To say vanity sizes should be rolled back?

[amoreoamicizia]

I bought some vintage St. Michael shorts this weekend in a size 12 which fitted me perfectly. In current sizes I'm an 8 or sometimes- incredibly- a 6 (looking at you, Boden).

As flattering as it is to think of myself as a size 8, it's simply not the truth or a reflection of reality. A small size 12 does seem about right, as that was my size as a slim-ish teenager in the 90s.

Who is this vanity sizing really helping? Who does it serve? Isn't it about time clothing manufacturers were held to account and forced to roll back sizes to what they were in the early 00s, at least?

M&S petite is a bit shit. They do, however mix them all up with trousers and aren’t very good at having a separate area.

if they call them short then often the waist to crotch on a trouser is the same as standard, petite often that’s shorter (to allow for having a smaller pelvis as well as shorter leg bones). It’s always worth checking if you are short and need the petite if it’s something like high waisted trousers as they can end up looking a bit Simon cowell.

Actually - just looking at M&S size guidelines, it does look like they are labelling shorter sizes as petite now - but sizes aren't necessarily petite in the traditional sense. I know I need shorter leg length (5' 3" with 65 cm inside leg), but I fit a regular body size, which is why I disregarded skirts labelled petite as I thought the waist would also be smaller (but they weren't). M&S have always had long/regular/short labels (I shop there a lot and have done for over 30 years). If size 16 short/petite also means that the item is smaller all over then I'll be size 18 or 20 petite in M&S now 😭

From M&S website

Height:

Our guide height for main range product is 5ft 6”.

For 5ft 3” and under please shop our petite range where garments have been developed to suit the petite stature.

Women of 5ft 10” and over please shop Tall

But they aren’t working because there is no standardised sizing. Even if a 42” breast 32” waist and 44” hips was a size 10 then we can decide what size we are from there

But when you have each clothing store having their own sizing guide you can’t really buy with confidence.

Recently went to buy a summer dress I took 11 size 16 dresses into the changing rooms and only 3 fitted.
The rest were too big or I couldn’t get the thing over my head or zip it up

My dd is very tall and very slim. She is mid 20s and shops in the children’s range because leg length in adult trousers don’t come in the same length as children’s trousers

Apparently because she has a 34” inside leg she must be at least a size 16

Thinly veiled teeny tiny stealth boast. Yawn.

'Teeny tiny' has become the new 'naice' on here.

I said yesterday that people can't help being small or short and not everybody who has commented, is bragging about it. Why would you boast about something that you can't help?

Consistency across brands - yes this is important

Just "rolling back" so that a 12 isn't called an 8, then no. I'm not saying OP did this, but sometimes this can morph into fat shaming. I fat shaming/phobia sometimes explains the backlash against "vanity" sizing.

People have generally got bigger (and taller), so I'm not sure there would be many people who are the "size 8" from the 1970s. So probably these small sizes just wouldn't be in the shops as much. Clothe sizes need to reflect (and move with) the needs of the population, not some ideal from the past.

Average height hasn’t gone up that much

Bearing in mind average height still includes the 5'2" and below little old ladies born from 1930 onwards and the considerably less diverse population born in the pre Windrush era, it's not caught up yet.

I'm 5'6". The vast majority of girls are taller than me by year 9 and it is not unusual in the slightest to have girls over six foot tall by that age - more unusual to have them above 5'9" at secondary transition, but only inasmuch as there only being about 5% of the intake noticeably taller than the rest of the cohort.

@NeverDropYourMooncup , I live in a multi-racial town and there are women and girls who are very tall and many who are very short. I'm the national average height for a woman and definitely do not feel short when out and about.
The population has a high Indian sub-continent heritage, and the women tend to be shorter than average.

Why would you be flattered by a number on a piece of clothing?

How bizarre.

Are you one of those people who thinks dress sizes are related to morality?

I can’t fathom why it would be flattering.

I think it's the opposite. Oh, I am "only a size 14" and people delude themselves about being thin and healthy.

If you are a size 22, you know you are overweight. If you are happy with it, it's up to you, but there's no pretending you are actually a slim uk average.

Vanity sizing are damaging.

It's not "vanity" sizing and people shouldn't be measuring their health by their dress size.

In principle I agree, but some on here do seem to want everyone to know about it.

looking at the obesity crisis and how overweight people are in this country, I am afraid dress size does matter!

But people like to pretend otherwise instead of addressing the problem for themselves.

The threads on here tend to be along the lines of 'Size 12 is tiny' or 'Size 16 isn't fat' so people are using it as a gauge.

I'm actually not stupid but when I was overweight it did make it easier to persist in denial if I was fitting into averagely-sized clothes. And having to go up a size probably did give me a bit of a kick up the arse.

What, you think dress sizes have made people fat?

Indeed, they have big feet as well. DD1 is only 5'4" at full adult height but has size 7 feet, bigger than mine at 5'7".

DD2 I've just bought size 10 football boots for, she's 5'10" aged 15 and still growing.

There is such a stream of women on Mumsnet claiming to be a size 8. Odd, that.

Why is it odd?

A good proportion of women must be a size 8. Otherwise shops wouldn’t bother stocking size 8 clothes.

Health and BMI are not, never have been and never should be, measured by dress size. The idea is absolutely preposterous.

The clothing industry is responsible for clothing people. It is not a body size or health police. If you want to measure your health, you need to look at BMI, blood pressure etc.

Besides, in the 90s plus sized people had very few options and all that happened was that the population got fatter, so using clothes to enforce healthy weights clearly doesn't work.

You have to consider people have got taller - this has been going on forever.

why, you think size 14 - in today's vanity size from one of the most generous shops, is helping people to recognise they are overweight?

Exactly. You can also ... LOOK at people in the street. There are still a lot of slim and very slim women everywhere. Sports clubs are packed, sport events are busier than ever.

Obesity crisis has never meant 100% of the population is overweight.

Only on MN must people be lying if they say they are 5ft or 5ft5 in a size 6 or 8. It's boring.