That's Progress, Sugar
I will paraphrase: "there are so many fat people now, we have to actually make clothes for them. Also, it turns out that they have money, and occasionally spend it on clothing. Wow!" Duh.
"As waistlines expand across America, fashionable plus-size clothes are proliferating and moving into the mainstream. In some cases, plus sizes are leaving the outer fringes of the store floor to hang next to 'regular-sized' clothes... But it took decades for many retailers to see the light. 'The stores did not want the plus-size woman to mix with the svelte and slender,' Barnard said. 'Bad for the image, they felt.'"
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank each of my svelte and slender friends for risking their image in order to mix with me, the plus-size woman.
"As waistlines expand across America, fashionable plus-size clothes are proliferating and moving into the mainstream. In some cases, plus sizes are leaving the outer fringes of the store floor to hang next to 'regular-sized' clothes... But it took decades for many retailers to see the light. 'The stores did not want the plus-size woman to mix with the svelte and slender,' Barnard said. 'Bad for the image, they felt.'"
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank each of my svelte and slender friends for risking their image in order to mix with me, the plus-size woman.
posted by mo pie at 7:11 AM
8 Comments:
I always thought the division of sizes was a psychological thing too. I have to admit I get uncomfortable shopping right next to a super-skinny size 0 girls. When I was looking for a belt the other day two skinny teeny-boppers walked down the aisle next to me. I was silently screaming "Be gone thin girls! I don't want you to see me looking for a 46" belt over here."
You have to love the comment that plus-size women are "very, very loyal" to brands. Besides the fact that makes us sound like lapdogs, could it be because there are so few brands for us to choose from? Ergo, the "loyalty" is a result of a lack of choice (desperation, let's say)?
Sheesh.
But... what? Where do retailers get these ideas in the first place? I'm generally a size 6, and I can't imagine why I would give it a second thought if someone were shopping for size 22 dress on the same rack at Ann Taylor. Like the dress would be less cute on me if someone who was a different size also looked cute? Pfft. Twits, all of them.
Did this phrase jump out at anybody else?
"a chain of plus-size lingerie stores nationwide called Cacique. The stores will carry sizes 12 to 28 and feature larger dressing rooms with tri-fold mirrors for viewing at different angles."
Larger dressing rooms are always good, it's nice not to feel cramped, but the way it's worded makes it sound like we larger women need bigger rooms because we might get wedged in the regular ones, and bigger mirrors too, for viewing our ample posteriors.
Shish.
On a less bitchy note, a couple of friends of mine who have lost weight greatly lament being unable to wear Cacique bras any more. I hear they are faboo.
I saw this article and was flabbergasted. I hate those retailers. It's like they decided since fat people have disposable income and can purchase their crap clothes, they'll acknowledge us and make fucking clothes for us. Bullshit. I am so angry. It's exploitation.
This is why I love mail order. And Daffy's.
I, too, can't see why a skinny person would mind a larger person wearing the same styles. Surely even a nasty and arrogant skinny person would think "I'm going to look so much better in that than she will" rather than "How dare she wear what I'm wearing"?
The only shop I can think of that has a separate section for larger sizes is H&M, and as far as I can tell, the styles are different (more tops with sleeves, for one thing) so it might be based on making it easier to find certain items. On the other hand, many of the clothes in the non-plus section seem to go up to size 20 - a good thing - so there's a fair degree of overlap, and it doesn't make it that much easier to find what you're looking for. (Furthermore, H&M have the most inconsistent sizing I have ever come across. I have clothes from there ranging from UK 14 to 20. Also, none of their trousers ever fit me in any size. I must be an odd shape.)
So I don't really know why they do it. I reckon less thought goes into stores' policies than we might assume. Besides which, frankly I'd like to be able to buy T-shirts with decent-length sleeves in size 14, too - why should they make assumptions about how much flesh you want to show based on your size?
As for it being easier to find skinny guys' trousers in the UK... this only seems to hold if your inside leg is the same length or shorter than your waist measurement, or at least this is what I've gleaned from shopping with my husband (32 waist, 34 leg). It's OK if you're thin, but not tall and thin. (Yes, I've told him I'd love to have his problem... but nicely!)
Responding to: "On a less bitchy note, a couple of friends of mine who have lost weight greatly lament being unable to wear Cacique bras any more. I hear they are faboo."
I think they are similar to Victoria's Secret type lingerie in a larger size range. No big deal to me, not that well made, don't last that long, not even all that cute.
I prefer Felina (which offers larger sizes! and is moderately priced) and Chantelle (which is super expensive, so not really comparable to Cacique). Both are available at department stores such as Nordstrom's or Macys, not in specialty shops such as Cacique. Or available online.
Michele
Post a Comment
<< Home