
Can a Dress Shirt Be Racist? - sssilver
https://backchannel.com/can-a-dress-shirt-be-racist-6b74244446e9
======
gech
"So here’s my question: With the “ethnicity” question, is this entrepreneur
courageously addressing the proposition that we’re different according to our
ancestry, and propelling us toward a post-racial future? Or is he pretending
to be scientific as a marketing gimmick, while actually enforcing false,
outdated and possibly dangerous ideas about race?"

No. He found out that if he asked questions about ethnicity to the customer he
actually could size them better. Everything else in this article is in your
head.

~~~
bloat
This is actually a well written and researched and interesting article about
race as a social construct and as a physical reality. Perhaps you shouldn't
just dismiss it because you (apparently) can't be bothered to think about
these things. Also it's not exactly uncommon (or reprehensible) to hang an
article like this off of a pithy and slightly overstated sound bite.

~~~
gozur88
This "race as a social construct" stuff is the phrenology of the 21st century.
It doesn't have any basis in science.

~~~
personjerry
You are wrong.

First, historically, race was only firmly established as a legacy of the
colonial era. For example, in the colonial era, how was it decided in
Louisiana if one man was black or not? The answer is, less than 1/32 of his
ancestry must be of "black blood"[0]. This sort of thinking and arbitrary
ruling is how race was established as a social construct.

Science at the time, based on the physiology of skull shapes and other body
features, was shaped in order to draw a line between the "superior" race and
the "inferior" race; this is a belief we sometimes still carry. In modern
science we know that there is enough variation in people that it is basically
impossible to concretely associate certain genes with certain races[1]. So in
fact, race IS a social construct; race is the generalizations we unfairly
make.

[As a bonus, any two humans average 99.5% the same DNA]

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-
drop_rule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_genetics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_genetics)

~~~
67726e
That doesn't refute the parent's point. There is more to race than some
jackass using it as a means to discriminate. It is not just a "social
construct".

~~~
personjerry
I thought I effectively showed a "basis in science" (genetics), directly
refuting the claim in the parent.

~~~
gozur88
So your idea is genetics are a social construct?

~~~
personjerry
I'm saying race is based on historical and social circumstances. This notion
is further supported because races are scientifically (genetically) difficult
to distinguish. Hence "race is a social construct" is in fact based in
science, directly arguing against the parent comment.

~~~
Pilfer
> _race is a social construct is based in science_

This is especially silly and misleading. Race is considered a "social
construct" _under the theory of Social Constructionism_. For people who don't
subscribe to the theory of Social constructionism, race is not a "social
construct". Social constructionism itself is not based on biological and
evolutionary fact. It is a philosophical approach to the world that
conveniently disregards biology, genetics, behavioral ecology, and enormous
scale (n=millions) of statistical studies. When you remove Social
Constructionism from your thesis, your entire argument falls apart.

Most people do not believe in discredited theories like social
constructionism. The other posters in this thread are asking you to rework
your argument without appeals to Social Constructionism, and you show you are
unable to do so.

------
ttronicm
One of the references cited in this article is a line of shoes released by
Nike designed to fit Native Americans better. They measured 200+ native feet
and determined that they were wider toward the toe than typical shoes.

While I don't culturally identify as native, there's no doubt that I am 1/16th
Cherokee. As it turns out, I have what I call "duck feet". They are very wide
up front. I didn't know about Nike's foray into native shoes, but I wish I had
and that they still made them.

Rather than being offended, I would be excited to have some shoes that
actually fit well. I usually end up with shoes that too big in other
dimensions or toe-crampers.

~~~
nikanj
Try Scandinavian shoes. Finns in particular seem to have built-in snow shoes,
so Karhu runners are extra wide to accommodate their client base.

------
AnimalMuppet
I find it depressing that the sociologists are saying that race is (only) a
social construct. I mean, sure, there's an element of truth to what they're
saying, but there's also a truth that they're denying. We build these social
constructs _because_ there's an external reality that they... well, let's say
that they _oversimplify_. But the external reality is there, and it isn't
going away.

The external reality is that there are real, physical differences between
people that correlate at least somewhat with what we perceive as "race".
That's reality, whether sociologists choose to acknowledge it or to ignore it.

~~~
empath75
So the problem with categorizing people into races is that there are many axes
along which people can be divided into buckets, and any particular race
grouping only has meaning in a particular place and time and will have totally
arbitrary boundaries, which are as much cultural as they are genetic and
physical. As long as people understand that, it's okay to talk about races
tending to have certain qualities. Because culturally we've divided people
based on those qualities.

But it's really important to understand that people of different races aren't
different kinds of people. Any more than people who have blonde or brunette
hair are different kinds of people.

------
calbear81
I think it's a reasonable question as someone who wears glasses and is Asian,
I have to look for glasses designed for the different shape of our noses
([http://www.eyewearenvy.com/pages/asian_fit_glasses_about_s-1...](http://www.eyewearenvy.com/pages/asian_fit_glasses_about_s-152-htm)).
Oakley also produces a line of "Asian" fit glasses and an article talking
about the whole science vs. racism angle was rehashed here
([http://qz.com/138525/why-oakleys-asian-fit-sunglasses-
arent-...](http://qz.com/138525/why-oakleys-asian-fit-sunglasses-arent-racist-
just-science/)).

~~~
mikestew
Wow, TIL... I always figured glasses were glasses, human heads were human
heads.

------
kazinator
I suspect the problem could be eliminated by taking a few more measurements.

Whatever is systematically wrong that correlates with race is a form of error.
You know that it's wrong because it is _measurable_. If it is measurable you
can just turn it into a measurement which compensates for the error.

How about giving users a choice: workflow A with fewer measurements plus race
question, or workflow B with a couple more measurements and no race question.

I suspect you have to get a circumference around the shoulders, the chest
under the arms, the waist around the navel and around the hips-butt. Also, the
circumference of the upper arm and neck circumference. If you have all these,
I don't see how you can possibly mess up a T shirt fit.

------
viraptor
Ignoring the racial issue for a moment, I don't understand how they ended up
with the questions at all.

> Naysayers told him that when customers input their measurements, they often
> made mistakes — the idea wouldn’t scale.

> Asking about waist size was insufficient, for example, because it gave no
> indication of the size of one’s midsection. So Skerritt added a question
> about how far one’s belly protruded. Other questions were too confusing,
> like one about how T-shirts fit around your chest and shoulders.

1\. There are dozens of fitted clothes manufacturers. More every year. It
doesn't look like they fail, or not scale. I see almost only positive
reactions about them on twitter.

2\. Of course trivial measurements will not be enough. The article gives the
example of midsection. But that's not other services ask for. Tailorstore asks
for either common t-shirt size, 2-3 measurements, or if you actually want a
fitted shirts, you provide: neck, chest, waist, hip, seat, shirt length,
shoulder width, arm length, wrist. No need to ask about hanging bellies - just
ask for measurements.

When they ask extra questions they seem to derive some ratios between basic
sizes. Maybe it works, maybe not... but did they actually find out that taking
own measurement doesn't work? I ordered some tailored shirts online, gave all
my measurements and couldn't be happier with the result. Are the extra
questions actually worth it? Maybe they did verify that, but it's not in the
article, and I find that really annoying - here's the solution to what people
told us will be the problem, we're not going to tell you if we verified that
it is a problem.

~~~
adiabatty
You're probably better with a tape measure than I am. I'd have trouble putting
a tape measure on my shoulders and positioning it in the right place — my
shoulders are rounded, not angular. I'd probably screw up most of the other
measurements as well, and I already have a tape measure. What about the
≈99.9%* of guys who don't? This sounds like a service for them.

* I made this number up just now, may be off by an order of magnitude or two

~~~
viraptor
I used the metal, rolled up one, mostly used for DIY stuff. It worked :)
(definitely wasn't precise though) You can also use one in any shop with
shirts. I don't think it's that big deal really.

------
rdtsc
I wonder if this kind of reporting is sponsored somehow by a competitor.

\---

He was essentially saying, Prove that it exists. And if you can’t or won’t
prove it, then stop talking about it. Because without proof, the concept of
race, as it pertains to variation in the human family, is too dangerous.

Let’s open a conversation about this. I’m curious to hear people’s lived
experiences in this arena.

\---

Well the author already opened the conversation. Next up is probably a storm
of Twitter responses casting this comapany as "racist".

------
force_reboot
It's interesting that despite trying to be highly sympathetic, the article
still paints Goodman in a bad light, in my opinion. All Goodman can say is
that race is a continuum, not a finite set. But so what? Self defined race is
still highly correlated with genes, and hence phenotype (in this case, body
dimensions), so why is self-defined race not a useful category? Anyone with
any knowledge of statistics, probability or machine learning can see through
Goodman's platitudes. Maybe left-leaning anthropologists have other reasons
for disliking these uses of the concept of race, but they need to be more
intellectually honest.

------
ZeroGravitas
Interesting that it was the white folks that got the good fit, out of the box.
Kind of makes the race thing seem like a hacked on solution to a fundamentally
biased algorithm.

~~~
tzs
> Interesting that it was the white folks that got the good fit, out of the
> box.

Assuming their market is primarily in the US, then 72% of their potential
customers are white, 12% are black, 5% asian, and the rest something else [1].

That's for the US as a whole. I'd expect the subset of the US population that
will buy online custom dress shirts tends toward the more affluent end of the
population, where the skew is even more heavily toward white.

So the default option is the one that is best for the majority (by a large
margin) of their customers. I don't see what is interesting about that.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_State...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_States)

~~~
T2_t2
... and a similar experiment in predominantly Han Chinese China likely results
in the same thing biased towards Han Chinese, In Thailand towards Thais, and
in Cambodia towards Khmer people.

My GF lived in China half a decade, and she had trouble with tailored clothes,
because they could never accept her southern-European proportions.

The idea that the most common size should be the most common group is just
business 101 (build for your customers).

------
tzs
Instead of asking for race/ethnicity, just say that the shirts are available
in fit variations A, B, C, etc., and show photos of several models of all
races each modeling the variation that fits that model best.

Leave it to the customer to notice that the majority of white models are
wearing "A", the majority of black models are wearing "B", and so on and guess
that if they don't know otherwise they have the best chance of getting a good
fit by going with the variation that is best for the majority of models that
look like them.

This still lets customers have the best shot at getting a great fit, and
furthermore if it turns out wrong for a particular customer it is easier for
them to realize they need to try another variation next time.

If I ordered a shirt and told the company I'm white and it did not fit well,
it would not occur to me to go back and tell them I'm black on my next order,
because I probably would not even be connecting race with fit.

With an A, B, ..., system, on the other hand, if my "A" shirt didn't fit right
it would immediately occur to me that maybe the "B" shirt would be better.

~~~
jonnathanson
_" Instead of asking for race/ethnicity, just say that the shirts are
available in fit variations A, B, C, etc., and show photos of several models
of all races each modeling the variation that fits that model best."_

That assumes people will accurately self-assess and honestly report their body
types. And...you'd be very surprised at how few people can do that.

In fact, "vanity sizing" is quite common in the fashion business. This is a
term meaning a label that says one size, often smaller than the _actual_
measurements of the garment, in order to make the buyer feel better about
him/herself. (For instance, ever buy a pair of jeans in size 34? Chances are
they're really a 36. The clothing company figures you'd refuse to admit to
yourself that you're actually a 36. So it plays to your vanity, rather than
risking your business by telling you something you don't want to hear.)

On the whole, your idea seems better than "race" or "ethnicity" as category.
But the weird benefit of "race" or "ethnicity" is that it doesn't force the
buyer to take a conscious self-assessment of his body type.

Perhaps another way to go about this would be to ask a series of questions.
"Do you ever have the following problems buying shirts off the rack? [Problem
1,Problem 2,Problem 3,...,Problem N]." These would come with visualizations.
Example: "The sleeves are usually too short."

~~~
braythwayt
I worked in men’s clothing for quite a while, and I have an anecdote to report
about customers self-assessing their size and cut. If you sell people what
they ask for, they will hate you for it.

In my day, off-the-rack shirts came in a collar size, an arm length, and there
were three cuts: tailored or “european,” standard, and “full,” for the pear-
shaped gentleman. People sized themselves at least an inch too small on the
collar, and would woefully under-report their arm length too. The problem, of
course, was that as you gain weight, your neck grows in girth and you need a
larger collar.

What about the arm length? Well, that’s measured from the nape of the neck to
the wrist. As you gain weight, you gain fat and/or muscle around your
shoulders and upper arm, and that can increase the measured length of the arm,
even though your skeleton remains the same. Customers would ask for a shirt in
the size they wanted their neck to be, and if you sold it to them, they’s
squeeze into it, there’s be an unsightly bulge, and they would decide that
your shirts were unflattering.

One of the tricks in those days was to report that a particular shirt’s
measurement was more accurate in metric, so if the customer didn’t mind, could
I take a metric measurement... And I would sell them the correctly sized
shirt. Although it was larger than they requested, it would look better
because it fit properly, and they would see a thinner, fitter person in the
mirror.

Needless to say, the exact same thing was true in the cut of the shirt. The
endomorphs would ask for a standard, and the standards would ask for the
tailored cut. And then they’d hate the shirt.

The best thing was to report that this particular manufacturer was off on
their sizing, and just hand them the short that you could eyeball was right
for them. They’d be back for more.

So where were we? Oh yes, you absolutely cannot rely on people self-selecting
their body type. The best thing is to measure.

