I've been fitting into size 12 pretty comfortably, and some size 10s (with stretch to them). Last night I discovered a box with about 5 pair of pants from 4-5 years ago....size 14....all different brands. And they all fit perfectly. Have sizes changed? Is a size 14 from 5 years ago the size 12 of today? Maybe that would account for all the people who have been saying they fit into a 4,2 or 0, which astounds me. Have manufacturers changed sizing to make us psychologically feel better about our sizes?
OMG...I was just laughing about this last night. I got a catalog from a made-to-order large size company. According to any conventional sizing I am still a 1-2X, but according to them I am an EXTRA SMALL!! I nearly fell out of my chair!
Talk about wanting us to feel better! Geeezzz, if that's all it takes to become an XS why bother???
I definitely think they have changed the sizes. When I was this same weight before I could fit a size 8 perfectly. An 8 is way too big now and most of my clothes are a 4-5. I know I'm not any smaller than I was then. I guess it was done to make us feel better. This time when I lost weight, I wore a size 8 at 170 lbs. I haven't noticed such a huge difference in shirt sizes. I started in a 2X and still wear mostly large in shirts.
It is called vanity sizing. And, usually, the more expensive the brand the more common the practice. The designers know that many women will spend an extra $100 to be able to claim they are a size 4 (or 2, 0, whatever).
My personal experience has been that there is an obvious trend every 10 years or so. When I graduated college in 1991 I was about 15 pounds lighter than I am now and wore a size 12-14...today, I wear an 8. That's a pretty big jump! That jump is why I try and tune out any media influences and pay attention to how clothes fit, how they look on me, and how I feel at any given size. The whole weight loss process alone creates enough emotional baggage - I don't need clothing designers, merchandisers, and department store presidents manipulating me on top of that! .
Absolutely! They even made another jump at some stores (Banana Republic, Ann Taylor) between last summer and this summer. I was physically smaller last summer and wore a larger size than I current wear at Banana Republic.
Quote:
Have manufacturers changed sizing to make us psychologically feel better about our sizes?
Maybe, but I suspect it's because the "average" absolute size of American women and teens has been creeping upwards. If a store routinely stocks sizes 2-16 or maybe 18, and an ever increasing portion of the population is outgrowing those sizes, they are losing a huge portion of the market. Most women are loathe to make the switch from shopping at "regular" stores to plus sized stores. The solution for the manufacturers is to resize the clothing the keep more people in their stores. I know when I was approaching the boundary of outgrowing misses sizes, I would buy anything rather than go into a Lane Bryant store or the plus sized department. This solves that problem for a lot of women.
At the other end of the spectrum, although most of us can't really empathize, it does cause problems for truly small women. My dd now wears a 0 or 00. She is nowhere near anorexic, but at 24 is very athletic at has very narrow hips. She has a hard time trying to buy professional looking clothing. Another friend who is 5" tall and 100 pounds of solid muscle, has to buy her nurses scrubs, then take them apart and resew them small enough so they don't fall off.
I've found that most designer dresses (well, as "designer" as I would come in contact with at Dillards) are actually smaller than the stuff at regular stores. In any case, I know there's something wrong when I can fit my wide load into a size 10 skirt.
I have a pair of size 12 button fly jeans circa 1990 that I'm saving in the back of my closet. When I get to a present day size 8, I might be able to wear them again. The day I get them on and buttoned without passing out is the day I douse them with lighter fluid and set them aflame.
I don't know, but it seems like we could all stop dieting and eventually we'll all be a 0 or even better a negative size number. Lol.
almostheaven, she probably has to buy her clothes in the kid's section now. My nephew's wife is that small, I'll ask her what she does. She wears a size 2 shoe and has to get those in the kid's department. She absolutely hates this because she is a business person and finds it almost impossible to find business like shoes this small without special ordering them and paying outrageous prices.
If anyone shops in vintage store, which I love to do, you'll quickly realise that sizes have been going steadily up for years. A 1930's size 16? A current size 8.
She wears a size 2 shoe and has to get those in the kid's department. She absolutely hates this because she is a business person and finds it almost impossible to find business like shoes this small without special ordering them and paying outrageous prices.
A store mentioned in the above article, Cinderella of Boston, has a site (very nice design btw) and their prices seem reasonable: in the $60s for a nice leather pump, $40s and $50s for leather flats, etc.
As they say: For over 50 years we have been the leader in women’s petite fashion footwear. Sizes range from 2 to 5½ Narrow, Medium or Wide and are specially crafted for a woman’s foot. Regardless of your age or lifestyle, you will find styles to fit your fashion needs. Casual to sophisticated, low heel to high heel, Cinderella of Boston has a shoe to satisfy all your petite footwear needs.
Ordering is easy with our on-line catalog. If you prefer, you can also order by mail,
phone or fax. We accept MasterCard, Visa, Checks and Money Orders.
As far as clothing sizing goes, yes, our sizes are routinely downsized to make the "average" a size 12. Or... upsized you might say. My sister, who is working in Manhattan in costume design, has noticed this as she has worked for the past 10 years. So wanting to get to a certain size as a goal is kind of meaningless. Or will be outdated in a few years at least Better to say a X-inch waist!
Last edited by BerkshireGrl; 09-17-2006 at 11:53 PM.
I still have size 10s from HS...can't get 'em above mid thigh (very attractive picture, ain't it?) but the slightly stretch ones at sears just make me look like a tramp. (Went with the 12's)
But it also seems jeans back then gave a girl more room in the seat and less in the leg (they were higher waisted too). I always end up with them tight on the thigh but then gaping enough at my spine that I could tuck a coke can back there. If anyone knows a brand with a decent waist to butt ratio, let me know. :-)
I always end up with them tight on the thigh but then gaping enough at my spine that I could tuck a coke can back there. If anyone knows a brand with a decent waist to butt ratio, let me know. :-)
ME TOO! Hate that! Even fat, I have a 12-13" difference between my hips and waist, and to get jeans up my thighs and on my hips, the waist ends up being huge. I have to wear a belt to cinch them in and end up with a weird "poof" of folded-in fabric on my stomach. Seeeexy!
I hear Lee jeans and Chic jeans are cut with a smaller waist... Right now my Bill Blass and Eddie Bauer jeans are about to get "Good Willed" in favor of ones that I can wear without a belt and not end up showing my Hanes to the world!
Off topic: have sizes changed?
I nearly fell out of my chair! 
Better to say a X-inch waist! 
