Comments on: Why Are Clothing Sizes So Out of Wack? http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/ A blog about music, pop culture, the Strokes, Jack White, kittens, and cute boys. Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:53:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Joan http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-470179 Joan Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:01:10 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-470179 Small people want nice clothes that don't fall off! Small people want nice clothes that don’t fall off!

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-466880 Anonymous Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:45:08 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-466880 All of you talking about your itty bitty sizes... cry cry babies that you're all size 4. Booo hooo... All of you talking about your itty bitty sizes… cry cry babies that you’re all size 4. Booo hooo…

]]> By: Joan M http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-279990 Joan M Mon, 07 Jan 2008 11:42:38 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-279990 I'm getting rather tired of the sizism which stigmatises smaller, often shorter women as "tiny". Dressmaking patterns from the 1970s give size 10 as having a 24 inch waist, and that was considered quite normal. In the 1080s, clothing manufcturers did a resizing exercise, and relabelled clothes as being a size smaller than they had been; ie a size 10 dress became a size 8! Lots of us "became" a size smaller overnight! Now, clothes are again being made larger for any stated size, and those of us at the lower end of the scale are being attacked for not being fatter! Maybe if we were 6 foot tall we would be skinny, but at heights of 5 ' - 5' 3" we have perfectly acceptable BMIs at size 2, 4 and 6. Jeans do not fit neatly into the dress sizing system, being based on men's notional waist sizes combined with trouser leg length. I’m getting rather tired of the sizism which stigmatises smaller, often shorter women as “tiny”. Dressmaking patterns from the 1970s give size 10 as having a 24 inch waist, and that was considered quite normal. In the 1080s, clothing manufcturers did a resizing exercise, and relabelled clothes as being a size smaller than they had been; ie a size 10 dress became a size 8! Lots of us “became” a size smaller overnight! Now, clothes are again being made larger for any stated size, and those of us at the lower end of the scale are being attacked for not being fatter! Maybe if we were 6 foot tall we would be skinny, but at heights of 5 ‘ – 5′ 3″ we have perfectly acceptable BMIs at size 2, 4 and 6.
Jeans do not fit neatly into the dress sizing system, being based on men’s notional waist sizes combined with trouser leg length.

]]> By: Roana http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-270458 Roana Sat, 22 Dec 2007 05:27:46 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-270458 Last week, I brought very nice dress from Gap store through couponalbum.com... It is very comfortable and nice... Last week, I brought very nice dress from Gap store through couponalbum.com… It is very comfortable and nice…

]]> By: Carla http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-212024 Carla Wed, 19 Sep 2007 03:54:27 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-212024 Topshop size 6 is very close in measurements to a US size 0 actually. UK-6: 31.5-24-33 US-0: 31.5-23.5-33.5. As for a size 4, it's absolutely tiny and you would have to be about 4ft10 and 90lb max! UK-4: 30.5-23-32 US-00: 30.5-22.5-32.5 Topshop size 6 is very close in measurements to a US size 0 actually.

UK-6: 31.5-24-33
US-0: 31.5-23.5-33.5.

As for a size 4, it’s absolutely tiny and you would have to be about 4ft10 and 90lb max!

UK-4: 30.5-23-32
US-00: 30.5-22.5-32.5

]]> By: Dawn :} http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-101438 Dawn :} Mon, 01 Jan 2007 19:14:05 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-101438 Topshop size uk 6 is a size 2 (us) and size 4 in h&M is a us size 0.xxxx Size 4 is def a new thing. Topshop size uk 6 is a size 2 (us) and size 4 in h&M is a us size 0.xxxx Size 4 is def a new thing.

]]> By: Jen http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-88944 Jen Thu, 07 Dec 2006 04:27:16 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-88944 jmfausti has it right. I used to be a size 6 ten years ago, and I have not lost weight or inches. Now I have to wear size 2 or even size 0 in some brands! I'm afraid that in a few years, I'll no longer be able to find clothes to fit me! I think it's so people will feel better about their size and thus buy more clothes... jmfausti has it right. I used to be a size 6 ten years ago, and I have not lost weight or inches. Now I have to wear size 2 or even size 0 in some brands! I’m afraid that in a few years, I’ll no longer be able to find clothes to fit me! I think it’s so people will feel better about their size and thus buy more clothes…

]]> By: snarkylush http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-86799 snarkylush Thu, 30 Nov 2006 20:44:52 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-86799 i agree that abercrombie/club monaco sizing is ridiculous. but i'm confused as to how topshop does their sizing. i wear a 6-8 there, and i'm definitely not anywhere near an american 0. i agree that abercrombie/club monaco sizing is ridiculous. but i’m confused as to how topshop does their sizing. i wear a 6-8 there, and i’m definitely not anywhere near an american 0.

]]> By: jmfausti http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-86776 jmfausti Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:24:07 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-86776 Because Americans are so fat and getting fatter, clothing sizes are getting larger, too. Due to a 2 being more like a 4 used to be, clothing manufacturers have to now make sizes for the people they've made all their clothes too big for. Because Americans are so fat and getting fatter, clothing sizes are getting larger, too. Due to a 2 being more like a 4 used to be, clothing manufacturers have to now make sizes for the people they’ve made all their clothes too big for.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-86760 Anonymous Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:42:24 +0000 http://www.themodernage.org/2006/11/29/why-are-clothing-sizes-so-out-of-wack/#comment-86760 "Like how ridiculously small do you have to be to be smaller than “nothing” (literally)?" Well, I'm not quite 5'1", and sometimes a size 0 can be a little too big for me. It depends on the designer. I also own a really expensive designer skirt in a size 8, and it's loose at the waist, but not noticeably so. Men's dress clothing sizes are based on their measurements; why not standardize women's clothing sizes similarly? Do guys have problems with casual clothing size discrepancies too? “Like how ridiculously small do you have to be to be smaller than “nothing” (literally)?”

Well, I’m not quite 5’1″, and sometimes a size 0 can be a little too big for me. It depends on the designer. I also own a really expensive designer skirt in a size 8, and it’s loose at the waist, but not noticeably so.

Men’s dress clothing sizes are based on their measurements; why not standardize women’s clothing sizes similarly? Do guys have problems with casual clothing size discrepancies too?

]]>