon-gate” that I noted: https://theconfluencecountdown.com/2013/08/04/this-might-be-lululemon-going-too-far/

      Still not entirely sure why their having “Hare Krishna” in a window seemed so wrong to me. I’ll admit — in keeping with your post (and I’m not Rand fan) — to not being objective(ist) at all on this front!


  3. I’m not surprised the quality has gone downhill, because with profit margins in the garment industry that’s happened EVERYWHERE. A friend who used to work at Diesel reminisces about the days those pricey jeans were made in Italy. You think that happens now? Not.

    I first heard about Lulu when I was admiring my Canadian roommate’s top, 2nd month into my first trip to Mysore, winter 2006. It was a nice cut. I liked it. She said the stuff lasted forever… I still buy their pants once in awhile. I don’t think I’ve got anything see-thru but then I practice alone anyway.

  4. this is something i observed too. I have a tshirt i brought from 2008 which is intact and a Tshirt brought 2 years back which is worn out.

    The most devastating for me was my socks . Same price, same design same brand – but brought in different years. The quality is sooo different. And i dont event own a lot of their stuff

    I think Lulu has gone downhill and soon we will find lulu in the league of ordinary clothing company with extraordinary marketing.

Leave a Reply to Leslie Kaminoff (@lkaminoff) Cancel reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s