Vanity sizing

Vanity sizing, or size inflation, is the phenomenon of ready-to-wear clothing of the same nominal size becoming bigger in physical size over time.[1][2][3] This has been documented primarily in the United States and the United Kingdom.[4] US standard clothing sizes are no longer used by manufacturers as the official guidelines for clothing sizes was abandoned in 1983.[5] In the United States, although clothing size standards exist (i.e., ASTM), most companies do not use them any longer.[2]

Size inconsistency has existed since at least 1937. In Sears's 1937 catalog, a size 14 dress had a bust size of 32 inches (81 cm). In 1967, the same bust size was a size 8. In 2011, it was a size 0.[6] Some argue that vanity sizing is designed to satisfy wearers' wishes to appear thin and feel better about themselves.[2][3] This works by adhering to the theory of compensatory self-enhancement, as vanity sizing promotes a more positive self-image of one upon seeing a smaller label.[5] Designer Nicole Miller introduced size 0 because of its strong California presence and to satisfy the request of many Asian customers. It introduced subzero sizes for naturally petite women.[2] However, the increasing size of clothing with the same nominal size caused Nicole Miller to introduce size 0, 00, or subzero sizes.[2] The UK's Chief Medical Officer has suggested that vanity sizing has contributed to the normalisation of obesity in society.[7]

In 2003, a study that measured over 1,000 pairs of women's pants found that pants from more expensive brands tended to be smaller than those from cheaper brands with the same nominal size.[8]

US pattern sizing measurements: 1931–2015

Pattern sizes – Du Barry / Woolworth (1931–1955)[9]

5'3"–5'6" tall, average: bust (3" < hips), waist (9" < hips)
Dimension/size	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	18	20	40
Bust	28	29	30	31	32	33	34	36	38	40
Waist	23	23.5	24	25	26	27	28	30	32	34
Hip	31	32	33	34	35	36	37	39	41	43

Pattern sizes – McCalls (1947)[10]

5'3"–5'6" tall, average: bust (3" < hips), waist (8-9" < hips)
Dimension/size	12	14	16	18	20	40	42	44	46
Bust	30	32	34	36	38	40	42	44	46
Waist	25	26½	28	30	32	34	38	38	40
Hip	33	35	37	39	41	43	45	47	49

Pattern sizes – DuBarry / Woolworth (1956–1967)[9]

5'3"–5'6" tall, average: bust (2" < hips), waist (9"–10" < hips)
Dimension/size	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	18	20
Bust	30.5	31	31.5	32	33	34	35	36	38	40
Waist	23.5	24	24.5	25	25.5	26	27	28	30	32
Hip	32.5	33	33.5	34	35	36	37	38	40	42

Pattern sizes – DuBarry / Woolworth (1968–present)[9]

5'3"–5'6" tall, average: bust (2" < hips), waist (9"–10" < hips)
Dimension/size	4	6	8	10	12	14	16	18	20	22	24
Bust	29.5	30.5	31.5	32.5	34	36	38	40	42	44	46
Waist	22	23	24	25	26.5	28	30	32	34	37	39
Hip	31.5	32.5	33.5	34.5	36	38	40	42	44	46	48

US misses standard sizing measurements: 1958–2011

Misses’ sizes (CS 215-58)[11] (1958)

5'3"–5'6" tall, regular hip
Dimension/size	8	10	12	14	16	18	20	22
Bust	31	32½	34	35½	37	39	41	43
Waist	23½	24½	25½	27	28½	30½	32½	34½
Hip	32½	34	36	38	40	42	44	46

Misses’ sizes (PS 42-70)[12] (1970)

5'2½"–5'6½" tall, average bust, average back
Dimension/size	6	8	10	12	14	16	18	20	22
Bust	31½	32½	33½	35	36½	38	40	42	44
Waist	22½	23½	24½	26	27½	29	31	33	35
Hip	33½	34½	35½	37	38½	40	42	44	46
Back-waist length	14½	15	15¼	15½	15¾	16	16¼	16½	16¾

Misses’ sizes (ASTM D5585 95(R2001)) (1995, revised 2001)

5'3½"–5'8" tall
Dimension/size	2	4	6	8	10	12	14	16	18	20
Bust	32	33	34	35	36	37½	39	40½	42½	44½
Waist	24	25	26	27	28	29½	31	32½	34½	36½
Hip	34½	35½	36½	37½	38½	40	41½	43	45	47

Misses’ sizes (ASTM D5585 11e1)[13] (2011)

5'5½" tall
Dimension/size	00	0	2	4	6	8	10	12	14	16	18	20
Bust	31⅛	31¾	33	34⅛	35¼	36¼	37¼	38¾	40⅜	42⅛	44	46
Waist (Straight)	25⅜	26⅛	26⅞	27⅝	28½	29½	30½	32¼	34	36	38¼	40½
Waist (Curvy)	23⅞	24⅝	25⅜	26⅛	27	28	29	30¾	32½	34½	36¾	39
Hip (Straight)	33¼	33⅞	35⅛	36⅜	37½	38½	39½	41	42½	44¼	46	48
Hip (Curvy)	34	34⅝	35⅞	37⅛	38¼	39¼	40¼	41¾	43¼	45	46¾	48¾

Men's clothing

Although more common in women's apparel, vanity sizing occurs in men's clothing as well. For example, men's pants are traditionally marked with two numbers, "waist" (waist circumference) and "inseam" (distance from the crotch to the hem of the pant). While the nominal inseam is fairly accurate, the nominal waist may be quite a bit smaller than the actual waist, in US sizes. In 2010, Abram Sauer of Esquire measured several pairs of dress pants with a nominal waist size of 36 at different US retailers and found that actual measurements ranged from 37 to 41 inches.[14] The phenomenon has also been noticed in the United Kingdom, where a 2011 study found misleading labels on more than half of checked items of clothing. In that study, worst offenders understated waist circumferences by 1.5 to 2 inches. London-based market analyst Mintel say that the number of men reporting varying waistlines from store to store doubled between 2005 and 2011.[15]

See also

• Body image
• EN 13402, European clothing standard
• US standard clothing size

References

1. "Flattery Gets Designers Everywhere". Fox News. 15 July 2002.
2. Schrobsdorff, Susanna (17 October 2006). "Fashion Designers Introduce Less-than-Zero Sizes". Newsweek. Retrieved 2018-12-01.
3. D'Angelo, Jennifer (15 July 2002). "Flattery Gets Designers Everywhere". Fox News. Archived from the original on 2006-05-25.
4. "Vanity Sizing". WNWO.com. Archived from the original on 2005-02-15.
5. "Hidden Numbers: The History of Women's Clothing Sizes in the U.S." Bodylore. Retrieved 2018-09-20.
6. Clifford, Stephanie (24 April 2011). "One Size Fits Nobody: Seeking a Steady 4 or a 10". New York Times. Retrieved 13 July 2011.
7. Howard, SJ; Davies, Sally C (27 March 2014). "Chief medical officer urges action to tackle overweight and obesity". BMJ. 348: g2375. doi:10.1136/bmj.g2375. PMID 24677657. Retrieved 7 May 2016.
8. Kinley, Tammy R. (2003). "Clothing Size Variation in Women's Pants". Clothing and Textiles Research Journal. 21 (1): 19–31. doi:10.1177/0887302X0302100103.
9. "A short history of U.S. white women's measurements used for patternmaking". Analog-Me. 30 November 2011. Retrieved 2015-03-11.
10. "Vintage 1940's McCall's 6879 Misses Shirtwaist Dress Size 14". yourpatternshop.com. Retrieved 2015-03-11.
11. "CS 215-58 Body measurements for the sizing of women's patterns and apparel" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-03-04. Retrieved 2015-06-17.
12. "PS 42-70 Body measurement for the sizing of apparal" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2016-03-07. Retrieved 2014-09-14.
13. "ASTM D5585 - 11e1: Standard Tables of Body Measurements for Adult Female Misses Figure Type, Size Range 00–20". Astm.org. ASTM. Retrieved 2011-11-13.
14. Sauer, Abram (September 2010). "Are Your Pants Lying to You? An Investigation". Esquire.
15. Jamieson, Alastair; Hadfield, Tom (September 2011). "Wrong trousers on the High Street as men fall victim to 'vanity sizing'". The Sunday Telegraph.

External links

• Johnson, Kate (5 May 2006). "As waistlines grow, clothing sizes shrink incredibly; 0 is the new 8". Boston Globe.
• "Study questions the sizing methods in women's apparel". Web2.unt.edu. 16 December 2003. Archived from the original on 2007-03-25. Retrieved 2013-03-14. Press release.
• Rickey, M (2007-09-22). "Vanity sizing". The Times (London).