Comments on: Hellbound: When Did Size 12 Become an XL?

By: Tara

Tara — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 02:26:08 +0000

I’m not sure about men’s clothing - except for what my husband wears. He’s 6′1″ and very slim. He HAS to buy large shirts so that they are long enough (men in belly shirts? ewwwwuuuuu). That means that his shirts are too wide and billow about him like a small tent.

It seems to be assumed, with men, that if you are tall you are also very fat. And some chain stores, Wal-Mart for example, cater to the… plus sized male… shall we say.

You know how hard it is to find a 30/34 or 32/34 in pants? It can be very difficult! Generally the pants have the reverse numbers - 34/30! Short and thick in the middle! It’s very frustrating for him to find pants. He gets whatever size will fit, and hopes the color isn’t too bad.

By: Dean Rieck

Dean Rieck — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:34:06 +0000

Tara is right. While at a conference in KY a few months ago, I talked to a woman who used to work in the clothing business and she said the sizes are meaningless…nothing is standardized.

But while some clothing sizes up to let people think they’re smaller than they are, other clothing sizes down. Used to be I’d fit into a small or medium in virtually any shirt. But now I have to buy large. And NO I haven’t gotten bigger. I’ve always assumed that with men, they do this on purpose to make you think you’re larger. Maybe Tara could confirm that.

By: David Leland

David Leland — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:12:52 +0000

Your posting’s reinforces my experience that human kind is not any closer to recognizing that we are all the same inside…

As a vertically challenged male (5′5″), you can imagine my astonishment when I’m watching an NBA game and the play “small ball.” That means guys a mere 6′10″ are running up and down the court…

I could go on and on….:-)

David

By: Roberta Rosenberg

Roberta Rosenberg — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:13:36 +0000

Tara - the better women’s clothing lines traditionally always offered sizes that, let’s say, were generous and flattering.

I agree, too, that clothing sizes in general have never been properly standardized. I worked for a women’s clothing manufacturer for about a year. They had 3 lines and 3 clothing models they used - one each for juniors, misses, and women’s - and size 8 was the ideal baseline. I believe, someone correct me, that the baseline today is a 6.

To answer your question - women can support manufacturers and retailers who support them. The Dove soap/beauty company is a great case in point.

By: Tara

Tara — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:57:30 +0000

Let’s not forget that a size 12 in Marilyn’s time was smaller than today’s size 12. Those who sell clothes don’t want women to feel *bad* about their size (because women are less likely to buy anything at all if they’re disgusted - but put a size 12 woman into an 8 and she’ll often scream with delight and buy an item just to have a tag with that number on it! I’ve seen it often, and unfortunately once bought a horrid pair of striped pants because of it….

So a woman who used to be a 16 can now find clothes in size 12…

Yet if I go to a cute boutique or even Hot Topic at the mall, my body, which fits into anything from a 4 to an 8 (tall, womens or juniors) - is considered a “large” or - rarely - a medium. Go figure.

When I was this size as a teenager I was a teen’s 9/11. Go figure that, too.

It’s all about vanity…

I once was thrilled to find some jeans (designer) that were sold like men’s jeans - by waist, hip and inseam measurements. Until I actually tried them on. I laughed when I realized that the hip and waist measurements were a good 6-10 INCHES SMALLER than my “real” measurements. So much for that… but I bought them anyway. Unlike the aforementioned striped pants, these were adorable, fit amazingly well, and were on clearance. What’s a woman to do?