A Revolution in the Plus-Size Market
August 7, 2017 10:07 AM Subscribe
"A 2012 market-research study estimated that 67 percent of American women wore a size 14-plus. The number has only grown, and the market for plus-size clothing is valued at $20.4 billion. Revenue in the category increased by 17 percent between 2013 and 2016 (compared with growth of just 7 percent in apparel overall). There is, to put it crudely, an insane amount of money just sitting on the table, and it seems, finally, that there are some savvy entrepreneurs out there ready to shrug off fashion’s inherent snobbery and claim a piece of it." Fashion for the 67 Percent by Ashley C. Ford
- Ashley C. Ford on twitter @iSmashFizzle
- A Week of Outfits from Ashley Ford at Cup of Jo (mentioned in the article)
- Ashley C. Ford on twitter @iSmashFizzle
- A Week of Outfits from Ashley Ford at Cup of Jo (mentioned in the article)
I'd think Amazon stands to benefit the most from this market. They have the data, the supply chain and the feedback. I don't understand how this market has remained 'untapped' for this long in the age of internet shopping and free returns. With their new Echo style judge thingamajiggie this will be a solved problem in a couple years I assume.... provided the customers don't forget to avail of the free return 30 day window..
posted by savitarka at 11:47 AM on August 7, 2017
posted by savitarka at 11:47 AM on August 7, 2017
Amazon is already selling clothes. I have clothes I've purchased from them, manufactured by third parties. But even with those, I've scoured the Q&A section, the comments, and the posted fit guide (if there is one) to figure out if something will fit, and still knew I was taking a chance. Amazon has also started its own clothing lines. Their "women's workwear" line, Lark & Ro, goes up to an XL. I don't have a lot of faith in Amazon solving this.
posted by booksherpa at 12:04 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by booksherpa at 12:04 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
What's so interesting (iif by "interesting" you mean depressing and unsurprising) is that there's a ton - an excess, if anything - of high end interesting casual men's clothes in larger sizes. Not a full range of larger sizes, but it's a situation where a company that made good quality women's clothes would stop at about a size twelve, and the equivalent men's company would stop at an xxl or xxxl - for the two to be equivalent, the woman's company would have to go up to an 18 or 20. And very often, men's sizes at these stores are more generous - the women's line will be cut rather small because that's posh, and the men's will be cut rather big because that creates more of a market. So it's really more like the women's stops at a small 12 and the men's stops at a large xxl.
When I stopped wearing women's clothes, it was really amazing - as a women's 16, I had terrible trouble finding clothes I liked, especially from a quality standpoint. My choice was usually either good quality but extremely staid, baggy, expensive clothes or low quality, tight clothes that still cost more than the straight size equivalents in, like, a modal cotton blend that fell apart after a couple of wearings. Now I am spoiled for choice, everything goes in the washing machine and half my clothes are technically "vintage" because they're old shirts that I got on eBay -but unlike women's clothes from twenty years ago, they still have plenty of life left.
It is a huge disgrace, and only the unspoken gender conditioning that keeps women from shopping in the men's section keeps this a secret. Even if you're at Target, the men's sweaters and tees are much better made than the women's equivalents, but there's no actual material reason that women's sweaters can't be as well made as men's.
posted by Frowner at 12:08 PM on August 7, 2017 [14 favorites]
When I stopped wearing women's clothes, it was really amazing - as a women's 16, I had terrible trouble finding clothes I liked, especially from a quality standpoint. My choice was usually either good quality but extremely staid, baggy, expensive clothes or low quality, tight clothes that still cost more than the straight size equivalents in, like, a modal cotton blend that fell apart after a couple of wearings. Now I am spoiled for choice, everything goes in the washing machine and half my clothes are technically "vintage" because they're old shirts that I got on eBay -but unlike women's clothes from twenty years ago, they still have plenty of life left.
It is a huge disgrace, and only the unspoken gender conditioning that keeps women from shopping in the men's section keeps this a secret. Even if you're at Target, the men's sweaters and tees are much better made than the women's equivalents, but there's no actual material reason that women's sweaters can't be as well made as men's.
posted by Frowner at 12:08 PM on August 7, 2017 [14 favorites]
A cool thing would be if there were the full range of sizes at the same stores, in the same departments, so that groups of differently-sized friends could all shop together. I know that sounds crazy, but there you go. It would be cool to be able to shop with my friends, even though we are not all the same size! I dream of a world where that can happen.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:26 PM on August 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 12:26 PM on August 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
I want basics.
Dear god yes please. I just want shirts with no weird necklines and nothing on them. And skinny jeans with a relatively flexible waistband that still have front pockets, and I would probably pay through the nose for them. My last two pairs of Lane Bryant jeans were either huge everywhere else or hideously constricting in the waist and I'm now wearing Maurice's jeggings even though their pockets are a travesty and they sit way too low on my hips even with a belt on. I would, and I'm not even kidding, seriously consider at this point paying for jeans what I paid for my smartphone if they would just fit and last for at least twelve months of daily wear. "Fashion" isn't even on my radar because it isn't my thing, but I can't even get reasonable comfort and basic social acceptability.
posted by Sequence at 12:32 PM on August 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
Dear god yes please. I just want shirts with no weird necklines and nothing on them. And skinny jeans with a relatively flexible waistband that still have front pockets, and I would probably pay through the nose for them. My last two pairs of Lane Bryant jeans were either huge everywhere else or hideously constricting in the waist and I'm now wearing Maurice's jeggings even though their pockets are a travesty and they sit way too low on my hips even with a belt on. I would, and I'm not even kidding, seriously consider at this point paying for jeans what I paid for my smartphone if they would just fit and last for at least twelve months of daily wear. "Fashion" isn't even on my radar because it isn't my thing, but I can't even get reasonable comfort and basic social acceptability.
posted by Sequence at 12:32 PM on August 7, 2017 [15 favorites]
tired of hearing the "news" that plus size women are an untapped market. fucking tap us then! so tired of going to kohls (et al) to see tons of cutish clothes for straight sizes and then nothing but cold shoulder chiffon ugly bullshit for fats.
and a lot of the plus size retailers only go up to 22/24, which is not big enough for me, or a lot of fats i see, so we're still stuck squeezing into stuff that doesn't fit (yeah, i know, i should lose weight).
then of course fat clothes are MUCH more expensive. i am okay with a little cost increase, because we do need more fabric to cover us. but a shitty pair of pants from lane bryant that will only last a season shouldn't cost $90.
and stop giving us huge flowy garments. they just make us look bigger!
this whole topic angers me on many levels.
posted by misanthropicsarah at 12:42 PM on August 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
and a lot of the plus size retailers only go up to 22/24, which is not big enough for me, or a lot of fats i see, so we're still stuck squeezing into stuff that doesn't fit (yeah, i know, i should lose weight).
then of course fat clothes are MUCH more expensive. i am okay with a little cost increase, because we do need more fabric to cover us. but a shitty pair of pants from lane bryant that will only last a season shouldn't cost $90.
and stop giving us huge flowy garments. they just make us look bigger!
this whole topic angers me on many levels.
posted by misanthropicsarah at 12:42 PM on August 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
My joke for years has been that I want Gap to open a plus size store and call it Canyon. I want basics.
then of course fat clothes are MUCH more expensive. i am okay with a little cost increase, because we do need more fabric to cover us. but a shitty pair of pants from lane bryant that will only last a season shouldn't cost $90.
Yes. Both of these damned things. They can be spendy, but I do love my Torrid pants. I just cannot bring myself, however, to pay more than $20 for a t-shirt.
posted by headspace at 12:45 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
then of course fat clothes are MUCH more expensive. i am okay with a little cost increase, because we do need more fabric to cover us. but a shitty pair of pants from lane bryant that will only last a season shouldn't cost $90.
Yes. Both of these damned things. They can be spendy, but I do love my Torrid pants. I just cannot bring myself, however, to pay more than $20 for a t-shirt.
posted by headspace at 12:45 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Even as a plus person, I still have a figure. My tastes and figure tend toward the tailored, but anything in the "Women's" section still has the Mu-Mu flowy look to it. I am also sick and tired of the LuLa Roe leggings and flowy tunic look. I was all about Eddie Bauer larger sizes but they don't want to carry that in the brick and mortar stores. Oh, and BTW, Lane Bryant is all fine and dandy only if you're also large and tall.
posted by PJMoore at 12:47 PM on August 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by PJMoore at 12:47 PM on August 7, 2017 [6 favorites]
I remember the first time this article came out in some other iteration (because the words "untapped market" and pointing to another new and super trendy collection are not new). All the names are the same-- ELOQUII, Christian Siriano, etc etc etc. Plus sized women and men have been shaking their money at retailers for years and keep getting shitty florals. Just give me a non-tissue paper thin, see through t-shirt that isn't hinting at crop top because I will buy and wear that all the time!
posted by thefang at 12:49 PM on August 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
posted by thefang at 12:49 PM on August 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
Yeah, I also feel like I've read this same damn article every single year, sometimes more than once a year, for the past 15 years or more. And then there are the fashion mags that herald a new age for plus sizes or "changing the conversation" or what have you -- Mode, which I loved, and a couple others -- but they disappear quickly and that's the end of that.
What drives me really insane is the self-perpetuating aspect the whole thing-- the idea that clothes just look better on women who are size 2 through 6 or what have you. If that's so, then of course, what designer would want to manufacture larger sizes to be worn by women who won't show off the clothes to their best advantage? So you get tons of clothing lines where XL is around a size 10. But naturally, that's absurd; if you design for size 4, then obviously your clothes will look best on a woman who is size 4. Why is it so difficult for designers to actually design for women who are size 14 and up?
posted by holborne at 12:58 PM on August 7, 2017 [9 favorites]
What drives me really insane is the self-perpetuating aspect the whole thing-- the idea that clothes just look better on women who are size 2 through 6 or what have you. If that's so, then of course, what designer would want to manufacture larger sizes to be worn by women who won't show off the clothes to their best advantage? So you get tons of clothing lines where XL is around a size 10. But naturally, that's absurd; if you design for size 4, then obviously your clothes will look best on a woman who is size 4. Why is it so difficult for designers to actually design for women who are size 14 and up?
posted by holborne at 12:58 PM on August 7, 2017 [9 favorites]
only the unspoken gender conditioning that keeps women from shopping in the men's section keeps this a secret.
I keep buying men's shirts in the hope that they will save me from the ugliness of the plus size women's section but I am very pear-shaped and even the upper size range of men's shirts don't fit my hips well.
The number of hours I've spend over these past few weeks looking for clothes I'd feel comfortable teaching in is honestly ridiculous. I have simple but very picky taste in clothes: I don't want ruffles or bows or lace, I don't want floral patterns, I don't want weird trends like cold shoulders and asymmetrical hems, and I almost never want to wear dresses. I would be so happy just wearing plain button-down shirts in a nice color, if only I could find them to fit my size and shape.
I also might have sworn off shopping at Lane Bryant forever because TWO overly aggressive salespeople made me cry on separate occasions. (Even online - it's company policy to be that aggressive, and I don't want to give them my money anymore). So. That narrows one's options considerably.
posted by Jeanne at 1:26 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
I keep buying men's shirts in the hope that they will save me from the ugliness of the plus size women's section but I am very pear-shaped and even the upper size range of men's shirts don't fit my hips well.
The number of hours I've spend over these past few weeks looking for clothes I'd feel comfortable teaching in is honestly ridiculous. I have simple but very picky taste in clothes: I don't want ruffles or bows or lace, I don't want floral patterns, I don't want weird trends like cold shoulders and asymmetrical hems, and I almost never want to wear dresses. I would be so happy just wearing plain button-down shirts in a nice color, if only I could find them to fit my size and shape.
I also might have sworn off shopping at Lane Bryant forever because TWO overly aggressive salespeople made me cry on separate occasions. (Even online - it's company policy to be that aggressive, and I don't want to give them my money anymore). So. That narrows one's options considerably.
posted by Jeanne at 1:26 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
The number of hours I've spend over these past few weeks looking for clothes I'd feel comfortable teaching in is honestly ridiculous.
I spent 8 years working in a Montessori school, much of it with 3-6 year olds, and needed clothes that: I could sit on the floor in, go out on the playground in, were machine-washable, and looked professional. I ended up wearing yoga pants from Catherines that looked good enough and had pockets*, and sheer tops (yes, mostly floral) over tanks. And Merrells for shoes, because I couldn't wear sneakers, and men's Merrells look unisex enough.
* GIVE US POCKETS IN OUR PANTS, DESIGNERS!
posted by booksherpa at 1:34 PM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
I spent 8 years working in a Montessori school, much of it with 3-6 year olds, and needed clothes that: I could sit on the floor in, go out on the playground in, were machine-washable, and looked professional. I ended up wearing yoga pants from Catherines that looked good enough and had pockets*, and sheer tops (yes, mostly floral) over tanks. And Merrells for shoes, because I couldn't wear sneakers, and men's Merrells look unisex enough.
* GIVE US POCKETS IN OUR PANTS, DESIGNERS!
posted by booksherpa at 1:34 PM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
The only time I ever feel like I'm having a similar experience to non-plus sized women shoppers is when we're all complaining about bras. And even then, similar. Not identical.
posted by gnomeloaf at 1:40 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by gnomeloaf at 1:40 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I will say, I totally do men's shirts. I live in Eddie Bauer men's flannel shirts and yes I realize my tastes are still stuck in the 90s. But jeans? I don't think I could do jeans. Yay pockets and all that, but anything that'd fit my waist and hips would be huge in the legs.
And if I start wearing baggy jeans then I'm going to have to get Doc Martens again or something. Okay, I know it wouldn't be a disaster, but skinny jeans have grown on me and I think I generally look good in them (especially with the oversized shirts) and I just don't get why it's so hard.
posted by Sequence at 2:25 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
And if I start wearing baggy jeans then I'm going to have to get Doc Martens again or something. Okay, I know it wouldn't be a disaster, but skinny jeans have grown on me and I think I generally look good in them (especially with the oversized shirts) and I just don't get why it's so hard.
posted by Sequence at 2:25 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
This topic makes me too angry to engage with for long. Like right now, today, I would pack up my stuff and go shopping for some new pants, capris, and bras, 'cause I could use some, but I really don't want to, because I know how this goes.
posted by limeonaire at 2:28 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by limeonaire at 2:28 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
And if I start wearing baggy jeans then I'm going to have to get Doc Martens again or something. Okay, I know it wouldn't be a disaster, but skinny jeans have grown on me and I think I generally look good in them (especially with the oversized shirts) and I just don't get why it's so hard.
Yeah, absolutely - even as an AFAB person who has wide shoulders and very flat hips for my size, it took a super long time to find men's pants that work for me, and if I didn't have sort of a weird build, they wouldn't work at all. With some exceptions (some sweaters and tees, mostly; maybe fancy socks) it's not really that most women would be happier shopping in the men's section - it's that it would make people even angrier at the poor quality that women get stuck with, since it becomes so obvious how easy it is to make a tee shirt in a sturdy cotton that is not translucent and how if you shop in the men's section, a lot of the time all the shorts, for example, will be together - you might wear a 30 waist and you might wear a 46 waist, but they're all on one rack. It's perfectly possible.
posted by Frowner at 3:13 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
Yeah, absolutely - even as an AFAB person who has wide shoulders and very flat hips for my size, it took a super long time to find men's pants that work for me, and if I didn't have sort of a weird build, they wouldn't work at all. With some exceptions (some sweaters and tees, mostly; maybe fancy socks) it's not really that most women would be happier shopping in the men's section - it's that it would make people even angrier at the poor quality that women get stuck with, since it becomes so obvious how easy it is to make a tee shirt in a sturdy cotton that is not translucent and how if you shop in the men's section, a lot of the time all the shorts, for example, will be together - you might wear a 30 waist and you might wear a 46 waist, but they're all on one rack. It's perfectly possible.
posted by Frowner at 3:13 PM on August 7, 2017 [3 favorites]
Yeah, I keep hearing about the clothing revolution, too. I am glad that ask.mefi has provided good advice and strategies:
If you are in Sydney, let's shop!
posted by jadepearl at 3:56 PM on August 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
- buy in the men's department
- find a few things that work and buy the crap out of it in multiple colors
- vendors who have some sense of women sizes e.g., Landsend; Royal Robbins (sorta)
- finding a tailor/seamstress who will either tailor your purchases or make you what you want (my sister, the seamstress, loves receiving custom orders for ordinary shirts. She just wants the client to bring an example or have pictures so she can construct appropriately)
- getting a buyer. Not many people know that the local goodwill or charity chains may have that option. ARC Village does in Minnesota, as an example, but the standard is Nordstrom's
- Drag Queens. Not have thought of this but this is AskMefi all over it and I look forward to reading
If you are in Sydney, let's shop!
posted by jadepearl at 3:56 PM on August 7, 2017 [5 favorites]
I also can't wear men's clothes, alas. I'm way too busty and have big hips, and men's stuff simply isn't cut for me. I suppose I could have the stuff altered, but in that case I may as well buy women's clothes because I can have those altered as well.
posted by holborne at 4:35 PM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by holborne at 4:35 PM on August 7, 2017 [2 favorites]
I have been causing a fuss at my retail employer, and it's such a frustrating situation.
These articles keep failing on their predictions because we like to pretend that one single company can disrupt the entire industry. But that's not going to happen. Instead you just get niche companies that do fine, but don't take up enough market space to make the existing players feel they need to change their business model.
The biggest issue is that amazon, and online in general, are poorly situated to deal with the issues in the plus sector. Online is great for small niche communities. For people who live on the long tail of the distribution curve. But plus is actually a large community, they're just marginalized.
Being a large underserved market, they're going to strain supply chains if you successfully cater to them. They'll buy a lot of product, but also return a lot of product. Initial high sales can be false positives, leading to bad design choices in future seasons. This is especially true since they're usually using non-plus models, so nobody gets a good idea of how clothes actually fit. That's just taking a ridiculous reality of women's marketing to it's absurd conclusion - building clothing to look great on a model too small to even buy your clothes.
Retail stores successfully subplanted catalogue sales because everyone saves money when we know the thing we want to buy is actually worth buying. Until we get back into retail stores, mixed with regular sized product, so we can choose clothing based on taste and not who it fits, we are leaving money on the table.
posted by politikitty at 5:09 PM on August 7, 2017 [8 favorites]
These articles keep failing on their predictions because we like to pretend that one single company can disrupt the entire industry. But that's not going to happen. Instead you just get niche companies that do fine, but don't take up enough market space to make the existing players feel they need to change their business model.
The biggest issue is that amazon, and online in general, are poorly situated to deal with the issues in the plus sector. Online is great for small niche communities. For people who live on the long tail of the distribution curve. But plus is actually a large community, they're just marginalized.
Being a large underserved market, they're going to strain supply chains if you successfully cater to them. They'll buy a lot of product, but also return a lot of product. Initial high sales can be false positives, leading to bad design choices in future seasons. This is especially true since they're usually using non-plus models, so nobody gets a good idea of how clothes actually fit. That's just taking a ridiculous reality of women's marketing to it's absurd conclusion - building clothing to look great on a model too small to even buy your clothes.
Retail stores successfully subplanted catalogue sales because everyone saves money when we know the thing we want to buy is actually worth buying. Until we get back into retail stores, mixed with regular sized product, so we can choose clothing based on taste and not who it fits, we are leaving money on the table.
posted by politikitty at 5:09 PM on August 7, 2017 [8 favorites]
The lack of plus size women's clothing - when fully 2/3 of American women are plus sized - is the best example I know of to prove that capitalism doesn't work.
posted by medusa at 6:05 PM on August 7, 2017 [18 favorites]
posted by medusa at 6:05 PM on August 7, 2017 [18 favorites]
The lack of plus size women's clothing - when fully 2/3 of American women are plus sized - is the best example I know of to prove that capitalism doesn't work.
It really is. I also feel like I've been reading this article for all of my adult life, but from what I can see the clothing landscape hasn't improved all that much.
posted by Dip Flash at 7:31 PM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
It really is. I also feel like I've been reading this article for all of my adult life, but from what I can see the clothing landscape hasn't improved all that much.
posted by Dip Flash at 7:31 PM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
I think one problem with marketing plus sizes is that a size 0 is a size 0 but the higher the sizes go the less likely they are to fit a random individual. Your size zero person is going to be 18 (14?) inches or so around in the chest, waist and hips, or if they are only twelve inches in the waist they can make do with a belt, but when you start going up to higher sizes you need to get custom fit in the bust, waist, hips, butt and thighs. A size 24 is only going to fit a very small percentage of size 24 women unless it is cut like a mumu.
So this means that any manufacture getting into making clothing for plus sized women has a much bigger challenge in terms of fit than the manufacturer who only makes clothing up to size 16. Let's say you want to come out with a tailored jacket. It's not too difficult to adapt the design for sizes 0 through to sixteen. But once you start trying to change the pattern to allow for women who have a bust larger than a B cup, or a voluptuous belly it completely changes the cutting lines, which completely changes the way the fabric hangs. It will no longer hang with the weave; you have to have diagonal cuts, which means that the fabric tends to sag and wrinkle, which means that you need to stiffen it with interfacing, which means that you end up with a new design all together. You now have to come up with a completely different pattern for the sizes with a bigger bust and a completely different pattern for the sizes with a bigger waist but not a bigger bust. So you have tripled your design and product costs to extend your line to fit people who are non-industry fit standard.
The scary part for the designer is that they are taking a gamble that the shoppers who want their tailored jacket in the size 16 to 24 range are going to have the right plus sized body to fit it. They will probably decide to fit for women who have large busts and waists, as there are more of them than there are plus sized women who have a large bust and a not as large waist or who have a large waist and a not so large bust. And the women who have the large bust may buy the jacket after all since they can at least fit into it, even if it is really loose in the middle. But she's not going to want to buy their dresses. So they will only design the jacket to fit one of the three potential body types - and that's presuming it's a short jacket and there's no question of needing to fit it to allow for women with booty.
So if you are a plus sized woman you already know that buying clothes from Amazon is probably going to result in a LOT of returns. I don't dare buy clothing sight unseen unless it's Men's Large or Extra Large and that's because there are people I can hand it on to if it doesn't fit me. Nothing fits in plus sizes as a rule, and it's not the designer's faults, it's because any designer can make clothing to fit a stick, but plus size people need custom clothing.
The reason why men can buy plus sized clothing and women can't is not so much a matter of the designers catering to them so much as biology being kind enough to make all plus sized guys pretty much the same shape. They don't have nearly the same variation in the chest and butt that plus sized women do, nor the thighs. With guys it's almost always in the gut and about all the designers have to allow for is how much the gut has sagged.
posted by Jane the Brown at 7:37 PM on August 7, 2017 [14 favorites]
So this means that any manufacture getting into making clothing for plus sized women has a much bigger challenge in terms of fit than the manufacturer who only makes clothing up to size 16. Let's say you want to come out with a tailored jacket. It's not too difficult to adapt the design for sizes 0 through to sixteen. But once you start trying to change the pattern to allow for women who have a bust larger than a B cup, or a voluptuous belly it completely changes the cutting lines, which completely changes the way the fabric hangs. It will no longer hang with the weave; you have to have diagonal cuts, which means that the fabric tends to sag and wrinkle, which means that you need to stiffen it with interfacing, which means that you end up with a new design all together. You now have to come up with a completely different pattern for the sizes with a bigger bust and a completely different pattern for the sizes with a bigger waist but not a bigger bust. So you have tripled your design and product costs to extend your line to fit people who are non-industry fit standard.
The scary part for the designer is that they are taking a gamble that the shoppers who want their tailored jacket in the size 16 to 24 range are going to have the right plus sized body to fit it. They will probably decide to fit for women who have large busts and waists, as there are more of them than there are plus sized women who have a large bust and a not as large waist or who have a large waist and a not so large bust. And the women who have the large bust may buy the jacket after all since they can at least fit into it, even if it is really loose in the middle. But she's not going to want to buy their dresses. So they will only design the jacket to fit one of the three potential body types - and that's presuming it's a short jacket and there's no question of needing to fit it to allow for women with booty.
So if you are a plus sized woman you already know that buying clothes from Amazon is probably going to result in a LOT of returns. I don't dare buy clothing sight unseen unless it's Men's Large or Extra Large and that's because there are people I can hand it on to if it doesn't fit me. Nothing fits in plus sizes as a rule, and it's not the designer's faults, it's because any designer can make clothing to fit a stick, but plus size people need custom clothing.
The reason why men can buy plus sized clothing and women can't is not so much a matter of the designers catering to them so much as biology being kind enough to make all plus sized guys pretty much the same shape. They don't have nearly the same variation in the chest and butt that plus sized women do, nor the thighs. With guys it's almost always in the gut and about all the designers have to allow for is how much the gut has sagged.
posted by Jane the Brown at 7:37 PM on August 7, 2017 [14 favorites]
I would just like to thank eShakti for being the only place I can shop for real with friends and family. Because sure, sometimes Nordstrom's contains multitudes, but sometimes it only has bad options for someone and that's awful. But EShakti makes it normal to compare patterns, pockets, fabric quality, etc. regardless of numbers and that's been lovely.
posted by jetlagaddict at 8:01 PM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
posted by jetlagaddict at 8:01 PM on August 7, 2017 [4 favorites]
I'm a 16 and I find that Talbots's women's store has normal looking clothes. I shop the outlet so I don't break the bank.
posted by Biblio at 10:38 PM on August 7, 2017
posted by Biblio at 10:38 PM on August 7, 2017
This is tangentially related because it's about curvy women's cuts rather than large sizes per se. Also, anecdotal.
I used to be able to wear Carhartt's women's cut work pants, because they had a fitted (conical) yoke, so they'd stay up even with heavy things hanging from them. Carhartt is trying to get fashionable, and they have shrink-and-pinked their women's pants -- lighter fabric, straight hips, narrow in the calf. The new fancy store downtown stocks one remaining cut in the original heavy-duty cloth, but with straight hips, indistinguishable from men's pants, which alas don't fit me.
The saleswoman was sympathetic because she knew exactly what I was going to say about the pants because she hears it a lot ("I could keep a lunchbox down the back of these.") But we couldn't figure out why it seemed like a good strategy, when Carharrt was successful with its previous clothes. Now they're in the mass market competing with tubular stretchy pants at every price, and how are they expecting to stand out by making -- tubular stretchy pants?
The margin on tubular stretchy pants is probably higher because they are easier to make, but it doesn't seem like a steady business for any individual manufacturer. Bad pants drive out good, I guess.
posted by clew at 11:37 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I used to be able to wear Carhartt's women's cut work pants, because they had a fitted (conical) yoke, so they'd stay up even with heavy things hanging from them. Carhartt is trying to get fashionable, and they have shrink-and-pinked their women's pants -- lighter fabric, straight hips, narrow in the calf. The new fancy store downtown stocks one remaining cut in the original heavy-duty cloth, but with straight hips, indistinguishable from men's pants, which alas don't fit me.
The saleswoman was sympathetic because she knew exactly what I was going to say about the pants because she hears it a lot ("I could keep a lunchbox down the back of these.") But we couldn't figure out why it seemed like a good strategy, when Carharrt was successful with its previous clothes. Now they're in the mass market competing with tubular stretchy pants at every price, and how are they expecting to stand out by making -- tubular stretchy pants?
The margin on tubular stretchy pants is probably higher because they are easier to make, but it doesn't seem like a steady business for any individual manufacturer. Bad pants drive out good, I guess.
posted by clew at 11:37 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Nothing fits in plus sizes as a rule, and it's not the designer's faults, it's because any designer can make clothing to fit a stick, but plus size people need custom clothing.
I mean, I think it's true that the very smallest sizes have very little variation, but I remember quite strongly going shopping as a teenager and there being distinct differences just between Penney's and... Kohl's? I dunno, whatever two cheap places I ever got to go, as far as which of their jeans fit me around the hips and which didn't at a size 11/12 or 13/14. If there were tons of places making plus-sized jeans with reasonably modern styles, I could probably find a place that made my perfect jeans with a couple weekends of going and trying things on. But it's hard to find anywhere who carries my size, in store, in a style that doesn't look like my great aunt should be wearing it.
posted by Sequence at 11:44 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
I mean, I think it's true that the very smallest sizes have very little variation, but I remember quite strongly going shopping as a teenager and there being distinct differences just between Penney's and... Kohl's? I dunno, whatever two cheap places I ever got to go, as far as which of their jeans fit me around the hips and which didn't at a size 11/12 or 13/14. If there were tons of places making plus-sized jeans with reasonably modern styles, I could probably find a place that made my perfect jeans with a couple weekends of going and trying things on. But it's hard to find anywhere who carries my size, in store, in a style that doesn't look like my great aunt should be wearing it.
posted by Sequence at 11:44 PM on August 7, 2017 [1 favorite]
Comparing your Penney's and Kohl's experience, Sequence, and the change at Carharrt, it seems like manufacturers are actually making fewer different shapes of clothing than they used to, even though the market has more shapes of people (because average weight has gone up). That is unexpected.
Wild hypotheses at midnight:
Overweight is more socially reviled than it used to be and manufacturers are just leaving money on the table. Plausible, but kind of hard to believe it would go on this long if one 'defector' could make bank.
Are simple shapes cheaper relative to curvy shapes than they used to be? Possible, FashionIncubator occasionally says things that imply as much.
Has the not-size-zero market diversified so much that many body shapes are rare enough to be unprofitable to design for? That mathematically *could* happen. It's consistent with a few plus-including design lines being very successful with some people and useless for others at a given "size". Even eShakti has only a few fundamental designs. I don't know how one would prove it, until Amazon measures everybody. (checks watch, listens for drone)
posted by clew at 1:02 AM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
Wild hypotheses at midnight:
Overweight is more socially reviled than it used to be and manufacturers are just leaving money on the table. Plausible, but kind of hard to believe it would go on this long if one 'defector' could make bank.
Are simple shapes cheaper relative to curvy shapes than they used to be? Possible, FashionIncubator occasionally says things that imply as much.
Has the not-size-zero market diversified so much that many body shapes are rare enough to be unprofitable to design for? That mathematically *could* happen. It's consistent with a few plus-including design lines being very successful with some people and useless for others at a given "size". Even eShakti has only a few fundamental designs. I don't know how one would prove it, until Amazon measures everybody. (checks watch, listens for drone)
posted by clew at 1:02 AM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
I want to know where drag queens buy their shoes, because trying to find anything comfortable and feminine for my size 13 foot is nearly impossible.
Long Tall Sally. They bought out Barefoot Tess and that's where all the cute, large sized shoes are now. The selection isn't as good but it's better than anywhere else.
posted by fshgrl at 2:12 AM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
Long Tall Sally. They bought out Barefoot Tess and that's where all the cute, large sized shoes are now. The selection isn't as good but it's better than anywhere else.
posted by fshgrl at 2:12 AM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
Fellow big-footed person here--Go to Nordstrom Rack for your shoes.
Do they have men's shoes? Size 15 here. Luckily I can find some I like on Amazon, but I'm always trying to develop sources.
posted by thelonius at 6:44 AM on August 8, 2017
Do they have men's shoes? Size 15 here. Luckily I can find some I like on Amazon, but I'm always trying to develop sources.
posted by thelonius at 6:44 AM on August 8, 2017
I'm going throw out some international recommendations.
Japan has a plus sized magazine called LaFarfa (Instagram) that primarily targets women in their 20s-30s. (It's easy to find on amazon jp.) They sell lots of clothes by Nissen, a catalogue company with a physical location in trendy Shibuya called SmileLand. Annoyingly, Nissen closed their English webpage a year or so ago.
Other places such as As Know As Olaca, Marui, and Earth Music and Ecology have plus sized lines.
Speaking of plain clothes Uniqlo (and GU) has some plus sized stuff, but it tends to end around a women's 16.
posted by Ms. Moonlight at 7:03 AM on August 8, 2017
Japan has a plus sized magazine called LaFarfa (Instagram) that primarily targets women in their 20s-30s. (It's easy to find on amazon jp.) They sell lots of clothes by Nissen, a catalogue company with a physical location in trendy Shibuya called SmileLand. Annoyingly, Nissen closed their English webpage a year or so ago.
Other places such as As Know As Olaca, Marui, and Earth Music and Ecology have plus sized lines.
Speaking of plain clothes Uniqlo (and GU) has some plus sized stuff, but it tends to end around a women's 16.
posted by Ms. Moonlight at 7:03 AM on August 8, 2017
I will say that for a couple of reasons, I'm a bit dubious about the statistic that the majority of American women are a size 14 or 16. First of all, just from an economic standpoint, I guess I have a hard time believing that in a capitalist system, designers would continue to disdain plus-size women if you threw enough money at them. I mean, I get that they view themselves as artistes and don't want their brand "sullied." But put that up against another, say, $100 million in net profits? I mean, come on -- it shouldn't be that much of a contest, should it?
But also, I'm a 14, and here in NYC, I'm usually about twice the size of the women I see on the subway every day. Same when I travel to San Francisco or LA. I don't see quite as many women that small in Seattle, but I appear to be on the larger size there as well. And when I took my niece and nephew to Disney World this past Winter, I didn't feel especially average; I felt like I was bigger than most of the women I saw there.
I mean, I'm not saying I'm right, but when I see those stats about the size of the "average" size 14/16 woman, I do tend to wonder where all these women are hiding themselves. Is this purely confirmation bias on my part? Or is my view just skewed because I've lived only on the coasts, and tend to travel mostly there?
posted by holborne at 10:27 AM on August 8, 2017
But also, I'm a 14, and here in NYC, I'm usually about twice the size of the women I see on the subway every day. Same when I travel to San Francisco or LA. I don't see quite as many women that small in Seattle, but I appear to be on the larger size there as well. And when I took my niece and nephew to Disney World this past Winter, I didn't feel especially average; I felt like I was bigger than most of the women I saw there.
I mean, I'm not saying I'm right, but when I see those stats about the size of the "average" size 14/16 woman, I do tend to wonder where all these women are hiding themselves. Is this purely confirmation bias on my part? Or is my view just skewed because I've lived only on the coasts, and tend to travel mostly there?
posted by holborne at 10:27 AM on August 8, 2017
Is this purely confirmation bias on my part? Or is my view just skewed because I've lived only on the coasts, and tend to travel mostly there?I'm going to go with a little bit of both. I definitely notice that women my age in New York are, on average, thinner than women my age in Iowa.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 10:35 AM on August 8, 2017
Here in Minneapolis, which is a fairly thin part of the Midwest, as long as I'm not in the richest parts of town I'm hardly fat at all for someone my age. I am a fairly blocky, large-boned person, so I look a bit smaller than I am, but I wear a 16.
Also, remember that weight tends to increase with age for most people - a lot of women who wear size 16 will be older, and therefore both less visible (lots of people just don't really notice older women) and more likely to be out of the workforce, so not in the business district at all anyway.
posted by Frowner at 10:51 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
Also, remember that weight tends to increase with age for most people - a lot of women who wear size 16 will be older, and therefore both less visible (lots of people just don't really notice older women) and more likely to be out of the workforce, so not in the business district at all anyway.
posted by Frowner at 10:51 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
Overweight is more socially reviled than it used to be and manufacturers are just leaving money on the table. Plausible, but kind of hard to believe it would go on this long if one 'defector' could make bank.
This is unlikely to happen. It's not a simple fix that needs to happen, it's a deep structural problem. The first defector needs to make a lot of expensive changes, narrowing their profit margin, while the followers can leverage that investment. Everyone is trying to avoid risk by waiting until someone else makes that first jump.
You need to deal with the showrooming issue. How do you get plus consumers back into your store to try on clothes and stop eating into your profits with expensive returns and noisy sales data. (If you can't trust your initial sales, due to high returns, you can't do decent assortment planning)
You need to do this in a way that doesn't cannibalize your straight sizing. Part of this is consumers are naturally wary that a brand can excel at both markets well. Another part is fear that being fat friendly will destroy your brand. Think about the price differential between Nike and a knock-off. Some of that is higher production quality, but most of it is brand equity.
You need to change the fit model system. Most samples get outsourced. It allows you to effectively see minor changes and manage a large assortment for a full line. The expensive designer only guides the process, and offshore folks make it happen. So if you want to use a more realistic fit model, you suddenly have a higher cost model. Plus, fit models are supposed to stay within centimeters of their body measurements. That means that even if you use larger fit models, you're using women who are by definition unique and not like the rest of the population.
It's not that this is difficult. But margins in retail clothing make this sort of risky investment unattractive. They can easily quantify appealing to more people who are similar to their current customers. It's difficult to quantify appealing to potential customers that they clearly just do not understand. They're too steeped in the industry culture where an average woman is a size 4. So you get magazine covers pointing to Amy Schumer as a plucky plus size woman. And when she tries to push back, she finds it hard to access language that isn't fundamentally fat phobic.
It's a huge undertaking to unpackage all that programming. So instead they keep trying to change an industry with a thousand paper cuts.
posted by politikitty at 11:07 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
This is unlikely to happen. It's not a simple fix that needs to happen, it's a deep structural problem. The first defector needs to make a lot of expensive changes, narrowing their profit margin, while the followers can leverage that investment. Everyone is trying to avoid risk by waiting until someone else makes that first jump.
You need to deal with the showrooming issue. How do you get plus consumers back into your store to try on clothes and stop eating into your profits with expensive returns and noisy sales data. (If you can't trust your initial sales, due to high returns, you can't do decent assortment planning)
You need to do this in a way that doesn't cannibalize your straight sizing. Part of this is consumers are naturally wary that a brand can excel at both markets well. Another part is fear that being fat friendly will destroy your brand. Think about the price differential between Nike and a knock-off. Some of that is higher production quality, but most of it is brand equity.
You need to change the fit model system. Most samples get outsourced. It allows you to effectively see minor changes and manage a large assortment for a full line. The expensive designer only guides the process, and offshore folks make it happen. So if you want to use a more realistic fit model, you suddenly have a higher cost model. Plus, fit models are supposed to stay within centimeters of their body measurements. That means that even if you use larger fit models, you're using women who are by definition unique and not like the rest of the population.
It's not that this is difficult. But margins in retail clothing make this sort of risky investment unattractive. They can easily quantify appealing to more people who are similar to their current customers. It's difficult to quantify appealing to potential customers that they clearly just do not understand. They're too steeped in the industry culture where an average woman is a size 4. So you get magazine covers pointing to Amy Schumer as a plucky plus size woman. And when she tries to push back, she finds it hard to access language that isn't fundamentally fat phobic.
It's a huge undertaking to unpackage all that programming. So instead they keep trying to change an industry with a thousand paper cuts.
posted by politikitty at 11:07 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
Do they have men's shoes? Size 15 here. Luckily I can find some I like on Amazon, but I'm always trying to develop sources.
Long Tall Sally/ Barefoot Tess has plenty of women's shoes in a 15. Check it out.
posted by fshgrl at 11:47 AM on August 8, 2017
Long Tall Sally/ Barefoot Tess has plenty of women's shoes in a 15. Check it out.
posted by fshgrl at 11:47 AM on August 8, 2017
Ain't nobody gonna solve this till we get body-scanning, robot-sewn clothes shops, I fear.
I wish they would hurry up on those.
posted by emjaybee at 11:49 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
I wish they would hurry up on those.
posted by emjaybee at 11:49 AM on August 8, 2017 [2 favorites]
Stonkle, politikitty, thanks for the views into the practical problems.
The first defector needs to make a lot of expensive changes, narrowing their profit margin, while the followers can leverage that investment. Everyone is trying to avoid risk by waiting until someone else makes that first jump.
Are the companies Ms. Moonlight mentions so small that they are inconsequential to most of the country's clothes purchasing, or are they first defectors gambling on staying in business long enough to leverage that investment, or what?
Also, is clothing production really centralized? News reports about the textile industry moving from country to country makes it sound like there's a lot of change. Not so much in the way the system works?
posted by clew at 11:54 AM on August 8, 2017
The first defector needs to make a lot of expensive changes, narrowing their profit margin, while the followers can leverage that investment. Everyone is trying to avoid risk by waiting until someone else makes that first jump.
Are the companies Ms. Moonlight mentions so small that they are inconsequential to most of the country's clothes purchasing, or are they first defectors gambling on staying in business long enough to leverage that investment, or what?
Also, is clothing production really centralized? News reports about the textile industry moving from country to country makes it sound like there's a lot of change. Not so much in the way the system works?
posted by clew at 11:54 AM on August 8, 2017
So the fit model issue is that samples are basically created at a size 4 and size 18 (for plus clothing). This makes a more inclusive model of clothing more difficult to implement. So while some companies are starting to go up to a size 20 in straight sizes, that size 20 is typically really wonky.
While there's a decent amount of competition overseas, most of these offshore companies contract with tons of different clients. They aren't going to invest in a new way of working for one client. And because of the power differential, their reputation is based on their client lists. So choosing to change the business model without a few large clients is a huge risk that 'they can't afford'. (Nitpicking about affordability aside, if you have a lot of capital, and a high appetite for risk, you don't get into contract clothing manufacturing.)
A lot of these new players aren't fundamentally changing the system. They're still using the size 18 sample sizes. They usually still use non-plus, plus models, but also outsource a lot to their customers. It helps with the societal issue of non-representation, but it doesn't change how we design clothes for the new normal. They aren't investing in the innovations that allow change to really scale and be adapted for wide use.
posted by politikitty at 1:51 PM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
While there's a decent amount of competition overseas, most of these offshore companies contract with tons of different clients. They aren't going to invest in a new way of working for one client. And because of the power differential, their reputation is based on their client lists. So choosing to change the business model without a few large clients is a huge risk that 'they can't afford'. (Nitpicking about affordability aside, if you have a lot of capital, and a high appetite for risk, you don't get into contract clothing manufacturing.)
A lot of these new players aren't fundamentally changing the system. They're still using the size 18 sample sizes. They usually still use non-plus, plus models, but also outsource a lot to their customers. It helps with the societal issue of non-representation, but it doesn't change how we design clothes for the new normal. They aren't investing in the innovations that allow change to really scale and be adapted for wide use.
posted by politikitty at 1:51 PM on August 8, 2017 [1 favorite]
« Older The more we dug into this, the more interesting it... | OMG YOU'RE MY HOOMAN Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
My joke for years has been that I want Gap to open a plus size store and call it Canyon. I want basics. I want a clothing store, department store sized, that has as many choices as women who wear straight sizes get. Give me a plus size Macy's with different designers of everyday clothing, the beachwear display, the office apparel, the casual weekend looks, the garden party dresses, plus a formal section, a swimwear section, a section of undergarments and lingerie, accessories sized for bigger bodies, and shoes made for women who are big in proportion and don't wear a 7 1/2.
I am sick and fucking tired of stores that are willing to take my money online, but don't want me to set foot in their stores - I'm looking at you, Old Navy. Or stores like Target that have rows and rows of misses clothes up front, and hide the small plus size section near the clearance and the maternity. I'm done with what I call the "plus size penalty" - you can try on our clothes, but you're going to have to pay shipping to do it, and maybe to return them, unless you buy a lot or we're willing to let you return clothes to the store where you couldn't buy the clothes in the first place.
One of my only choices as a size 18 teenager was Lane Bryant. One of my only choices as a plus size woman approaching 50 is Lane Bryant. How many teenage girls and their moms do you know who happily shop in the same store?
Things are better. Somewhat. But mainly because online shopping has exploded, and not because brick and mortar stores are doing a damn thing. Modcloth and eShakti are great, but where is the equivalent brick and mortar store that carries the same clothing in sizes from 0 to 28 (or larger)? I have seriously considered learning to sew, so that I can buy t-shirts from my husband's big and tall catalog and reshape them to acknowledge the existence of hips. I want to know where drag queens buy their shoes, because trying to find anything comfortable and feminine for my size 13 foot is nearly impossible.
I appreciate this article, as I appreciate any light shone on this issue. But this isn't news, and it's not new.
posted by booksherpa at 11:40 AM on August 7, 2017 [39 favorites]