Wednesday, August 3, 2011
quicko: sizes
I don't think I've mentioned this before and it's bordering on a bit obvious, but there are different sizes of clothing here as to in, well, other parts of the world. I think shoes are roughly the same (though there's a distinct proclivity away from half sizes here), but tops, pants, bras, etc. are done on different systems. Thank goodness I'm really just more of an eyeballer to begin with.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I have NO idea how some women manage to buy clothes on-line and get stuff that fits. I have to try something on before I buy it.
Supposedly women's clothing sizes were originally meant to be based on average size at certain ages; so a size 12 item would fit a 12 year old, a 14 would fit a 14 year old and a 16 would fit a 16 year old. After that it was pretty static since, on average, women don't really grow much taller past the age of 16.
Of course, there were larger women around so the 'plus' sizes of 18 and higher were invented. BUT then no one wanted to think that she was a size 18 (because that would mean she was fat) so some manufacturers reinvented their sizing to make those women feel better about their size by calling them a 16 or a 14 and adjusting their other sizes accordingly. But there is no consistency between manufacturers (and it's only become worse over the years - supposedly my butt is 'still' size 12, hmmm).
Personally I think we should go for something like the European system or a version of that used by men where the size is based on the size of a certain part of the garment, say the hips or the bust. It wouldn't be perfect (since other parts of one's anatomy may make it hard to fit) but it might help to gauge a shirt made by one company against one made by another.
As for shoes, if you find an Australian company that offers half sizes, it normally denotes a wider fit, not an increase in length. Other companies might call a wider fit a C and a narrower fit an A with their regular fit being B.
Post a Comment