To wonder why clothes aren't more expensive in bigger sizes

[mrsfoof]

If you buy children's clothes, you'll have probably noticed that you have to pay a good few quid more for a T-shirt in age 12 than you would for the exact same T-shirt in age 5. Fair enough, the bigger size uses a lot more fabric.

Why then, is a size 24 ladies' T-shirt the same price as the same T-shirt in a size 6, despite it using a lot more - maybe even twice as much - fabric?

Would people be more motivated to stay a healthy weight if they had to pay more for bigger clothes? Why don't we charge more for bigger clothes? Are the prices based on the average amount of fabric used - so skinny people pay more and very large people pay less than they should do based on the resources used to make their clothes?

FWIW I'm marginally overweight and wouldn't have a problem paying more for my size 14 than a 6. I think it would motivate me to lose some weight if the size 10 was cheaper though!

OP, please stop saying that you can’t be fat shaming because you’re overweight yourself.

Firstly, you’re a size 14 which you know perfectly well isn’t even particularly large. You chose size 24 as your example for a reason.

Secondly, even if you were larger, belonging to a group doesn’t stop you from having views that are discriminatory to that group. Internalised fatphobia is a thing, just as internalised misogyny/racism/homophobia are. You’re making yourself sound very ignorant by repeatedly using your own (very moderate) fatness as a defence.

I’ve been on both sides of this argument.

Before kids I was a size 6. After my second, I was a size 16-18 post partum. I don’t agree with fat shaming when it’s centred around fat people being ugly, gross etc, but, not every criticism of being fat is fat shaming. It is unhealthy to be overweight. I felt like absolute shit when I was (emotionally and physically). I mourned the loss of my old body. Shopping was harder (not in terms of finding stuff to buy, but not liking how items now sat and looked on my new shape).

I’ve managed to lose a good chunk of the weight I gained (now a size 12 and I’m relatively happy with this) within a 2 year time period. Would I have been ok with paying more for my clothes during that period of time, though? I don’t know. I do think it would have encouraged me in the weight loss journey, though.

However, I do think within the next 10 years the government will probably have a tax on larger clothes to try and encourage weight loss, as I honestly don’t think the sugar tax etc is really working very well.

I actually have bigger issues with all these miracle teas and weight loss products that speak to people when they’re feeling their lowest and extort money out of them on shit that doesn’t work. I was nearly taken in a few times in desperation, but luckily for me I was relatively broke during maternity leave so didn’t have any spare cash for these. I lost weight initially due to just simply eating less, and then as restrictions opened up, moving more and eating less. It wasn’t a quick weight loss, but it was slow and consistent.

No company is going to impose a fat tax on clothes off their own bat, though. Marketing themselves as inclusive makes them back more £££ than the fat tax ever would. Inclusivity is the biggest key trend in retailing at the minute, it would be daft to go against that and get boycotted.

Not all slim people starve themselves; I have several relatives (young ones admittedly) who are small (around 5ft), wear a size 4 or kids' clothes because they're tiny, but they still eat 3 decent meals a day. Of course they smaller portions than someone taller though, a 5ft fully-grown person doesn't need the same calories as a 6ft person.

At a size 14 I'm overweight (not everyone who is a 14 will be - I understand that).

I chose a size 24 as an example, not to 'fat shame' but as an example of a big contrast in the physical size of the clothes from say a 6. There would be little point in comparing an 8 and a 14 as they aren't that different.

Seeing as there's a strong correlation between poverty and obesity it's even more objectionable to suggest that people should pay more for larger sizes.

Take that, fatso! You're already struggling and now you've got to pay more just to clothe yourself! That'll teach you, won't it! Stop eating so many fucking pies!

*At a size 14 I'm overweight (not everyone who is a 14 will be - I understand that).

I chose a size 24 as an example, not to 'fat shame' but as an example of a big contrast in the physical size of the clothes from say a 6. There would be little point in comparing an 8 and a 14 as they aren't that different.*

None of this addresses the main point of my post which was that being overweight yourself doesn’t preclude your comments from being hurtful to other overweight people.

And I’m a size 14 too, with an overweight BMI. I can recognise that my experience of being overweight, shopping for clothes, and how I’m viewed by society in general, is vastly different to my friend who is a size 28 and will probably never be smaller due to a whole host of complex reasons. I’d never dare to assume I can speak for her as an overweight person because I happen to be a bit overweight too.

No you are not ‘simply asking a question’ as you oh so innocently make out, you said this:

Would people be more motivated to stay a healthy weight if they had to pay more for bigger clothes?

How can you not see that is making a judgement that people wearing bigger clothes = unhealthy? Or are you honestly that dense? Oh and being a size 14 does not give you the right to judge others on their size.

The difference in the cost of fabric would literally be pennies. It would cost more to have to print different price labels for different sizes.

They should just stop making clothes sizes after a size 16 really.
Bizarre world we live in. Obese has become the norm.

And not even overweight! no: obese :(
It is scary

So fat people should walk around naked..?

@PixieLaLa I used the term 'healthy weight' to mean neither overweight nor underweight. I didn't use the term 'normal weight' instead (which may have seemed less offensive for some) because in the UK, overweight or obese is more normal than 'healthy' weight (I.e BMI 18-25 or thereabouts). It's not my business to judge whether people are unhealthy or not based on their size. It's a term used by scientists and medical professionals, presumably with evidence for the terminology used.

Or not leave the house at all, that should help with losing weight shouldn't it? Getting food delivered, moving less, being isolated and unemployed.
But then at least the rest of society won't have to look at fat people or interact with them - which is what it's really about, despite all faux concern and 'fear'.

@mrsfoof I was referring to the lady in the article for had one meal a day and a smoothie to maintain her size 4 figure.
Not healthy IMO

Here. You can be super slender but do it in an unhealthy way.
I actually reckon I was healthier at size 14 than size 10. Size 10 sedentary. Size 14 I was fit.
Plus pretty sure research suggests carrying a little extra weight as you age is better than being very slim.

I used the term 'healthy weight' to mean neither overweight nor underweight

what a load of bullshit considering you are suggesting smaller sizes charge less and as incentive for larger sizes to loose weight. At least have the balls to stand by your revolting judgemental comments.