WTH? I can't even...
Replies
-
I love ModCloth, but the quality and fit vary WIDELY.
It's great that they have customer photos, but even better would be if they used mannequins that weren't completely flat chested. It's really hard to tell how a dress is going to fit on an actual woman with breasts if there don't happen to be any customer photos or reviews for something.
Thank goodness they have easy returns! I really take advantage of the extra $5 credit that they give for returns as I buy lots of dresses that don't quite fit right.
0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »I love ModCloth, but the quality and fit vary WIDELY.
It's great that they have customer photos, but even better would be if they used mannequins that weren't completely flat chested. It's really hard to tell how a dress is going to fit on an actual woman with breasts if there don't happen to be any customer photos or reviews for something.
Thank goodness they have easy returns! I really take advantage of the extra $5 credit that they give for returns as I buy lots of dresses that don't quite fit right.
<----Actual woman with breasts that fed 3 babies, and is yet...flat chested.
I see a lot of C and D cups in the customer photos. If that's flat chested? Eeep.0 -
I really hope that's true. I love prints, but at 47 worry that I'm venturing into cat lady or Red Hat Society territory.Joannah700 wrote: »They don't have many swimsuits, but I love buying dresses from Modcloth because they usually have a TON of customer-modeled photos, with the relevant stats there (height, bra size, size ordered) for your reference. I wish more online places would do that, it's nice to see just how short a hemline will be, etc.
I was going to mention Modcloth.com. They just did a campaign where some of their worker bees modeled the swimsuits - and you can see that they have all sorts of different body types.
Now these are nice plus size models (except the middle one and two on the far right obviously).
Yup...but not models, which is probably why...they're ModCloth employees...like, buyers, phone reps, etc.
I also like the age diversity in the customer review photos. Because, I seriously love their adorable print dresses, but sometimes worry that I've reached the age where fun prints are no longer twee, but now "Insane Cat Lady." I like seeing some fellow middle-aged broads rocking some fit and flair silly prints and looking charming.
You'll never be too old for fun prints!
I can't really afford a lot of their stuff ($100+ on a dress is too much for this girl) but if I could, I'd be covered in polka dots, horsies, and flowers all day, errrday.
0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »I love ModCloth, but the quality and fit vary WIDELY.
It's great that they have customer photos, but even better would be if they used mannequins that weren't completely flat chested. It's really hard to tell how a dress is going to fit on an actual woman with breasts if there don't happen to be any customer photos or reviews for something.
Thank goodness they have easy returns! I really take advantage of the extra $5 credit that they give for returns as I buy lots of dresses that don't quite fit right.
<----Actual woman with breasts that fed 3 babies, and is yet...flat chested.
I see a lot of C and D cups in the customer photos. If that's flat chested? Eeep.
I mean the (wooden?) mannequins that are LITERALLY flat--not even a A cup.0 -
I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
I would like to see models or mannequins that are more of an average size--B or C--so that those of use who are either bigger or smaller can make some kind of reasonable estimate about what will fit.0 -
I thought "plus size" was anything 10 and above. As soon as you get into double digit sizes. Though in my opinion you're not a "plus size" until you're a 12-14.0
-
azulvioleta6 wrote: »I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
Add a mummy tummy, and that's my body type. I'm anatomically incorrect? Who knew?0 -
Awe man..yeah no joke... I was totally flat chested, similar to that mannequin up til I was in my mid 30s. My daughter is 18 and got my body...same same, she wears an A cup.
A woman can be a real woman without having sizable / visibly curvaceious breasts. At least I hope so! LoL Its the first place Im losing weight, I dont have much to work with as it is, and Id hate to have to tell my ex bfs Im not a real woman afterall!!! LMFAO
ps...I see what you are trying to say, but...just yeah, there are a lot of body shapes out there...if they dont match up, doesnt make them anatomically incorrect or less than a woman. Just different!!! Also, I have to say, in general a LOT more models shown / clothing are made for women with breasts than flat chested.0 -
dawnmcneil10 wrote: »I read somewhere once that a plus size model was a size 12. Correct me if I'm wrong but a size 12 is not "plus size". I love the plus size suit though.
Well, I guess normal size models are about a size negative two in the pictures, and that is not normal size
0 -
Joannah700 wrote: »lishie_rebooted wrote: »meganjcallaghan wrote: »lishie_rebooted wrote: »lishie_rebooted wrote: »dawnmcneil10 wrote: »I read somewhere once that a plus size model was a size 12. Correct me if I'm wrong but a size 12 is not "plus size". I love the plus size suit though.
There's no way that woman is even a size 6.
The one on the right? I'd peg her at a size 8 which is the lowest number that is considered "plus". It's no different than the regular models who are size 0 or whatever. The fashion industry just uses the "smallest" they can get away with.
No way! I'm a size 6 and she's definitely slimmer than me!
But no I don't think it's the same model, the eyes and eyebrows are different, and she shape of the mouth, even if it seems similar.
She may have a higher muscle mass than you do.
In the 5'7" before/after thread, I posted that at 150#, I'm a size 2/4 and there were other women who weigh less than I do with a larger pant size.
Yes but my point is that there's no way she's a size 8.
vanity sizing.
she very well could be an 8.
just like in some brands, I'm an 8.
true story. i can swing between size zero and size 12 depending on brands. it's ridiculous.
And that's why I hate shopping.
I can be different sizes in the same cut of jean/pant from Old Navy just based on what color the thing is...Joannah700 wrote: »They don't have many swimsuits, but I love buying dresses from Modcloth because they usually have a TON of customer-modeled photos, with the relevant stats there (height, bra size, size ordered) for your reference. I wish more online places would do that, it's nice to see just how short a hemline will be, etc.
I was going to mention Modcloth.com. They just did a campaign where some of their worker bees modeled the swimsuits - and you can see that they have all sorts of different body types.
I dislike high-waisted swim suit bottoms. I don't particularly find them attractive on anyone.
That said, the two women with bangs are rocking the suit. And I think they'd all look better if it was a red suit with white polka dots lol (personal preference. i just really like red and white polka dots)
FYI - they do have those in red and white polka dots too - and lots of other styles, but the website caters to vintage inspired frocks, hence...the high waist options in the campaign.
Just for you.
I know it caters to vintage style. Ive purchased clothes there. Still hate high waist bikinis.
And she looks much better in red. The black just made most of those ladies look washed out or something.0 -
dawnmcneil10 wrote: »I read somewhere once that a plus size model was a size 12. Correct me if I'm wrong but a size 12 is not "plus size". I love the plus size suit though.
There's no way that woman is even a size 6.
On the left or right? On the right, a size 6 easily.0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
Add a mummy tummy, and that's my body type. I'm anatomically incorrect? Who knew?
Apparently, so am I.
0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
Add a mummy tummy, and that's my body type. I'm anatomically incorrect? Who knew?
Right? Thanks. That's about how my breasts would look in that dress as well.0 -
This isn't about who is a "real" woman and who isn't. Women of all shapes and sizes are "real" women.
This is about companies who make clothing to cater to a specific market segment with a particular body type... and yet refuse to use models with that same body type to showcase the clothes.
Whether it's 5'9" models showing petites clothes or size 6 models showing plus sizes, the problem is that the industry can't seem to wrap its head around the same diversity that it is currently profiting from.0 -
This isn't about who is a "real" woman and who isn't. Women of all shapes and sizes are "real" women.
This is about companies who make clothing to cater to a specific market segment with a particular body type... and yet refuse to use models with that same body type to showcase the clothes.
Whether it's 5'9" models showing petites clothes or size 6 models showing plus sizes, the problem is that the industry can't seem to wrap its head around the same diversity that it is currently profiting from.
Hmmm...overweight women aren't all of just one specific body type either. So I'm not sure how clothiers could be marketing to one body type just because it's a plus-size category.
On the one hand you're saying they're marketing to one specific body type (they aren't - plus-size women come in all shapes too) and on the other hand you're saying they should celebrate diversity.
The fashion world is never going to celebrate diversity unless it's the carefully cherry-picked "difference du jour that looks hip". This should come as a surprise to no one, including non-plus-size women who can't magically turn themselves into 5'11" heroin chic 19-year-olds (Thou Shalt Not Age) with legs up to their chins any more than most plus- size women can turn themselves into the magically hourglass-shaped non-cellulite-plagued airbrushed models their proposed clothes are currently hanging on.
The fashion world has never, as far as I can tell, hinged on realism nor been open-minded and forgiving, with a few exceptions such as Coco Chanel's war on corsets, and even then the "freeing" clothes were expected to hang on a stick, with breast-binding where necessary. I'm not sure why it's so gasp-worthy that the plus-size category isn't somehow bucking this trend.0 -
This isn't about who is a "real" woman and who isn't. Women of all shapes and sizes are "real" women.
This is about companies who make clothing to cater to a specific market segment with a particular body type... and yet refuse to use models with that same body type to showcase the clothes.
Whether it's 5'9" models showing petites clothes or size 6 models showing plus sizes, the problem is that the industry can't seem to wrap its head around the same diversity that it is currently profiting from.
Hmmm...overweight women aren't all of just one specific body type either. So I'm not sure how clothiers could be marketing to one body type just because it's a plus-size category.
On the one hand you're saying they're marketing to one specific body type (they aren't - plus-size women come in all shapes too) and on the other hand you're saying they should celebrate diversity.
The fashion world is never going to celebrate diversity unless it's the carefully cherry-picked "difference du jour that looks hip". This should come as a surprise to no one, including non-plus-size women who can't magically turn themselves into 5'11" heroin chic 19-year-olds (Thou Shalt Not Age) with legs up to their chins any more than most plus- size women can turn themselves into the magically hourglass-shaped non-cellulite-plagued airbrushed models their proposed clothes are currently hanging on.
The fashion world has never, as far as I can tell, hinged on realism nor been open-minded and forgiving, with a few exceptions such as Coco Chanel's war on corsets, and even then the "freeing" clothes were expected to hang on a stick, with breast-binding where necessary.
I think there's a difference between a flat size 0 model wearing a shirt that's pinned up behind her so it hangs slightly differently than a size 8 with curves, and a size 6 model wearing a sample that doesn't actually look like the garment that will be shipped to someone who wears a size 18, because something that hits the size 6 at midriff will hit the size 18 at their bustline, and everything below that is left unadorned.
Using the example of the plus sized bathing suit, there's a good chance the print material will stop much higher on the plus sized suit, creating a completely different line, and the black underskirt will be a good 5-6" longer than in that picture.0 -
This isn't about who is a "real" woman and who isn't. Women of all shapes and sizes are "real" women.
This is about companies who make clothing to cater to a specific market segment with a particular body type... and yet refuse to use models with that same body type to showcase the clothes.
Whether it's 5'9" models showing petites clothes or size 6 models showing plus sizes, the problem is that the industry can't seem to wrap its head around the same diversity that it is currently profiting from.
Hmmm...overweight women aren't all of just one specific body type either. So I'm not sure how clothiers could be marketing to one body type just because it's a plus-size category.
On the one hand you're saying they're marketing to one specific body type (they aren't - plus-size women come in all shapes too) and on the other hand you're saying they should celebrate diversity.
The fashion world is never going to celebrate diversity unless it's the carefully cherry-picked "difference du jour that looks hip". This should come as a surprise to no one, including non-plus-size women who can't magically turn themselves into 5'11" heroin chic 19-year-olds (Thou Shalt Not Age) with legs up to their chins any more than most plus- size women can turn themselves into the magically hourglass-shaped non-cellulite-plagued airbrushed models their proposed clothes are currently hanging on.
The fashion world has never, as far as I can tell, hinged on realism nor been open-minded and forgiving, with a few exceptions such as Coco Chanel's war on corsets, and even then the "freeing" clothes were expected to hang on a stick, with breast-binding where necessary.
I think there's a difference between a flat size 0 model wearing a shirt that's pinned up behind her so it hangs slightly differently than a size 8 with curves, and a size 6 model wearing a sample that doesn't actually look like the garment that will be shipped to someone who wears a size 18, because something that hits the size 6 at midriff will hit the size 18 at their bustline, and everything below that is left unadorned.
Using the example of the plus sized bathing suit, there's a good chance the print material will stop much higher on the plus sized suit, creating a completely different line, and the black underskirt will be a good 5-6" longer than in that picture.
And with all that pinning and rearranging on a seriously underweight, minority by numbers height model in perfect lighting/shadow with very specific poses (and dozens of pictures taken to get a single one that "looks right"), non plus-size clothes are virtually guaranteed to hang in entirely differently on an average-weight (range) and average-height (range) individual as well.
I'm not seeing the difference. It's all the same industry tricks on all the same extreme-fringe body types, and all the same "What the hell? This hangs and acts and looks nothing like the picture" results. I say this as a woman who has weighed as little as 98 and as much as 220.
0 -
Hmmm...overweight women aren't all of just one specific body type either. So I'm not sure how clothiers could be marketing to one body type just because it's a plus-size category.
Again, you're missing the point. Plus sized women come in all sorts of shapes and sizes. But a size 6 model is not plus sized. The clothes don't fit the model. And it's really hard for the customer who MIGHT fit into those clothes to gauge how they'll fit her when they're being shown on a model that's nowhere near the size the clothes are made for.
Similarly, petite women come in all shapes and sizes. There are slim size 00 petites, curvy petites, plus sized petites... but there aren't very many petites who are 6 feet tall. So when a company uses a 6-foot tall model to showcase petites clothing, it's hard for those of us who actually might want to buy those items to envision how they'll look on a woman under 5'4" (which is the actual definition of petite... though it comprises roughly half the female population... and the fact that we're relegated to a niche market is ridiculous.)0 -
This isn't about who is a "real" woman and who isn't. Women of all shapes and sizes are "real" women.
This is about companies who make clothing to cater to a specific market segment with a particular body type... and yet refuse to use models with that same body type to showcase the clothes.
Whether it's 5'9" models showing petites clothes or size 6 models showing plus sizes, the problem is that the industry can't seem to wrap its head around the same diversity that it is currently profiting from.
But...yeah, the fashion industry moves along like this...starts with designers of couture, who are paid to come up with faaabulous ideas that determines whats in this season that the clothing industry then pulls from for inspiration, to develop into a line for the masses who want to rock the latest trends, which can be distributed mass market at the cheapest cost to them to produce it.
Some companies cater to the "average" woman..whatever that is. Some to plus size, some to tall, some to children, some to puppy clothes, i dont know, whatever. They can cater to whoever they want..they certainly cannot cater to every single shape and size out there, because...mass market. Its up to us as the consumer to decide who we buy from...and theres lots of choices. Its also why every single person has certain lines they can wear well, and others they cant wear at all, or worst case scenario, lines that dont look as horrible on them as the rest of them do.
But it remains, if you want to wear something that looks like it was made for your body, you'll either need a seamstress or a tailor..but to expect that from every line, or any line, off the rack from mass produced clothes...thats a high expectation. The next best thing is finding the brands that look good on us and taking it from there.
Of course, thats coming from someone who is 5'10" with a 36" inseam and a pear shape, no one..and I do mean *no one* is trying to cater to my body type LOL Im happy to find clothes for tall women, or clothes for pear shaped women, but its rare the two shall meet! So Ive never had the luxury of being able to walk into a store and it just fits...ordering from online or a catalog? Hah! So yeah, the idea of someone catering to me is over my head. Im just happy to find something that doesnt make me look more awkward than I already am.
Which is sort of hilarious, since models are taller than the average women, they get special model sizing for the clothing in catalogs, but the mass market stuff that actually goes out is for women of "average height". Supposedly. I dont know...all I know is 90% of stuff looks short on me. Anyway...
0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
Add a mummy tummy, and that's my body type. I'm anatomically incorrect? Who knew?
You have to at least have nipples, right? That mannequin is absolutely FLAT. What percentage of the population is like that? It has to be really...small.
I never said "real woman" and I don't want to imply that being flat chested isn't as valid as anything else...but it would be great if the mannequins looked something like an actual human body or maybe had some kind of average amount of breast tissue. Modcloth is the only place I order from where I notice this issue.
We hear a lot about average height and clothing size, but this has me wondering about average breast size. I feel like in my whole life I've ever only seen a couple of women who were almost absolutely flat like that.
I also wonder if this is something that varies a lot by ethnicity.0 -
-
azulvioleta6 wrote: »azulvioleta6 wrote: »I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
Add a mummy tummy, and that's my body type. I'm anatomically incorrect? Who knew?
You have to at least have nipples, right? That mannequin is absolutely FLAT. What percentage of the population is like that? It has to be really...small.
I never said "real woman" and I don't want to imply that being flat chested isn't as valid as anything else...but it would be great if the mannequins looked something like an actual human body or maybe had some kind of average amount of breast tissue. Modcloth is the only place I order from where I notice this issue.
We hear a lot about average height and clothing size, but this has me wondering about average breast size. I feel like in my whole life I've ever only seen a couple of women who were almost absolutely flat like that.
I also wonder if this is something that varies a lot by ethnicity.
Speaking of putting nipples on mannequins lol Here in Miami, the South Beach mannequins have not only nipples but also quite generously endowed. .. You have to come visit lol (and yes, there are indeed women here shaped like that...)
But yeah, my grandmother is Chinese and i always just assumed got those genes from her. ..until I finally met her two years ago that is. I'm just blessed in other ways hehe!
0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »azulvioleta6 wrote: »I am talking about this kind of thing...just completely anatomically incorrect.
Add a mummy tummy, and that's my body type. I'm anatomically incorrect? Who knew?
You have to at least have nipples, right? That mannequin is absolutely FLAT. What percentage of the population is like that? It has to be really...small.
I never said "real woman" and I don't want to imply that being flat chested isn't as valid as anything else...but it would be great if the mannequins looked something like an actual human body or maybe had some kind of average amount of breast tissue. Modcloth is the only place I order from where I notice this issue.
We hear a lot about average height and clothing size, but this has me wondering about average breast size. I feel like in my whole life I've ever only seen a couple of women who were almost absolutely flat like that.
I also wonder if this is something that varies a lot by ethnicity.
Eh, part of the issue is an optical illusion. The mannequin is small-breasted, but not flat. If you look at the angled view you can see 'em. This one is a dress that I actually have. (HELLO, CRAZY LADY, NICE PRINT)
Also, this brings me back to the original point I made about ModCloth...the customer photos! You can look through and get a better idea of how the dress really looks on ALL body types, from XS to 4XL, with varying boobage and curves at each size along the way. I usually just look at the mannequin photo to get closeups of the fabric and construction, then use the customer photos for imagining fit.
0 -
I love torrid, the swim wear is more fashionable and the models are at least a size 12/14.0
-
This isn't about who is a "real" woman and who isn't. Women of all shapes and sizes are "real" women.
This is about companies who make clothing to cater to a specific market segment with a particular body type... and yet refuse to use models with that same body type to showcase the clothes.
Whether it's 5'9" models showing petites clothes or size 6 models showing plus sizes, the problem is that the industry can't seem to wrap its head around the same diversity that it is currently profiting from.
Hmmm...overweight women aren't all of just one specific body type either. So I'm not sure how clothiers could be marketing to one body type just because it's a plus-size category.
On the one hand you're saying they're marketing to one specific body type (they aren't - plus-size women come in all shapes too) and on the other hand you're saying they should celebrate diversity.
The fashion world is never going to celebrate diversity unless it's the carefully cherry-picked "difference du jour that looks hip". This should come as a surprise to no one, including non-plus-size women who can't magically turn themselves into 5'11" heroin chic 19-year-olds (Thou Shalt Not Age) with legs up to their chins any more than most plus- size women can turn themselves into the magically hourglass-shaped non-cellulite-plagued airbrushed models their proposed clothes are currently hanging on.
The fashion world has never, as far as I can tell, hinged on realism nor been open-minded and forgiving, with a few exceptions such as Coco Chanel's war on corsets, and even then the "freeing" clothes were expected to hang on a stick, with breast-binding where necessary. I'm not sure why it's so gasp-worthy that the plus-size category isn't somehow bucking this trend.
I totally 100% agree.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions