ysabetwordsmith | What's Wrong with Women's Clothes

Lots of things.

Among the worst is sizing. By this point it is basically meaningless. I can take a whole armload of clothes into a fitting room and 0 of them fit. It's one of several reasons I can't shop for clothes online except for extremely simple things like T-shirts.

But there's a simple fix for that issue, and people aren't thinking of it.

1) Require designers to print the measurements of each garment. So numbers will fit on tags, I propose:

TOPS / FULL-BODY GARMENTS
Bust at (width / distance below neckline)
Waist at (width / distance below neckline)
Hips at (width / distance below neckline)
Length (total distance between neckline and hemline)

BOTTOMS
Waist at (width / distance below neckline)
Hips at (width / distance below neckline)
Length (total distance between neckline and hemline)

2) Require that sizes be accurate, permitting a fault tolerance no more than 3/8 of the size difference. If it's a half-size bigger than the label says, it's fraud.

Designers could still print their own brand sizes (Small, Medium, Large or Aardvark, Windmill, Doorbell -- whatever) because it's convenient to have an approximate idea of range. But with physical measurements on the garments, people would have a better idea what would fit their body without needing to drag a tape measure to the store.

An alternative is expanding the use of bodyscanners, but that has rampant privacy issues in a civilization with no real privacy protections left. If the numbers are on the clothes and required by law to be accurate, then people can carry their measurements in the privacy of their own minds and just compare those to the tags.

EDIT 2/29/20: Various folks have suggested other measurements that determine wearability. There are many of these. They will not ALL fit on a tag, unless it is a full sheet of paper which is unfeasible. A scancode is useful only to people who carry a smartphone, which is not everyone. Hence, I suggest a summary of 3-4 measurements on the tag and the rest online or a separate display instore. For reference:

See detailed lists of measurements and how to take them for WOMEN, MEN, and CHILDREN. If you fit none of those categories or your body is quirky, consider browsing all of them to determine which measurements seem relevant to your needs.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Now I'm imagining a gag line of men's clothes catering to the /Female/ Gaze...think like what they did in Maddie and Tae's music video for Girl in a Country Song.

Believe it or not, that's how men's clothes are often advertised online if they have a man wearing them and not just folded for display. I ran into this when trying to find images of men in particular outfits.

Behold the Assumed Female Gaze.

He looks like a page from a pinup calendar. Do you think a man would enjoy looking at another man's clothes practically falling off his body? Do you think most men want to wear a shirt half open and untucked? I don't. Unless they are trawling for sex at the moment, most men put their bodies away. Hell, many men don't care how they look, they just want clothes that fit and don't get them bitched at. (Gay men seem to be an exception to most of these rules, but such advertising is not limited to gay magazines.)

To me, that picture looks like it's selling the shirt to a woman who is going to put it on a man she wants to see in it, not selling to a man who's going to wear it himself.

>> Gay men seem to be an exception to most of these rules <<

Which doesn't help much for me. One of the two categories into which way too much of the nonstandard stuff in the "men's" department seems to fall is "I am so manly that my manliness overwhelms the features of this garment that you presume are feminine." Fine if one wishes to proclaim their manliness, but useless for those of us who do not.

>> it's selling the shirt to a woman who is going to put it on a man she wants to see in it <<

Which aligns nicely with the trope that men like to count on women who can pick out their clothes for them.

>>Which doesn't help much for me. One of the two categories into which way too much of the nonstandard stuff in the "men's" department seems to fall is "I am so manly that my manliness overwhelms the features of this garment that you presume are feminine." Fine if one wishes to proclaim their manliness, but useless for those of us who do not.<<

Sadly so.

I confess that one of the few shades of pink I don't entirely despise is what I can rosepetal and might as well be called mobster, and another is the hot pink favored by gay men. Advertising masculinity, as you put it, from an odd angle.

On the bright side, there are more companies now that offer gender-neutral clothes, including some for adults. So that's convenient. I almost never see them in stores -- most are online -- but sometimes I get lucky.

>>Which aligns nicely with the trope that men like to count on women who can pick out their clothes for them.<<

Plenty of men do. If that works in their relationship, fine.

>> [...] the hot pink favored by gay men. Advertising masculinity, as you put it, from an odd angle. <<

Puts me in mind of the cheeky answer one of my gay friends has for the perennial "which one of you is the woman" question with the subtext of who's penetrating whom: "Neither of us. Gay men love men."

>> Plenty of men do. If that works in their relationship, fine. <<

Indeed. I was more noting that the existence of the trope supports the likelihood of the campaign's success, though.

>>Puts me in mind of the cheeky answer one of my gay friends has for the perennial "which one of you is the woman" question with the subtext of who's penetrating whom: "Neither of us. Gay men love men." <<

ZOT!

>>Indeed. I was more noting that the existence of the trope supports the likelihood of the campaign's success, though.<<

It probably does.

However, there's a business opportunity for someone to present men with this shopping experience:

"Here are my measurements, preferred colors, and work/casual requirements. I need a clothing capsule for fall/winter."

*ten minutes and a cup of coffee later*

"Here is your clothing capsule. That will be $250."

"Awesome!"

I imagine millions of men would appreciate that option. It's not that different from some current options -- there are few places selling capsules to women -- but I haven't seen anyone doing it for men. And I have observed that many men just don't want to bother with shopping. Aside from occasionally buying a statement T-shirt they see and love, most of them would rather have someone else present them with a functional set of clothes that don't suck, so they can spend their time doing something other than shopping.

>>Hell, many men don't care how they look, they just want clothes that fit and don't get them bitched at.<<
I'm female, and that's usually how I feel about wearing clothes. Occasionally I want to dress up and look pretty, but even then I want comfy stuff I can move in. And I'll usually be covering up collarbones down, allowing fot bare arms in summer and bare ankles/lower calves with a skirt.

>>Unless they are trawling for sex at the moment, most men put their bodies away.<<
Combined with common female 'fashion' this makes a disturbing sort of Fridge Logic for why rude men seem to think women want to be constantly sexualized. [Grumble.]
On a related note, if anyone needs to cover neck/collarbones/shoulders or make a snug dress less 'revealing', experiment with scarves (the big Pashmina sized ones) and pins; you can do all sorts of things and look really classy.

>>To me, that picture looks like it's selling the shirt to a woman who is going to put it on a man she wants to see in it, not selling to a man who's going to wear it himself.<<
I buy someone clothes, I get what they want, not what they look sexy in (unless that is what they want, but then they should probably do their own shopping.)

Now I'm imagining the Pit Crew's fashon designer (whose name escapes me at the moment) getting a rewquest from a prospective male clint who wants to "be attractive to women" and gets a very loooong discussion from the celibate villaness, the lesbian, chick, the bi, chick, and well, everybody else about exactly how intricate a topic that actually is. Hey, even if he's being obnoxius, he asked first, instead of just assUme-ing.

What's Wrong with Women's Clothes

Re: And then there's this

Re: And then there's this

Re: And then there's this

Re: And then there's this

Re: And then there's this

Re: And then there's this

Re: And then there's this