You must log in or # to comment.
This is one of many reasons I don’t buy textbook economics of capitalism.
For example, if they’d just put lots of pockets in women’s clothing decades ago as standard, they’d have sold SOOOO much.
This idea that capitalism and the free hand of the market will gravitate towards bulk of demand is bullshit.
Capitalism’s goal is profits. Not helping the customer, selling more, or anything else. We’re in late-stage capitalism, so it is ‘Profits Uber Alles’.
I read a thing (not sure if it’s true) that the reason there’s no pockets in women’s clothing is that women have more diverse body shapes than men. Pockets are designed not to interrupt the lines of the garment where possible - it’s more straightforward to place men’s pockets because they’re going to be in a more predictable place when worn Vs women where it ends up making the clothes fit poorly.
where it ends up making the clothes fit poorly
a.k.a makes the clothes fit anything but skin-tight because the pockets need space so the clothes have to be wider-cut
That seems like an oversimplification, outside looking in for me, but there’s no way a single dimension could ever adequately describe an item of clothing - my sister and wife have similar sized waists, but something tight round the posterior on my wife would be baggy on my sister.
I use to work retail selling (mostly) women clothes. At one point we had the same model of sundress with and without pockets. Every one of them that was watching or trying the one without got like super hyped and excited when we told them we had it with pockets. The pocketless one still sold better. And it wasn’t even a tight fitting dress, it was slack and baggy.
Unfortunately, I’m pretty sure that this is one instance that validates the textbook approach. In addition to the comment here, I had read several on the red site several years ago, one I remember from a buyer for a chain of outdoor gear stores, and another from the owner of a boutique clothing store. Both said that they tried to get women’s clothing with real pockets, but eventually gave up because it just doesn’t sell.
This topic came up in a group of my sailor friends on a boat last week, and ironically, all of the women’s garments had good pockets, so they couldn’t provide an example. But then, they were all wearing utilitarian clothing, rather than stylish. One friend had just bought new pants from REI; I’ve noticed for decades that if you want real pockets, shop at REI.
For what it’s worth, stylish, form-fitting men’s clothing also has tiny, or no pockets.
I knew it! I’m not crazy!
I ordered new shoes last week, same size as always of course. They’re at least two sizes too large. WTF?
This isn’t just a problem with women’s jeans which have arbitrary size numbers. Even men’s jeans which are size by the actual waist and inseam measurement can be wrong. In addition to vanity sizing, cheaper jeans are also made from larger material cuts out of the patterns at the same time to save manufacturing cost sometimes twice as many as shown here:
Those at the top or bottom of the stack may end up a bit smaller or a bit larger than the pattern, but they all get marked with the same size.
Whether it was this manufacturing problem or vanity sizing, this is why I stopped buying Old Navy jeans. I could pick out 3 jeans all labeled with the same size and one would fit okay, one would be too small, and one too large. I have never had this problem with Eddie Bauer jeans.
The ultimate jeans post
This is fascinating! thanks for the pics, it makes so much sense.
The only question is why they are making jeans with wax instead of denim
Is that then called a jeack?
Even men’s jeans which are size by the actual waist and inseam measurement can be wrong.
They’re not generally sized by the actual waist measurement. I wear 33W and my pants all measure about 36" around the belt line. The “waist” measurement derives from many decades ago when men wore high-waisted pants where the waist was a few inches smaller than the circumference around the hips, where waistlines are today. Men were also generally a lot fitter back then, too!
Holy shit. This man jeans.
Dickes’s work pants are always like this, horribly inconsistent. But they were cheap and they last forever so you just have to grab a pile of the same size, try them all on and buy the ones that fit. Good luck ordering online…
And then imagine how it feels like to shop for clothes if your body doesn’t even conform to the expected average norms.
I god damn hate it. Stuff is either too wide or too short, the sleeves are NEVER long enough, the only available shoes that fit and don’t feel like torture are jogging shoes or sneakers, the neck width is never sufficient (unless you buy men’s clothes, which will look like a tent because tits weren’t part of the equasion)…
Uuugh, I hate shopping for clothes. -.-
You should be super angry about this. First, clothes sizing is based off of a size 4 fit model let’s call her Gwen. Gwen is the designers idea of the perfect woman. She’s usually white, and she has perfect proportions. All the jeans from the brand are sized up from Gwen’s butt. Clothes are made to fit Gwen, not you, and when you go into the shop, things don’t fit, we always blame ourselves and our bodies. Even though the clothes were never intended to fit us they were intended to fit Gwen.
And guess what. When standard sizes were first measured at least in the US, they purposely excluded women of color. So the basis of sizing is completely biased.
The only positive, there are now a bunch of independent sewing pattern companies that have more diverse fits of clothing. Sewing and tailoring and pattern drafting are the best way to stop supporting all the companies that produce fast, racist fashion. If you want to make affordable clothing, look for a creative reuse store for inexpensive fabric to practice on. There’s tons of free information on YouTube to learn sewing.
As a 160cm guy, s sized shirt for guy is so baggy for me but s sized shirt for woman is just right. And buying s sized made in country A is different size than s sized made in country B.
What is this inconsistent shiteThose differences actually make sense to me. If you try to sell pants with the same length inseam in Honduras and the Netherlands, you’ll either prop up the local tailoring industry or fail. Those at least have an inseam measurement, but a medium shirt is going to have to be made for different proportions as well.
I think men’s and women’s sizes could be adapted to be more focused on body shape and less on gender, but I get where they’re coming from. Women are on average smaller than men, so a women’s medium will similarly be smaller than a men’s medium.
They could just use measurements. Even with elastic materials just give a range. Remembering a few numbers is not difficult for most people
Yes, though you would have to remember more numbers if you’re not making gendered sizes, things like the diameter of the arm hole and the distance between the neck and shoulder, but it’s not like there’s no way to do it. It’s just easier for clothing companies to gender clothes and most people don’t care enough to do anything about it.
People’s clothes would probably fit a lot better though.
You only need a few numbers really, and a small table printed on the label would be easy enough. At the end of the day a company is going to produce a limited number of patterns. Probably still only going to get xs/s/m/l/xl/xx… So roughly 7 patterns. In any case, having the numbers can tell you whether a m or a s will be choking you or a comfortable fit, whether it will constrict your arm motion, or be an unintentional crop top. It just demands more quality control from the manufacturer and honest labeling which is antithetical to their interests (getting people into the store, errant purchases, etc…)
Yeah but, shoe industry at least have the consistent going on…sort of.
As someone from south east asia, my size is like below average even for asian standard, which mean i can’t expect to buy cloth and fit if i visit europe or US. Cloth from Uniqlo kinda fit me tho but i guess their shirt might be unisex.
Yeah, that’s got to be difficult. I’m in the opposite boat, as a 178 cm tall woman. I struggled finding dresses that were long enough in the US, but upon moving to central Europe, I have no issues at all (and my size shoe doesn’t run out within a day of being restocked anymore). I basically just don’t buy clothing made by Asian companies unless I can try it on in person first. People joke about “big bones,” but I’ve got a BMI of 20 and I have tried on XL and XXL sizes that don’t go over my shoulders.
I don’t remember ever buying cloth/shoe i can’t try first, because i need to know how loose it gonna be 🤣
Even for men’s clothes the sizing seems to only really be consistent within the same item, maybe brand. Even though they’re supposed to be measurements you still have to try everything on.
Really? I’ve been buying the same size of trousers since I stopped growing. And I only went up one size for some upper body garments because I put on quite a bit of muscle.
I was buying pants the other day and I was a 34 in one brand and a 36 in another.
I was in a clothing store last week that only started at L for mens clothing. Theres also a shoe store closeby that only sells mens shoes for 40 (EU) and above.
Like wtf, there are plenty of men that are smaller than 180cm and that have small feet. At least give me some options. These are the same stores that complain that everybody orders their shit online nowadays.
Yeah! Last time I go into a store called “Destination XL.”
(I’m joking, I saw the rest of your comments about this.)
Maybe those are specifically for big people, it’s really hard for them to find suitable sizes in regular stores.
No, it was a normal store from a german name brand. They had one jacket in S and one shirt in M. Even the employee said that its just a shitty order policy by their bosses.
A shitty order policy or just knowing their regular customers?
The employee told me that there are tons of other men having the same problem at that store. Just because 80% of your customers wear L or larger doesn’t mean you shouldnt stock any inventory for the 20% that wear S or M.
We haven’t even talked about kids clothing yet…ohhh boyyy does that one suck
Being the kid sucks worse
You’re dragged around the store as a living mannequin, while simultaneously being bored out of your mind
“outside straight sizes” wat? they have gay sizes too?
Shopping for trousers as a fat kid before elastic waistbands became mainstream on “regular” clothes was an extended humiliation. “The waist is too tight! the legs are too long!” No, I’m just fucking deformed because I’m fat.
I used to be a “husky” kid. Now I have the opposite problem - so difficult to find 34x34 in thrift shops/marketplace. Seems everyone my height has more waistline than inseam.
I’d smarm it up with “what’s wrong with a belt/bracers” but having lost weight (then regained it) the amount of folding over that can happen for trousers that are for people much bigger than you can be quite uncomfortable
Straight sizes (xs - xxxl) vs Plus sizes (0x - 5x)
Designers create garments for one size (typically Large), and then scale it down and up for the other sizes, but above a certain threshold that doesn’t proportion correctly, so plus sizes are scaled from 2x.
The term “straight” here was originally opposed to curved.
I refuse to allow anyone else to buy clothes for me
I just want to see more women’s clothes with pockets.
That’s funny, I’m over here wishing for men’s clothes with less pockets
How dare you make such a dangerous wish.
There are plenty of men’s pants with just the front and rear pockets!
Big pockets! Bigger than a chapstick
Sew your own
There’s a ton of tutorials on YT, and a basic sewing machine is like $80
(Not to say that women’s pants shouldn’t have decent pockets, just that you’re not forced to deal with them)
While true, it’s hardly fair that I, as a man, don’t need to learn to sew, buy a sewing machine , spend time getting materials or actually doing the sewing in order to have good pockets. My pants just come with good pockets.
Yes, but men’s clothes come with the other issues, too. I just started sewing my own pants because I couldn’t find a pair that was in the right spot between good fit and style, affordability, quality and not being made under exploitive labour conditions.
While that’s certainly true, I don’t think that doesn’t apply to women’s clothing as well nor does it change that women’s clothing not having pockets is kinda bullshit, even though you can technically add your own after the fact.
It would be more of a “yes, but…” Situation if women’s clothing that didn’t have pockets always fit perfectly and hit all the criteria you mentioned. They have that problem and they don’t get pockets.and not being made under exploitive labour conditions.
It’s that last one that’ll get you.
I’m time, space, and cash poor. I just want clothes I can wear.
That takes time, the rare spare time not everyone has and not everyone wants to spend on makeing bought product useful.
I don’t understand why women say this, then buy clothes without pockets (or without useful pockets).
Because often the options are non existant
I really want a law that requires clothes sizes to use actual, verifiable measurements.
yeah hope they’ll get right on that, add it to the list. we’ve already got one on the list: pass a law saying you cant shrink portion sizes on your labels until you can say “zero calories” in each of 1000 servings of oil
Its not hard to have a waist circumference then short/mid/long. I think that’s how overalls are sized - in practice its try them on & allow for shrinkage after a couple of washes.
Men’s pants too. And at the same store, by the EXACT SAME maker.
I have 34’s, 36’s and 38’s in different colours and materials. They all fit comfortably, and if i get different sizes in those particular styles, they’re either too big or too small.
Make it make sense, please.
That’s just poor quality control.
Yes, that’s exactly what it is.
Which brand has good quality control?
Not Levi’s lol.
I just got some women’s Levi’s and holy crap it was hard to find the size. I’m about 38-31-41 in inches and 5’9" often jeans fit in a “29” sometimes 28, or 30.
I ordered the 29. Hips fit but waist measurement was 25", what the actual fuck? Who has a 24" waist and 41" hips? Is that even possible?
I ended up with a 31 but they really are too loose everywhere. So comfortable and were cheap so I kept them but WTF, Levi’s?
I’ve literally purchased 2 identical pairs and they’ve still been different sizes
You gained weight after the first purchase, and then converted the fat to muscle in the second purchase
Schrodinger’s body composition: fat or muscle depending on what pair of pants you wear.
One relevant fact about men’s pants is that the W (waist) size dates from the 1930s and 1940s when men wore high-waisted pants. The actual waist measurement was always about 3" smaller than the circumference around the hips; as the waistline of men’s pants migrated downwards to where it is today, manufacturers kept the nominal W measurement of how big the waistline would have been if it had still been higher. I generally wear pants with a 33W but the actual circumference around the belt line is always around 36". It’s not vanity sizing so much as anachronistic sizing.
There was a comedian a few decades ago who had a routine about how the aging process in men means your pants start migrating up towards your neck, but in reality it was just old men continuing to wear the kind of pants they had gotten used to as young men. It’s a common phenomenon - I work with a bunch of women in their late 50s and early 60s and they all still have feathered haircuts like women did in the late 1970s and 1980s.
Forces women to go to store to try on, stay there longer to find a good fit. Ensure makeup, perfumes, bags/accessories, and jewelry are always in eyeshot of the women’s clothing racks and along the entry/exit paths.
It’s not woman-exclusive and also the companies deciding the sizing are not the same as the companies running department stores (for large clothing brands these days, online shopping in their own store would be optimal, since retailers take a large cut).
It’s mainly that making sure sizes are actually the same costs more money than just going with whatever comes out, and it’s hard to make purchasing decisions based on size consistency once a large amount of brands do this.
Thank you
I feel this. Even for jeans, where measurements are given, it can be tricky to get them right. Oftentimes, the cut makes all the difference. In the end, that’s the design of the garment and that might fit your body or not. I think designers should have all the freedom in the world making their jeans tighter or looser, higher or lower at the spots they want but a better description would reduce returns for online stores a lot.
Though, I’ve seen some stores which put serious effort into this, allowing you to enter body measurements and then showing how it might fit you with a sketch or allowing you to compare it with another pair of jeans.
Tbh, online shopping clothes has never been a good idea. I don’t know how it became so popular when it is so much extra effort to find clothes that actually fit without gathering a huge collection of pieces that don’t.
Stores rarely have the sizes I need. Shoes and clothes are a pain to find… but when I find something I buy the same thing online over and over again until I can’t get it anywhere anymore. It’s easier than going to the stores and realizing they don’t have it anymore.
Over the years I’ve also gathered a few brands that make clothes I like, I understood their sizing scheme and are not fast fashion. It’s easier to search online what I want and then order it to the store.
