They're literally conspiring against 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 wear size 34 cargo shorts.
There is no point near my waist that is even close to a tape measured 34 inches.
-
I suppose one of the many reasons why there are no consistent clothing sizes is because it's so difficult to agree on a way to measure things. What parts do you measure? The lower leg thickness? the upper leg thickness? the waist circumference? The leg's length? What if these numbers are all independent of each other and can't be reduced to a single number?
We have centimetres, how hard is it to just provide the measurements of a piece of clothing with it?
-
different cuts exist that already set out at least some standards for this
I don't disagree that it is difficult, but we have the ability to do this. We've done more difficult things
wrote last edited by [email protected]if companies actually did share 5 numbers with each piece of clothing (notice that that actually wouldn't work since each piece of clothing is a bit different since they're still largely hand-sown and measuring each piece of clothing is unpayably expensive) it would lead to a bureaucracy hell. businesses in europe already complain about too much bureaucracy, because they have to document a lot of things, and this would make the outcry a lot worse.
on top of that most customers wouldn't actually bother reading a datasheet of 5 numbers and instead just try them on. so it's not even a big advantage.
-
It's not woman-exclusive and also the companies deciding the sizing are not the same as the companies running department stores (for large clothing brands these days, online shopping in their own store would be optimal, since retailers take a large cut).
It's mainly that making sure sizes are actually the same costs more money than just going with whatever comes out, and it's hard to make purchasing decisions based on size consistency once a large amount of brands do this.
Well that's just declining quality due to profit motivated practices. Like yeah if you're going to old navy or H&M you're going to be disappointed. A second-hand store is a total guess. Avoiding fast fashion and sticking to a known high quality brand is at least going to give you some consistency for mens wear. I have throughout my life for example been able to order levis' slim-straight in the same size and expect the same fit with only minor but expected variations depending on material (thick/stretch, etc). Haven't bought Levi's in ages though so maybe they're garbage now idk. I don't know of a single woman who's ever had the luxury of a brand that makes clothes they don't have to try on.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I feel the same way, especially shoes. I guess the chart, size guide and even measurements is BS.
This is why I dont order clothes online, last order I got the shirts are like big night shirts. Ah, well. -
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.
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.
-
And then imagine how it feels like to shop for clothes if your body doesn't even conform to the expected average norms.
I god damn hate it. Stuff is either too wide or too short, the sleeves are NEVER long enough, the only available shoes that fit and don't feel like torture are jogging shoes or sneakers, the neck width is never sufficient (unless you buy men's clothes, which will look like a tent because tits weren't part of the equasion)…
Uuugh, I hate shopping for clothes. -.-
You should be super angry about this. First, clothes sizing is based off of a size 4 fit model let’s call her Gwen. Gwen is the designers idea of the perfect woman. She’s usually white, and she has perfect proportions. All the jeans from the brand are sized up from Gwen’s butt.
Clothes are made to fit Gwen, not you, and when you go into the shop, things don’t fit, we always blame ourselves and our bodies. Even though the clothes were never intended to fit us they were intended to fit Gwen.And guess what. When standard sizes were first measured at least in the US, they purposely excluded women of color. So the basis of sizing is completely biased.
The only positive, there are now a bunch of independent sewing pattern companies that have more diverse fits of clothing. Sewing and tailoring and pattern drafting are the best way to stop supporting all the companies that produce fast, racist fashion. If you want to make affordable clothing, look for a creative reuse store for inexpensive fabric to practice on. There’s tons of free information on YouTube to learn sewing.
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
-
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.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I knew it! I'm not crazy!
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
Tbh that's part of the reasons I want Levi's ones specifically, they have been very consistent with sizing in my experience
If it's becoming hard to find I'd better start fishing for a new pair straight away
-
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.
-
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.
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 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.
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.
-
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’.
-
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.
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.
-
As a guy I feel this for shirts specifically, sometimes I have to wear an XL sometimes it's a L and once in a blue moon I can wear a M. Why you may ask? Because for some fucking reason damned near every shirt assumes medium means 5'7 twink with a shoulder width smaller than my chest width, I'm 5'5 barrel chested and with wide shoulders where sometimes I can't wear a shirt cause I am forced to A pose by the shoulders. Also I can sometimes rip medium sized shirts assunder if I flex my back right.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Same. The more-standardized sizes in men's clothing means I just have to resign myself to the fact that I need to buy size M, size L, or size XL depending on the brand, and that it still will never fit right. This is why the majority of my shirts are short-sleeved, even in winter.
I've recently met several men who got into sewing as a result.
