I dove back into the whole vanity-sizing 'scandal' a week ago. Two links:
Why clothing sizes make no sense, on slate.com. The nonsense has a lot to do with modeling women's clothing sizes on shoe sizes: an arbitrary number that doesn't say any actual measurements. Add in that the women whose measurements were taken for the earliest sizing chart
(
Read more... )
Comments 4
Reply
I'm guessing that particular company doesn't serve many Asian women. I've read that some companies in California are making sure to keep smaller sizes stocked in their clothing lines, to serve the larger Asian population there. But in my state? Not a significant population, apparently.
I don't know how many times I've not fit the medium gone back for the large and found out it fits exactly the same through the shoulders as the medium did. Its just stores being cheap they only actually make the shirt longer and don't bother with the sleeves.
Wow, that's... terrible! Ugh, I don't know why I'm even surprised, though.
Reply
I ordered new pants for work, I'd gained a little weight, so I went up a size, from a '14' to a '16'. When they came, they were smaller than the pants they were ordered to replace. The whole 'sizing' thing makes no sense anymore.
Reply
I always encounter the opposite problem. I'm fairly slender (for an American woman) and really flat-chested, but I haven't gotten smaller over the years... and there are several stores that don't carry shirts that fit me anymore, including JC Penney's and Kohls. At least not in the misses section, and I refuse to shop in the juniors department. THAT'S WHERE MY STUDENTS SHOP. Ugh.
And my jeans size in most brands has gone down two sizes since college, even though my waist is two inches larger than it was at the time.
The lack of consistency in clothing sizes is laughable, except for how it makes me want to cry sometimes.
Reply
Leave a comment