vanity sizing
Replies
-
Yeah vanity sizing has been othe upswing forever. Like a PP said, that's why people are alway oh, Marilyn was a 14 and look at her. That's why she's the idiol for the size 14+ set... without taking time to note the massive differences in sizes. I'm a solid size 8, but the last vintage dress (early 60s style) was a 14.
Retailers will also mark their sizes to accomidate larger butts to sell more clothing. If you wear a size 6 in one jean and an 8 in another, most but will buy the 6 just because.
My clothing size was a goal for me (I just really wanted to be an 8 in both dress and pants) but now that I'm here, I can see it's not that important. No one else but me sees the tags on my clothes.0 -
How about people read the label? When it comes to cloths, us a tape measure. Hat's why I don't need NPR.0
-
I tend to not keep clothes for more than 5 years. But what I don't get about "vanity sizing" is - just 6 months ago I was buying 12's. Now I'm buying 4/6's. Does that mean all sizes are getting bigger and I was really bigger than a 12 or are they making the smaller sizes a bit bigger.
Like when I look at my size 4 Old Navy jeans that I just purchased 2 weeks ago and my size 12 Old Navy Jeans I bought in March, there is a "HUGE" difference. So I know I'm way smaller now, but the 4's don't look like a "4" should or at least in my eyes. But I've always been either a 10-12-14, so buying 4's to me is just crazy...0 -
At least in men's clothes, pants and suit sizes are based on nominal measurements.
They say men's pant sizes are the waist measurement rounded to the nearest even inch. It isn't. I have pants that 42's (bought less than 2 months ago that are loose) and my measurement as of last night was 49.5
So, I no longer go by pant sizes (haven't really for a while) I have 4x shirts that are too small and 2x shirts that are too big.
But damnit, if it makes you subconsciously happy to wear a tent labeled as a napkin (just so you can tell your friends) then whatever floats your boat.
As for me, I'm going to do the work on my boat to make it float without help from some corporate *kitten* trying to get his bonus for the trip to Vegas to see his hooker gf and cocaine baby.0 -
I've noticed it very recently, just in the last couple years. I have shopped at the same store for years as they always have clothes that fit me (jeans especially) and my style and are affordable. I've noticed with the jeans, my size has gone down slightly as well as their shirts have gotten bigger. I used to always wear a L in their shirts and now I find myself mostly in the mediums and occasionally a small. Not sure to call it vanity sizing. As a whole, we are a bit bigger than we used to be. So why should sizes stay the same?0
-
One more reason to read labels, and measure your body by body fat percentage. Helps me sleep at night at least.0
-
I actually found this out when I was stocking apparel at Wal-Mart. It's depressing, really.
This is always why I have no choice but to try clothes on before actually purchasing them.0 -
I do a fair bit of sewing, and have for close to 20 years, so I'm very familiar with the vanity sizing thing. Clothes used to be the same size as their pattern counterparts, and then manufacturers found they could boost sales by making them bigger. Pattern sizes have remained unchanged over time - a pattern for a size 12 from 1950 is a size 12 on a pattern from today. I can wear size 4 jeans, but anything I make myself has to be a size 8 (and really I tape out at a size 10, but I sew smaller seam allowances than the patterns call for)...until they finally fell apart my favorite pair of jeans was my mother's size 12 from when she was in high school...they did not in any way shape or form resemble a size 12 from a store today, they were about a 6 in today's sizes...it's really sad, particularly for people who tend to "go up" a size every year or two - they don't realize that they are going up about 2 sizes and this is not a healthy trend...maybe if the sizes were the same as on the patterns it would be alarming enough to motivate them in a more positive long-term direction...0
-
I have three different type of pants that I ALWAYS buy and I fit a different size in each one.
AE - I wear a 12. I probably could fit a 10, but I hate tight pants.
Old Navy - Size 8, sometimes 10. However, their sizing changes the most often. Give it a month and I can probably fit in their size 4.
Cotton Industrial (Belks) - 11 (yeah it's in the Jr's section, but I love the style of them.)
If I tried any of those in vintage sizing, I probably couldn't even get them over my knees.
Like a lot of people already said, I use the tape measure to see where my progress lands, not my dress size. However, when it comes to pants that I have had for quite some time, I do like to try the ones on that haven't fit for a year to see if they go over my *kitten*.0 -
Heard the NPR story this morning, too. What really makes me mad is that even within a brand that you've worn for a long time you just can't trust their sizing. Not even from their body measurement suggestions on a sizing chart. What do I care if my pants say size 2 if it took three purchases to get it right since I thought I was a 6? How flattering is that 2 when you had to add size 000 to your clothing line? Ridiculous. Where it gets silly is in historical references when people say things like "Marilyn Monroe was a size 10!". Not a 2012 size 10, morons. She had a 22 inch waist.
OMG the Marilyn Monroe thing cracks me up. Just look at a damn picture and you can see that she was not a modern day size 10. http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/04/marilyn-monroe-was-not-even-close-to-a-size-12-16/ I found that article interesting.
Anyways, yeah, I hate how inconsistent it is even from the company's size charts, as well. For instance, at my heaviest, my waist was 31.5" and my hips were 41.5". According to the size charts from Express, I should have been a 12 in their pants. However, when I went in and bought a couple pairs of pants and a skirt, they were all size 8. So stupid! What if I had purchased online?
I hate how it varies from brand to brand, too. I legitimately own bottoms in everything from a 0 to an 8, and they all fit. Whaaaaatever.0 -
it's an interesting story. Will have to process my thoughts and come back on it.0
-
My favorite is going to Old Navy (they are the worse at this) and you pick up a size, say a L, in a shirt and then pick up the same shirt in a size L that is either 2-3 inches smaller or bigger. If it is the same size of the same shirt, you should be able to hold them up and they match size exactly.
Also, something that may play in to the pants size... I wear my pants low, as do many people now. Back in the 1950's they wore their pants much higher, usually closer to the actually waist. My waist is much smaller than my hips. Hmmmm.... I bet if I wore my pants closer to my natural waist I'd probably be a smaller size. But I don't like waistbands above my belly button. :P0 -
Heard the NPR story this morning, too. What really makes me mad is that even within a brand that you've worn for a long time you just can't trust their sizing. Not even from their body measurement suggestions on a sizing chart. What do I care if my pants say size 2 if it took three purchases to get it right since I thought I was a 6? How flattering is that 2 when you had to add size 000 to your clothing line? Ridiculous. Where it gets silly is in historical references when people say things like "Marilyn Monroe was a size 10!". Not a 2012 size 10, morons. She had a 22 inch waist.
OMG the Marilyn Monroe thing cracks me up. Just look at a damn picture and you can see that she was not a modern day size 10. http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/04/marilyn-monroe-was-not-even-close-to-a-size-12-16/ I found that article interesting.
Anyways, yeah, I hate how inconsistent it is even from the company's size charts, as well. For instance, at my heaviest, my waist was 31.5" and my hips were 41.5". According to the size charts from Express, I should have been a 12 in their pants. However, when I went in and bought a couple pairs of pants and a skirt, they were all size 8. So stupid! What if I had purchased online?
I hate how it varies from brand to brand, too. I legitimately own bottoms in everything from a 0 to an 8, and they all fit. Whaaaaatever.
:laugh: I was going to mention the Marilyn thing too, but I thought, nope not stirring that pot today. :laugh: Every time I hear that, I giggle.
And brand-to-brand different sizing is expected to me. I just absolutely can not stand it when ONE brand is so inconsistent it makes me want to scream. The Express thing sounds very similar to Old Navy. I currently own a bunch of Old Navy clothes (capris, shorts, and pants) and they range from size 8-12 and I believe I have one skort that is actually a 6 and they ALL fit, talk about inconsistent!
Designers and department stores have made it were you HAVE to try clothes on before you buy them. And buying online is a HUGE gamble.0 -
Eh...some brands do it, others don't. Do I believe that my Rock Republic jeans in a 29 truly represent a size 8? Uh, NO. And my loft pants run half a size big.
But, about 17 years ago when I was in college and weighed about the same as I do now, I was wearing the exact same sizes. So it hasn't changed THAT much.0 -
Great article! Completely common sense, but it still taught me something new. Best start eating more slowly and consciously!0
-
yep, I knew this back in the '70's when I was sewing clothes. The design pattern sizes had changed measurements/sizes from the '60's. And of course the sizes vary wildly from maker/designer.
But then too, we walked or rode our bikes everywhere, the library, the ymca, church, downtown, school, ect. Only took the car or taxi for major shopping trips, to the lake, ect. Today we tend to take transportation (car, taxi, bus, tram) everywhere. Exercise seems to be an after thought for most americans, and it has been taken out of a lot of schools too. Fast food is cheap and easy.
The average american IS fatter than what we were in the '50's, but then too, average american doesn't like to be called fat~0 -
i feel like im in WALLe...0
-
I do wish all the sized would be the same at every restaurant, but I don't think that the government should make food decisions for you. New York is heading in a very very bad direction as far as our personal liberties are concerned. However, I don't think the clothing sizes should lie....0
-
I do wish all the sized would be the same at every restaurant, but I don't think that the government should make food decisions for you. New York is heading in a very very bad direction as far as our personal liberties are concerned. However, I don't think the clothing sizes should lie....
and this is the quandry.. do we continue to be lied to?0 -
just for fun I measured hubbys waist where his pants sit, he is 41 inches.. however he wears a 36 inch waist pant... that is a crazy difference, I asked him " how big isyour waist? " he said" well a 36 obviously" that is when I clued him in to his 41" size and his jaw dropped, then I explained apparently vanity sizes are not just womens! He is not too happy lol0
-
Listening now. Thanks for sharing.0
-
I do wish all the sized would be the same at every restaurant, but I don't think that the government should make food decisions for you. New York is heading in a very very bad direction as far as our personal liberties are concerned. However, I don't think the clothing sizes should lie....
and this is the quandry.. do we continue to be lied to?
These are not the droids you're looking for...0 -
I am a guy, but I suspect that some bra manufacturers are making vanity cup sizes so a B cup can think she is a D cup.
Do any women agree or am I crazy?0 -
I am a guy, but I suspect that some bra manufacturers are making vanity cup sizes so a B cup can think she is a D cup.
Do any women agree or am I crazy?
You're crazy :-) Cup size is relative to the band size. So, a B cup with a 38" band, is the same as a D cup with a 36" band. The cup size is the number of inches bigger than the band size. 1" per cup size. The band sizes are pretty much exact to the measurements.0 -
I am a guy, but I suspect that some bra manufacturers are making vanity cup sizes so a B cup can think she is a D cup.
Do any women agree or am I crazy?
You're crazy :-) Cup size is relative to the band size. So, a B cup with a 38" band, is the same as a D cup with a 36" band. The cup size is the number of inches bigger than the band size. 1" per cup size. The band sizes are pretty much exact to the measurements.
This is how it's supposed to work, but as any women can tell you, try on the same size bra in different brands and, just like pants, they're gonna fit differently! Example: when I measured a solid 34C, at Victoria's Secret I had to buy a 34D. I laughed and called my sisters, cuz smallish boobs run in our family and the thought of any of us being an actual D is preposterous. Now I measure a 32C supposedly, but the bras I recently bought at Target are 34Cs and tightish in the band, no matter what the tag or the measuring tapes say!0 -
I didn't read the article, but here's a fun fact: I shop at Old Navy a lot because I'm cheap. So last year I bought some size 6 jeans there. Those jeans are now a little baggy on me. But I have another pair of size 6 jeans that I bought there 4 years ago -- same cut, same rise, same everything -- that I can barely get buttoned. In 4 years, their clothing sizes have changed that drastically at the SAME STORE. That blows my mind.0
-
I am a guy, but I suspect that some bra manufacturers are making vanity cup sizes so a B cup can think she is a D cup.
Do any women agree or am I crazy?
You're crazy :-) Cup size is relative to the band size. So, a B cup with a 38" band, is the same as a D cup with a 36" band. The cup size is the number of inches bigger than the band size. 1" per cup size. The band sizes are pretty much exact to the measurements.
This is how it's supposed to work, but as any women can tell you, try on the same size bra in different brands and, just like pants, they're gonna fit differently! Example: when I measured a solid 34C, at Victoria's Secret I had to buy a 34D. I laughed and called my sisters, cuz smallish boobs run in our family and the thought of any of us being an actual D is preposterous. Now I measure a 32C supposedly, but the bras I recently bought at Target are 34Cs and tightish in the band, no matter what the tag or the measuring tapes say!
I can't find bras at Victoria's Secret that fit me. I wear, generally, a 36 or 38 B. 36B is a little tight around at Victoria's so I try on a 38B and suddenly the cup changes sizes and becomes more like a C. I don't care if I'm a B or a C, I just want a bra that fits! Luckily I have found one brand that has been consistant in sizing over the years, both band and cup wise.0 -
That's why I buy UK sizes...so I'm closer to not lying to myself.
0 -
I listened to the same program on NPR this morning. Doesn't surprise me one bit since I went to UM and know the professor who was cited in that segment as well as the research on portion/dress sizes.
It's amazing how sophisticated the marketing folks have become in manipulating people into consuming/purchasing more.0 -
In 1979 I weighed 125 lbs and wore a size 14
In 2010 I weighed 180 lbs and wore a size 14
Ahh! the magic of vanity sizing...
Currently bouncing around between 140-145 an wearing a size 6.
Last time I was a size 6 (6X actually) I was 6 years old.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 423 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