Ryan
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 16, 2014 13:40:36 GMT -5
Posts: 2,218
|
Post by Ryan on May 5, 2017 8:44:41 GMT -5
I don't know how companies can make sizing easier, but it doesn't seem like it's an easy task. Even if you break the sizing into body size (twig, pear, etc), you'll still have people complaining that it doesn't fit them right because of XYZ. It's not as simple as guys pants/shirts.
Most companies probably won't admit it but they don't really want to sell dresses for people that are outliers. They can stick with the x% that falls within these sizes and then forget about the rest.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,247
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 5, 2017 9:00:24 GMT -5
With blouses/shirts I have found buying mens shirts do very well for me. I have to cut the length about 4-6 inches and long sleeves I roll up. My peeve now in women's pants are the skinny pants and capris ........ I can't wear either one, no matter what the size ................. grrrrrrrrrrrr Of course I'm an OF but would like clothes that look good on me. I don't want the frumpy Hillary look but that is what is available What is an OF?
|
|
WholeLottaNothin
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 15:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 1,721
|
Post by WholeLottaNothin on May 5, 2017 9:46:48 GMT -5
Old Fart?
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,049
|
Post by MJ2.0 on May 5, 2017 10:02:22 GMT -5
it's not about "want", it's about profitability and return on investment. I guess there aren't enough bigger people to persuade the average clothing stores to cater to larger people. If bigger people were the norm and smaller people were the minority, you would definitely see a change in their offerings.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on May 5, 2017 10:26:11 GMT -5
it's not about "want", it's about profitability and return on investment. I guess there aren't enough bigger people to persuade the average clothing stores to cater to larger people. If bigger people were the norm and smaller people were the minority, you would definitely see a change in their offerings. That's what I'm commenting on in my first post in the thread. If the average size is now 14, that's a new norm that the retailers obviously haven't yet reacted to, IMO. Anne's post about women in that size not shopping indicates to me that part of the problem is that there aren't appealing clothes in those sizes. Sure, some people might be waiting to change size, but if there were appealing, well fitting clothes in size 14, then women would be buying them.
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,049
|
Post by MJ2.0 on May 5, 2017 10:30:36 GMT -5
it's not about "want", it's about profitability and return on investment. I guess there aren't enough bigger people to persuade the average clothing stores to cater to larger people. If bigger people were the norm and smaller people were the minority, you would definitely see a change in their offerings. That's what I'm commenting on in my first post in the thread. If the average size is now 14, that's a new norm that the retailers obviously haven't yet reacted to, IMO. Anne's post about women in that size not shopping indicates to me that part of the problem is that there aren't appealing clothes in those sizes. Sure, some people might be waiting to change size, but if there were appealing, well fitting clothes in size 14, then women would be buying them. I'm seeing a lot of boutique type plus-sized stores that are opening up. A lot of their stuff is really cute! But I can see how it would be annoying to not have the option to get my clothes at places like The Limited/Ann Taylor/etc. I've encountered many beautiful and stylish plus sized women, but I have no idea what their clothing expenses are like or how hard it was to find things that look really good on them.
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on May 5, 2017 10:38:08 GMT -5
When I was in a 14, I was not plus size--plus size clothes were too large. Maybe a 16 would be the start of plus sizes? It's exactly like Milee said--there wasn't anything appealing that I could find, so I just got away with as little as I could.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 48,110
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on May 5, 2017 10:40:50 GMT -5
My guess is that it's way cheaper and they make more profit when they keep their designs cookie cutter rather than setting things up to manufacture clothes to fit individual women in the real world.
Kinda like how all Barbies look alike, they are designed to be mass produced. One type of head fits on one type of body, all you have to change is some small differences and you have "diversity" without sacrificing profit.
I don't know anyone who can wear the majority of clothing straight off the rack, myself included and according to snotty comments that have been made in my direction at times I am the one clothes are "supposed" to fit.
Just because I am tiny doesn't mean my body proportions are the same as every other tiny woman on the planet. I have long legs. If I try to wear petite pants I either look like an oompa loompa because the knees/thigh portion of the pants don't hit where they are supposed to or I look like my pants shrank because several inches of ankle are visible.
But petite tops and jackets fit perfectly. So I have to shop in two different departments if I want clothes that fit. I think that's pretty much the norm for the majority of us.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on May 5, 2017 12:08:42 GMT -5
I wonder if some of the "marketing to those sizes" isn't impacted by the premise that it's simply harder to make things generically flattering for those sizes due to such differences in body types. As a general rule, the larger something gets, the more variety you get in the makeup of that size. I'll use men as an example in hopes that leads to me getting flamed a lot less, but I think the same probably applies to women (a size 16 who is very busty compared to a size 16 who is not). If you're a guy who wears a small t-shirt size...you probably look a lot like most every other guy who wears a small t-shirt size (assuming it fits you and you're not wearing shirts way too tight for you). If you're a guy who wears an XXL t-shirt size, you could have huge shoulders and chest because you work out, or you could have small shoulders and a big gut. It takes totally different cuts to make those things look good on those 2 different guys. You're probably also looking at a broader ranges of height, etc.
So let's get to "average size"...what does "average" mean in this case? Is it the median, the mean, the mode? Those could mean very different things in terms of 14-16 being average. It could also be that for sizes 14-16 you need enough different cuts for enough different body shapes that the average size+cut is actually a completely different size (maybe a size 8 which has only 2 cuts or something). Here's the part I'm sure will get me flamed...it's probably SUPER easy to make clothes for a size 2, or 4, or whatever. You can throw a burlap sack on someone with great/fit body and they'll look good. You can't throw a burlap sack on someone who's larger and expect that it's going to look good on them. It HAS to be more work. Using the t-shirt example above, I'm a tall guy with big shoulders...tossing a normal t-shirt on me looks terrible, there's just way too much fabric in the stomach area and has to be 2 sizes too big in the first place so it's long enough...so to actually get a good shirt I have to get a different size, athletic cut, plus it has to be a "tall" version. I'm sure that's a lot more work than a manufacturer just spitting on "here's a small".
I'm going to guess there's also some chicken/egg logic going on with retailers. I'm guessing they have some research that says size 14-16 don't do as much shopping in brick-and-mortar outlets as smaller sizes...which is probably 100% true. But do they not do the shopping there because they don't want to...or because they've figured out it's useless to since they don't carry their sizes?
Totally agree that the biggest part of the problem is that a 5' tall size 16 and a 6' tall size 16 are different, that different body shapes come into play, etc. But that exact issue is the opportunity. Not one retailer has really cracked that code and designers seem to want to stick to the current sizing system. IMHO, a savvy retailer would create a sizing system that's slightly outside the paradigm. Maybe there are still sizes, but within sizes there is a cute name for apple, stick and pear shapes for example... because a 16 apple needs a very different fit than a 16 stick or a 16 pear. In the past, there might not have been the numbers of people to justify this type of stratification, but the population is large enough now that makers could do this and still have economic order quantities plus be a godsend to women. Well there's an opportunity, the question is whether it's more likely to be an opportunity to make money, or to lose your shirt. There's also the question of barriers to entry to take market share from some of the big-name companies already catering to these sizes specifically.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 5, 2017 12:27:48 GMT -5
I don't know where "Scary Mommy" lives such that she believes people weren't concerned about her being dramatically underweight, but I'm guessing the real reason is because nobody deduced she had a problem.
Also, you have to know somebody pretty darn well to feel comfortable "thin shaming" them. The criticism would have to be something more than a casual "You're all skin and bones." or "Look at how skinny you are.", which could easily be mistaken for compliments. You'd have to really grind it in that they're killing themselves and they look terrible. Have fun with that.
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,049
|
Post by MJ2.0 on May 5, 2017 12:31:12 GMT -5
I don't know where "Scary Mommy" lives such that she believes people weren't concerned about her being dramatically underweight, but I'm guessing the real reason is because nobody deduced she had a problem. Also, you have to know somebody pretty darn well to feel comfortable "thin shaming" them. The criticism would have to be something more than a casual "You're all skin and bones." or " Look at how skinny you are.", which could easily be mistaken for compliments. You'd have to really grind it in that they're killing themselves and they look terrible. Have fun with that. these do not sound positive/complimentary to me.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on May 5, 2017 12:32:48 GMT -5
it's not about "want", it's about profitability and return on investment. I guess there aren't enough bigger people to persuade the average clothing stores to cater to larger people. If bigger people were the norm and smaller people were the minority, you would definitely see a change in their offerings. That's what I'm commenting on in my first post in the thread. If the average size is now 14, that's a new norm that the retailers obviously haven't yet reacted to, IMO. Anne's post about women in that size not shopping indicates to me that part of the problem is that there aren't appealing clothes in those sizes. Sure, some people might be waiting to change size, but if there were appealing, well fitting clothes in size 14, then women would be buying them. Crap, PB ate my post. Point is..."average" matters in terms of how you get to it. Looking at a few quick google searches, looks like lots of folks use "average"/mean waist size and weight to get to this. Mean isn't necessarily something you want to tailor retail to. The "mean" population center of the US seems to fluctuate between Missouri and Kansas...neither actually has all that large of a population...the distribution matters (in that case, heavy coastal populations that pull the mean to a place that does not have a heavy population).
You could see a shift from an average size of 10 to 14-16 simply by having a bunch of size 0-2 move to size 6-8...or by having a bunch of women who used to be size 14-16 move to size 20-22. You could actually have a smaller population of size 14-16 than ever...just because it's the "average" doesn't mean the group itself has grown. It would be critical to a retailer to understand the actual distribution...perhaps the reality is that the distribution of the sizes doesn't warrant much more retail space. It's certainly not enough to simply know the arithmetic mean of sizes.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on May 5, 2017 12:39:12 GMT -5
I don't know where "Scary Mommy" lives such that she believes people weren't concerned about her being dramatically underweight, but I'm guessing the real reason is because nobody deduced she had a problem. Also, you have to know somebody pretty darn well to feel comfortable "thin shaming" them. The criticism would have to be something more than a casual "You're all skin and bones." or " Look at how skinny you are.", which could easily be mistaken for compliments. You'd have to really grind it in that they're killing themselves and they look terrible. Have fun with that. these do not sound positive/complimentary to me. Ok so try "You look like you've lost some weight" vs "You look like you've gained some weight". Pretty much the same comment...but MOST people are going to handle one very differently than the other.
Or "you're so thin those pants are practically falling off of you" vs "you're so fat those pants look like they're ready to burst"...the latter is going to be "fat shaming", the former is rarely going to be taken that way.
Like it or not, MOST people would like to weigh less than they do vs weighing more than they do...so the 2 simply aren't taken the same way by most folks.
Virgil is right in that the same kind of casual comments usually don't hit people as "thin shaming" as the corresponding casual comment would for "fat shaming"...and probably with good reason...most people aren't trying to shame thin people with those same comments.
|
|
MJ2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 24, 2014 10:27:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,049
|
Post by MJ2.0 on May 5, 2017 12:44:45 GMT -5
Maybe I'm just weird or crotchety, but I don't see a reason to make ANY unprovoked comments on someone's weight or body shape. I had a friend who was thin and wanted to gain weight - she hated people commenting on how skinny she was. Is it so hard to just say "you look nice today" or nothing at all?
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on May 5, 2017 12:52:49 GMT -5
Maybe I'm just weird or crotchety, but I don't see a reason to make ANY unprovoked comments on someone's weight or body shape. I had a friend who was thin and wanted to gain weight - she hated people commenting on how skinny she was. Is it so hard to just say "you look nice today" or nothing at all? I think the disconnect is that a lot of people take "you look like you've lost some weight" to be equal to "you look good today" because thin=good and fat=bad.
Nothing at all is fine, but then you'll be accused of not being friendly...or being too stuffy.
No matter what you do, you'll always find a way to offend someone. I typically don't say anything (because I just don't care, not being I'm being polite by not commenting) and I get people who go out of their way to get me to comment on them (clothes, weight, etc). I think you'll find that people don't really care if it is provoked or unprovoked...the comment means the same thing to them if you say "you look fat" regardless of whether they asked for your opinion.
|
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,292
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on May 5, 2017 13:11:51 GMT -5
Doesn't lane bryant already do this?
And who does Ashley graham model for?
|
|
Chocolate Lover
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -5
Posts: 23,200
|
Post by Chocolate Lover on May 5, 2017 14:07:54 GMT -5
Doesn't lane bryant already do this? And who does Ashley graham model for? LB makes some ugly overpriced crap. IF you can find a simple t-shirt that isn't covered in stupid designs or glitter or ugly pictures it'll still cost you $30 and still tear up/wear out at the same rate the $8 t-shirt from Target will. It's just as hard to find something there as it is the "normal" stores. (former customer who never wants to go back)
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on May 5, 2017 14:16:27 GMT -5
Do you have an "Addition-Elle" in your neck of the woods?
They seem to have some nice clothes.
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 31,345
|
Post by andi9899 on May 5, 2017 15:09:19 GMT -5
My guess is that it's way cheaper and they make more profit when they keep their designs cookie cutter rather than setting things up to manufacture clothes to fit individual women in the real world. Kinda like how all Barbies look alike, they are designed to be mass produced. One type of head fits on one type of body, all you have to change is some small differences and you have "diversity" without sacrificing profit. I don't know anyone who can wear the majority of clothing straight off the rack, myself included and according to snotty comments that have been made in my direction at times I am the one clothes are "supposed" to fit. Just because I am tiny doesn't mean my body proportions are the same as every other tiny woman on the planet. I have long legs. If I try to wear petite pants I either look like an oompa loompa because the knees/thigh portion of the pants don't hit where they are supposed to or I look like my pants shrank because several inches of ankle are visible. But petite tops and jackets fit perfectly. So I have to shop in two different departments if I want clothes that fit. I think that's pretty much the norm for the majority of us. I'm the exact opposite. I have to have petite pants and even those are too long sometimes. Petite shirts and jackets are too short. I feel your pain.
|
|
andi9899
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 6, 2011 10:22:29 GMT -5
Posts: 31,345
|
Post by andi9899 on May 5, 2017 15:14:08 GMT -5
Dress shirts when you are busty, however, can be a nightmare. Amen! Unless you want to buy shirts too big just so you can button them. Then the rest is just hanging off of you which is not a good look.
|
|
|
Post by empress of self-improvement on May 5, 2017 15:36:39 GMT -5
Doesn't lane bryant already do this? And who does Ashley graham model for? LB makes some ugly overpriced crap. IF you can find a simple t-shirt that isn't covered in stupid designs or glitter or ugly pictures it'll still cost you $30 and still tear up/wear out at the same rate the $8 t-shirt from Target will. It's just as hard to find something there as it is the "normal" stores. (former customer who never wants to go back) I only go to Lane Bryant for the jeans and even then I have been actually picking them up at Shit-Mart. Bootcut jeans are the only ones I like. I hate everything else. And I'm fat, not dead. I don't need nor want a muumuu covered in flowers. Gag.
|
|
Chocolate Lover
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -5
Posts: 23,200
|
Post by Chocolate Lover on May 5, 2017 15:47:34 GMT -5
LB makes some ugly overpriced crap. IF you can find a simple t-shirt that isn't covered in stupid designs or glitter or ugly pictures it'll still cost you $30 and still tear up/wear out at the same rate the $8 t-shirt from Target will. It's just as hard to find something there as it is the "normal" stores. (former customer who never wants to go back) I only go to Lane Bryant for the jeans and even then I have been actually picking them up at Shit-Mart. Bootcut jeans are the only ones I like. I hate everything else. And I'm fat, not dead. I don't need nor want a muumuu covered in flowers. Gag. Yeah, I got tired of paying huge prices for jeans that gave in to the thigh rub faster than the cheap ones did. My Walmart jeans seriously outlasted my last LB pair. I had a couple of camis from LB that were 14/16, and they came down to mid thigh if i pulled them straight down. How wide did they expect me to be?!
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 39,512
|
Post by chiver78 on May 5, 2017 15:55:22 GMT -5
I only go to Lane Bryant for the jeans and even then I have been actually picking them up at Shit-Mart. Bootcut jeans are the only ones I like. I hate everything else. And I'm fat, not dead. I don't need nor want a muumuu covered in flowers. Gag. Yeah, I got tired of paying huge prices for jeans that gave in to the thigh rub faster than the cheap ones did. My Walmart jeans seriously outlasted my last LB pair. I had a couple of camis from LB that were 14/16, and they came down to mid thigh if i pulled them straight down. How wide did they expect me to be?! guess I know where I need to shop next! I love layering tanks under things, that's plenty long enough! please tell me there is NOT a built-in bra...? those damn things give me uniboob. ick. as far as jeans, I had the best luck for years buying Old Navy's "Diva" in bootcut. I haven't figured out what is now the closest since they redid their designs, though. I've been wearing out an old pair that I fit into again, these were my favorite the first time around. I hope they survive til they are too big for me!
|
|
|
Post by empress of self-improvement on May 5, 2017 15:57:35 GMT -5
I only go to Lane Bryant for the jeans and even then I have been actually picking them up at Shit-Mart. Bootcut jeans are the only ones I like. I hate everything else. And I'm fat, not dead. I don't need nor want a muumuu covered in flowers. Gag. Yeah, I got tired of paying huge prices for jeans that gave in to the thigh rub faster than the cheap ones did. My Walmart jeans seriously outlasted my last LB pair. I had a couple of camis from LB that were 14/16, and they came down to mid thigh if i pulled them straight down. How wide did they expect me to be?! They expect the boobs to be as huge as the rest of us? Mine aren't quite that ginormous, TYVM. I have managed to keep my jeans for a pretty long while, even with the thigh rub wear out, but that would probably be because I had to wear a uniform when I worked at Panera and the rest of the time I was usually in my pajamas. Kind of like right now. Sadly those days have come to an end and I need to buy new jeans to replace them. They look so new except where there are 2 strands of thread on the inner thighs. <<sigh>> Even when I weigh less, I inherited thunder thighs from my grandmother so they are NEVER going to not meet in the middle.
|
|
Chocolate Lover
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -5
Posts: 23,200
|
Post by Chocolate Lover on May 5, 2017 16:00:15 GMT -5
Yeah, I got tired of paying huge prices for jeans that gave in to the thigh rub faster than the cheap ones did. My Walmart jeans seriously outlasted my last LB pair. I had a couple of camis from LB that were 14/16, and they came down to mid thigh if i pulled them straight down. How wide did they expect me to be?! guess I know where I need to shop next! I love layering tanks under things, that's plenty long enough! please tell me there is NOT a built-in bra...? those damn things give me uniboob. ick. as far as jeans, I had the best luck for years buying Old Navy's "Diva" in bootcut. I haven't figured out what is now the closest since they redid their designs, though. I've been wearing out an old pair that I fit into again, these were my favorite the first time around. I hope they survive til they are too big for me! No built in bra. I have some Old Navy but unless they're on sale... I'm too cheap to spend a lot on jeans that are going to wear out
|
|
Chocolate Lover
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 15:54:19 GMT -5
Posts: 23,200
|
Post by Chocolate Lover on May 5, 2017 16:01:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I got tired of paying huge prices for jeans that gave in to the thigh rub faster than the cheap ones did. My Walmart jeans seriously outlasted my last LB pair. I had a couple of camis from LB that were 14/16, and they came down to mid thigh if i pulled them straight down. How wide did they expect me to be?! They expect the boobs to be as huge as the rest of us? Mine aren't quite that ginormous, TYVM. I have managed to keep my jeans for a pretty long while, even with the thigh rub wear out, but that would probably be because I had to wear a uniform when I worked at Panera and the rest of the time I was usually in my pajamas. Kind of like right now. Sadly those days have come to an end and I need to buy new jeans to replace them. They look so new except where there are 2 strands of thread on the inner thighs. <<sigh>> Even when I weigh less, I inherited thunder thighs from my grandmother so they are NEVER going to not meet in the middle. Mine were pretty big (think I was in a G at the time) but there wasn't enough gut to make up the difference in length.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 39,512
|
Post by chiver78 on May 5, 2017 16:05:09 GMT -5
guess I know where I need to shop next! I love layering tanks under things, that's plenty long enough! please tell me there is NOT a built-in bra...? those damn things give me uniboob. ick. as far as jeans, I had the best luck for years buying Old Navy's "Diva" in bootcut. I haven't figured out what is now the closest since they redid their designs, though. I've been wearing out an old pair that I fit into again, these were my favorite the first time around. I hope they survive til they are too big for me! No built in bra. I have some Old Navy but unless they're on sale... I'm too cheap to spend a lot on jeans that are going to wear out I was too cheap to spend much $ at all, not intending to be this size for long. years later, well.... but anyway, I only buy them when they are on sale, too. $20 usually.
|
|
sesfw
Junior Associate
Today is the first day of the rest of my life
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 15:45:17 GMT -5
Posts: 6,268
|
Post by sesfw on May 5, 2017 18:33:21 GMT -5
All I can say is ............ Thank heavens for thrift stores
When I worked for SA many years ago I discovered I could buy better quality clothes from a thrift store than I could afford at a new store.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 5, 2017 21:01:25 GMT -5
OK. Survey time. Body Weight VisualizerI've put in the settings for a 40-year-old female, 5'8". The slider allows the weight to change and the image will adapt accordingly. What is the lowest weight that you'd consider "too fat"--in the sense that you'd start feeling unattractive? Make the determination based on the appearance of the graphic.
|
|
msventoux
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 12, 2011 22:32:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,037
|
Post by msventoux on May 5, 2017 21:48:01 GMT -5
these do not sound positive/complimentary to me. Ok so try "You look like you've lost some weight" vs "You look like you've gained some weight". Pretty much the same comment...but MOST people are going to handle one very differently than the other.
Or "you're so thin those pants are practically falling off of you" vs "you're so fat those pants look like they're ready to burst"...the latter is going to be "fat shaming", the former is rarely going to be taken that way.
Like it or not, MOST people would like to weigh less than they do vs weighing more than they do...so the 2 simply aren't taken the same way by most folks.
Virgil is right in that the same kind of casual comments usually don't hit people as "thin shaming" as the corresponding casual comment would for "fat shaming"...and probably with good reason...most people aren't trying to shame thin people with those same comments.
Beg to differ. I was extremely thin when I was younger. Not anorexia thin, but very, very thin. And I ate like a horse and never gained weight until a few years ago. There was no end to the comments I received. "Oh, look at you, you're going to blow away. You need some meat on your bones; guys want something to hold onto. You're so skinny, you need to eat more." Of course, all the comments came from people heavier than I was. I didn't take them as compliments and I don't believe they were meant to be. Comments came from family, friends and complete strangers. To this day I still hate eating in public. Not because I have issues with food, but because it always led to more comments; from people I was dining with, sometimes waitstaff and sometimes random people. I cleaned my plate; clearly I had an eating disorder. I didn't clean my plate; I must have an eating disorder. I ate a reasonable amount; I must be going to binge/purge later. Maybe people can mind their own business and not comment on the appearance of others. If they absolutely have to comment, maybe a generic comment that they look great and leave it at that.
|
|