If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Metro)   Introduction of new US triple-zero dress sizes makes fat chicks angry, hungry   (metro.co.uk) divider line 143
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

7664 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jun 2014 at 12:51 PM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



143 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-24 09:30:49 AM
If fat chicks want to feel good about themselves putting a size 8 around their 30" waist, then they are going to have to make some concessions to the skinny chicks.
 
2014-06-24 10:17:07 AM
Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.
 
2014-06-24 10:29:34 AM
Super-skinny celebs like Alexa are supposed to be back in vogue

 After all these years of fatties ruling the actress and modeling professions, skinny girls will finally have their time in the spotlight. Our nightmare is over.
 
2014-06-24 11:17:21 AM
Who the fark is Alexa and she looks like shiat.
 
2014-06-24 11:45:16 AM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


It doesn't.  My boyfriend admitted he went through my clothes to see what size I wore so he could surprise me for Christmas and couldn't understand how I had everything from a size 5 to a size 11 and they all seemed to be the same.  Or how some of my things were kids' XL considering my bras are 34 DD or 36 D.  Answer? Depends on the brand/store and it's a mystery best left to us.
 
2014-06-24 11:46:54 AM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


They sure don't.  To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small.  There is no rhyme or reason.  I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches.  Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything.  I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.
 
2014-06-24 11:55:31 AM
We are going to need more pics.
 
2014-06-24 12:17:06 PM

nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.


Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.
 
2014-06-24 12:23:21 PM
I feel that retailers need to solve this sizing nonsense as it has to hurt their bottom line from an online sales perspective.  When your customers are returning half the stuff they buy because your sizes have no rhyme or reason, that's potentially a loss of ~$10 from shipping and handling alone per purchase.
 
2014-06-24 12:24:13 PM
23" waist is impossibly small? Back in my day, when being skinny wasn't even en vogue, 24" waist line was what was considered hot. 36"X24"36"
 
2014-06-24 12:36:55 PM

serpent_sky: Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.


Are you trying to rack up hits on your profile? :p

/said "rack"
 
2014-06-24 12:53:14 PM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


Stop fighting the programming!
 
2014-06-24 12:57:37 PM
I work with a BBW.
(Yes, there is ONE in our nation)
She makes her own outfits, and looks wonderful when she walks into a room.

Fark off the rack.
 
2014-06-24 12:57:38 PM
Or as it was known in 1950s US catalogs, a six.
 
2014-06-24 12:57:59 PM
It's pretty funny that size deflation means we have to add more significant digits to zero to distinguish it from bigger zeroes.
 
2014-06-24 12:58:05 PM

jaylectricity: 23" waist is impossibly small? Back in my day, when being skinny wasn't even en vogue, 24" waist line was what was considered hot. 36"X24"36"


Only if she's 5'3".
 
2014-06-24 12:58:34 PM
 
2014-06-24 01:02:15 PM
At Globo Gym we understand that "ugliness" and "fatness" are genetic disorders, much like baldness or necrophilia, and it's only your fault if you don't hate yourself enough to do something about it.

- White Goodman

/I'm White.  W H I T.
//E
 
2014-06-24 01:03:31 PM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


It's across the board. When I shop at Walmart, a medium T-shirt will usually fit me. When I go to the running store, I usually have to get an XL.
 
2014-06-24 01:04:36 PM

Mugato: Super-skinny celebs like Alexa are supposed to be back in vogue

 After all these years of fatties ruling the actress and modeling professions, skinny girls will finally have their time in the spotlight. Our nightmare is over.


*funnied*
 
2014-06-24 01:06:12 PM
About time. I'm the market for a 000. Sometimes 00 is not small enough. I wore a 0 in high school and I weighed less than I do now. Even with middle aged waist, a 00 is usually not small enough. I wear a size 5 shoe, also impossible to find. I'm also 5'0" tall, so pants are too long. Children's pants have no ass in them, and the waist is the same width as the hips. Due to the asslessness of children's pants, I am constantly pulling them up when I sit so as not to provide a free crack giveaway.

People should not hate on tiny women. We deserve clothes too. I'm not anorexic or bulemic, I'm just descended from short, thin people. Plus, with the ascendency of BBW and "curvy" girls, we're told we are ugly, too.
 
2014-06-24 01:06:52 PM

serpent_sky: nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.

Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.


Same here. Big in the shoulders and chest, but if stuff fits in the chest it hangs like a sack, and if it fits in the waist, it's too tight in the shoulders and chest. -_-  "fit-and-flare" dresses seem to work, sometimes, but forget finding a nice blazer or jacket. Big hips + smaller waist and really muscled legs from dancing, and finding jeans is next to impossible, too.  And I'm about your height, so I feel your pain. I might just have to start buying stuff and hemming it.

\Skinny jeans can go DIAF
\\ Bring back flares
\\\8-10 inch difference between bust and waist doesn't help either
 
2014-06-24 01:07:00 PM

serpent_sky: James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.

It doesn't.  My boyfriend admitted he went through my clothes to see what size I wore so he could surprise me for Christmas and couldn't understand how I had everything from a size 5 to a size 11 and they all seemed to be the same.  Or how some of my things were kids' XL considering my bras are 34 DD or 36 D.  Answer? Depends on the brand/store and it's a mystery best left to us.


img.fark.net
 
2014-06-24 01:07:51 PM

serpent_sky: nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.

Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.


Same. Ugh, I hate it so much. Is it really so much to ask for a shirt that fits my bust AND waist? Don't even get me started about jeans.
 
2014-06-24 01:10:41 PM

eeyore102: serpent_sky: nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.

Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.

Same. Ugh, I hate it so much. Is it really so much to ask for a shirt that fits my bust AND waist? Don't even get me started about jeans.


I don't have the bust problem per se -- but I totally concur about the seemingly arbitrary system of clothes sizing that exists.
 
2014-06-24 01:10:44 PM

ZeroPly: James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.

It's across the board. When I shop at Walmart, a medium T-shirt will usually fit me. When I go to the running store, I usually have to get an XL.


Someone could make a joke about what the medium walmart customer looks like compared to the medium running store customer, but that person would be a cad.
 
2014-06-24 01:11:51 PM

serpent_sky: nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.

Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.


Dresses are of the devil. I have the opposite problem: If it fits the tits, the waist/hips are too small; if it fits the hips, the bust is all flappy. They seem to think small waist = small tits and large waist = ginormous tits. It sucks for women on both ends of the spectrum.

Also: Agreed on long dresses. I'm 5', I could hem one of those dresses and have enough fabric leftover to make a whole new skirt. And let's not talk about the summertime obsession with capri pants, or as I call them: pants that look stupid because they're not supposed to actually be pants.

As for the article, I'm a Fatty McFatty and I'm hardly outraged or even care. It's yet more vanity-sizing BS that will make shopping even harder for many women. We need more standardized sizing for womenswear already! It's a big reason I don't shop for clothing much online (or shoes, but that's another gripe for another day). It's at least a 70% sure thing I'll have to return it and that's a pain and huge hassle. As someone above pointed out: companies are losing a lot of sales for this very reason.
 
2014-06-24 01:12:34 PM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


Oh, the reality is about marketing. If show a woman who wears a size 16 an 8 and it fits, she will buy it. If clothing designer A drops a size 8 to a size 6, clothing designer B will drop it to a 4. The average dress size in the US is 14 in today's vanity sizing. In reality, its a size 20. We men have it made, since most of our clothing is measured in inches. Still, some clothes are size S-M-L and these correspond to M-L-XL of a decade ago. For example I have a 33 inch waist, so bought a pair of gym shorts that were medium because a medium has always been 32-34". Well today's medium is 36-38" - a large, which do not fit. The Japanese, because they are smaller, go the opposite direction. A Japanese large is a US small.
 
2014-06-24 01:15:00 PM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


FTFY
 
2014-06-24 01:15:06 PM

nekom: I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches.


I'm going to have to call BS on this one. Go ahead and measure your waist, buddy. 32s haven't been 32" in at least a decade.
 
2014-06-24 01:15:34 PM
I know that my buttier (it's a word, don't bother looking it up) have made statements like "I can buy shirts there, but I have to go to a different store for pants".

And it all ends in a shiat ton of tailoring if they're short.
 
2014-06-24 01:16:17 PM

BigAlly: James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.

FTFY


You better be careful before you light your fedora on fire with that sick burn
 
2014-06-24 01:19:43 PM

JackieRabbit: James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.

Oh, the reality is about marketing. If show a woman who wears a size 16 an 8 and it fits, she will buy it. If clothing designer A drops a size 8 to a size 6, clothing designer B will drop it to a 4. The average dress size in the US is 14 in today's vanity sizing. In reality, its a size 20. We men have it made, since most of our clothing is measured in inches. Still, some clothes are size S-M-L and these correspond to M-L-XL of a decade ago. For example I have a 33 inch waist, so bought a pair of gym shorts that were medium because a medium has always been 32-34". Well today's medium is 36-38" - a large, which do not fit. The Japanese, because they are smaller, go the opposite direction. A Japanese large is a US small.


I find it odd that, at 31" waist and 34" legs, I've had to start shopping at "big and tall" stores if I don't want baggy pants. Off the rack, it looks like I'm wearing these.

cbsjackontheweb.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-06-24 01:19:58 PM

serpent_sky: nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.

Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.


Dresses off the rack may be impossible, but a decent seamstress could probably fix that for you. I basically need a 8-2-4 tall dress, if such a thing existed. So I buy the 8 and get it altered. Usually $25 or so. Compared to the cost of a nice dress, a very minor expense. There have been times when she's said that it just isn't possible for a certain style, so those just get returned. Old Navy's dresses are very forgiving and stretchy, sho they're ok off the rack, but you definitely get what you pay for.
 
2014-06-24 01:21:56 PM
"desirable for women to have the body shape of six-year-old girls "

blogs.riverfronttimes.com
 
2014-06-24 01:22:52 PM

serpent_sky: nekom: They sure don't. To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small. There is no rhyme or reason. I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches. Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything. I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.

Dresses are almost impossible for me, since I have pretty big boobs and most dresses either won't fit over them or will hang off them like a potato sack on the rest of my body because the difference between my waist and chest is significant. Also, being 5'2", the current trend of really long dresses in no way works for me, since there's a ton of fabric for me to trip over at the bottom of all of them.


You just described my first world problems.
 
2014-06-24 01:23:33 PM
I don't understand why we can't get waist/hip/inseam measurements on the tag like men do.  It would save so much time.
 
2014-06-24 01:23:38 PM
there needs to be an actual standard size convention for women

really should more akin to how mens formal wear is sized
 
2014-06-24 01:24:20 PM
Chick in the article? I'LL make HER a sammich. Looks like she damn well needs one, FFS.
 
2014-06-24 01:25:12 PM
Women, always taking centre stage in the freak show of humanity.
 
2014-06-24 01:25:39 PM

jaylectricity: 23" waist is impossibly small? Back in my day, when being skinny wasn't even en vogue, 24" waist line was what was considered hot. 36"X24"36"


Yeah, but the ideal these days is 26-24-26.
 
2014-06-24 01:27:44 PM

GloomCookie613: jaylectricity: 23" waist is impossibly small? Back in my day, when being skinny wasn't even en vogue, 24" waist line was what was considered hot. 36"X24"36"

Only if she's 5'3".


That's more or less an average height.
(5'4.5" now, but 5'3" is within "normal" variation)
 
2014-06-24 01:29:19 PM

James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.


FTFY.
 
2014-06-24 01:30:31 PM
Thread is useless without pics.
 
2014-06-24 01:30:43 PM
Triple-Zero?  You mean my wife *might* be able to buy clothes from US retailers?  She's not even particularly skinny.  She used to be able to buy clothes from the Junior's section, but that ended a few years ago.  Hell, half the stuff in the Junior's section fits *ME*, and I'm six feet tall and 190 pounds.
 
2014-06-24 01:31:33 PM

nekom: James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.

They sure don't.  To make matters worse, one company's size 6 might fit and another's way too big and yet another's way too small.  There is no rhyme or reason.  I wear a 32 waist, that means the circumference is 32 inches.  Take a size 6 dress and no matter what part you measure, nothing will ever add up to 6 of anything.  I really feel sorry for a woman trying to find a perfect fitting outfit.


It not just women's clothes, it's all clothes. I have to hunt around to find shirts that aren't too big, making me look fat, but aren't too small, making my look like a jackass. Hell, even my jean size varies by brand. It all varies by brand. But really, why wouldn't it? There is near infinite variation in body shape and sizes; everyone can't possibly fit into a standard system. Would it be helpful if sizes were standardized? Sure. Would it be realistic to do so? No way, there's way too much variation possible. Your jeans may say "34x32", but there are a lot more measurements that can vary than just inseam and waist. The only solution is to have someone make your clothes custom for you, or to shop around a lot until you find the ones that are shaped for you already. The only reason it's always just "women's clothes are so hard" is most guys just don't give a shiat if their shirt doesn't fit perfectly. Women should either drop their level of caring to be inline with mens, or shut the fark up and accept that with nearly infinite body variation it would be impossible for every company's mass produced clothing to match every body.
 
2014-06-24 01:33:02 PM
So where are these triple-naughty chicks?
 
2014-06-24 01:33:26 PM
Threadjack?  I have this argument when i order a "Medium" soda.  How in the hell do you justify 24oz of soda as medium?  Medium-median-moderate-normal. Pretty close to synonyms right, or at least thats what i hear in my head. Who in the hell thinks 2 cans of soda at once is Medium?

Actually, as I type that, maybe I'm seeing why we need vanity sizing in the first place.
 
2014-06-24 01:33:56 PM

dj_spanmaster: JackieRabbit: James!: Women's clothing sizes seem to have no real connection to reality or logical consistency.

Oh, the reality is about marketing. If show a woman who wears a size 16 an 8 and it fits, she will buy it. If clothing designer A drops a size 8 to a size 6, clothing designer B will drop it to a 4. The average dress size in the US is 14 in today's vanity sizing. In reality, its a size 20. We men have it made, since most of our clothing is measured in inches. Still, some clothes are size S-M-L and these correspond to M-L-XL of a decade ago. For example I have a 33 inch waist, so bought a pair of gym shorts that were medium because a medium has always been 32-34". Well today's medium is 36-38" - a large, which do not fit. The Japanese, because they are smaller, go the opposite direction. A Japanese large is a US small.

I find it odd that, at 31" waist and 34" legs, I've had to start shopping at "big and tall" stores if I don't want baggy pants. Off the rack, it looks like I'm wearing these.

[cbsjackontheweb.files.wordpress.com image 254x334]


[oddly-appropriate I username.jpg]
 
2014-06-24 01:34:33 PM
Vanity sizing has been around for years. This isn't new.

I think it's great that women who aren't hamplanets will be again able to find clothes that aren't from the kid section or made to measure.
 
Displayed 50 of 143 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report