What's Wrong with Women's Clothes
Feb. 28th, 2020 02:45 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ysabetwordsmithLots 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.
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.
Online
Date: 2020-02-28 10:20 pm (UTC)It is a gigantic pain in the tuchus.
And, frankly, it's still not terribly accurate.
Re: Online
Date: 2020-02-28 11:01 pm (UTC)Some companies just have letter or number sizes and refuse to tell you measurements. Most give just 1-2 measurements if they give any.
But then there are the cool ones. The places that give a whole sizing chart with a dozen measurements. The places that have 3-6 body types and the shape is pictured for each garment what types it is designed to fit. The places where you can customize what sleeves, neckline, and hemline you want on a dress.
I don't know how accurate the cool ones are, but I would bet their customers get better results than from the previous categories of sellers. This is because many of the companies doing detailed fits exist because their founder(s) got fed up with the shitty sizing nonsense. It is a good business strategy to meet needs that your competitors are failing!
Re: Online
Date: 2020-02-29 02:37 am (UTC)http://retrorack.blogspot.com/2014/07/gails-10-rules-of-shopping-eshakti.html?m=1
Re: Online
Date: 2020-02-29 08:04 pm (UTC)