Fashion designers introduce less than zero sizes - Page 2

Aella · November 9th, 2006, 07:40 AM

I was all ready to be shocked by the new size, until I did the inches-to-cm conversion...and wow, it's not that outrageous. It's certainly small, but I know plenty of women and girls who are that small naturally, especially if they're short and small-boned.

I don't know much about US sizes, but the imported american clothes I've tried have tended to be MUCH larger than their European counterparts. Hell, my friend's mum is chubby and manages to comfortably fit into this "small" T-Shirt she bought in an American imports retail outlet, which is just not right.

PinkCadillac · November 15th, 2006, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by luvspink

I'm actually glad designers are starting to do this. I really don't agree with the whole misleading "subzero" title, but it's great that designers are noticing that some of their customers are more petite!

I agree with you
I dont think that all women that size are sick or anorexic. My mum is 46 years old but she's naturally very thin and petite. She eats a lot though and when she gains weight the fat just goes on her tummy. I can tell you, for her it's a nightmare buying clothes especially trousers cause they are all big for her. She has to go shopping in childrens shops to find a pair of jeans that fits well, so it's great that designers notice this

moomies · November 15th, 2006, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aella

I was all ready to be shocked by the new size, until I did the inches-to-cm conversion...and wow, it's not that outrageous. It's certainly small, but I know plenty of women and girls who are that small naturally, especially if they're short and small-boned.

I don't know much about US sizes, but the imported american clothes I've tried have tended to be MUCH larger than their European counterparts. Hell, my friend's mum is chubby and manages to comfortably fit into this "small" T-Shirt she bought in an American imports retail outlet, which is just not right.

I'm not too sure about American sizes but for me (in Canada) it really depends on the brand, I can wear and fit well into kids sizes 12-14 to adult size Large and Extra Large without looking too tight or too loose and can wear anything in between whether small or medium depending on the brand. I'm short but I'd say I'm rather chubby. I can't buy clothes just by looking at the size/number on the label, I have to try them on to see if they fit.

missbazilb · November 16th, 2006, 02:42 PM

Aside from the whole weight/obesity issue, is there also the possibility that people are getting, well, bigger? IE, my mom was 5'6" and my dad was 6'0". I'm about 5'10", my brother is 6'1" and my sister is 6'0". I know lots of my friends' parents and grandparents are teeny tiny compared to me. So, if everyone is getting taller, then would they not also get proportionately bigger in terms of waist size, etc.? I work part-time in a clothing store, and when some girls in their early 20s come in, they make me feel short!

pacific breeze · November 16th, 2006, 03:01 PM

I tend to find that American clothes fit bigger than Canadian ones. I can usually wear a size 6 in DKNY, Liz Claiborne etc., but I wear an 8 in most other brands.
I don't really care about the number as long as it fits -- I have a summer dress that I love that is a size 4, but it fits just fine and I haven't been a size 4 in 15 years or more. And I have a pair of pants that are a 10, and they also fit. Go figure.

Daphne · November 16th, 2006, 04:13 PM

I think clothing is actually getting smaller. I remember when I was 11, I tried to wear clothing in the juniors department, but I couldn't. It was all too big for me. Now I look at the clothing in the juniors department, and I could have easily worn a 0-3 at 11 (before I hit puberty and the breasts and hips came).

Somerset · November 20th, 2006, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tofucheesecake

That's so annoying and frustrating. And then the "curves are great!" advocates say "Oh, Marilyn Monroe was a size 12!" when really she was probably closer to today's size 6.

She looks like a modern day 10/12 to me. Most definitely not a 6.

MgMMD · November 20th, 2006, 03:13 PM

My friend works in the clothing industry. She is a designer. She told me the following:

Due to increased maternal nutrition and anti-smoking, etc measures for women people are bigger. Sure obesity is a problem BUT as recently as the 70's the average shoe size for a woman was a size 6. It is almost a size 8 now. Shoe size is not dependant on weight.

Maryiln Monroe was 145lbs in Some Llike it Hot. Also you can never measure celebrity size as their clothing is custom made. Also, women of that generation were girdled at a young age, which lead to smaller waists.

hotncmom · November 21st, 2006, 06:04 PM

I found the size chart for Vogue patterns, which haven't changed in many years, and it's interesting to see that the teeniest size they had was a 6. I would be a 10 to a 12 based on these measurements...and I feel like I am pretty small compared to most women (I wear a 4 to a 6 now). So there has been quite a bit of vanity sizing in recent years.

MEASUREMENTS IN INCHES
SIZE X-Small Small Medium Large X-Large XX-Large
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Chest 28 1/2 29 1/2 30 1/2 32 34 36 38 40 42 44
Bust 30 1/2 31 1/2 32 1/2 34 36 38 40 42 44 46
Waist 23 24 25 26 1/2 28 30 32 34 37 39
Hip 32 1/2 33 1/2 34 1/2 36 38 40 42 44 46 48

Well, the chart didn't come across but a 6 is considered an extra small, an 8/10 a small, a 12/14 medium, etc. Here is the link:

http://www.voguepatterns.com/tech/measure/bmisses.html

So if Marilyn was a size 12 she was still pretty small by today's standards. Look at it this way...a 6 on this chart corresponds to a size 0 today. So an 8 becomes a 2, a 10 becomes a 4, a 12 becomes a 6, etc. Marilyn in those pics above looks about a size 6 (in today's sizing) to me. She's slender and curvy but not "skinny" like those size 0 celebs. In fact, her size and body type is very approximate to my own (complete with small tummy roll when sitting). Hey, if I lived back in those days I'd have an ideal body! Imagine that

missbazilb · November 23rd, 2006, 04:09 PM

I went on to a website that said Marilyn was 5'5 1/2". She's very pretty, but her upper arms, thighs and stomach look very soft, and definitely not sickly skinny the way most actresses look today.

I'm about five inches taller than Marilyn, weigh about 145, and probably still would look like a heifer compared to today's actresses.

glamed · January 25th, 2007, 02:04 PM

I know a few people who are naturally very small and can benefit from the size 0, or maybe even 00....but these people are VERY small! But yet they still find clothes to wear before the 00. I mean, come on...Victoria Beckham and her soccer ball sized waist? I think that is just crazy! She looks too small in my eyes. I do not think a size 00 is healthy for an average person...it is really necessary? I think that is they are going to start making subzero sizes, then they need to also starting making larger sizes also. Am I the only one who thinks this?

hotncmom · January 27th, 2007, 09:55 PM

Quote:

they need to also starting making larger sizes also. Am I the only one who thinks this?

They don't need to make larger sizes! They have already vanity sized clothing (in the U.S. anyway) to the point where they have to have 00. Back in the '80's sizes started at 2, I believe. 2 was the smallest size. Somewhere between then and now they have taken what used to be an 8 and made it a 6 or even a 4. A 12 is now a 10 or an 8. So now a 2 is now a 0 or 00. Americans are fatter but still want to believe they can fit into that smaller size. So manufacturers change the tags.

I don't understand where all this obsession over sizes came from. I was a teen in the 80's and I never thought about my weight, and neither did any of my friends. Girls who starved themselves or threw up were only on afterschool specials. I never knew what size any of my friends wore and didn't care. No one bragged that they wore a 2 (the smallest size back then). The biggest body issue problems were over boob size.

Now, even my 65-year old MIL talks about how she just bought some pants that were a size 8! Like I should be impressed. All I hear about it how so-and-so is a size 0. If I wear a particularly flattering outfit people will tell me I look so thin - it's meant as a compliment but I can't help but feel weird about it. When did it become so common to discuss your jean size and worry about whether your jean size is larger or smaller than someone else's?

Pandora · January 27th, 2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aella

I was all ready to be shocked by the new size, until I did the inches-to-cm conversion...and wow, it's not that outrageous. It's certainly small, but I know plenty of women and girls who are that small naturally, especially if they're short and small-boned.

Amen!

I never knew what size I was in the US; all I know is that my aunt once sent me sizes 1 and 2 and they were huge on me. Seeing the measurements I would then be one of those "subzeros": waist a bit smaller than 24" (althogh I usually round it up... it's actually 60 cm), and hips around 34" (87 cm... even smaller than the subzero). I'm Brazilian and my size here is a 36. I have cousins who wear a Brazilian 34, which is smaller. Mind you, we're all tiny and flat (I am the tallest at 5'4").

I don't know why it's so hard to accept the fact that there are naturally small people too who are healthy as horses, but just happen to have a tiny structure... and they also need to be clothed.

AmberS · January 28th, 2007, 05:44 AM

I think it's sad that it has now become acceptable and fashionable to wear zero size clothing. This, I believe, is purely a result of media and marketing promotions just to boost sales. I am a voluptuous women with plenty of curves and 'love handles' and proud of it!! I wish there were more websites and companies promoting the kind of clothing which suits me and what I wear, such as http://www.serenityblue.co.uk/womens_clothing.cfm

Aella · January 28th, 2007, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pandora

Amen!

I never knew what size I was in the US; all I know is that my aunt once sent me sizes 1 and 2 and they were huge on me. Seeing the measurements I would then be one of those "subzeros": waist a bit smaller than 24" (althogh I usually round it up... it's actually 60 cm), and hips around 34" (87 cm... even smaller than the subzero). I'm Brazilian and my size here is a 36. I have cousins who wear a Brazilian 34, which is smaller. Mind you, we're all tiny and flat (I am the tallest at 5'4").

I don't know why it's so hard to accept the fact that there are naturally small people too who are healthy as horses, but just happen to have a tiny structure... and they also need to be clothed.

Exactly, and there's such a thing as body structure too. Even when I was at my heaviest, my hips were never more than 93 cm-they're 88-89 now, and I don't consider myself too skinny, it's just my bone structure. Mind you, I don't have a small waist like you (I'm at 66-67), so finding clothes that fit is a bit of a bitch regardless of size. Thank God for low-waist jeans!

I think clothing companies should provide for a wider range of sizes/heights/body types, period. My best friend is tall and skinny with a teeny waist and regular-sized hips, another one of my friends is petite and small all over, another one extremely tall and slightly curvy, and what we all have in common is having trouble finding clothes (especially jeans) that fit!