Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?

1118119121123124239

Replies

  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    DamieBird wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    The idea that Size 12 is the average sized woman , so that must make it ok. (As a former size 12-14) is something I disagree with. I am currently a size 8 and know that my weight for height is actually on the high end of the healthy weight range.

    I'm not challenging what you're saying, your comment just makes me think of how ridiculous it is to measure someone by 'size X'. Not that I think you were doing this, but it also bugs me when people say size X is too big for a healthy person. Sorry, but body type, skeletal structure, and height go a long way towards size - not just how much fat a person happens to have.

    I still have about 20ish (maybe 25) pounds to lose, but I can guarantee you that a size 12 will look much different on me at 5'7" than it will on someone who is 5'4" (for example). It will probably look much different on me at 5'7" than it would on someone with a more slender build who is also 5'7". I have wide shoulders and hip bones that balance out my proportions no matter what my size better than some women who have narrower body types. Size 'X' is meaningless as a comparative tool.

    Size 12 may be the average woman in the US, and it's perfectly acceptable for many, many women. FWIW, even at a near normal BMI at my lowest weight, I was a size 12 in some things *shrug*.

    Yeah, all this.

    I look awful when a size 12 (US sizes, and even the US sizes of my early adult years), but that doesn't mean other women don't fit in them when at a healthy weight.

    Very true. Musculature matters a lot. I am into weight lifting so my shoulders are wider than average and my quads/glutes are well developed. I need a larger size than my waist suggests, not because I am not fatter, just built different. Note that I usually have to get something that looks good belted, is stretchy on the waist (so it forms), or have it tailored. Height also plays a huge factor. A woman who is 5'3" and a size 12 is a vastly different shape than a woman who is 5'10" and a size 12.

    you know a size for woman's jeans doesn't just pertain to the waist right??? a size 6 (what I wear normally) is bigger all around...not just the waist.

    I think that's the point (or the problem): We're - many of us - proportioned differently. For some of us, with respect to the same style/brand of pants, if the waist fits, the hips will be loose. For others, they'd have to pick the size that fits their hips, but the waist would be loose. I even know some very muscular women for whom quad size is the limiting factor in many styles.

    None of these things are necessarily due to body fat: At BMI 19-20 (which I'd estimate as low to mid 20s BF%), my waist is 26.5-27. For others my height (5'5"), their waist might be at 22-23" with similar BMI/BF. I'd have to be skeletal to get to 22-23". But I have boy hips, about 34" at that weight. This theoretical other woman might have woman hips, maybe 36" or more.

    Musculature counts, as @VeronicaA76 noted. So do more inherent skeletal differences: Pelvic width, ribcage volume, shoulder breadth, etc.

    Breast size also varies widely in women, though that obviously doesn't affect pant size. But that and shoulders affect tops, as does arm musculature at times. In one brand of t-shirts I like, tanks fit fine in S, and XS will fit if the specific style isn't too short. Things with sleeves fit tolerably in M - S is hopelessly narrow in shoulders and armholes - and the shoulder line falls at the right place in a L. Some jackets/sweaters would need to be a L for my arms (not waif-like) to fit and still bend comfortably.

    "Size 12" means little or nothing, on its own, as a criterion for reasonable body size.

    actually size 12 does mean something...

    for example a size 12 jean is made to fit a person with a waist that measures 34.5 inches...a 10...32.5 inches...etc.

    and for women in the US

    http://www.sizeguide.net/size-guide-women-size-chart.html

    so given that information (and yes knowing people are all different) a woman with a size 12...aka 34.5 inch waist..that is not healthy.

    and I expect that lots of woman if not most who are a size 12 fall in that frame...over 33 inches in the waist but less than 36....

    Although high waisted styles are starting to be in fashion more these days, most jeans don't actually sit at someone's waist. That 34.5 is probably several inches below a woman's natural waist. Again, using size '12' as a metric for Healthy across the board is ridiculous.

    Just a ridiculous as using a size 12 as a metric for fat across the board.
  • VeronicaA76
    VeronicaA76 Posts: 1,116 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    The idea that Size 12 is the average sized woman , so that must make it ok. (As a former size 12-14) is something I disagree with. I am currently a size 8 and know that my weight for height is actually on the high end of the healthy weight range.

    I'm not challenging what you're saying, your comment just makes me think of how ridiculous it is to measure someone by 'size X'. Not that I think you were doing this, but it also bugs me when people say size X is too big for a healthy person. Sorry, but body type, skeletal structure, and height go a long way towards size - not just how much fat a person happens to have.

    I still have about 20ish (maybe 25) pounds to lose, but I can guarantee you that a size 12 will look much different on me at 5'7" than it will on someone who is 5'4" (for example). It will probably look much different on me at 5'7" than it would on someone with a more slender build who is also 5'7". I have wide shoulders and hip bones that balance out my proportions no matter what my size better than some women who have narrower body types. Size 'X' is meaningless as a comparative tool.

    Size 12 may be the average woman in the US, and it's perfectly acceptable for many, many women. FWIW, even at a near normal BMI at my lowest weight, I was a size 12 in some things *shrug*.

    Yeah, all this.

    I look awful when a size 12 (US sizes, and even the US sizes of my early adult years), but that doesn't mean other women don't fit in them when at a healthy weight.

    Very true. Musculature matters a lot. I am into weight lifting so my shoulders are wider than average and my quads/glutes are well developed. I need a larger size than my waist suggests, not because I am not fatter, just built different. Note that I usually have to get something that looks good belted, is stretchy on the waist (so it forms), or have it tailored. Height also plays a huge factor. A woman who is 5'3" and a size 12 is a vastly different shape than a woman who is 5'10" and a size 12.

    you know a size for woman's jeans doesn't just pertain to the waist right??? a size 6 (what I wear normally) is bigger all around...not just the waist.

    I think that's the point (or the problem): We're - many of us - proportioned differently. For some of us, with respect to the same style/brand of pants, if the waist fits, the hips will be loose. For others, they'd have to pick the size that fits their hips, but the waist would be loose. I even know some very muscular women for whom quad size is the limiting factor in many styles.

    None of these things are necessarily due to body fat: At BMI 19-20 (which I'd estimate as low to mid 20s BF%), my waist is 26.5-27. For others my height (5'5"), their waist might be at 22-23" with similar BMI/BF. I'd have to be skeletal to get to 22-23". But I have boy hips, about 34" at that weight. This theoretical other woman might have woman hips, maybe 36" or more.

    Musculature counts, as @VeronicaA76 noted. So do more inherent skeletal differences: Pelvic width, ribcage volume, shoulder breadth, etc.

    Breast size also varies widely in women, though that obviously doesn't affect pant size. But that and shoulders affect tops, as does arm musculature at times. In one brand of t-shirts I like, tanks fit fine in S, and XS will fit if the specific style isn't too short. Things with sleeves fit tolerably in M - S is hopelessly narrow in shoulders and armholes - and the shoulder line falls at the right place in a L. Some jackets/sweaters would need to be a L for my arms (not waif-like) to fit and still bend comfortably.

    "Size 12" means little or nothing, on its own, as a criterion for reasonable body size.

    actually size 12 does mean something...

    for example a size 12 jean is made to fit a person with a waist that measures 34.5 inches...a 10...32.5 inches...etc.

    and for women in the US

    http://www.sizeguide.net/size-guide-women-size-chart.html

    so given that information (and yes knowing people are all different) a woman with a size 12...aka 34.5 inch waist..that is not healthy.

    and I expect that lots of woman if not most who are a size 12 fall in that frame...over 33 inches in the waist but less than 36....

    I have a 29" waist and have to wear a 12 to fit quads and glutes, and height. It sucks. My go to brand is now Forever 21 ultra distressed boyfriend cut (100% demin), sized by inches, slightly loose on the thighs and distressed so I have even more room there. Sometimes I wish it were acceptable to just wear a bedsheet.

    I thought you went with 501's and shrank them? Which is it?

    Also, what is 100% denim? No such thing. Denim is a specific weave and can be made out of any fiber.

    I did, I shrank the 501's in super hot water, as hot as I could stand. My go to brand that I don't have to mess with are the Forever 21 jeans (and they are a lot cheaper than Levi's)

    I meant 100% cotton.
  • HeliumIsNoble
    HeliumIsNoble Posts: 1,213 Member
    edited August 2017
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    The idea that Size 12 is the average sized woman , so that must make it ok. (As a former size 12-14) is something I disagree with. I am currently a size 8 and know that my weight for height is actually on the high end of the healthy weight range.

    I'm not challenging what you're saying, your comment just makes me think of how ridiculous it is to measure someone by 'size X'. Not that I think you were doing this, but it also bugs me when people say size X is too big for a healthy person. Sorry, but body type, skeletal structure, and height go a long way towards size - not just how much fat a person happens to have.

    I still have about 20ish (maybe 25) pounds to lose, but I can guarantee you that a size 12 will look much different on me at 5'7" than it will on someone who is 5'4" (for example). It will probably look much different on me at 5'7" than it would on someone with a more slender build who is also 5'7". I have wide shoulders and hip bones that balance out my proportions no matter what my size better than some women who have narrower body types. Size 'X' is meaningless as a comparative tool.

    Size 12 may be the average woman in the US, and it's perfectly acceptable for many, many women. FWIW, even at a near normal BMI at my lowest weight, I was a size 12 in some things *shrug*.

    Yeah, all this.

    I look awful when a size 12 (US sizes, and even the US sizes of my early adult years), but that doesn't mean other women don't fit in them when at a healthy weight.

    Very true. Musculature matters a lot. I am into weight lifting so my shoulders are wider than average and my quads/glutes are well developed. I need a larger size than my waist suggests, not because I am not fatter, just built different. Note that I usually have to get something that looks good belted, is stretchy on the waist (so it forms), or have it tailored. Height also plays a huge factor. A woman who is 5'3" and a size 12 is a vastly different shape than a woman who is 5'10" and a size 12.

    you know a size for woman's jeans doesn't just pertain to the waist right??? a size 6 (what I wear normally) is bigger all around...not just the waist.

    I think that's the point (or the problem): We're - many of us - proportioned differently. For some of us, with respect to the same style/brand of pants, if the waist fits, the hips will be loose. For others, they'd have to pick the size that fits their hips, but the waist would be loose. I even know some very muscular women for whom quad size is the limiting factor in many styles.

    None of these things are necessarily due to body fat: At BMI 19-20 (which I'd estimate as low to mid 20s BF%), my waist is 26.5-27. For others my height (5'5"), their waist might be at 22-23" with similar BMI/BF. I'd have to be skeletal to get to 22-23". But I have boy hips, about 34" at that weight. This theoretical other woman might have woman hips, maybe 36" or more.

    Musculature counts, as @VeronicaA76 noted. So do more inherent skeletal differences: Pelvic width, ribcage volume, shoulder breadth, etc.

    Breast size also varies widely in women, though that obviously doesn't affect pant size. But that and shoulders affect tops, as does arm musculature at times. In one brand of t-shirts I like, tanks fit fine in S, and XS will fit if the specific style isn't too short. Things with sleeves fit tolerably in M - S is hopelessly narrow in shoulders and armholes - and the shoulder line falls at the right place in a L. Some jackets/sweaters would need to be a L for my arms (not waif-like) to fit and still bend comfortably.

    "Size 12" means little or nothing, on its own, as a criterion for reasonable body size.

    actually size 12 does mean something...

    for example a size 12 jean is made to fit a person with a waist that measures 34.5 inches...a 10...32.5 inches...etc.

    and for women in the US

    http://www.sizeguide.net/size-guide-women-size-chart.html

    so given that information (and yes knowing people are all different) a woman with a size 12...aka 34.5 inch waist..that is not healthy.

    and I expect that lots of woman if not most who are a size 12 fall in that frame...over 33 inches in the waist but less than 36....

    Generic size charts are a daydream. ;) And it seems you're not in the US, so size 12 is something entirely different for you than for me? (BTW, the sizeguide site absolutely refuses to function for me, on either of 2 devices I have at hand.)

    Looking at Wikipedia's sizing article (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_standard_clothing_size), the US ASTM 2011 standards for a size 12 (misses) waist/hip would be 32.5"/41" in straight cut, and 30.75"/41.75" in curvy. A 34.5" waist would be about a size 14 straight or 16 curvy.

    And you're missing my point.

    Using the sizes above, one would require a size 12 if one's hips were 41", regardless of waist size. In these sizes, my waist & hips are at least a size apart (6 and 0 in curvy, 4 and 2 in straight).

    I agree that some women who are 5'6" plus or minus 2" and wearing US size 12 may be heavier than desirable for optimal health. Some may not. I weighed about 142 pounds (BMI 23.6, several pounds into the normal range) at that size (using the size charts I quoted), but that's still too heavy for me. My 6'1" rowing double partner would be a perfectly reasonable weight in that size.

    Are most American women "too heavy"? Unquestionably. But judging individuals purely by numeric size alone? Silly.

    Edited: typos

    I agree "generic" sizing charts are a daydream.

    No not in the US but close enough I can shop there at will.

    I get that you cannot say a woman who "wears" a size 12 is not healthy...but at the same time knowing that a size 14-16 is average for my age/ethnicity is a weight of 180...(caucasian/45)

    So I do feel that on average that a person who is a size 12 is not as healthy as someone in a size 8 as far as weight related health issues go.

    we will have to agree to disagree however...partially because speaking of outliers when we were talking averages throws a curve ball into it...

    so again I assert and agree that being "averaged size" be it 12 or 14 or 16 is not on average a good thing....because it means you are probably overweight leaning towards obesity...

    I was average for a long time...
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    DamieBird wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    The idea that Size 12 is the average sized woman , so that must make it ok. (As a former size 12-14) is something I disagree with. I am currently a size 8 and know that my weight for height is actually on the high end of the healthy weight range.

    I'm not challenging what you're saying, your comment just makes me think of how ridiculous it is to measure someone by 'size X'. Not that I think you were doing this, but it also bugs me when people say size X is too big for a healthy person. Sorry, but body type, skeletal structure, and height go a long way towards size - not just how much fat a person happens to have.

    I still have about 20ish (maybe 25) pounds to lose, but I can guarantee you that a size 12 will look much different on me at 5'7" than it will on someone who is 5'4" (for example). It will probably look much different on me at 5'7" than it would on someone with a more slender build who is also 5'7". I have wide shoulders and hip bones that balance out my proportions no matter what my size better than some women who have narrower body types. Size 'X' is meaningless as a comparative tool.

    Size 12 may be the average woman in the US, and it's perfectly acceptable for many, many women. FWIW, even at a near normal BMI at my lowest weight, I was a size 12 in some things *shrug*.

    Yeah, all this.

    I look awful when a size 12 (US sizes, and even the US sizes of my early adult years), but that doesn't mean other women don't fit in them when at a healthy weight.

    Very true. Musculature matters a lot. I am into weight lifting so my shoulders are wider than average and my quads/glutes are well developed. I need a larger size than my waist suggests, not because I am not fatter, just built different. Note that I usually have to get something that looks good belted, is stretchy on the waist (so it forms), or have it tailored. Height also plays a huge factor. A woman who is 5'3" and a size 12 is a vastly different shape than a woman who is 5'10" and a size 12.

    you know a size for woman's jeans doesn't just pertain to the waist right??? a size 6 (what I wear normally) is bigger all around...not just the waist.

    I think that's the point (or the problem): We're - many of us - proportioned differently. For some of us, with respect to the same style/brand of pants, if the waist fits, the hips will be loose. For others, they'd have to pick the size that fits their hips, but the waist would be loose. I even know some very muscular women for whom quad size is the limiting factor in many styles.

    None of these things are necessarily due to body fat: At BMI 19-20 (which I'd estimate as low to mid 20s BF%), my waist is 26.5-27. For others my height (5'5"), their waist might be at 22-23" with similar BMI/BF. I'd have to be skeletal to get to 22-23". But I have boy hips, about 34" at that weight. This theoretical other woman might have woman hips, maybe 36" or more.

    Musculature counts, as @VeronicaA76 noted. So do more inherent skeletal differences: Pelvic width, ribcage volume, shoulder breadth, etc.

    Breast size also varies widely in women, though that obviously doesn't affect pant size. But that and shoulders affect tops, as does arm musculature at times. In one brand of t-shirts I like, tanks fit fine in S, and XS will fit if the specific style isn't too short. Things with sleeves fit tolerably in M - S is hopelessly narrow in shoulders and armholes - and the shoulder line falls at the right place in a L. Some jackets/sweaters would need to be a L for my arms (not waif-like) to fit and still bend comfortably.

    "Size 12" means little or nothing, on its own, as a criterion for reasonable body size.

    actually size 12 does mean something...

    for example a size 12 jean is made to fit a person with a waist that measures 34.5 inches...a 10...32.5 inches...etc.

    and for women in the US

    http://www.sizeguide.net/size-guide-women-size-chart.html

    so given that information (and yes knowing people are all different) a woman with a size 12...aka 34.5 inch waist..that is not healthy.

    and I expect that lots of woman if not most who are a size 12 fall in that frame...over 33 inches in the waist but less than 36....

    Although high waisted styles are starting to be in fashion more these days, most jeans don't actually sit at someone's waist. That 34.5 is probably several inches below a woman's natural waist. Again, using size '12' as a metric for Healthy across the board is ridiculous.

    nope actually if you google how to measure for pants it indicates to measure at natural waist...not below the belly button...so the 34.5 is the natural waist.

    I don't think on average that a woman who is a size 12 is as healthy as they could be and are probably considered overweight...I know what I looked like at a size 12 and I am taller than average...I was soft squishy and fat.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    joemac1988 wrote: »
    Every time someone says CICO isn't the whole story, I'd be willing to be that they've read or heard the words "a calorie isn't a calorie" somewhere.

    Of course it's simplifying things to say that CICO is the whole story somewhat (obesity is a complex issue), but frankly, when it comes to losing weight, creating a calorie deficit is what matters.

    Obfuscating and conflating that primary truth with bullet point issues which are secondary to it confuses people and does most dieters a disservice. I really don't understand why people cling to such a disorganized way of thinking about this.

    There are ways of prioritizing the variables involved in this process without making meaningless statements about how the process works.

    @livingleanlivingclean

    @joemac1988 where is the reference to health? This is stating CICO is all that matters for weight loss.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    Very interesting. TIL that I'm a standard sized 10. Except in the bust. I'm between a 14 and 16 there.
  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,492 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    Very interesting. I wear a 00/0 but according to this I am a size 14 via waist measurement but below the smallest size for hip. Gosh I am weirdly proportioned....
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.

    And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
  • 3bambi3
    3bambi3 Posts: 1,650 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.

    And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.

    Wasn't it something ridiculous like 100 middle-class younger white women that they used as the standard?
  • DamieBird
    DamieBird Posts: 651 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    DamieBird wrote: »
    The idea that Size 12 is the average sized woman , so that must make it ok. (As a former size 12-14) is something I disagree with. I am currently a size 8 and know that my weight for height is actually on the high end of the healthy weight range.

    I'm not challenging what you're saying, your comment just makes me think of how ridiculous it is to measure someone by 'size X'. Not that I think you were doing this, but it also bugs me when people say size X is too big for a healthy person. Sorry, but body type, skeletal structure, and height go a long way towards size - not just how much fat a person happens to have.

    I still have about 20ish (maybe 25) pounds to lose, but I can guarantee you that a size 12 will look much different on me at 5'7" than it will on someone who is 5'4" (for example). It will probably look much different on me at 5'7" than it would on someone with a more slender build who is also 5'7". I have wide shoulders and hip bones that balance out my proportions no matter what my size better than some women who have narrower body types. Size 'X' is meaningless as a comparative tool.

    Size 12 may be the average woman in the US, and it's perfectly acceptable for many, many women. FWIW, even at a near normal BMI at my lowest weight, I was a size 12 in some things *shrug*.

    Yeah, all this.

    I look awful when a size 12 (US sizes, and even the US sizes of my early adult years), but that doesn't mean other women don't fit in them when at a healthy weight.

    Very true. Musculature matters a lot. I am into weight lifting so my shoulders are wider than average and my quads/glutes are well developed. I need a larger size than my waist suggests, not because I am not fatter, just built different. Note that I usually have to get something that looks good belted, is stretchy on the waist (so it forms), or have it tailored. Height also plays a huge factor. A woman who is 5'3" and a size 12 is a vastly different shape than a woman who is 5'10" and a size 12.

    you know a size for woman's jeans doesn't just pertain to the waist right??? a size 6 (what I wear normally) is bigger all around...not just the waist.

    I think that's the point (or the problem): We're - many of us - proportioned differently. For some of us, with respect to the same style/brand of pants, if the waist fits, the hips will be loose. For others, they'd have to pick the size that fits their hips, but the waist would be loose. I even know some very muscular women for whom quad size is the limiting factor in many styles.

    None of these things are necessarily due to body fat: At BMI 19-20 (which I'd estimate as low to mid 20s BF%), my waist is 26.5-27. For others my height (5'5"), their waist might be at 22-23" with similar BMI/BF. I'd have to be skeletal to get to 22-23". But I have boy hips, about 34" at that weight. This theoretical other woman might have woman hips, maybe 36" or more.

    Musculature counts, as @VeronicaA76 noted. So do more inherent skeletal differences: Pelvic width, ribcage volume, shoulder breadth, etc.

    Breast size also varies widely in women, though that obviously doesn't affect pant size. But that and shoulders affect tops, as does arm musculature at times. In one brand of t-shirts I like, tanks fit fine in S, and XS will fit if the specific style isn't too short. Things with sleeves fit tolerably in M - S is hopelessly narrow in shoulders and armholes - and the shoulder line falls at the right place in a L. Some jackets/sweaters would need to be a L for my arms (not waif-like) to fit and still bend comfortably.

    "Size 12" means little or nothing, on its own, as a criterion for reasonable body size.

    actually size 12 does mean something...

    for example a size 12 jean is made to fit a person with a waist that measures 34.5 inches...a 10...32.5 inches...etc.

    and for women in the US

    http://www.sizeguide.net/size-guide-women-size-chart.html

    so given that information (and yes knowing people are all different) a woman with a size 12...aka 34.5 inch waist..that is not healthy.

    and I expect that lots of woman if not most who are a size 12 fall in that frame...over 33 inches in the waist but less than 36....

    Although high waisted styles are starting to be in fashion more these days, most jeans don't actually sit at someone's waist. That 34.5 is probably several inches below a woman's natural waist. Again, using size '12' as a metric for Healthy across the board is ridiculous.

    Just a ridiculous as using a size 12 as a metric for fat across the board.

    That is the point I was trying to make :smiley:
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.

    And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.

    and I guess this is my point...the average woman is now a 14-16...so that means in today's sizes...

    so a size 12 60 years ago was really a 16 or higher...

  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    Yes, according to the chart I'm 16 by waist, 14 by hips (2 1/2" difference between hips and waist - I'm tube-shaped from my ribs down.) I don't even try to buy pants that fit around my waist, and in real life wear a 6-8 in mid-rise jeans. (In the Talbot's alternate universe I wear a size 0 - 2).
  • HeliumIsNoble
    HeliumIsNoble Posts: 1,213 Member
    edited August 2017
    earlnabby wrote: »
    earlnabby wrote: »
    Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?

    Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.

    In the UK:

    1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers

    2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028

    3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/

    4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect

    5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide

    This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:

    uayh9p8vqtog.jpg

    This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.

    8fr6l78psvx4.jpg

    That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.

    And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
    And a good thing too. If you want to be actually able to buy clothes.

    It's one thing for dressmaking patterns to have a specific set of measurements; if you're choosing to make your own clothes, you're probably able to adjust the bust or hips in or out to fit yourself

    If you're a store selling clothes, you want to sell them to fit the shoppers, and the shoppers are not all going to magically have the body shape with the much lauded ten inch difference twix waist and hip that used to be taught as fricking holy gospel in sewing.

    If you're a customer who wants to buy clothes, who can't sew, universal standardisation across stores would either see you able to buy everywhere, or... nowhere.

    Government regulation on clothing sizes would be very restrictive here.

This discussion has been closed.