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?

The bridal industry has not been affected by vanity sizing. They stick to measurement charts.

If this is true, then I’m a true size 14. I still fit in said dress. I’m wearing size 14 top and size 16 trousers. I weigh the same as I did on my wedding day. (5 years ago, which was when all this ‘ridiculous’ vanity sizing started to get so widespread apparently) not sure how that works.

I wear the same size clothes as I did 30 years ago despite the fact that I am 2 stone heavier.

I really wish shops would be consistent with their sizing. You can never tell by a label any more whether it will fit you. You have to try it on. Labels are almost pointless! A size 8 in one shop is a size 12 in another. Men’s sizing is no different nowadays either.

I also just want consistency. I'd buy a size 22 if it meant I could go in and pick a size up and it fit properly every time.

But no, I have to accept that I'm somewhere between a 10 and a 16 depending on shop, cut, whether there is an R in the month etc. So tedious and really puts me off clothes shopping.

Vanity sizing covers a bit more than 5 years. It's cumulative. The real worry is the 6 inches that some clothes have gained in a few decades. That's pretty rapid evolution. Size 10 waists were around 24 inches in the 80's to 90's. Now they are often 30 inches. People are not much taller than they were barely a generation ago, they're just fatter.

5 years ago isn't when it started! It started in the early nineties. In the late 80s I was a smallish size 10 (size 8s were not widely available). I am now a smallish size 8 and inches bigger in every direction. And over a stone heavier (which is as it should be, seeing as I am getting on for 50).

These threads make me feel so shit. I'm trying to lose my baby weight which brought me from size 14 up to a 16. If the things I'm buying are vanity sized then I don't want it pointed out to me, tbh.

Then why on earth would you click on a thread with such a clear subject title? Surely that's your own responsibility

I hate these threads. I hate the fact that I feel compelled to click on them for my daily dose of masochism.

Page after page of women reducing themselves to numbers, statistics, measurements. Comparing their size to the size of their mum, grandma, sister, self - ten, twenty, even fifty years ago.

Women telling other women that they've never met that their size must mean they're not healthy.

Women who feel perfectly well, who are loved, respected and desired being told they are somehow lacking because of some number on a tape measure.

I'm a size 14. I'm about a stone overweight. I'm perfectly healthy. I'm overweight because I overeat. I overeat because I'm anxious. I'm anxious because I live in a society in which I'm constantly judged and found wanting.

I'm also a mother, teacher, lover, businesswoman, writer, daughter, sister, friend, aunt, neighbour...is there a number that represents that?

Phew, I'm not the only one seemingly unaffected by this Margesimpson. Wonder if everyone else is shopping somewhere different.. Or do we have uniquely shaped bodies?

I remember my mum being a size 14 in the early 1980's. When I look at pictures of her then she was very slim. I'm a size 14 and taller than her but I look fat comparatively. I unfortunately think there is some truth in this but I don't think that comparing with clothes from e.g. 2000 cuts it as I think vanity sizing was already prevalent by then.

I always say this in these threads but here goes...

I don't believe vanity sizing exists (not in an industry that doesn't really give a shit about people!) what it is is the way clothing manufacturers size their clothes for ease in relation to their 'average' customer.

The 'average' customer, or the size they sell most of us always a 12. Then the 10 and 14 are 2 inches smaller/bigger in relation to this. It's how sizing works in ladies fashion. As the population get bigger, the average gets bigger.

This also explains the very normal anomalies between sizes and no standardisation between different shops. For example the average m&s shopper will be a different size to a New Look one. Young shops and high end shops will be smalller because young people and rich people tend to be thinner. Middle aged middle class shops like Hobbs will be bigger as we are fatter!

In FCUK I am a 14 (so 2in bigger than their average). In Hobbs i'm a 10 (2in smaller) and in DVF I'm an 18 (or extra large so 6in bigger!!). I'm 5ft 10 with a 29in waist.

I have some of my mums skirts from M&S from the 80s, plain tweedy pelmet skirts. They are a size 10 they no longer fit my mum who is a size 10/12 in today's sizes. They fit me snugly as a modern 6/8. Sizing has definitely changed.

Higher end designers sizing is much smaller than high street, I can still just about squeeze into my Topshop jeans I've had since my teens that are a size 4 but can no longer fit into my size 8 Isabel Marant trousers.

I studied fashion buying 20 years ago btw and this is what I was taught then and others tell me it's still the case.

I have a vintage late 60's/early 70's long floral skirt, and on the label it says: "Size 12, waist 24 inches"

What would a 24" waist be these days?! Double 00?

(And no, not a brag, it never fitted but love it too much to get rid...)

I tend to ignore the 10/12/14 labels and go by the European sizes, which seem based on measurements. At the moment, I'm in a 40 - which would be a 14 in H&M and Oasis, and a 12 in most other places. Goal is to fit into 38s again.

Well the one thing that has not changed since the 80s is the boundaries of what is considered a healthy BMI. So as long as people are objectively healthy and are a healthy weight, would the vanity size police agree to STFU about waist measurements and the like?

Depends on the shop MissMisery, in a high end designer it might be a 10. Depends on the average of their clientele.

Also what varies (which is good) is the proportion so some shops a top or bottom may be less or more proportionally different to the waist. This means people who are naturally pears, triangles, apples, hourglasses etc would still fit in dress and coats from certain shops.

And then of course there's the European factor. Lots of high street shops are from Spain etc (Zara/mango) and their population are differently shaped to us (shorter etc so distance between waist and hip will be shorter and trouser length).

IMO all this variation is a good thing as then all of us no matter what proportions we are can find something to wear.

That 'average size of customer' shop profiling point made by a couple of posters is spot on - and has made shopping easier, and more sensible, for me since I first read it on here (if one of you said it on the thread I read, thank you!).

So, I know I need to size down in Boden, Monsoon, that sort of place, and size up in Zara-type shops. Someone apologised for always banging on about this - don't! It is very, very helpful .

My dd wears a size 6 or 8.
Her measurements are exactly the same as mine were at her age when I wore a size 12.
It does vary between shops though.

I am o!d enough to have some clothes that I wore in the 1970s. Just a few of my favourites. They are size 12.
I was 8 stone then at 18 and I'm 9 stone now at 60.
I wear a size 10/12 now in most things but my old 70s clothes are much smaller. I don't really care what the label says about size, I'll try anything if it looks like it will fit.

Oh yawn! Until sizes are standardised across the board there are always going to be shops who are more generous than others.

If vanity sizing really bothers you go and shop in H&M where you can congratulate yourself on getting into their ridiculously tiny clothes.

It's because everyone's so fat nowadays

H&M clothes are far from tiny compared to sizes from the 80s and earlier!

I have a size 12 Top Shop dress in my wardrobe, vintage, from the 70s. It fits me perfectly. I currently wear a size 8 in modern Top Shop clothes (and I am late 40s so def not their target demographic).

it absolutely has - in the last 20 years at least.

in 1997 I measured 38-28-38 and was a size 16 in most shops. I had some size 16 next trousers I barely fitted into.

I remember there being a thread on here that said a size 14 is quite chubby... I replied saying nonsense I measured this when I was a 14/16 and I was super happy with myself and looked lovely. Curvy but still relatively slim

The person replied to me saying things had changed a bit in 20 years and those measurements now made me a 10/12 (14 at a push in some places) I was shocked.

I don't measure that now but on that website that shows you what size you should buy in each shop (you put in measurements and it tells you) now those measurements make me a 10 on the bottom half in Gap and a few other places. A fucking 10! wtf. also 12 is the majority of places including on top. Silly season.

Size 4 didn't exist back then - size 4 was what is now a 6 or 8 - and size 8 was almost an unrealistic body goal unless you were petite, now every bugger is size 8 and it's size 4 that is the super rare tiny size.

I also looked up 80's measurements for clothes size and at size 18 now, I'd have been size 24 in the 80's

make me a 10 on the bottom half in Gap and a few other places

Gap uses american sizes, so a 10 is equivalent to a 14.