
A size 8 dress today is nearly the equivalent of a size 16 dress in 1958 - thanatropism
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/08/11/the-absurdity-of-womens-clothing-sizes-in-one-chart/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_3_na
======
ChuckMcM
Having 3 sisters, a wife, and three daughters, I have heard the litany all too
often that they _have_ to shop at a store because there is no telling what you
are going to get from a catalog.

The engineer in me wants to figure out if one could codify hips, bust, waist,
and leg length to get a 4! set of combinations but I can't imagine any store
that would buy 24 alternates in small, medium, large, and XL, that is 96
copies of the item just to sell one to someone. Not really economical. The
thing that really bothers them though is when a supplier has reliably supplied
the same size for several years and suddenly changes manufacturers or
something and wham it doesn't fit.

It certainly suggests that roboticly made to order clothes would be a winner
(Google could try that with their robotics companies) and one of the big
obstructions, the sewing machine, is slowly succumbing to automation

[1] [http://motherboard.vice.com/read/automated-mini-factories-
wi...](http://motherboard.vice.com/read/automated-mini-factories-will-bring-
back-custom-fit-clothes) [1]

~~~
x0x0
It's not just women's clothes. For years, I bought jeans at gap because their
sizes were true. Then 6 years ago some asshole decided to monkey with their
sizing, and instead of being able to walk in and pick up jeans in the exact
same size, I would have to try on a range each time. And it wasn't even
consistent between different styles.

I now buy Tommy Bahamas and hope they don't get bit by the same stupidity.

~~~
dublinben
Design aside, the consistency is so bad with Gap jeans that you could try on
three pairs in the same "size" and they'll all fit differently. It's simply
not possible any more to expect off the rack clothing to fit perfectly the way
you think it should. You just have to try something on before you buy it.

------
paulcole
Men's clothes aren't that different. Measure the actual waists of a few pairs
of chinos and jeans and compare to the sizing.

Also worth noting that quality control and variability in manufacturing is so
scattershot that 5 pairs of size 32 Levi's 501s will fit very differently.

~~~
dghughes
I have a very hard time finding anything to fit me as a 5'8" slim male it's
nearly impossible. I am somewhere between medium and small sometimes one or
the other or in the middle.

I've had pants tailored and they were amazing it was like I was part of the
human race having actual pants that fit it's amazing how much it affects your
personality and how ill fitting clothes make you feel.

But shirts that's something I've never had tailored. If I could afford it I'd
have all my clothes tailored to fit.

~~~
irishcoffee
As a 6'4 dude with a 32 in waist and a 35/in inseam, I just said fuck it. Let
people think what they want about my clothes. Finding pants that 'fit' is a
joke. It cracks me up that women don't think men have this problem.

Ah shit, its 2015, I shouldn't say that.

~~~
yummyfajitas
I have similar measurements (34" waist, I'm also taller) and I find gap/old
navy fits perfectly. Order online, choose the "tall" tab on the product page
and choose 36" inseam there.

~~~
zaphar
Old Navy Jeans fall apart _way_ too fast for me and I don't even wear them
very hard. I've stopped buying them after the last two pairs wore holes within
6 months. Maybe I just got unlucky but examination of the material shows them
to be much thinner than a pair of Levi's or Wranglers.

------
zdw
I wonder how much taller/bigger framed people are today than they were in the
past.

This isn't just all people packing on more fat - better nutrition leads to
increases in height and bone density.

~~~
thrownaway2424
Americans gained about 1/2" (women) to 1 1/2" (men) in the 100 years to 2012.
I don't know how much of that was gained in the first or last half of the
century.

------
tesseract
A patternmaker's blog/commentary on this subject, that I came across recently:
[http://www.vanitysizing.com/](http://www.vanitysizing.com/)

------
thanatropism
I don't like this new title...

There was plenty outcry when sizes 0 and 00 were introduced, and what
attracted my attention to this article was not so much that dress sizes had
changed upwards, but that such sizes are not "new", "anorexic" sizes at all!

------
jetskindo
I guess when we talk about dress size we have to adjust for inflation from now
on.

------
ufmace
I don't know about the absolute trends, but I do know that men's clothing
isn't much better as far as standardized sizing. Probably the only saving
grace of men's fashion is that it isn't nearly as unfashionable or important
if men's clothes are poorly fitted.

If you actually care about how your clothes fit and the style, then prepare to
spend hours shopping per garment, or go custom.

------
jinushaun
This is a problem for men's clothing too. I actually track my sizes per brand,
per year in order to make shopping online remotely plausible.

------
batiudrami
Strangely, a UK/AU size 8 is still about the same - it's comparable to a size
0 in the US.

------
nikanj
I moved from Europe to North America and my shoe size went from 9.5 to 11.5.
Amazing!

------
t0mbstone
I don't understand why all clothing sizes (for both men and women) aren't just
in inches (or cm)? Why do the clothing manufacturers have to make everything
so confusing?

~~~
hibikir
Because the number of measurements you'd care about is way too high, and even
if you knew the size, that doesn't mean you know if the 'fit' is good for that
kind of garment.

For instance, this weekend I bought two pairs of jeans. That means I tried on
about 20 pairs. Waist size was the least of the issues. Does if fit the legs?
Does it fits my butt? Does my package fit comfortably? It's hard to make it
all work at once.

------
bmir-alum-007
Sadly, I think the only way for most Americans to maintain a healthy lifestyle
would require significant, paternalistic education and intervention. One idea
others have proposed would be clearly-and-emphatically warn of future denial
of certain healthcare expenses and conditions for people that fail to achieve
and maintain reasonable goals to curtail high-risk lifestyle choices, i.e.,
smoking, poor diet. The key is conditions which arise even with good lifestyle
habits should have priority over people that don't take care of themselves and
expect everyone else to clean up their mess.

(I'd be first in line because I could lose 20 lbs (9 kg).)

~~~
bbcbasic
> One idea others have proposed would be clearly-and-emphatically warn of
> future denial of certain healthcare expenses

A uncertain punishment in the distant future doesn't motivate anyone to do
anything. That is human nature. Charging per kilo for airline tickets though
may be a motivator though, because by losing weight you immediately save
money.

------
aubergene
See this great interactive, What Size Am I?, by Anna Powell-Smith

[http://sizes.darkgreener.com/](http://sizes.darkgreener.com/)

------
pervycreeper
Curious if there are any studies which have A/B comparisons of consumer
purchasing habits relative to size labelling.

~~~
galago
I guess it depends on what you mean by "studies" and "A/B" testing since this
kind of pricing test has probably been done informally since the sizing was
standardized. It may have only become effective after Americans started
getting really fat.

~~~
pervycreeper
I guess the idea is to have two identical garments labelled with different
sizes, and see if one is more likely to sell. Perhaps there is not a big
difference, and the size inflation is more about creating customer goodwill.

------
walru
It may be old school, but a proper tailor is worth their weight in gold.

------
simplexion
"Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data show that the average
American woman today weighs about as much as the average 1960s man."

That is a disgusting statistic.

~~~
zdw
That's kind of shame-y.

The average woman of today is likely as tall or taller than the average 1960's
man, so corresponding weight increases would be reasonable.

~~~
Jtsummers
[http://m.livescience.com/49-decade-study-americans-taller-
fa...](http://m.livescience.com/49-decade-study-americans-taller-fatter.html)

Women and men are both only an inch taller on average compared to 1960. And
women are 4" shorter on average today than the average 1960s man.

------
smegel
> the average American woman

Well I'm glad they clarified American women.

------
smitherfield
Kinda puts into perspective the (inaccurate anyway) claims about Marilyn
Monroe or whoever's dress size. The "standards of beauty" of the 1950s placed,
if anything, an even greater emphasis on being slim than they do today.

~~~
peterwwillis
In the 1950s, hourglass figures were what was hot. I'm not sure that qualifies
as slim, compared to the previous 3 decades, and _especially_ not the decade
after: [http://greatist.com/grow/100-years-womens-body-
image](http://greatist.com/grow/100-years-womens-body-image)

------
asquabventured
I read this and think to myself sarcastically "Thank God the government got
involved." and then I realize there are probably a non-trivial amount of
people within the US who probably think the government should re-involve
themselves in this matter.

Then I wonder what type of person doesn't understand how markets work and why
they think this matter is any kind of issue. I can elaborate more if needed in
follow-up replies to avoid being seen as just flame bait material.

~~~
bbcbasic
The fast-food and processed food maker lobbyists are involved, that is for
sure. A fat nation is a profitable nation, but if everyone just went for a
daily jog (a half marathon perhaps...) then they can just burn it all off.

