A few years back I lost a few pounds and went shopping - knowing that when I came up through that particular weight I took an 18. Yet, when I went shopping I was able to wear a 16. I figured it was just the store I was in, but went to some others and yep - took a 16.
I am getting back into that weight range and went into my closet - those
16s are starting to fit again. I still maintain that on the way up to this weight I grew out of a 16 a good 15-20 pounds below where I am right now. This would have been probably 14 years ago.
Also, I have a pair of 18 jeans from the Avenue - they are from that older time frame and yes, I saved then all of this time to try to get back in them - these jeans are way smaller than my 16s from 3 years ago. In fact. I can't possibly even get into them. I know how much I weighed when I bought them and it was 18 pounds less than I do right now.
So it seems to me that an 18 from 14 years ago is now a 16 ... or maybe even a 14 (?!)
Is this the "vanity sizing" that I see mentioned from time to time? What gives?
Sadly, I had given up on myself and gone the stretch pants route for so long, that I am seriously fashion impaired. I am determined to get stylish and feel better about myself, and I do understand that size is just a number.
But I must admit that this whole size thing fascinates me. Any ideas?
All stores vanity size - it's a ploy to make people feel good about themselves! And it worked, to the point where I didn't think I was overweight because I could fit in a size 14.
Sizes are only really guidelines though - there are some shops that I'm a size 8 in and some I'm a size 14 in, so I don't tend to worry about it and just wear what fits. All shops cut differently - over here, Jane Norman seems to be the one that cuts to the 'proper' sizing and e.g. H&M seem to vanity size because there is no WAY I'm a size 6, yet today I got into a size 6 skirt in that store.
Sizes have changed and a modern 8 is a vintage 12, I think. Or thereabouts. If you really care that much about what size something is then cut out the label once you've bought it. I prefer shops that go by inches rather than sizes, personally - I know I'm a 28 inch waist so I'd rather have a store that sized like that than size 12 or whatever.
Vanity sizing is definitely real, and it's a fascinating from a sociological perspective to compare vanity sized lines with non-vanity lines. If you compare 'vanity' sized brands (which tend to cater to thirtysomething, middle-class women -- think Banana Republic, Ann Taylor, The Limited, as well as department store lines) with brands that target teens and young-20s women (Urban Outfitters & similar), the sizing is totally different.
As a petite girl, I always self-identified as a size 2... little did I know that according to measurement, at my largest, I should have been a size 6/8!! But I still fit into 2s and 4s... which had grown along with me.
Indeed it is, says someone who loves vintage clothes, and has taken a lot of knocks to her self-esteem as a result.
Those lovely, filmy white dresses and petticoats from the early 1900s through the early 1920s, known as "summer whites" -- I feel monstrous when I am sorting through those at a vintage clothing store. Ladies from the start of the previous century were generally tiny creatures. I have just a few garments from this period that fit. And only one shirtwaist (that would be a blouse) is a ready made & that one has no size tag, so I don't know what size I am for that period. But I'm in the "unusually large" range for clothing of that period. One good thing is their height was generally closer to mine.
During World War II, the sizes are larger, but still, their waists & hips are narrow. I'm their equivalent of a plus size, if not quite such a freak.
By the 1950s, I'm in a size 16 or an 18 -- again, if I can find it. I have better luck with sweaters of this period because their bras were so structured & conical, whereas ours flatten us out a bit more & round us out. The extra material help, as does the stretchy sweater fabric.
In 1970s through 1980s clothes, I'm a size 14 or 12, and these are easier to find.
So while I think it is indeed "vanity sizing," it's trend that goes pretty far back, and reflects the predominant body type of various periods.
I don't foresee this ending. I think stores will end up sizing like Chico's, eventually, as the population grows even heavier.
I agree that sizes are guidelines. And I think that I am finally getting to a place where it doesn't really matter to me. Just as I am finally realizing that the inches leaving my waist mean as much as or more than the pounds leaving the scale. And I am finally realizing that if I am really going to do this I am going to do it a pound or two a week. Ah! Enlightenment
It is very interesting sociologically. And I know it really dates me that I am noticing it in this way. Plus I can't believe how long I had been avoiding buying clothes with zippers.
saef - That is all so interesting! I guess it is an ever changing thing, I just didn't realize that. Its funny because back in high school (in the 80s) I was a 10. I must admit I've picked up 10s in the stores recently .... eyeing that as my goal size .... and I thought they seemed bigger than I remembered
Funny. It doesn't really matter, though. Its just a number. I just honestly didn't realize that sizes had changed so much!
Indeed it is, says someone who loves vintage clothes, and has taken a lot of knocks to her self-esteem as a result.
Those lovely, filmy white dresses and petticoats from the early 1900s through the early 1920s, known as "summer whites" -- I feel monstrous when I am sorting through those at a vintage clothing store. Ladies from the start of the previous century were generally tiny creatures. I have just a few garments from this period that fit. And only one shirtwaist (that would be a blouse) is a ready made & that one has no size tag, so I don't know what size I am for that period. But I'm in the "unusually large" range for clothing of that period. One good thing is their height was generally closer to mine.
During World War II, the sizes are larger, but still, their waists & hips are narrow. I'm their equivalent of a plus size, if not quite such a freak.
By the 1950s, I'm in a size 16 or an 18 -- again, if I can find it. I have better luck with sweaters of this period because their bras were so structured & conical, whereas ours flatten us out a bit more & round us out. The extra material help, as does the stretchy sweater fabric.
In 1970s through 1980s clothes, I'm a size 14 or 12, and these are easier to find.
So while I think it is indeed "vanity sizing," it's trend that goes pretty far back, and reflects the predominant body type of various periods.
I don't foresee this ending. I think stores will end up sizing like Chico's, eventually, as the population grows even heavier.
Your post made me think about something I hadn't before. My mom, who was 5'5 inches tall and weighed around 140 all her life, felt like a "big" woman. (She passed in '66 when I was 12) My sis who is 5'7" felt/feels the same way, probably cause my mom did, and she is taller. She has stayed around 135-145 all her life. When I was in grade school and shopping with them, (60s) Mom wore a size 14 and Sis a 12.
Fast forward, Sister now wears a 2,4,6,8 or 10. depending on the store.
I find all of this really confusing. I have several different sizes in my closet right now. What I decided to do is cut out the label on the ones that fit. Not because I was trying to blind myself to what size I wore but just so when I was in a hurry it was a visual cue for me that I could put that on and it would fit. In the past, I spent more time than I wanted to trying different clothes on just so I could find one that fit me.
Also, I have given away clothes that both don't fit, I can't alter as the seasons change. It was really difficult to do at first but now I actually look forward to it.
Vanity sizing - bane of my life!
Target have 3 different ladies sections - petite, normal and fat. All of them vanity size. Even the petite section are one size out from standard sizing (ie a petite 6 = 8 really). The normal sizes are 2 sizes out (a normal 8 = real 12). And the fat section is far out from reality - 4 sizes out. (A fat 16 = real 24).
I found this out today. I was hoping to get into normal 18s (real 22s) - no such luck. Still in the fat section (really ultra fat).
I blame vanity sizing (together with the ubiquity of fast food and social acceptance) for the obesity epidemic. Bring back standard sizing already!
At my thinnest I was in a real 12 (modern 8, petite 10), so I have my work cut out for me.
I feel like I'm not "earning" my weight loss and the joy I feel when fitting into a size 4 is "undeserved" because I'm not "really" a "real" size 4. From a rational standpoint I'm a moron for thinking that way, but it seems a lot of people here understand these sorts of sentiments.
I think the issue for me is just that there is no consistency in sizing. I am in a pair of size 8 pants today that are swimming on me. I have other 8's that are snug. I have fit in a size 5 at Target and then two days later not been able to pull the same cut/style size 5 pants up over my butt. And I always feel disappointed if I get something that is too small to try on.
When I was about 10 pounds less in the early 90s, I generally wore an 7/8 in Juniors and an 8 in Misses. Now I wear a 7 in juniors and a 6 or an 8 in Misses, depending. There is a discrepancy between the times, but I find the current discrepancy between stores (or even within stores) more irritating.
target definitly uses vanity sizing in most of their stuff... except their hoodies are cut really small. i have a size 8 skirt from target that fits well but im more of a size 12 anywhere else.
i fit into size mediums everywhere. i dont feel that at 175 pounds i qualify as a size 6-10 but thats what the stores say lol. its not cool because now when i lose weight and i fit in smaller sizes i have to question whether i really lost the weight or if that store just cuts clothing larger. unless its a dramatic size difference of course
while it makes sense as people get bigger to make the clothes bigger its still annoying.
also walmart is the worst at sizing. i can wear a size small at walmart lol. wth?
As long as you're within a size range that you can buy clothing pretty much anywhere, why sweat the number on the label? I mean, really. The only person who sees the label is you.
I agree with MariaMaria. The best thing to do is to buy what fits and not worry about sizing. Vanity sizing is the bane of my existance and is the fastest way to drive down my self-esteem. Case in point, I have lost almost 35 lbs, but the pants that I wore at my highest weight still fit, although they are starting to get too loose. However, when I try on the next size down they are still a bit too snug. But, I quickly learned that there is a huge difference between an 18W and a regular size 18. The 18W is too big on me and the regular 18 is usually a bit snug. Unless the 18 comes from Old Navy, then it is falling off and I need a 16. It's all too much!
Last edited by digitalrequiem; 02-16-2011 at 09:55 AM.
Vanity Sizing?
- these jeans are way smaller than my 16s from 3 years ago. In fact. I can't possibly even get into them. I know how much I weighed when I bought them and it was 18 pounds less than I do right now. 
