Hellbound: When Did Size 12 Become an XL?
By Roberta Rosenberg on Jan 30, 2008 in Hell-bound, Occasional Rantings
When Did Medium Become the New Huge?
There’s a wonderful line in the movie The Devil Wears Prada where the Stanley Tucci character, an executive at the Vogue-like fashion magazine, eyeballs the Anne Hathaway character and says to her (paraphrasing),
“Size 6? I don’t think we’ll have anything in the [samples] closet for you … especially since 6 became the new 2 and 2 became the new 0.”
Now imagine, for a moment, men’s clothing starting at size 0. I can’t since I’m quite sure, they’d all want to start at Large, if not Extra-Large … at least in the right context. 
At 53, I deserve pretty, well-constructed and well-designed clothes that fit right, even when they cost a little or sometimes a lot more. That’s fine by me. I’m also a gal, shall we say, who’s built on a little on the plush and plenty side. That’s fine by me, too. So when I buy a item listed as something more than medium, I generally understand what size range that entails.
Until today. Perusing one of my favorite online vendors, I found an item I liked. I checked the sizing for XL. The equivalent was a US ladies size 12.
Size 12? An XL? Where was I when this happened?
For years that meant medium. Over the last decade 12 became large and some designers decided to not even make clothing for women larger than size 12 and relegated them to the backwaters of the women’s sizes and plus-size ranks.
Marilyn Monroe at the height of her hot blond allure was a curvy size 14.
Can you imagine MM buying her clothes at Lane Bryant? No, me either.
As a copywriter, I wonder how I would spin this unfortunate and unfair turn of events that would still appeal to those now rotund 12s without making the rest of us – like most US women – feel, oh I don’t know – gargantuan? I don’t think I’m talented enough to make this all sound lively and “too much fun.”
Frankly, it makes me want to crack open a nice box of Mallomars and take a nice long drag on a Virginia Slims cigarette.
I tell my students that their messages will always be received and interpreted through the lens of the prospect’s experience and deepest desires/fears. I’m strong and self-confident enough to tell a retailer to stuff it and take my business elsewhere. But even I felt hurt and even a little abused when I saw 12=XL.
I especially think about the girls my daughter’s age who are still figuring out who they are within the stranglehold of adolescent self-absorbed self-consciousness. What message does it send – Hi, Girlfriend! Looking for a great outfit? Who isn’t. But wait, you’re a size 12? Whoa, see you on that show, Biggest Loser, loser.”
Talk about taking the pipe – why not serve a heaping spoonful of anxiety and a big wet dollop of self-loathing as that little something extra?
I am not my dress size, but there’s no way that size 12=XL in any universe I live in … and I mean any.
- Enjoyed this post? Get free updates by email or RSS
- Need a copy critique or a consult? Contact the Maven
- The ultimate guide to writing and designing effective landing pages – Marketing Sherpa’s Landing Page Handbook, 2008 (aff)
[tags] body image, women’s clothing sizes, consumer expectation, lingerie sizing, adolescent angst [/tags]
Tara | Jan 31, 2008 | Reply
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?
Roberta Rosenberg | Jan 31, 2008 | Reply
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.
David Leland | Jan 31, 2008 | Reply
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
Dean Rieck | Feb 4, 2008 | Reply
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.
Tara | Feb 9, 2008 | Reply
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.
Janet Sellers | Feb 10, 2009 | Reply
I am furious
When is someone going to do something about this
The average woman is a size 14 I am told and that looks very appealing on most women
I am a size 8-10 and I thought I look great and yet there are people out there who think i am fat
This is awful
Growing up I average model was the “perfect size 8″ now even that is fat
So now we have a lot of nasty over sexed young people who are size 0 with faux boops that are huge
this is sick, sick, sick!!!!
Can wait to see that generation, with their back, bone and over all health problems
I should live so long