It’s that feeling, right? The feeling when you’re scavenging through a clothing rack, anxiously sliding hangers aside in search of that one size - your size. That in-between feeling of hope that maybe you’ll find just one - maybe even one size smaller - you could potentially try and squeeze into it right? Even if you’re lucky enough to find it, you’ll make your way into the change room to find yourself disappointed yet again with its proportions. Too much side boob here, a nipple falling out there - a cautionary tale for getting done for public indecency - a busty girl’s tale as old as time.

We’ve universally acknowledged the sizing issue in the fashion industry. As a community, we’ve picked apart and dissected the damage that the unattainable beauty standards and lack of size inclusivity have done to affect the clothing we put on our bodies. Yet, even with the body positivity movement and a shift to more ‘size inclusivity’ - I still find my inboxes filled with women’s distaste with size options that don’t fit into the neat standards of a “typical size 8 body”.

We tend to turn our heads to blame the issue on ingrained culture behind these beauty standards, with the Barbie dolls and Victoria’s Secret runway shows that have been pushed down our throats since we were minors, fairly so. Yet we are still missing a pivotal aspect which makes up this multifaceted issue. Dirty - stinking - cash! The fashion industry is glorified for its impact on pop culture and its significance in our societal fabric, yet we forget that at the end of the day - it is just a collection of businesses, trying to increase their bottom line. Capitalism has a major effect on why you can’t find your size on the rack and why clothes don’t fit your body properly.

A Quick History on Sizing

Let’s take it back to the pre-industrial era, the early 1800s. At this point in time, every piece of clothing was custom-made by independent tailors and dressmakers. Garments were made to individual body measurements and there was no existence of a universal ‘standardised size guide’.

Moving into the later 1800s, we begin to see the rise of the early industrial period, followed by the presence of wars (The Civil War). So there was now a profuse push towards bulk production of uniforms for large armies. This is when we had a need for the first ‘generic size guide’. It was constructed for men based on the width measurement of their chest; it wasn’t until many years later that the notion of women’s sizing came into play. The rise of industrialism unleashed this demand for scalability, volume and efficiency rather than precision - ultimately a notable moment in the rise of capitalism. The more that can be produced, the more money that is made. The birth of “ready-to-wear” began to take over boutiques, then expanded into department stores. Cha ching.

Wigan Mill Girls, Slubbing Frames postcard, 1910, featured in BBC Bitesize.

It wasn’t until the 1930s - 1940s that there were large-scale studies pursued to determine a standardised size guide. The first major study was taken by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, withdrawn from the measurements of 1,000 women. This study prioritised the information of white, middle-class women - famously disregarding women who didn’t fall into this category. This skewed data created a guide based on only 3 measurements: bust, waist and hip. An already rocky foundation for size. By the 1950s, we had a loosely followed “official sizing system” to fit our bodies into neatly categorised numbers - sizing simplified for manufacturers.

100,000 US Women measured for 1940s Dress sizes, Glamour Daze

Around the 1960s - 1980s, the undercurrent of the societal climate was merging with the forces that were pushing consumption. People were buying at a rate never seen before, and markets (such as the fashion industry) began to become more saturated. This propelled the rise of ‘vanity sizing’, a marketing tactic to manipulate consumer psychology to essentially buy more. Cha ching. Retailers understood the way that beauty standards set in this period affected consumers, and used this notion to their advantage. Manipulating their sizing - labelling garments smaller than “true size” to elicit feelings of being “smaller”. Understanding the power these emotional devices held enabled them to not only make sales, but change the experience to reshape how the customer feels about their body. Sizing then no longer being labelled as a numerical fact, but a strategy for customer retention through “flattery”. An opportunity to make more sales.

Fast Fashion: Where we stand now

We live in a world where shopping no longer stops when you’re not in front of the rack. You don’t even have to physically slide hangers to the side to find your size - just move your fingertips half a centimetre. Markets are overly saturated, ads shoved down your throat every few seconds. The next microtrend is only a couple of taps away from being yours. But the question is:  will it fit?

The dominating force of exploitation and mass production, otherwise known as ‘fast fashion’, has infiltrated our wardrobes, further negatively affecting the composition of clothing sizes. It has taken the ideals behind industrial production and amplified them - capitalism on crack.

Fashion lead times have immensely shrunk, with big brands such as Zara and H&M producing garments in as little as 14 days - don’t even get me started on Shein. Let’s put the design process into perspective - the phases of: design, fabric sourcing, pattern making, grading, sampling, testing, cutting, sewing, quality control, distribution & more. ‘Fast fashion’ has amplified the capitalistic priority for speed over precision, and you can piece together what state that leaves your clothing sizes in. If a design is intended to fit well, there needs to be so much more attention to detail. Elastics, seams, fabrics that move with the body in the right places - elements that shouldn’t be ignored. Time is money, and the more they streamline these processes, the more money they save; in return, the more money they make. Cha fucking ching.

It was the process of trying to expand my business that really brought this to my attention. Seeing the behind-the-scenes of production costs and how it is ultimately cheaper to produce a smaller size - a size that doesn’t have the elements of curves and crevices. Let’s talk shop: if the amount of fabric it takes to produce a size 18 could make three size 8s - what do you think these brands are going to be more willing to produce? And those lush areas that might need another seam to fit right or some more elastic to gather up your knockers - well, that’s going to eat into the dollar - they will skimp out on those.

The question I now pose when I look at a garment is: was it built with my body in mind - or the bottom line?

In recent months, I had received a message from a customer that really struck a chord in me. She was exclaiming how the lack of size inclusion had her negatively conscious of her body, hating on herself for her inability to fit into available sizes of a specific brand - she was facing the blame inwards. The shame we feel towards our bodies as women is a deeply multifaceted issue, but throughout this blog post, I wanted to draw attention to this issue through the lens of a capitalistic standpoint (just one of the many rabbit holes we could go down, unfortunately). Draw away the blame from your mirror’s reflection, away from the curves of your body and onto the industrial billion-dollar giants that want to fit you into neat and cheap size categories. The system is flawed, not your body. Next time you’re shopping and something doesn’t fit you, I hope you shift your perspective and this standpoint stays with you.

Group of mannequins, Pinterest 

So what then, are we just doomed to find something that fits?

I come bearing good news - remember that we are living in a time where fashion markets are overly saturated - and this can work to our advantage. With the rise of ecommerce, we have seen an increase in fashion brands (roughly 3 - 4 thousand in the last 5 years), and with it so many of them catering to small niches and gaps in the market, appealing to different body shapes and sizes outside of the neat ‘generalised’ sizing. Tall, short, long torso, busting out of your top or pushing up your bra - the solution is to find the brands that actually cater to your body type and its needs. Do the work, take time to find what brands’ sizes work well with your shape, which feel good on you and that are designed with you in mind - get clear on which ones don’t. I’ve built a mental inventory of what brands, styles of clothes and fabrics work well for me - designs constructed to fit my body and not with the bottom line in mind. With every body shape being so uniquely different - be aware that it’s almost impossible to make a size range that caters to us all - it wouldn’t keep them rich. At the end of the day, it’s your body and your money - vote with your dollar.