Have Sizes Changed Over THe Years?

AuntieMC

Have Sizes Changed over the years? The last time I weighed 180 (about 30 years ago), I wore a size 18. NOW, at 180, I wear a size 14! Oh, and it seems to me that back then, a size 18 was called a "Large". Now, the 14 is called a Large! Does anyone else remember back then, 30 years ago? Is my memory playing tricks, or have the sizes actually changed??

LesIsMoreXX

A lot of sizes have changed and also, every brand has its' own size specification chart so you could go into one store and be a size 10 and another store and be a 14 etc. It's so annoying!

aalpass

It's retail companies trying to be smarth. 30 years ago i was 1 so I can't comment on the sizes then, but I do know if i walk into a store and the cute skirt only fits me in a size 16 - its not getting bought; but if the cute skirt first me in a size 10 - oh hell yeah its getting bought! (BTW I'm pretty much a standard 14).

Crochetluvr

Yes....they call it "vanity sizing". I am a size 14 now. The last time I was a size 14, I weighed 140....that was back in the mid 80's.

MyChocolateDiet

That's called "vanity sizing" stores do it so we'll be so excited that we're in a smaller size that we'll be in a better mood and hopefully spend more. If you want to track your sizes as a measure of reaching your goal find a brand and style that are pretty common, or likely never to go away, and try the same exact pair of pants same cut, same brand every time from the same store.

Mokey41

Sizes have changed considerably. They call it vanity sizing because as the population gets fatter and fatter they don't want to say they wear a 4XL so they make the clothes bigger and bigger. Huge problem if you're on the small end of the scale especially here in Canada. I'm wearing a 4 or 6 here and don't really want teen clothing but the selection of ladies clothing in those sizes is horrible.

Robin_Bin

Yes. One term for it is "vanity sizing". Stores realized that some people are flattered when they can wear a "smaller" size and more likely to buy it.

When I go to the store I can usually buy new items 2 or 3 sizes smaller than when I started here less than a year ago, but when I go back into the older items I kept, I can only go down one size. (Those clothes are usually at least 5 years old.) The older items with the same label-size are very different! I'm beginning to think I'll need to create my own labeling to know which things are truly a similar size. I'm often wearing things that are labeled at very different sizes at the same time! Sometimes, even before it was the style... I once found a size 6 and a size 14 skirt that both fit -- on the same day! The difference in that case was the way they fit on my hips (always wide even when I was low-weight) and my waist (which at the time was about 10 inches less than my hips -- want that to be true again!)

taliar93

It's a combination of vanity sizing and stores were still using manniquins from the 50s, because women were so much smaller back then an 18 was huge some companies still use them in aus as far as I know, my best example of vanity sizing would have to be city chic, I was a large with them a couple of years ago and before I started losing weight last year I was apparently a medium-small with them now, despite my measurements not changing lol

CristinaL1983

10 years ago I bought a pair of express jeans in a size 12. I weighed 153 (I'm 5'7'') and was a bit of a gym rat (aside from running 3-5 miles a day). I gained a couple pounds (5 if I remember correctly) and couldn't wear them anymore. I a currently sitting at 173 and wear a size 10. Yeah, I'd say sizes have changed even over just the past decade. I would probably be wearing a 14 or 16 if I weighed this much 10 years ago.

SandraJN

I am 5'2" and weighed 105 - 110 lbs from the late '60's into the mid 80's. I wore a size 4-6. Now it would probably be a zero, which didn't exist then. At 120 I was a size 8. Sizes have changed.

pg3ibew

A 32 waist is still a 32 waist. Men's sizes haven't changed.

BinaryPulsar

Sizes have changed considerably. They call it vanity sizing because as the population gets fatter and fatter they don't want to say they wear a 4XL so they make the clothes bigger and bigger. Huge problem if you're on the small end of the scale especially here in Canada. I'm wearing a 4 or 6 here and don't really want teen clothing but the selection of ladies clothing in those sizes is horrible.

Yes, it is difficult for people on the small end of the spectrum. A lot of stores no longer sell clothing in my size. I wear xs and a 00 now and I sure hope those don't end up being too big for me from further vanity sizing (they already are too big in some brands like at J.Crew). I'm also in Canada. I shop at Banana Republic (they have petite and small sizes). I know that I will not get any smaller. I just don't want the clothes to get bigger.

kdeaux1959

I really think it is more a function of the style more than anything. Yes, I now wear a "loose fit 32" @ 224 lbs where I used to wear a regular 34 @ 170 lbs... Of course, I actually AM smaller than I used to be at 225 since I initiated weight training... Some styles I can wear up to a 36 in but most styles I am squarely in 34. Depends on the style.

shariannamarie

There is also "stretch denim" nowadays that allows you to fit not smaller sizes..

BinaryPulsar

There is also "stretch denim" nowadays that allows you to fit not smaller sizes..

This is true also.

kdeaux1959

and on a side note, when I was 344, I wore the upper sizes of the clothing available on the shelf... I am actually not concerned that I may drop below what is available in regular stores (before I get my body fat percentage where I am trying to achieve)... Interesting problem..

Aviva92

A 32 waist is still a 32 waist. Men's sizes haven't changed.

I thought that I read somewhere that they have changed for men too and 32 doesn't necessarily mean a 32 waist anymore like it used to.

fitfreakymom

THey make sizes bigger to make people feel better about themselves and then that person will go back and buy more clothes from that brand.

BinaryPulsar

I really think it is more a function of the style more than anything. Yes, I now wear a "loose fit 32" @ 224 lbs where I used to wear a regular 34 @ 170 lbs... Of course, I actually AM smaller than I used to be at 225 since I initiated weight training... Some styles I can wear up to a 36 in but most styles I am squarely in 34. Depends on the style.

Well, I am a petite woman. They also don't sell my shoes size in most stores. Most stores start at a size 6 shoe size for women. So, some people are just smaller framed. I know I will not get smaller, but if the clothes get bigger, then my size will change from that alone.

pg3ibew

A 32 waist is still a 32 waist. Men's sizes haven't changed.

I thought that I read somewhere that they have changed for men too and 32 doesn't necessarily mean a 32 waist anymore like it used to.

Not sure about that. I put a tape around my waist and come up with 31". I put on 32" pants and there is an inch to spare. Whether they are jeans, dockers, slacks or suit pants. There doesn't seem to be the size variances like women's clothing.

CharlesLadd

The real size change has been the size of the plate! Today's dinner plate is notably larger. Our concept of a serving has been adversely affected as a result.

When I was in college, back when MacDonalds was bragging they had sold a few million sandwiches (early 60s), we used to buy two regular hamburgers, an order of fries and a coke for less than $1.00. The fries were no larger and possibly smaller than the small size now, and the hamburgers were the basic variety (with chopped onion, catsup and mustard). That would leave many of us feeling unfed now.

The measurement that counts is the inch or centimeter, the pound or kilogram, not the clothing size. Ignore that little tag. Try it on, and if it fits, buy it. If the size tag bothers you, just cut it out. It's not about what covers it, it is about what it covers.

fitfreakymom

Stores like sears do not seem to vanity size but the garage and zellers do

cuterbee

Back in the 50s, a size 12 meant a 30.5 inch bust with correspondingly small waist and hip (I'm not sure where my vintage patterns are, or I'd get those measurements for you). The size 10s I wore in the 70s fit my adult daughter who wears a size 4 in today's sizes. Women's clothing sizes change constantly.

fitfreakymom

I think they should have left the sizes alone, if you are a 4x then you are a 4x, if you are a 2 then you are a2

Klem4

Yup... just go to a vintage store and try on the size you currently wear, bet it won't fit. lol. Its super annoying how sizes are not very standardized. I admit though, I get caught up in it still. Still lusting and trying to move towards that size 4 tag. :-P

Robin_Bin

I really think it is more a function of the style more than anything. Yes, I now wear a "loose fit 32" @ 224 lbs where I used to wear a regular 34 @ 170 lbs... Of course, I actually AM smaller than I used to be at 225 since I initiated weight training... Some styles I can wear up to a 36 in but most styles I am squarely in 34. Depends on the style.

For women's sizes this used to be true. For instance, woman with a big bust might wear a smaller size in an item that was looser there. As I said above, on a single day, I've fit into clothes that were 4 sizes apart because of different styles.

But it truly is a matter of different sizes now. Like the original poster, and as I said above, I have older clothes in my closet, and unless they magically shrunk as they hung there, they are still very different from the clothes I can buy in similar styles (sometimes even the same brands) now. This trend is fairly well documented (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanity_sizing, http://www.webmd.com/healthy-beauty/features/vanity-sizing, http://shine.yahoo.com/fashion/what-size-are-you-really-the-truth-behind-vanity-sizing-2532831.html), although there is some disagreement and some argue, as you do, that the styles are changing (mostly with "loose fit" and stretchable cloth to accommodate a larger population) or that it's a myth (http://www.vanitysizing.com). Some women's stores, like Chico's, have given up on trying to match a changing "standard" and created their own, new sizing.

fitfreakymom

It's like cookbooks if you look at a cookie recipie in a new cook book and compare the same recipie to one in a cook book from 20 yrs ago the older makes more cookies with the same amount of ingredients.

I have a book here from around the 70's and one from a couple yrs ago and compared a chocolate chip cookie recipie and the older one made about a dozen more cookies.

Robin_Bin

The real size change has been the size of the plate! Today's dinner plate is notably larger. Our concept of a serving has been adversely affected as a result.
...

Very true. (As was also pointed out in the posting about cookbook portions. Thanks for pointing that out!)
One term for this is "portion distortion". Do a Web search for lots of interesting examples, or take the quiz at http://www.choosemyplate.gov/supertracker-tools/portion-distortion.html.

I hope this isn't a spoiler for the quiz, but one example is that a standard muffin in 1984 was 1.5 ounces or 210 calories, but in 2004 it was 3.3 times larger at 5 ounces and 500 calories! (Again, if you look on the Web, you'll find many other examples of how "standard" portions have changed. No wonder there's a growing problem with weight!)

catmanor

Oh yes sizes have changed.. back when Cindy Crawford was the top model she was a size 10 and that was "the perfect size" now days she would be classed as a plus sized model..

Talk about screwed up!!

altinker

Yep, it's called vanity sizing. Look it up. Somebody can go to K-Mart and buy size 6 clothes and then go to Nordstrom and buy size 2's that are too big. Bra sizes have also seemed to change as well.

BrendaLee

Most definitely! You really see the difference when you start trying on vintage clothing.