Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site h-sc1.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!h-sc1!desjardins From: desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: The "Weight" Problem Message-ID: <292@h-sc1.UUCP> Date: Tue, 23-Apr-85 15:38:16 EST Article-I.D.: h-sc1.292 Posted: Tue Apr 23 15:38:16 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 26-Apr-85 05:39:50 EST References: <3613@alice.UUCP> Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center Lines: 22 > > It's been my experience that most women's clothing, especially > "designer" or "good" clothing, two different adjectives here> is built for the size seven model, > and size 12 (about which I am informed) is > build for someone with a waist the size of Mount Olympus, since there > is bloody well NO scaling (it's called "fitting" for some silly reason) > to different *relative* sizes of larger/smaller women. Due to the lack > of change of pattern/(in a shoe it would be called "last") the person > in size 12 clothing LOOKS FAT, regardless of whether she is fat, slightly > pudgy, or actually skinny (relative to the "best" body weight). My experience has been a little different, mostly with designer jeans -- they're ALL size 6. Except the size 3's. Size 7 doesn't fit me, size 9 (which I usually wear) doesn't fit, 11 - no, 13 -no, and they don't make them any bigger. It's the same problem -- they just assume that everybody has what they consider to be the "ideal" body (no hips, no rear end, no thighs, and VERY short) -- or if they don't, then they should squeeze them- selves into these jeans anyway (which lots of locals around here (Boston) do and look disgusting). marie desjardins