Sears, Sexism and Size 8

Jun 19, 2008 11:34

While browsing through a replica 1897 Sears catalog, I came across the underwear section. I noticed something that struck me odd. Extra large underwear for men ran in the sizes 44-52. Extra large underwear for women ran in the sizes 6-8. Perhaps sizing ran a bit differently then but it just seems as though societies view of overweight men and women varied greatly. I don't really see size 6-8 as being extra large. This struck me as interesting since I'm a fat chick who doesn't even wear the size 14 (6+8=14). Could it be that society had a sexist view of what size a woman should be or is it that men ate more than a woman or both?

My sister called me this morning to get my opinion on some doors. She is looking to replace the front and back door on her home. I found the same door in the Sears catalog for a bit over 5 bucks. Okay, the Sears door was solid wood and I'll admit the glass was most likely a thin flimsy pane but, I thought of one word when I saw the price - inflation.

I realized that Sears, Roebuck and Company hail from Chicago. Embarrassingly, it clicked as to why the Sears Tower is called the Sears Tower. Yes my friends, it took 35 years for that Aha moment. Like it's never happened to you! ;)

I just remebered! I have a Sears gift card worth $4.28. Don't ask. That's another story for another day.

It's hip to be square,
~Danielle
--------------------------------------
"Not only is women's work never done, the definition keeps changing."

- Bill Copeland

Previous post Next post
Up