Comments on: Ann Taylor Drops Size 16s

By: Gretchen

Gretchen — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:12:16 +0000

I have a huge problem with certain stores that cater to “outdoorsy” people. You know, the woman with unwashed hair and Birkenstocks, the ones who refuse to wear makeup and dress in tank tops and shorts?

The problem with these stores (the biggest offender being REI) is that their idea of large or extra large is often no larger than a size 14 or perhaps a skimpy-cut size 16. Oh, you can go there and buy Keen sandals or men’s coats or stock up on camping supplies, but heaven forbid you want to get clothes to wear while kayaking. Or hiking. Or yoga. All activities I participate in on a regular basis.

I am a size 18-20 and after 2 years of dieting and exercising, I have only lost 20 lbs. I refuse to give up my outdoor activities because there are no appropriate clothes to wear. I have told my husband that I am boycotting that place.

By: Liza

Liza — Sun, 31 May 2009 00:33:00 +0000

^^I mean violently, not like “omg! I lost half my size so I’m better than everyone!”

By: Liza

Liza — Sun, 31 May 2009 00:32:10 +0000

On Fringe, people kept getting cut in half when they tried to pass into the other world.

Just sayin’

By: Katharine

Katharine — Wed, 27 May 2009 13:00:20 +0000

@im – The standard used to be an 8 in Standard American Sizing. Standard American Sizing is what’s still used in most sewing patterns, and an 8 in that scale has measurements approximating, yes, to somewhere between what is labelled a 2 and a 4 in regular retail level clothing. (Designer and more expensive “bridge” clothing still mostly uses standard sizing, without much if any vanity drift, which is why designer clothing “fits small”.)

I asked someone once, on a fashion professionals’ blog, if that was true, and she scoffed at me – “oh, no no, we use size 8s who are 5’6″, and it’s a size 8 in the line.” But quite frankly, I don’t always believe that, as a person who sews myself. In many, many lines, the off proportions in fitted clothing are just too obvious right round a size 10, for things to be scaled up a mere size.

Mind you, there are other factors at work, such as that cheaper clothing is cut in great stacks, which can throw the bottom pattern pieces WAY out of alignment (causing huge discrepancies even in one single size).

By: defiantcreatrix

defiantcreatrix — Wed, 27 May 2009 06:45:52 +0000

Prettywoman, let’s ignore the fact that people eat all sorts of different amounts, exercise all sorts of different amounts, and are all different sizes; let’s pretend that any woman can be a size two with only a couple-three years of serious work and that once she gets there she can stay there. (this isn’t true, but let’s say for the sake of argument it is)

I would like to know *exactly* what I, as a woman well into the realm of “morbidly obese” am expected to wear during that couple-three years of strenuous work. Men’s sweatpants? Why? Women who wear big sizes have money to spend on clothes–why don’t they exist?

By: Mulberry

Mulberry — Wed, 27 May 2009 03:29:50 +0000

Prettywoman, that’s not even true. You can eat less, move more, and still be a large size.
Last time I checked, nobody was paying me to wear their clothes. If I’m paying, I want clothes that fit well.
In this economy, those in the clothing industry must surely be thriving if they can afford to ignore the market for large sizes.

By: jm

jm — Tue, 26 May 2009 20:53:06 +0000

I forget where I read this, but I think the average “fit model” is a size 2/4 and retailers just scale up. As someone mentioned above, that doesn’t account for hips, bellies, asses, etc and is why we end up with all those weird fit issues in “large” sizes like 16/18. I was a HUGE fan of Forth & Towne for the five seconds it was around because the clothes were designed around a fit model that was a 10/12. Of course, that place went out of business because of the same lack of market. Eye roll.

By: Meredith

Meredith — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:04:20 +0000

Whoops. Unnecessary “but” in that first sentence. I really need to proofread before posting.

By: Meredith

Meredith — Tue, 26 May 2009 14:03:24 +0000

Prettywoman, while I’m sure you meant well, but this website is meant to be a safe space where no one has to hear about how dieting can change our lives. Everyone here has done it. We’ve tried it. We know it doesn’t work, and we are working on loving ourselves exactly as we are, and valuing ourselves for more than our dress size. I lost 65 lbs and kept it off for over four years, but am gaining it back now. I’m glad you are feeling good, but I’ve been there, too, and it didn’t work for me in the long term. Please be supportive of our decision not to diet, and please keep this a safe space for us. Thanks.

By: frm4551

frm4551 — Mon, 25 May 2009 19:49:55 +0000

@Prettywoman: Wow, please tell me more about this other world you speak of. Is it a magical place where my thighs never rub together and all life’s problems are solved with the reduction of food intake in relation to hours on the treadmill?

Point is, regardless of where you’re at on this journey to the “other” realm you should be able to find a pair of jeans that fit and not be treated with disrespect when you show up willing to spend money in their store. Nobody is asking the thin people (the residents of this “whole other world” I assume) to give up anything or pay extra for their tiny little clothes. We just want a shirt that buttons over our boobs and a pair of khakis that can button around the waist without causing camel toe.

We pay for these things, often more, and it would be nice to hear a “thank you, come again” instead of being told our transaction is more appreciated online.