Vanity Sizing

poesch77

I agree with sizes being all over the place! I can wear anywhere from a size 17 Junior, Women's 16 to a Women's 13 and I am over 200lbs and 5'6 1/2. You can't just say I wear a size X anymore! I went to design school and in drafting class we learned that eventhough each "jean" is made from a pattern a lot of times each pair are cut from the last pair so they are never the same size.....you can have 2 pairs of same brand jeans and only one pair fits right! Annoying as it is, trying on any pair of jeans is the way to go!

kala_rebecca

I don't have a goal size because of vanity sizing. Sizes are all over the place in different stores. My 16's are baggy now that I've lost 40 lbs, but I guess my real size is much larger.

maidentl

I recently bought three pairs of jeans from Kohl's. One pair in a 10, one in a 12 and one in a 14. It's craziness.

LorinaLynn

@LorinaLynn: You can't find clothes at 125 pounds? I went to check your pictures and found it amazing that clothes in your size are hard to find. You will have to travel to Europe to shop.

That's why it bugs me, because I'm not that small. Certainly not so small that small sized shirts are too big.

Maybe I should add the caveat that I'm extremely cheap and only shop sales. It's not so much that the sizes don't go small enough, as there's very few items in stock. At least in my price range. When I was an 8 or 10, there was fantastic selection. Now that I'm a 2 or 4, there's hardly any. Looking for jeans at JCPennys this week, I found one pair of 4s in a style I'd wear and price I'd pay, and they were a little big on me. They didn't have any 2s, but they had hundreds of 8, 10 and 12. And seeing how I can try on four pairs all the same size and have them all fit differently, I don't want to buy online.

You know what bugs me more? Underwear.

I'm a boring old married woman. I just want to buy a six pack of Hanes or Fruit of the Loom bikinis. I don't want to spend $5 or $10 on one pair of undies. I have a fairly big bum, but the smallest size (5) is baggy and droopy.

I know. There's far worse problems to have!

i_love_vinegar

i cant even fit into most clothing anymore, it has gotten so out of control.

if i go to vintage shops, i can find size 4's that fit...when i go to a regular store i can find size 00's that are still too big.

it is very frustrating...most of my clothing from the U.S. is simply too large...<.<

funkycamper

Vanity sizing is crazy. I just now fit into a size 12 again. The same size I wore in high school. I now weigh 177#. In high school, I weighed 117#. Yeah, 60# less. And my thigh measurements are now the same size as my waist was in high school. Sizes mean nothing anymore.

Gettinfit2

Vanity sizing is crazy. I just now fit into a size 12 again. The same size I wore in high school. I now weigh 177#. In high school, I weighed 117#. Yeah, 60# less. And my thigh measurements are now the same size as my waist was in high school. Sizes mean nothing anymore.

Yeah, that is the problem with thinking that smaller sizes today are similar to the ones years ago. The size 14 I wore 5 years ago is at least two sizes smaller than a size 14 today. Vanity sizing is a joke.

Troll

oh hun, good luck. Im a size 2 wedding dress, and a 3,5, or 7in jeans. Im at 28.75 chest, 22.75 waist, and 33 hips. My step mom in law says shes in a zero after gastric bypass, but shes 3 of me easily. All i can figure is shes got a different brand of pants. Its crazy. And anybody notice mens pants are hip and leg length? My fiance is 29x32. Why cant womens jeans do that, hahaha!

LorinaLynn

I still have clothes from high school (Class of 1990!) that I can wear now, even though I'm a solid 15# more than I was then. Most of my jeans were size 5 or 7 in juniors, which is just about what I wear now.

thetrishwarp

I don't even notice vanity sizing, because sizes have beeen that way ever since I started buying clothes (I'm 19). I worry though - I'm at the top end of a healthy BMI and I'm in size 4 (in all the stores I shop at) and size small...so if I get further into the healthy range, what will there be to wear?

raevynn

I really noticed "vanity" sizing when I bought my last pair of jeans...

.... size 18.

Really? HAH!! The last time I wore "18" pants was a solid 50 lbs ago.... it is impossible that I'm somehow the same measurements while weighing 50 lbs more.

The higher priced stores will ALWAYS have vanity sizing. It keeps their customer base happy.

Oh, and my "18" jeans are a little roomy. Yes, it makes me feel good, while I still realize they are, in fact, size 22.

it_be_asin

Women's clothing sizes are completely arbitrary - they change between countries, labels, and even between garments made by the same labels. Before and after vanity sizing the sizes are just as arbitrary - so just try on as much as you need to and wear what fits, pay no attention to the number on the label

it_be_asin

I sometimes wonder if size 0-2 women have all their organs. Where do you pack them all inside such a tiny little body?

Trust me, they are all there. Once upon a time, most women were now the size that gets called in the US 0-2. Our mothers and grandmothers seemed to make all the organs fit OK.

tiedye

I don't even notice vanity sizing, because sizes have beeen that way ever since I started buying clothes (I'm 19). I worry though - I'm at the top end of a healthy BMI and I'm in size 4 (in all the stores I shop at) and size small...so if I get further into the healthy range, what will there be to wear?

I legit wear children's clothes sometimes because they fit better and are cheaper. Has to be something stretchy because women's clothes are made for curves and children's aren't!

bllowry

I've been shopping at the charity shops and I can take 6 pairs of size 16 jeans to try on and two pair will fit me; I make a not of the brand so I can look for them again. I get very irked when I'm in a shop and two things in the same brand don't fit the same. There's no quality control at all any more.

tiedye- I buy boy's trainers 90% of the time as I wear a small shoe. I just can't justify spending $40.00 for a woman's size that will be slightly too wide when I can buy a boy's that fits me perfectly and is only $15.00.

melizerd

I have a pair of leather pants from when I was 17 (12 years ago) and they are a size 10. When I was that size I was my ideal weight and measurements. I was somewhere about 142lbs (5'7") and 36,25,36 and while I can get them on and zipped right now they do not really fit. I'm currently 166lbs and yet I'm in a 10/12 most of the time now. Definitely vanity sizing going on.

I wish women's clothes were more like men's and done by inches instead of random numbers of sizes.

ElizabethRoad

I sometimes wonder if size 0-2 women have all their organs. Where do you pack them all inside such a tiny little body?

Trust me, they are all there. Once upon a time, most women were now the size that gets called in the US 0-2. Our mothers and grandmothers seemed to make all the organs fit OK.

My grandmother is 5'8" and quite slim but she would not fit into a size 2. Don't be insulting. If most people were that size at one time, it was because they were also short! It is not healthy for most of us to be that small.

SerenaFisher

I sometimes wonder if size 0-2 women have all their organs. Where do you pack them all inside such a tiny little body?

Trust me, they are all there. Once upon a time, most women were now the size that gets called in the US 0-2. Our mothers and grandmothers seemed to make all the organs fit OK.

My grandmother is 5'8" and quite slim but she would not fit into a size 2. Don't between insulting. If most people were that size at one time, it was because they were also short! It is not healthy for most of us to be that small.

I was just thinking this. My grandmother was probably a size 6 in the "vogue" chart. Which is tiny!

As for the actual sizing. Doesn't bother me. In actual sizes even super models are like a size 8 to 6. When you think if it that way being a 8 to a 10 sounds slim. A 12 sounds healthy... and naturally it depends on height. Who cares about pant size? My measurements are 34D 24.5 and 36 hip. 5'8.5 130lbs. Goal 125lbs. Measurements would be 34D 24 35.5 hip... and that is what all my friends would deal "very thin"... still a size 8 to 10a

jnissi

While we are talking about sizing. Why don't they make things with shape any more? It seems like everything is made for Sponge Bob. LOL Seriously, where is the clothing for curvy women? You know, the whole hour glass thing. Shopping is annoying!

Paige1108

Men are actually in this same fight. The problem is they don't even know it. Here's an Equire article about male vanity sizing.

"Are Your Pants Lying to You? An Investigation
September 7, 2010 at 8:30AM by Abram Sauer |
The devastating realization came in H&M. Specifically, in a pair of size 36 dress pants. I'd never bought pants at H&M before, and suddenly asked myself: how could a 36-inch waist suddenly be so damn tight?
I've never been slim — I played offensive line in high school — but I'm no cow either. (I'm happily a "Russell Crowe" body type.) So I immediately went across the street, bought a tailor's measuring tape, and trudged from shop to shop, trying on various brands' casual dress pants. It took just two hours to tear my self-esteem to smithereens and raise some serious questions about what I later learned is called "vanity sizing."
Your pants have been deceiving you for years. And the lies are compounding:

H&M 36=37
Calvin Kline 36=38.5
Alfani 36=38.5
Gap 36=39
Hagger 36=39
Dockers 36=39.5
Old Navy 36=41

The pants manufacturers are trying to flatter us. And this flattery works: Alfani's 36-inch "Garrett" pant was 38.5 inches, just like the Calvin Klein "Dylan" pants — which I loved and purchased. A 39-inch pair from Haggar (a brand name that out-testosterones even "Garrett") was incredibly comfortable. Dockers, meanwhile, teased "Leave yourself some wiggle room" with its "Individual Fit Waistline," and they weren't kidding: despite having a clear size listed, the 36-inchers were 39.5 inches. And part of the reason they were so comfy is that I felt good about myself, no matter whether I deserved it.
However, the temple for waisted male self-esteem is Old Navy, where I easily slid into a size 34 pair of the brand's Dress Pant. Where no other 34s had been hospitable, Old Navy's fit snugly. The final measurement? Five inches larger than the label. You can eat all the slow-churn ice cream and brats you want, and still consider yourself slender in these.
I enjoyed many of these pants, as I mentioned, but I'm still perturbed. This isn't the subjective business of mediums, larges and extra-larges — nor is it the murky business of women's sizes, what with its black-hole size zero. This is science, damnit. Numbers! Should inches be different than miles per hour? Do highway signs make us feel better by informing us that Chicago is but 45 miles away when it's really 72? Multiplication tables don't yield to make us feel better about badness at math; why should pants make us feel better about badness at health? Are we all so many emperors with no clothes?
The mind-screw of broken pride aside — like Humpty Dumpty, it cannot be put back together, now that you know the truth — down-waisting is genuine cause for concern. A recent report published in the Archives of Internal Medicine found that men with larger waists were twice at risk of death compared with their smaller-waist peers. Men whose waists measured 47 inches or larger were twice as likely to die. Yet, most men only know their waist size by their pants — so if those pants are up to five inches smaller than the reality, some men may be wrongly dismissing health dangers.
But vanity waist sizing is so entrenched, it couldn't possibly be changed overnight, at least not without a government mandate. The only solution seems to be a gradual, year-by-year shaving of quarter-inch by quarter-inch until, in 2021, men's pants finally correspond with the label numbers — conveniently just in time for the New World Order's switch to mandatory full jumpsuits."