- cross-posted to:
- womensstuff@piefed.blahaj.zone
- cross-posted to:
- womensstuff@piefed.blahaj.zone
You must log in or register to comment.
At this point I’m wondering if the designers just roll dice and put the result on the label.
I know this is a problem, as I see my wife deal with it frequently.
But understand that men’s sizes aren’t consistent either. I have a 32" waist…maybe. Some jeans and shorts fit me perfectly, some are way too tight, and some are way too loose. Even within the same brand and product. The jeans I have on today are pretty good for fit. A different pair of jeans I was wearing a few days ago required regular adjustments to keep from falling down. My weight hasn’t varied THAT much.
The situation for men isn’t as bad as women’s sizes, though. I’d love to know how they think they can compress all of the different measurements a woman’s body can have into a single number. At least they haven’t tried that with men - for example, pants are waist and inseam length, so you can usually get what you need, or at least pretty close (notwithstanding the above issue). If they condensed that into one number, I have no idea how that would work.
Yeah as a trans woman it was bittersweet when my hips stopped fitting in men’s jeans. They’re sturdier with bigger pockets and way more (but not really) consistently sized.
The problem in men’s sizes is tolerances in fabric cutting as they stack more and more sheets per cut. Women’s clothes do that while also playing calvinball.
All this means rhat as a long legged skinny girl with thick thighs, biker’s calves, and an ass I’d only trade while pant shopping, pant shopping is a long pain in the ass.
I’m a size M guy, everything from head to toe is M. If M doesn’t fit, I will try S, but most of the time that is too small, so I just skip that fit or brand. Sometimes the size difference is so ridiculous it might as well be two different shirts. One time I tried a polo in M and it looked like an oversized 90s hip‑hop shirt on me so I tried the S and it was so tight it looked like swimwear lol.
There’s a slightly better balance with consistency for men’s clothes because styles and patterns don’t need to change as frequently.
That being said, it varies by brand and varies more when the brand is lower quality. Old Navy clothes might as well be sized “No way,” “I dunno,” “maybe, well, no,” and “Woah, way too big.” But something higher end like BR will be consistent with themselves on things like jeans that rarely change. All the people in some sweatshop in Bangladesh have the patterns down doing the same thing for years.
Shoes. Bought a pair of Bass shoes from the Bass online store. The shoes that arrived were completely different from the ones I ordered. The picture on the shoebox were what I wanted, but not what was in the box. Explained the issue and returned the shoes. The replacement shoes were exactly the same. I returned and gave up.
We all know that the rich wear personally tailored suits and so-on. But, what I think would be amazing is to be rich enough to wear a personally tailored t-shirt, or personally tailored socks. For women, I can’t imagine the joy of having a personally tailored bra that was built precisely to fit their exact body. That must exist at some level of wealth, but I just wonder how rich you have to be to justify that kind of spending.
For most people, even when you find something that fits well, there are going to be compromises, like the shoulders might fit perfectly, but it’s just a bit too long, or a bit too tight. But, just imagine something simple like a T-shirt where instead of “medium” you get something that takes into account your torso’s length, your ribcage’s size, your shoulder’s width, your arm’s circumference, the size of your neck, and so-on.
Tailors are pretty affordable. Anyone can take clothes into a tailor and get them tailored to their body shape. Idk if bras are able to be adjusted though.
Always get a size up and wash them hot to shrink to you
It’s less extreme but men’s clothing is like this too. I found a cut of jeans I liked in a store then ordered 4 mor pairs in different colors. None fit the same and 2 were unwearable.
I did the same! It was not jeans but pants that is supposed to look like they are a bit more formal but are more comfortable. From the website did I just pick 3 different colors of the same size but they all fit so differently, and one pair had much thicker fabric, felt more like they went “close enough” and called it a day lol
I wear size 34 cargo shorts.
There is no point near my waist that is even close to a tape measured 34 inches.
I knew it! I’m not crazy!
i know the author is only familiar with their own experiences and i don’t expect them to know the other side but this is definitely not exclusive to women’s clothes. every brand just uses their own sizes for everything from hats to pants to shoes.
Some woman shop for/wear “men’s” clothes, either because they shop for the men in their life, or for themselves because the standards are more sensible (even if not perfect) compared to women’s sizing. In other situations, we wear “men’s” cut clothes because it’s the default - like when a workplace gives everyone a free T-shirt. 9 times out of 10, it’s probably a cut designed for men - even if the workplace has a majority of women (as was the case when I worked in a nursing home.)
At least for pants, a lot of men’s pants sizes usually go off a band + length measurement, which is a ratio that women’s clothes don’t offer at all. T-shirts can be bad either way, but I once grabbed two (“women’s”) shirts off the same rack in a store and both fit me perfectly - one was Small, the other was Extra Large. I’ve never seen that bad of a difference when trying on “men’s” clothes, and that’s part of why I prefer to buy from the men’s section. It’s more sensible.
So yeah, vanity sizing hurts everyone. But unless you do shop for both men’s and women’s clothes, it’s hard to appreciate just how awful vanity sizing is for women in particular.
Shoes are there worst. I need EE width. Some brands, the"Wide Fit" works. Others, “Extra Wide”. And that doesn’t even address how extremely difficult it is to even find wide shoes in-store nowadays.
This is one of many reasons I don’t buy textbook economics of capitalism.
For example, if they’d just put lots of pockets in women’s clothing decades ago as standard, they’d have sold SOOOO much.
This idea that capitalism and the free hand of the market will gravitate towards bulk of demand is bullshit.
Capitalism’s goal is profits. Not helping the customer, selling more, or anything else. We’re in late-stage capitalism, so it is ‘Profits Uber Alles’.
Unfortunately, I’m pretty sure that this is one instance that validates the textbook approach. In addition to the comment here, I had read several on the red site several years ago, one I remember from a buyer for a chain of outdoor gear stores, and another from the owner of a boutique clothing store. Both said that they tried to get women’s clothing with real pockets, but eventually gave up because it just doesn’t sell.
This topic came up in a group of my sailor friends on a boat last week, and ironically, all of the women’s garments had good pockets, so they couldn’t provide an example. But then, they were all wearing utilitarian clothing, rather than stylish. One friend had just bought new pants from REI; I’ve noticed for decades that if you want real pockets, shop at REI.
For what it’s worth, stylish, form-fitting men’s clothing also has tiny, or no pockets.
I use to work retail selling (mostly) women clothes. At one point we had the same model of sundress with and without pockets. Every one of them that was watching or trying the one without got like super hyped and excited when we told them we had it with pockets. The pocketless one still sold better. And it wasn’t even a tight fitting dress, it was slack and baggy.
I read a thing (not sure if it’s true) that the reason there’s no pockets in women’s clothing is that women have more diverse body shapes than men. Pockets are designed not to interrupt the lines of the garment where possible - it’s more straightforward to place men’s pockets because they’re going to be in a more predictable place when worn Vs women where it ends up making the clothes fit poorly.
where it ends up making the clothes fit poorly
a.k.a makes the clothes fit anything but skin-tight because the pockets need space so the clothes have to be wider-cut
That seems like an oversimplification, outside looking in for me, but there’s no way a single dimension could ever adequately describe an item of clothing - my sister and wife have similar sized waists, but something tight round the posterior on my wife would be baggy on my sister.
Random memory unlocked: Back in high school, I had to borrow my girlfriend’s jeans for some reason I don’t remember. (We happened to wear the same size.) I do remember having SO MUCH room in the pockets, because I had narrower hips.
No one’s mentioned bras and how they are significantly worse? Lets make arbitrary cup and band sizes, but then add in how each bra has a different shape and projection even in the same brand. Are you full on top, full on bottom, average, shallow? What about root width and height? Well you won’t know if any bra will fit until you try, even changing cup and band sizes won’t make a bra not made for your shape fit properly. Each brand does their own different sizing even in each bra, each global country has their own sizing system, and it is madness.
The whole “cup size” thing is so weird. Even the name “cup” makes it sound like it’s based on volume, but it’s not. It’s the difference between a measuring tape wrapped at boob height vs a measuring tape wrapped just below the boobs. This means that a 36A and a 28E might have the same volume of breast tissue but wildly different “cup sizes”. It really seems like the whole thing would be a lot easier to manage if there were just a “breast volume” measurement and a “band length” measurement.
Lemmy needs a community for A Bra That Fits. It’s hard to express just how bad the bra-sizing problem is in the US. It goes far and beyond vanity sizing. I don’t even bother with US sizes anymore. Not only do the sizes mean next-to-nothing, but most stores only carry up to about ~ 44 DDD. Which means that many people who require different sizes end up wearing what’s available - even if it doesn’t fit right. When I measure myself and plug it into a bra sizing calculator, I end up with something even specialty lingerie shops don’t carry. But that’s not a problem for Victoria’s Secret or whatever - they’ll attempt to push whatever they have in stock, even if its sizing makes no sense, because their end goal is to make a sale - not to actually help you.
I suspect the powers of capitalism (aided by the internet/shopping online) have convinced most stores not to carry sizes that aren’t mainstream. Yes, this even applies to boutique shops that supposedly cater to larger sizes. They don’t want to keep stock that isn’t likely to move, which means tons of people like me end up getting completely shafted. I could spend hours researching places, making calls, traveling across the state to find these places, find the one or two bras in the entire building that actually fit me, just to end up with a material that makes me itch or has an ugly style that only a grandma would wear. (Sexy lingerie? For massive titties? LOL good luck finding that.) I’ve wasted days doing this, and it’s only gotten worse since Covid (when many stores moved inventory out of physical buildings and made them exclusively available online. Which defeats the point of actually going to their stores at all.) My only real option is to bra shop online, using British sizes, and fucking pray that everything will work out all right.
On top of that, bras are expensive. Prices vary with sales and all, but I’d say about $50 is average for one. Add in the scarcity aspect and the varying quality levels (that I can’t afford to be picky about), and I’m lucky to own 2-3 bras that fit at any given time. I have to hand-wash and thoroughly dry my bra most nights so I can wear it again the next day without risking a yeast infection. It absolutely sucks and there isn’t a damn thing I can do about it.
I agree! I was wanting a woman-oriented instance that could host things like ABTF. If I went with piefed it would help with voting being available to subscribers, but I would also like a way to have it hidden from /all. I would like to get it up and running but we’ll see.
Even when I tried Victoria’s Secret, they never had pretty/sexy colors/styles in my “size” (they sized me incorrectly, too small at 34DDD). Even the calculator got me wrong and told me 34FF/F (too big). I ended up being 36E in Panache in certain styles. They are expensive, but I’ve been ordering it online at places that accepts returns to try on, then buy cheaper on places like ebay. I was also a 34G in Chantelle. Have you tried Polish bras? I think they are much more expensive but people on that sub were always bringing up Ewa Michalak. I haven’t tried it since I’ve found some consistency in Panache.
I hate hand-washing btw, I usually throw them in a washing machine with a lingerie bag and air dry them but recently tried hand-washing and fuck that noise. I’m going to try to stick with hand-washing to extend the lifespan but ugh. I also managed to scrub off one of my bras’ label info on accident q.q It was so exhausting. I can’t imagine having to do that every day, so sorry.
This isn’t just a problem with women’s jeans which have arbitrary size numbers. Even men’s jeans which are size by the actual waist and inseam measurement can be wrong. In addition to vanity sizing, cheaper jeans are also made from larger material cuts out of the patterns at the same time to save manufacturing cost sometimes twice as many as shown here:
Those at the top or bottom of the stack may end up a bit smaller or a bit larger than the pattern, but they all get marked with the same size.
Whether it was this manufacturing problem or vanity sizing, this is why I stopped buying Old Navy jeans. I could pick out 3 jeans all labeled with the same size and one would fit okay, one would be too small, and one too large. I have never had this problem with Eddie Bauer jeans.
Edit: I found picture showing the larger stacks (which can introduce the mismatched sizing) I was referring to:
Is that then called a jeack?
Holy shit. This man jeans.
This is fascinating! thanks for the pics, it makes so much sense.
The only question is why they are making jeans with wax instead of denim
The ultimate jeans post
Even men’s jeans which are size by the actual waist and inseam measurement can be wrong.
They’re not generally sized by the actual waist measurement. I wear 33W and my pants all measure about 36" around the belt line. The “waist” measurement derives from many decades ago when men wore high-waisted pants where the waist was a few inches smaller than the circumference around the hips, where waistlines are today. Men were also generally a lot fitter back then, too!
Dickes’s work pants are always like this, horribly inconsistent. But they were cheap and they last forever so you just have to grab a pile of the same size, try them all on and buy the ones that fit. Good luck ordering online…
Men’s pants too. And at the same store, by the EXACT SAME maker.
I have 34’s, 36’s and 38’s in different colours and materials. They all fit comfortably, and if i get different sizes in those particular styles, they’re either too big or too small.
Make it make sense, please.
I’ve literally purchased 2 identical pairs and they’ve still been different sizes
One relevant fact about men’s pants is that the W (waist) size dates from the 1930s and 1940s when men wore high-waisted pants. The actual waist measurement was always about 3" smaller than the circumference around the hips; as the waistline of men’s pants migrated downwards to where it is today, manufacturers kept the nominal W measurement of how big the waistline would have been if it had still been higher. I generally wear pants with a 33W but the actual circumference around the belt line is always around 36". It’s not vanity sizing so much as anachronistic sizing.
There was a comedian a few decades ago who had a routine about how the aging process in men means your pants start migrating up towards your neck, but in reality it was just old men continuing to wear the kind of pants they had gotten used to as young men. It’s a common phenomenon - I work with a bunch of women in their late 50s and early 60s and they all still have feathered haircuts like women did in the late 1970s and 1980s.
That’s just poor quality control.
Yes, that’s exactly what it is.
Which brand has good quality control?
They’re not a fashion brand, but I’ve had good quality long lasting jeans from Eddie Bauer.
Not Levi’s lol.
I just got some women’s Levi’s and holy crap it was hard to find the size. I’m about 38-31-41 in inches and 5’9" often jeans fit in a “29” sometimes 28, or 30.
I ordered the 29. Hips fit but waist measurement was 25", what the actual fuck? Who has a 24" waist and 41" hips? Is that even possible?
I ended up with a 31 but they really are too loose everywhere. So comfortable and were cheap so I kept them but WTF, Levi’s?
You gained weight after the first purchase, and then converted the fat to muscle in the second purchase
Schrodinger’s body composition: fat or muscle depending on what pair of pants you wear.
I don’t wear women’s clothes, but I do feel like shirt sizes are some sort of scam. I want a long shirt, yet the L and the XL are the same length. Wtf. Or when an L is longer than an XL. Granted, maybe the size is horizontal rather than vertical. But c’mon.
That’s why I propose a 2d size system. Size for height and for width. Also, sizes got to mean something. Not just feels, but concrete values within a range. Or make them numbers, idk.
Length and width ought not be yoked like that, an XL shouldn’t be longer, just wider. You need Short, Medium, and Tall and Extra Tall for that dimension.
I was a tall and skinny kid and the heartbreak of never having pants long enough, because the small ones were all also very short, still I feel it!
As an adult, the first time I saw a ladies size Small Tall in the shop I almost cried.
Women’s bra sizes also suck, because the volume of the cups is tied to the diameter of the half circle the underwire describes, but small boobs aren’t small in width, they just sit closer. Champagne glass, but small bras assume shot glass instead, basically. They need three measurements.
Women’s bra sizes also suck
Shopping with my wife for bras is… Fun. Cups can be anywhere from a DDD to a I, bands from a 38 to a 46.
Somehow this makes sense somewhere.
She punched me when I sat a bra on my head and said ‘try this one,’ but I was right!
Even for men’s clothes the sizing seems to only really be consistent within the same item, maybe brand. Even though they’re supposed to be measurements you still have to try everything on.
We haven’t even talked about kids clothing yet…ohhh boyyy does that one suck
Being the kid sucks worse
You’re dragged around the store as a living mannequin, while simultaneously being bored out of your mind
I was in a clothing store last week that only started at L for mens clothing. Theres also a shoe store closeby that only sells mens shoes for 40 (EU) and above.
Like wtf, there are plenty of men that are smaller than 180cm and that have small feet. At least give me some options. These are the same stores that complain that everybody orders their shit online nowadays.
Yeah! Last time I go into a store called “Destination XL.”
(I’m joking, I saw the rest of your comments about this.)
Maybe those are specifically for big people, it’s really hard for them to find suitable sizes in regular stores.
No, it was a normal store from a german name brand. They had one jacket in S and one shirt in M. Even the employee said that its just a shitty order policy by their bosses.
A shitty order policy or just knowing their regular customers?
The employee told me that there are tons of other men having the same problem at that store. Just because 80% of your customers wear L or larger doesn’t mean you shouldnt stock any inventory for the 20% that wear S or M.
Really? I’ve been buying the same size of trousers since I stopped growing. And I only went up one size for some upper body garments because I put on quite a bit of muscle.
I was buying pants the other day and I was a 34 in one brand and a 36 in another.
I bought 4 polo shirts from the same brand, 2 black, 2 white. All of them in small. Black fits perfectly but white seems like its 2 sizes too big. Worst part is that small is their smallest size… But I’m trying to fix it with a reverse diet.
I really want a law that requires clothes sizes to use actual, verifiable measurements.
yeah hope they’ll get right on that, add it to the list. we’ve already got one on the list: pass a law saying you cant shrink portion sizes on your labels until you can say “zero calories” in each of 1000 servings of oil
Its not hard to have a waist circumference then short/mid/long. I think that’s how overalls are sized - in practice its try them on & allow for shrinkage after a couple of washes.
