To say vanity sizes should be rolled back?

Of course many shops have vanity mirrors too which must be effective in persuading us to buy.

These are likely not at all accurate though, I tend to buy expensive jeans (AG, 7 for all mankind etc) and have for about 20 years (since I was 18). I am the same weight and my waist is in fact 28 inches and have since had a kid so unlikely to be thinner round the waist! In 2003 I was buying a size 28. Recently bought a pair. Size 25. Size 26s I could literally take off without unbuttoning.

i think vanity sizing isn’t great because people DO judge their health/weight by what size they wear and it’s easy to convince yourself that you’re still a size 12 so you can’t really be much different when in fact you’re tipped into an unhealthy weight range (realize plenty of people could be normal BMI as a 12, it puts me well into overweight).

"Make stores use waist and leg length measurements for bottoms, perhaps waist and bust for tops, and do so accurately. Simple."

That would be impossible for stores like ASOS that add hundreds of new garments a day. And as someone with a large bust, the fabric and shaping means that two different garments with the same measurement in theory can fit very differently.

I always took two age sizes bigger in clothing as a child because I was taller than average, it didn't mean that I was pretending to be two years older, it was just the size that fitted. I love the idea that fat people don't know they're fat because they fit a specific size.

Of course. How else will all the fatties who don't read the 21738 daily Mumsnet posts know how fat they are?

Exactly! I’ve shrunk by four stone over tne past 18 months and nothing will take away my pleasure in being able to fit into (and zip up) a size 12/M jacket, vs struggling to lever myself into an XL! I’m proud of the weight I’ve lost and feeling the benefits on all levels. Comments like the one on here about size 12s are just plain nasty - even based on modern sizing a size 12 is in no way ‘large’.

I don't really get why people get their (teeny tiny) knickers in a twist over this to be honest. This is a regular thread on Mumsnet.

How big a problem is it really? Do we really think people who are overweight are so stupid they can't see it as long as the label on their clothes says an acceptable size?

I can't say I've seen much change in the last 20-30 years either. I was a size 10 as a slim youngster in the 90s and I'm a size 14 as an overweight middle aged woman who's about 2 stone heavier. That seems about right to me.

If I fit into a size 10 tomorrow I wouldn't suddenly believe I was thinner because I have eyeballs and a functioning brain.

Amazing, thank you! There's one a couple of towns over that looks quite big - guess where I'm headed this weekend? 😄

Net-a-porter measures individual items of clothing in all sizes and I’m sure this helps keep returns/costs low. I would like to see all online retailers do this.

YABU. They weren't any more consistent in the early 2000s and that's what is important.

Call me a 10 or a 20, I don't care - I just want to be able to buy clothing from any shop and know that the size I've picked is going to fit.

Not really aiming at you specifically, but BMI shouldn’t be used to measure the weight of individuals, it’s really more for measuring larger groups.
That said, according to BMI, people built like George Clooney are apparently obese, which is clearly ridiculous.

Yes this.

Also people don't seem to understand that the amount of ease that designers include varies hugely.

I make lots of my own clothes and patterns often have a size chart for their suggested sizing (so if you have a waist of x inches that designer considers that a size y) but also a chart showing finished garment size where you can see that size y actually has a finished waist of x+2 inches). That extra 2 inches is the ease and if you like a more fitted look you may want to size down a couple of sizes.

If you accidentally use the finished garment size as your body measurements you will not be able to move in it or may not be able to get it on at all (ask me how i know 😭).

ETA - unless you're using a stretchy fabric then you may even want negative ease for a very fitted look!

Sizing is not simple even using cm or inches!

Absolutely this.

Is there a real purpose to this thread, or is it just humblebragging about modern sizes just being too big for someone's teeny-weeny body, conscious or otherwise? Making sizes smaller again wouldn't resolve the real issue, which is the total lack of consistency in sizing not only across shops/brands but even within them.

Make stores use waist and leg length measurements for bottoms, perhaps waist and bust for tops, and do so accurately. Simple.

@Watercoloursky if you have a big TK Maxx near you it would be worth a look - sometimes the designer stuff is sample sizes, and the normal clothes are all stuff that hasn't sold because it's unpopular sizes, so there tends to be quite good stuff in the smallest sizes.

I am aware how much size inflation there is, but think it’s only bad really because it allows people to be deluded about how big they are. Selling in inch measurements would simplify and standardise and support honest self assessment. It’s just a marketing ploy to seduce you into buying.

Sizing was deregulated in the 1980s, and I don't think we can put the genie back in the bottle following the (industry avowed) vanity sizing of the 1990s, much as I wish it could be done.

What I'd like to see instead (because I think it's more achievable) is
a) sizing always accompanied by a chart that gives measurements in cm & in, and for those the be "true" measures, not allowing for people who pull the tape measure in tight (annoying when you're drowning in excess fabric, having ordered a 29" waist and it measuring 32)
b) a change in rhetoric, so that people no longer think of 12 as "medium" as that maps to the 1980s, since then, everything has changed (by vanity, not the old-style revalorisation) and we need to start thinking of 8-10 as normal/medium, 12-14 as large, and 16 and above as the XL sizes.

We live in an obesogenic society, and the population is much fatter than it was. As you can see from my suggestion, I want peoples perception of clothing sizes to reflect that a lot off the population is fat. It could be done differently, by revalorising so that 12 is indeed "medium" again. But that cannot mean the same thing as an 80s 12, where it reflected a healthy weight.

On current sizing, it's possible to be obese but wear 12/14 clothes comfortably. Which is of course fine, provided the perception of those sizes is indeed "large, but that's typical now" rather than "medium, which means normal weight")

Size of course would not matter if obesity did not cost the NHS so much - it's implicated in so very many conditions, and the damage creeps in over the years of being fat - people can feel fine and vigorous for many years whilst the silent damage is being done. Especially if they think that wearing a 12 means they're OK.

The numbers on labels are arbitrary, that's why they differ from brand to brand. They may as well be called 'Dave' or 'Belgium' or a nice emoji of a strawberry. They aren't ever going to be consistent between shops because each shop cuts for a different body type/set of measurements and the numbers reflect that, not anyone else's sizing. 'Vanity sizing' suggests it's some kind of weird conspiracy to keep the population overweight when it's a reflection of a number of things from brand customer base to people being larger overall (height, bra size, proportions) to clothes being made with more ease so the brand can stock four sizes instead of ten and save money.

Just check the brand's actual size chart before buying, and if you don't like the size on the label, cut out the label. And if you don't like the idea of someone who 'should' be a size 18 wearing size 12 clothes, or that you should have a 10 on the back of your pants instead of a 6, I would also recommend having a good think about why that bothers you so much, perhaps with a therapist.

so true!! never thought about that before. S, M, L, XL, XXL etc. do men think that the sizing has changed since the 80's wonder?

Men's sizing is definitely all over the place too, especially in the shops that use M/L/XL instead of inches as the basis of their sizing.

My sons are forever swapping clothes when their online purchases don't fit.

I was caught badly the other day, I bought a bunch of 2nd hand dresses from ebay and they are all too tight, they were from an online charity shop and obviously many years old.

@wery, wear the size that fits you. It's just a number.
The BMI is calculated on height and weight, and it doesn't indicate a size.

Nobody has issues with people being small, slim, slender, whatever. It’s the comments about how they are so tiny it’s impossible to find any clothes, or that only people of gargantuan proportions wear a size 12 from M&S, or how if your bmi is X you’re a size 8 and if you’re in a 10 then you’re clearly overweight…. Just nonsense.

anyway, have we had “obesity epidemic “or “we’ve lost sight of what a normal size is” yet?

The people who think wearing a size 12 is a sign of being unhealthy have very little idea about different body shapes and the impact of height on dress size.

I'm a relatively short, narrowly built woman so I would look quite big if I was a size 12. My friend is tall and slightly wider built and wears a size 12 regularly. She looks the same as me but just a scaled up version if that makes sense. So she doesn't look fatter or more unhealthy.

Obvs it's rubbish that you should have to do this, but I'd suggest getting a tailor to take your jeans in up the back seam. I've done this before because I have quite muscular thighs so I'd get the ones that fitted my legs and then just get them altered. It's a pretty easy alteration so not that expensive, and you get a perfect fit.