I think the issue is that clothing designers don't really see themselves as out to make money. They see themselves as artists. They have an idea of what they want their clothes to look like that is more important to them than increasing profits.
It makes sense that carrying more sizes would increase profit, but then I know Old Navy shunted their plus size stuff online. Was that a brand decision or was it honestly not selling? It doesn't really matter what size the average woman wears if the people buying clothing aren't distributed across sizes the same way.
@clevernamehere: A common complaint among plus sized fashion designers and specialty boutiques is that plus sized women don't speak with their wallets. We complain about designers not offering clothes in our sizes, but when it comes down to it, plus women overwhelmingly tend to spend less money on clothes. However, that really doesn't explain why Old Navy moved their plus line to online only.
I wonder if part of the reason why plus sizes are disappearing is the popularity of online shopping. It doesn't make much sense to not try anything on if you are having fit problems. However, I can wear anything from an 18 in regular misses sizes to a 22w or 25 in juniors plus. There is no standardization. Sometimes it is more convenient to order online than to waste hours at the mall, hoping that a store has my size.
@psychgirl1221: I'm within the "normal" range of sizes and I like to do a lot of online shopping because I can try things on at home with pieces I already own. I only usually do it when I can get free shipping though.
I was really surprised when the plus sizes disappeared from the Old Navy in NYC because they seem to do crazy business in every section, but I tend to doubt they would get rid of a profitable division. Old Navy isn't Donna Karan- there is no image. I would guess that some women are uncomfortable with their size and don't like to shop, some do what I do, and because plus sized women tend to be older, they have more clothes to begin with.
Re: sizing. Sizing isn't standardized well, but what you're describing doesn't surprise me. Juniors is designed to be the smallest (and shortest) since it is meant for teens- an 8 in juniors is supposed to be smaller than an 8 in misses.
@psychgirl1221: "Plus size women don't vote with their wallets" is the biggest whiny buck passing ever. We are voting with our wallets- we don't like any of the ugly overpriced shit you grudgingly halfassedly don't even TRY to sell us. Because it doesn't fit and it doesn't look good because a size 18 woman is not a size 2 twinkie just made bigger.
(Like, for example, why do they make size 20 daisy dukes? Why does Sears corporate buy as many of them as they do for size 2, and then when they don't sell, designers' take-away is that fat women don't buy clothes.)
Fuck you, Angela Missoni. This makes me want to squeeze into the smallest size you have and walk around yelling "I AM WEARING MISSONI AND I'M FAT!!! MISSONI LUVS FAT PEOPLE"
The only problem with this plan is that it would require me to actually buy your clothes.
Someone here once said (and if it was you, please identify yourself so I can heart you) that the issue of plus sized clothing was like the battle between greed and vanity, and vanity won out. Because if these designers were greedy, they'd look at the plus sized demographic and their eyes would go $$!!!
@rodmanstreet: That was me, but I stole it from another commenter a very long time ago and tweaked it a bit. I think what a posted (and what I think every time I see posts on clothing and plus sizes) is that it is our love of the dollar and our love of thinness coming smack dab against each other. It amazes me that a love of thinness (or hatred of fatness) is what is strongest in the end because I thought nothing could trump American's love of the almighty dollar.
I don't get what's wrong with the Missoni quote. The rest of them yes, but not that one. I cannot count the number of times I have been pushed into buying something by salespeople just trying to make a sale only to wind up donating it unworn because it in fact looks like crap. I'd rather you tell me it looks like crap so I don't waste my money on it and point me towards something else than that.
@colormeroutine: The problem is that she specifically uses women "squeezed into an outfit" as an example of someone wearing ill fitting clothes. If she had left it at, "I don't want women to wear ill-fitting clothes," there would be no problem with the quote. However, because she chooses to focus on larger women trying to fit into a smaller size (as opposed to the myriad of short, tall or thin women that wear garments that don't fit) she is singling out fat women and revealing the true intention of her message which is, "I don't want fat people to wear my outfits."
@Vivelafat says Sweep the leg, Johnny.: It's not just fat women who squeeze themselves into the wrong clothes. My former roommate was a size 6 but had all of her fat concentrated around the belly and top of the hips, and didn't pay any attention to fit. She would constantly buy clothes that were not right for her, so they were either falling off or cutting into her. I also see "skinny girls" all the time with muffin tops in their mall-shuffling jeans.
@noisy doll: Look at the wording in your comment, "all of her fat was concentrated around the belly" and "muffin-tops in their mall-shuffling jeans." While both of these phrases may not be specific to fat women, they are about fat. It's not just that she doesn't want fat people in her outfits, she doesn't want the people who wear her clothes to have fat.
@Vivelafat says Sweep the leg, Johnny.: That's probably the best way to put it, yeah. I think it's kind of ridiculous that it's not even enough to simply be small in measurements, but you also can't be squishy in any way to look good in so many designers' clothes. Particularly jeans. I mostly can't stand jeans, even though I wear them as often as anyone else. grr.
Even when you can fit into stuff, though, most things in the malls and shops are aimed at such a narrow, narrow group of girls.
Every time there's a miserable retailer "didn't hit our target" report, I just want to slap them all and shout, "I had money and NO WHERE TO SPEND IT, you MORONS!"
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to wear clothes meant for a 17-year-old sylph. It is neither age- nor lifestyle-appropriate for me, and the only other options are active wear and suits -- what about just regular clothes that don't show my boobs to my coworkers?
Gap used to be pretty good for me, but they've decided providing awesome, wearable jeans for people who don't look good OR don't want to go around in denim leggings is not the direction they want to go in.
@JennaW: the gap completely re-made and re-vamped their denim line this fall. it is incredible. i hated their jeans for years but tried them out because i was bored while my husband was looking for good khakis. they actually have a variety of styles to correspond with a variety of body types and the denim is very high quality. this is coming from a jean snob who usually only wears j brand, paper denim and paige premium.
@awinoforever: Well, *I* liked them before. But from what they're showing on their website, they seem to have eliminated the styles I liked best without a good correlative replacement.
However, I'll go have an actual try-on to be fair, since you say they're awesome now (still? And because they were my go-to, and I hate having start over for basics and classic stuff).
@JennaW: i thought you meant you liked them before the second to last revamp? they've redone the line so much in the last ten years i guess it's hard to keep track!
but i would def give it a shot. i personally loved the "long and lean" cuts, "curvy" fit was nice as well. beware of the skinny though! i'll let youfigure out who that's clearly supposed to be for.
@awinoforever: Yes! I had totally sworn off Gap jeans for years, because their shit was a nightmare on my body. This fall I discovered that all my usual favorites changed their denim fits to be all wrong on me (screw you, Ann Taylor Loft!) but the Gap went the other way and made jeans that fit me perfectly. I tried on about 6 styles and they all fit correctly where they should. I wish the denim itself was higher quality, but I can't complain about the cuts and styles.
@kerry: I think that Gap went to the same cuts that Banana uses, which makes me happy because for years Banana has been the only company I buy jeans at. I always found it odd that Gap's jeans were awful on me but Banana was great and they were owned by the same company. It was weird.
@awinoforever: I've worn Diesel for years and they fit well, but I bought a couple of pairs of J Brand when Bloomingdales had a denim sale. They fit so strangely! They are super-tight on my thighs, but loose on my butt. My butt is kind of large-ish, and I am far from used to pulling up my pants. It feels like I'm wearing a diaper. Is this just the way they fit? Because I am not a fan.
Honestly, and I am saying this from experience, a lot of people who enter into the fashion industry are self-loathing. Probably has a lot to do with it in the end. They just convince themselves that it's a financial decision or that their market will not support it.
I think that's being overly harsh of Tory and not nearly harsh enough on Stella. Tory likes seeing women feel good in her clothes (presumably why they wear them) and has a added a size rare in higher end clothing to her line. Kudos (if insufficient). Stella has been told by women that they can't wear her clothes and she has done precisely nada.
@bluebears: Yes, there are a lot more J.Crew-ish looks around now. They changed the head designer. They still have the fairly boring, classic workwear. But now there are more fashion-forward items now. (Think lots of ruffles.)
@femme-bot: A designer 14 is different than regular 14. A designer 14 may be a regular 12.
I've lost weight in the past 2 years. I've gone down a size or two in the low-to-mid designers. But I still wear the same size in designer clothing (bought at a discount!).
@lilyHaze: Hm, in my experience some designers (ahem, Marc Jacobs) run pretty big and I sometimes need to go down a size or two. But yeah, some others can run small.
@lermanzo: Yeah...that figure may be kind of misleading though since (as I think I saw on here in a linked article) that is a true average- meaning it takes in EVERYONE on both ends of the spectrum and pops out this size. For retail purposes, you would want to look more at what your biggest group is, and provide clothing based on that group. I think that is the 6-10 range, so by targetting this group you get the most number of people who will want your clothes, then go a few sizes smaller and a few larger.
This may not be true, but judging by experience of shopping sales (where you usually find the tiniest and largest sizes on the racks) I can see it being the case. If you think of it this way it does make a bit more sense why designers wouldn't feel tons of pressure to extend their lines sizes to go into plus sizes or petites.
@LaFemme: well, what about me? i'm not plus-sized, either. a 2005 article from the chicago trib (can't find it, only references) says 62% of women are over size 14.
and in my experience, the only clothes that fit me are mom clothes from mom stores. also, the sale racks i see are STUFFED with 2s, 6s, and 10s
@lermanzo: I didn't say that if if designers are targetting the largest groupings of sizes it wouldnt suck hard for a whole bunch of people, it does. I am in between size ranges, and it blows to have to sometimes pay the cost of a top in alterations alone. I just don't think every designer and clothing store out there is ignoring their bottom lines by not offering sizes 0000-30.
@femme-bot: That's the trditional wisdom - the more high class the clothes, the smaller the size. Most women are shocked that their wedding dress is the smallest thing they'll ever buy in their life.
Also: she 'ushered in' heroin chic? Srsly? Heroin chic began in the 90s/earlier, and she only dated a smack addict- I thought she was supposed to be 'Cocaine Kate.' Urgh!
Tbh, I really, really hate this statement, but I did also think that Kate Moss was maybe being more than a little tongue in cheek. That's not to discredit the idiocy of such a statement, but she does seem the type to make flippant statements like that purely because it is sort-of expected of her.
Not sure if it's been said already, but I think when she says, "If you're beautiful on the inside, it will show on the outside" is way more damaging. It's not true, and it's a terrible thing to say.
@Kiran59: I took it along the lines of "you get the face you deserve." Meaning if you are superficially beautiful then you are internally beautiful, and vice versa. Now, I'm sure she didn't mean it that way, but that's the way I believe it sounds. Conversely, as a non-anorectic, I actually always took the phrase "nothing tastes as good as thin feels" as a mantra to prevent oneself from overeating and/or as encouragement to practice discipline when planning meals. But I totally see how people with ED would take it the way they do.
It's hard to please everyone, which is why I'm not really pissed at her for saying any of this stuff, because I don't think she meant harm to anyone. Everyone takes what they hear and applies it in their own unique way. But I just think of all the less conventionally beautiful people in the world and wonder how a statement like that would make them feel, coming from a supermodel.
@bananaballs: I don't understand how her statement could be read as positive in any sense. 'Overeating'? 'Discipline in planning meals'? What do those even mean? A person with healthy eating habits eats a wide range of foods, and eats until he or she is reasonably satisfied. What would constitute 'over'-eating or 'un'-disciplined eating?
The way Moss' statement contrasts eating with thinness also perpetuates the idea that weight is determined by food intake; i.e., that it's possible (and good) to get/stay 'thin' by eating less -- certainly not true for a huge proportion of the population.
@Vidya108: I wasn't trying to convey that her statement was positive. To me, and FOR me, "overeating" means eating past the point where you are full, and being disciplined means making healthful choices, balanced meals, etc. That's what those terms mean to me, and I apologize for any confusion.
I agree with you that that phrase probably shouldn't be used very often, but I was just making a point that her original statement is something I would never say. It's not like I was qualifying the one thing with the other.
@bananaballs: "To me, and FOR me, "overeating" means eating past the point where you are full, and being disciplined means making healthful choices, balanced meals, etc. That's what those terms mean to me"
I don't know that that's necessarily a problem. I think the problem arises from the assumption that if one has those habits, one will automatically be thin. That's not the case, nor is its inverse -- if you 'overeat' and don't make 'healthful choices', you will automatically be 'fat' -- true.
I know you know some people who eat huge amounts of junk all the time and are rail-thin.
(If you don't, I can introduce you to several of my annoying cousins.)
I'm also sure you know the purported definition of 'fat' varies, in the U.S. practically according to coast. Someone who's deemed 'skinny' at size 4 in the midwest can also be perceived as 'fat' in Beverly Hills.
It's the linkage between eating habits and body size that's at issue in your statement. Correlation doesn't equal causation.
@Scout: You can save your $5 for a trip over to California. I used to live near LA, and believe me, plenty of boys there tell girls to lose weight, or suggest that girls shouldn't eat this or that. They believe that skinny girls are happier... and probably cheaper to take out to dinner.
Kate doesn't know better. The drugs have taken their toll.
My biggest issue with this statement, and what it suggests, is that you need to deny yourself to be "skinny"...or that you'll feel better as a person if you match the ideal body type, regardless of whether it's actually healthy for you or not. Maybe being skinny doesn't feel good to people, not because of what they eat, but because that's not healthy for their body.
Plus, I'm not sure we know how skinny feels in a vacuum. We value and idealize certain body types over others. So psychologically, meeting the beauty ideal may "feel good"...but it might not be achieved in a healthy way, or actually be healthy, or result in actually feeling good so much as feeling like we meet the ideal.
11/24/09
It makes sense that carrying more sizes would increase profit, but then I know Old Navy shunted their plus size stuff online. Was that a brand decision or was it honestly not selling? It doesn't really matter what size the average woman wears if the people buying clothing aren't distributed across sizes the same way.
11/24/09
I wonder if part of the reason why plus sizes are disappearing is the popularity of online shopping. It doesn't make much sense to not try anything on if you are having fit problems. However, I can wear anything from an 18 in regular misses sizes to a 22w or 25 in juniors plus. There is no standardization. Sometimes it is more convenient to order online than to waste hours at the mall, hoping that a store has my size.
11/24/09
I was really surprised when the plus sizes disappeared from the Old Navy in NYC because they seem to do crazy business in every section, but I tend to doubt they would get rid of a profitable division. Old Navy isn't Donna Karan- there is no image. I would guess that some women are uncomfortable with their size and don't like to shop, some do what I do, and because plus sized women tend to be older, they have more clothes to begin with.
Re: sizing. Sizing isn't standardized well, but what you're describing doesn't surprise me. Juniors is designed to be the smallest (and shortest) since it is meant for teens- an 8 in juniors is supposed to be smaller than an 8 in misses.
11/24/09
(Like, for example, why do they make size 20 daisy dukes? Why does Sears corporate buy as many of them as they do for size 2, and then when they don't sell, designers' take-away is that fat women don't buy clothes.)
11/24/09
The only problem with this plan is that it would require me to actually buy your clothes.
11/24/09
11/25/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/24/09
Every time there's a miserable retailer "didn't hit our target" report, I just want to slap them all and shout, "I had money and NO WHERE TO SPEND IT, you MORONS!"
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to wear clothes meant for a 17-year-old sylph. It is neither age- nor lifestyle-appropriate for me, and the only other options are active wear and suits -- what about just regular clothes that don't show my boobs to my coworkers?
Gap used to be pretty good for me, but they've decided providing awesome, wearable jeans for people who don't look good OR don't want to go around in denim leggings is not the direction they want to go in.
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
However, I'll go have an actual try-on to be fair, since you say they're awesome now (still? And because they were my go-to, and I hate having start over for basics and classic stuff).
Thanks!
11/24/09
11/24/09
but i would def give it a shot. i personally loved the "long and lean" cuts, "curvy" fit was nice as well. beware of the skinny though! i'll let youfigure out who that's clearly supposed to be for.
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/25/09
#tips
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
I've lost weight in the past 2 years. I've gone down a size or two in the low-to-mid designers. But I still wear the same size in designer clothing (bought at a discount!).
11/24/09
11/24/09
This may not be true, but judging by experience of shopping sales (where you usually find the tiniest and largest sizes on the racks) I can see it being the case. If you think of it this way it does make a bit more sense why designers wouldn't feel tons of pressure to extend their lines sizes to go into plus sizes or petites.
11/24/09
and in my experience, the only clothes that fit me are mom clothes from mom stores. also, the sale racks i see are STUFFED with 2s, 6s, and 10s
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/24/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/20/09
I think that quote you mentioned is just one to encourage inner beauty and not worry too much about weight. I find it much more healthy then this one.
11/20/09
It's hard to please everyone, which is why I'm not really pissed at her for saying any of this stuff, because I don't think she meant harm to anyone. Everyone takes what they hear and applies it in their own unique way. But I just think of all the less conventionally beautiful people in the world and wonder how a statement like that would make them feel, coming from a supermodel.
11/20/09
The way Moss' statement contrasts eating with thinness also perpetuates the idea that weight is determined by food intake; i.e., that it's possible (and good) to get/stay 'thin' by eating less -- certainly not true for a huge proportion of the population.
11/20/09
I agree with you that that phrase probably shouldn't be used very often, but I was just making a point that her original statement is something I would never say. It's not like I was qualifying the one thing with the other.
11/21/09
I don't know that that's necessarily a problem. I think the problem arises from the assumption that if one has those habits, one will automatically be thin. That's not the case, nor is its inverse -- if you 'overeat' and don't make 'healthful choices', you will automatically be 'fat' -- true.
I know you know some people who eat huge amounts of junk all the time and are rail-thin.
(If you don't, I can introduce you to several of my annoying cousins.)
I'm also sure you know the purported definition of 'fat' varies, in the U.S. practically according to coast. Someone who's deemed 'skinny' at size 4 in the midwest can also be perceived as 'fat' in Beverly Hills.
It's the linkage between eating habits and body size that's at issue in your statement. Correlation doesn't equal causation.
11/20/09
I guess both SKINNY and MEDIOCRITY sells.
11/24/09
11/24/09
Of course, boys and men make stupid statements but very rarely having to do with body image.
Kate should know better given the rampant body abuse, self-mutilation and esteem issues in her industry.
#tips
11/25/09
Kate doesn't know better. The drugs have taken their toll.
11/20/09
Plus, I'm not sure we know how skinny feels in a vacuum. We value and idealize certain body types over others. So psychologically, meeting the beauty ideal may "feel good"...but it might not be achieved in a healthy way, or actually be healthy, or result in actually feeling good so much as feeling like we meet the ideal.
11/21/09
But ... deprivation in order to please others is a requisite for the well-behaved modern woman! Where are your morals, young lady?
*has vapors, faints*
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/21/09