To think that vanity sizing has gotten ridiculous?

[Namila]

I recently bought a beautiful, vintage, evening gown for a formal event. The dress is from the '80s. When I saw the dress on the rack (a unique piece since it was second hand) and the label read "size 10", I was disappointed as usually size 10 is way too big for me.

I thought I would still try it on, thinking that perhaps a tailor could work on it and make it fit properly. Imagine my surprise when I realized that not only it was not too big, it was nearly too tight!!

When I shop in "modern" stores I need to buy an 8, and sometimes even a 6. I'd normally swim in a 10! I am short and petite, but definitely not extremely skinny.

AIBU to think that this vanity sizing thing has gotten a bit crazy and the current sizes have nothing to do with the way sizes were even just a couple of decades ago?

OK, this really pisses me off. Yes, OK, sizes were smaller in the 80s. We get it. Who realistically has clothes that are 30 years old other than vintage pieces? Does it matter?

I also frequently see people saying that 15-20 years ago, dress sizes were waaaayyy smaller. Bullshit. I was a teenager in the late 90s/early 00s. I weighed the same as I weigh now, roughly have recently lost some weight). I wore a size 12. I am a size 12 now. There has been no vanity sizing in New Look, Topshop, Oasis, Warehouse and similar brands. I can guarantee that I fit into the same size clothes now at the same weight as nearly 20 years ago.

The vanity sizing argument is used to put women down and make people feel that despite being a healthy weight, they are kidding themselves and in the olden days they would have been heifers. So, 'yeah you might think you're nice and slim at a size 10 but in reality you are a lump of lard and would have been forced to shop in Evans 15 years ago'. Bollocks.

I've never seen this sort of thread started by someone who is delighted to be a size 20 instead of a 22. They always seem to be started by size 6/8/10 people and there is an implied dig at fatties. Makes me uneasy.

I hear this all the time but in practice I've never actually found it to be the case! Size 10/12 depending on the shop and when I pick up something vintage it's normally about the same. Shop sizes vary wildly. I tried on a pair of high waisted Dorathy Perkins jeans in a size 10 and the same style in a size 12 but from Top Shop. I was in a department store and tried one on after the other and the size 12 was significantly tighter than the 10

Can’t size 6/8/10 people air their clothing gripes on here then?

Is it in the guidelines ? Or is it made up?

"there is an implied dig at fatties. Makes me uneasy."

Sorry but where do you feel like I took a dig at "fatties"? My OP was just about the way stores label their clothes!

I also used to be a 10, 10 years ago but now need at 6. I’m no smaller!

Really?? You think that since 2007, all shops have vanity-sized by 2 sizes?? I have loads of clothes from 2007- no difference at all between them and current clothes sizes. It's always the 'size 6's' who point this out as well- as in, I am a size 6 (the smallest size a shop sells) but in reality I am pretty fat so if you are above a size 6, you must be mahoosive. It's never the size 14s who claim to in reality be size 18.

The only thing I can think is that you shop in different places to 10 years ago or that you have lost weight/inches and not realised it. Because size 12 sure as heck has not changed since 2007 in my wardrobe.

@Papafran exactly! I have a BMI of 21. I'm 9 stone. Would I have been considered overweight 20 years ago? I'm pretty sure my mum was a similar size/weight to me in her 30s and was wearing a size 10/12. She's certainly never been bigger

The OP was saying that she was usually a size 6 and the size 10 was way too big, so "vanity sizing" (ie sizing to make fat people feel better) had "gotten ridiculous". That's the point of the word "vanity"

They always seem to be started by size 6/8/10 people and there is an implied dig at fatties

Yes, 100% this, Fuzzy. I guess it's because size 10 is a socially acceptable/desirable size so they can say 'i am really a 10 but vanity sizing makes me a size 6'. The implication being that they are still slim because 10 is a slim size. But at the same time, they are implying that anyone currently a 12 must in reality be a 16 or above.

If the item is vintage it could have been altered at some point in the last 30 years so it may not a true reflection of an 80s size 10 either.

YY Papafran I have a fitted size 12 skirt from 2004 They havent changed as much as certain people want to believe.

Well OP, you learned your lesson here. You must be sure in future to go through the forum with a fine tooth comb to make sure that someone hasn't posted something similar in the past.
Failing that, please be sure to check with some of the other members of mn to ensure they approve of your post in advance.

And to your original point, YANBU and this is the reason I never buy clothes in Next

My DSis recently gave me a 1980s size 12 item from Liberty. Remember that in the 1980s, sizing was still regulated. It's about the same size as a 6 in many brands today. Though I can be anywhere between a 4 and a 10.

Sizes deregulated in the (late?) 1980s, and the decade or so after that was they heyday of vanity sizing (which was done to sell, via the feel-good factor) and even though it's stabilised a bit now it does still reflect the marketeers boom, not the considered revaluation based on population measurements that happened when regulated.

Clothes size is pretty meaningless nowadays. The old ideas of what is 'slim' 'normal' or 'large' by numbers don't work any more

(PS: stating threads on subjects that have been discussed before is fine on MN. It's reanimating zombies that's not liked)

i've found that sizing is all over the shop (har har) even within the same shop.

tried on two tops exact same style but different colours - one fit perfectly the other was too tight.

in asda looking at knickers - two different pairs 'same' size. placed one on top of the other and one of them was an inch bigger.

i fucking despair.

FFS just buy the clothes that fit without getting all dramatic about the number on the label. If you have a 34" bust and a top is made for a 34" bust then great, it's your size and might fit. It makes no difference whether the size label says 6, 10, 12, 34 or whatever.

My work did reverse vanity sizing, I ordered new uniform trousers in the same size as before going by the label but they had changed to (presumably cheaper) suppliers and the new trousers were about 2 inches narrower round the waistband, laid out flat.

Not really relevant, just a little anecdote.

Vanity Sizing is a health issue.

Clothes sizes have changed significantly over the last 30 years (as statistically studied by the Economist and other publications)

People think that a size 12 / 14 is "healthy" I see it described as such regularly on threads on here
But that is a 1970's size 16/18 and is not healthy

The UK and the whole developed world are in the midst of an obesity epidemic which is bringing healthcare systems to their knees.

Anything that normalises being overweight is bad for us.
Thus vanity sizing is a bad thing

@PickAChew you sound like my kind of person.

I CBA what size the label says- as long as it fits me.

I'm sure there's a wider argument about how women's clothing size is much more of a feature than men's. I've never seen a male celebrity's waist size discussed when the outfit fit the oscars are being reviewed. That a whole other thread though I am sure!

It's nonsense that a 12 is unhealthy. A UK 12 according to the ASOS size guide is a 30" waist. The average UK woman is around 65 - 66 inches tall. At that height a 30" waist is far less than half the average woman's height and perfectly healthy.

"It's nonsense that a 12 is unhealthy."

Where was it said in this thread that a 12 is unhealthy..?

Ta1kinPeece at 21.18 said a 12 isn't healthy OP

As a size 12 some years ago I had a beautiful red dress from H&M. It didn't really fit, it was too small. I hung onto it for ages, but if I'd got any skinnier, I would have looked haggard and size 12 is bang on for me. I was gutted. I hear they haven't improved.

Talkinpeece this is the second thread I've seen you on, this week, insisting that a BMI or size within normal range is "unhealthy" or "grossly overweight" as you so eloquently put it in the other thread. Size 12-14 is a perfectly healthy size for most women who aren't well below average height, particularly if they are busty.

Ouch
It's nonsense that a 12 is unhealthy. A UK 12 according to the ASOS size guide is a 30" waist.
That is one website. What do Asda say ?
The average UK woman is around 65 - 66 inches tall.
Indeed but lots of us are not average. Short people with a 30 inch waist are likely overweight
At that height a 30" waist is far less than half the average woman's height and perfectly healthy.
It might be but my waist is 30 inches and I'm 65 inches tall
I wear Next size 8 and Sainsburys size 6

Size 14 (modern) for short people (half the population) is unlikely to be healthy.
Thus Vanity sizing has allowed the normalisation of excess weight
which is a health risk

pickachew
Indeed. And I'll keep saying it until the health message starts to sink in on the bits of MN who choose not to read the science press.