[cherrypie]

It's really amazing how sizes have changed over the decades. It occured to me while shopping the other day that part of the problem finding clothes when you are heavier is because the sizes have all gotten so small. What used to be a large is now a plus size.

I thought it would be interesting if some older posters posted what size they were in the "old days" to show how much they have changed. Please include your old weight, height, size and what decade it was


me:


135 5'5 size 11 8o's (these were skin tight jeans btw)

at one point I was down to 115 and the smallest size I ever wore was a 9

[Italiannie]

I have found the complete opposite to be true for me. It's called vanity sizing. There was never a size 0 or 00 when I was younger. Those would have been your size 2-6's.

I bought a pair of jeans the other day that were 2 sizes smaller than what I normally wear. I loved the number, but knew it was a marketing gimmick. I believe that you could also find the opposite to be true. The clothing industry has no standard sizing.

[runningfromfat]

late 1990's 5'6" 140lbs size 8
early 2000's 5'6 ~155lbs size 10
today 5'6" 169lbs size 6-8!



I really wish I knew what my measurements were back then to compare!

[weebleswobble]

My grandma offered me her 1960's wool size 12 suit when I got down to a size 12...I didn't think the blazer would fit (I am busty) but I was wearing a 10 jeans and 12 pants (I had gotten down to 185, this was last year).

I couldn't even pull the pants up past my thighs. It was like putting on a pair of 6's or 8's.

[jeminijad]

The measurements of any given size have INCREASED over the decades. This is well documented, from the old clothes your grandma has to the manufacturer's old dressforms. In my old job, I inspected incoming apparel for a major manufacturer, and worked with in house designers and apparel buyers, and this was common knowledge.

Like was talked about in another thread, Marilyn Monroe's size 12 is today's size 6.

[berryblondeboys]

When I was 18 in 1988 at 178 lbs - size 16w
When I was 27 in 1997 at 185 lbs - size 14w
Now when I'm 42 in 2012 at 178 lbs - size 10/12 and my waist is wayyyyyyyy larger now than when I was a teenager. The was no plus size juniors, so I was wearing women's 16w.

I have a LLbean skirt saved from 1993 - a classic wool pleated skirt. I was about 190 when I got it(i had just gained weight from 180 from the summer before) it is a size 16 and it was too tight for me when I got it. I never could wear it. It fits me now, just right. I tried on a very similar skirt at LLbean the other day and the size 10 fits me. I didn't change, the sizing did.

[losermom]

1981/18 yr old @ 140 lbs=size 14-16
2012/49 yr old @ 140 lbs=size 6-8, sometimes even a size 4.

[Alicia87]

That's soo frustrating! They really need to standardize sizes for women...while yes it's nice to be able to wear the "smaller" sizes, it'd be even nicer if I could walk into any given store and know what my size is! Even if it's a 14 or whatever, so long as I know where I'm at.

Side note - my nieces for the longest time thought you wore whatever age you were because their ages tended to coincide with their sizes for a while lol

[Arctic Mama]

Well one place the sizes haven't changed is dressmaker sizes. When I am sewing a pattern, despite firmly being a 14-16 my pattern size is invariably a 26-28. There has been definite size creep and it is no more obvious than when sewing a vintage pattern (or even a modern one) and realizing your inch measurements correspond to a vastly different size on the pattern than off-the-rack clothing. They used to be very similar but have diverged more and more from the 70's onward.

[runningfromfat]

Originally Posted by Alicia87

That's soo frustrating! They really need to standardize sizes for women...while yes it's nice to be able to wear the "smaller" sizes, it'd be even nicer if I could walk into any given store and know what my size is! Even if it's a 14 or whatever, so long as I know where I'm at.

Side note - my nieces for the longest time thought you wore whatever age you were because their ages tended to coincide with their sizes for a while lol

Actually, I'm pretty happy they don't have standard sizes! The reason being is that I'm pretty curvy (30H/28HH bra size, normally wear Levi's Supreme Curve Jeans) so standard sizing wouldn't allow for clothes that fit women with different proportions!

That being said, it would be nice if the clothing sizes were based off of your waist measurement, so a 31 would be for someone with a 31" waist. Then the bust/hips could be set according to whatever that particular manufacturer defined as their fit model. Actually, ideally, they'd list the measurements (or more like the range of measurements, especially for stretchy clothes) that correspond to that article of clothing. The sizes are so arbitrary anyways that they don't mean much!

Then again, picking a waist measurement is also tricky because most pants don't fit at your natural waist so while Levi's might say something is a size 29 that really corresponds to 34-35" waistband because it's meant to sit on your hips (and they assume that your high hips are 5-6" larger than your waist). That means for people like me who have a small difference between their natural waist and high hip need to size down (3 sizes normally!) whereas someone with a large difference would need to size up.