Is 'vanity sizing' getting worse?

[LaburnumGrove]

Years ago I was a 10 and my wedding dress was a 10 (very fitted waist) and my waist was 24 inches.

We all know that has changed and some 10s now are 28 inch waist.

But what about tops too?

I've noticed that more and more tops (T shirts etc) are available in a size 6 which was very unusual before.

I'm usually an 8 now in many clothes but some tops I'm verging on needing a 6. I'm petite and 32D bust but size 6 hardly ever existed in most brands years ago.

No, only on Mumsnet.

A late 70s M&S size 12 top was 34", now it would be 36". 2" difference in 50 years. A size 14 was never a 24" waist in recent times, despite what MNers might want to claim.

Sizing varies hugely depending on brand and fashion style, I'm currently sizing down in jeans because I've gone from skinnies to wide leg flares, my usual size will fit, but I want them a bit closer fitting than is fashionable. It doesn't mean vanity sizing.
The 70s tops mentioned above would be skinny fitting as per the fashion.

Just buy what fits. I don't know anyone in real life who can't find clothes to fit and some of them are really slim. Only on MN is there a competitive skinnyness.

Clothes have got longer, that I can't deny and as a tall person I'm here for it. But girls in general seem to be taller.

...most clothes today don't sit on the actual waist.

I bought a dress last summer. It seemed to fit OK, but it had loops for the thinnish fabric tie belt and they sat at the base of my ribcage. It was weird. When I checked the photos, the belt seemed to sit in roughly the same place on the model, so I'm inclined to think that was how it was meant to be. Nevertheless I couldn't get used to the way it felt and sent the dress back.

Now I'm inspecting dresses as carefully as I do trousers if there's a sash or belt involved.

Humble brag

Where is your waist in relation to your ribcage then?

The waist thing is very relevant with jeans. Jeans go from hanging onto the hips, hence a big waist measurement to practically buttoning under the ribcage, hence a smaller waist and rinse and repeat over the years. We are back in a short boxy jumper phase like the 80s after a skinny rib polo phase. All these things affect sizing. Clothes in the 1950s were very fitted.

Size 10 in the late 60’s and 70’s was 22” waist. I know because that was my size. I’m still a size 8-10 but my waist measures 26”.

I bought a vintage St Michael’s (M&S) skirt recently and it was labelled ‘26” waist - Large’. So a 26” waist was a large size then.

I’m not sure when m&S stopped using the St Michael’s brand name but I’m guessing at the end of the 70’s.

Actually, I was way off in my dating of the demise of the M&S St Michael’s name… it was 1999-2000.

My waist is right where my ribcage stops - the bottom of your ribcage is where the definition of your waist starts isn't it?

it makes it harder to buy things online, or go to a shop and pick up a number of items; you need to take an 8,10 and 12 of everything.

There is not even any consistency in the manufacture of the clothes. I like Gap jeans, know which style I like. I have tried to buy several pairs in the same size, in the same style and the fitting changes massively. Some are bigger than others even when buying the same item.

Buying clothes is becoming more and more frustrating. There has to be consistency but there isn't. Maybe the answer is to ditch the classic way of sizing (using numbers) and instead use measurements. Or more guidance from the brands as to which size to try if you have certain size waist/bust/hips measurement.

and to add insult to injury, manufacturer's sizing guides are not accurate either. I have ended up with wildly wrong sizes even if I carefully check the shop's own sizing guide and take all my measurements.

Oh, that was Miss World!

Hmm. Out of interest I just went and got out my old suitcase full of clothes that no longer fit…but I was saving just in case.

I’m not that old, I’m 45, so these clothes only go back 15 - 25 years, and not back to the 1950’s or any time when women did seem to be significantly smaller.

I’ve also spent the last year on Mounjaro and am now wearing a UK size 8 (vanity or not, I have no idea).

So, I pulled out a lot of old dresses from the case, mostly a size 10 or 12 and the brand Coast for the most part. I pulled out a Miss Selfridge skirt (pink cord ruffle edged mini - so cute) size 10. An Animal dress size 10. Some tops from Next in size 10. Some trousers from RI size 10.

I have just tried a lot of things on and they are all hanging off me. Which is a shame as now they are all too big for me! I should have done this 6 months ago. So, the likelihood is that 20 years ago I would have needed a size….8.

So unless we are talking about a REALLY long time ago, I don’t think things look to have changed that much. I had some beautiful dresses though.

Just realised that you are talking about a really long time ago lol! So my 20 year old clothing came after the change.
Happy to be feeling quite young this morning!!

Yes, and the lead up competitions. Miss Wales, Miss Scotland, Miss England, Miss Northern Ireland, Miss Great Britain and Miss United Kingdom. It went on for weeks because I think the regional competitions were televised too. I became a feminist when I realised that the winners had to be crowned and sashed in their bathing costumes rather than the gorgeous ball gowns they wore for one of their rounds! Dirty old men getting to touch half naked women. Actually, I think I remember kissing too. Yeuch!

Yes, vanity sizing is a pain but as long as you know that on the highstreet you are likely a 4 and in the boutiques an 8/10, you are pretty safe.