XXL Shirts

Magrus · Post by **Magrus** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 3:16 pm

[QUOTE=Yeltsu]@Mag: pah! I got myself my friend and his gf into my coat one time, we walked the distance from my house to his inside my coat, it was really wierd

Although the weirdest thing is that none of us had drunken anything either

[/QUOTE]

Thats a LOT different than having your girlfriend on your lap and pressed against you in your hooded sweatshirt man. That sounds quite awkward!

[QUOTE=dragon wench]I swear.. designers have made female clothing smaller just to satisfy the fantasies of the average male.. [/QUOTE]

Yeah, while I don't go shopping for ladies clothes, I noticed that myself. Girls don't HAVE to wear tight and revealing clothing to be attractive. It is nice occasionally though.

jopperm2 · Post by **jopperm2** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 4:04 pm

I think sizes have changed. I didn't realize that it was the case for women too though. I was a pretty small guy in school, not really anymore though. In high school I wore a large shirt usually. I have always thought, if I'm a large, what are people that are normal size or larger? Perhaps it's because we're all getting too fat these days, but I always thought they inflated the sizes to make guys feel big and strong.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:55 pm

[QUOTE=dragon wench]Speaking of XXL, has anybody else noticed that sizes seem to have gotten smaller? At least they have for women

[/QUOTE]

Not only for women - for girls, down to age 3. An investigation of childrens clothes revealed that most of the major clothing manufacturers make girl's clothes smaller than boy's clothes although girls and boys have the same body size until puberty. I don't know how you size childrens clothes in Canada, but in Europe it is common to use body lenght. However, it turns out that girls' T-shirt size 95 (that is for body lenght 95 cm) is on the average 10 cm tighter and 5 cm shorter than boys' T-shirt size 95! Now, why is this?

The manufactures replies:
"It's fashion"
"It doesn't matter since it is the parents who choose the clothes anyway"
"It's an EU standard that girls should have a slimmer look than boys"
"What's wrong with girls looking girlish?"
"It's not the girls' T-shirts that are small, it's the boys' T-shirts that are big"

Magrus · Post by **Magrus** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 11:04 pm

I've had a problem with little kid's clothes since I saw my baby sister forced to wear outfits similar to every girl 14+ in schools. All the jeans and shirts in the stores are skin tight! The only decent clothes she owns are handi-downs from our cousin from when she wore them 10 years ago. It's indecent having a 7 year old in skin tight clothes.

What happened to cute little girl clothes from when I was growing up anyways? Girls had little baggy overalls, and shorts and shirts and stuff. Not wandering around looking like Britney spears as soon as they were out of diapers.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 11:08 pm

[QUOTE=C Elegans]Not only for women - for girls, down to age 3. An investigation of childrens clothes revealed that most of the major clothing manufacturers make girl's clothes smaller than boy's clothes although girls and boys have the same body size until puberty. I don't know how you size childrens clothes in Canada, but in Europe it is common to use body lenght. However, it turns out that girls' T-shirt size 95 (that is for body lenght 95 cm) is on the average 10 cm tighter and 5 cm shorter than boys' T-shirt size 95! Now, why is this?

The manufactures replies:
"It's fashion"
"It doesn't matter since it is the parents who choose the clothes anyway"
"It's an EU standard that girls should have a slimmer look than boys"
"What's wrong with girls looking girlish?"
"It's not the girls' T-shirts that are small, it's the boys' T-shirts that are big"[/QUOTE]

Oh joy! And here I was thinking I was being seduced by conspiracy theories again!

I actually find this really disturbing, especially since it obviously starts so very young. I recently read an article stating that girls as young as 5 are claiming that they "are too fat." In addition to the various media onslaughts that contribute to anorexia the downsizing of girl's clothing surely cannot help...

Regarding kid's clothing in Canada, we go by sizes rather than length, most of which are based on a hypothetical age. I think size 10 is supposed to fit age 10 etc. Though, I'm foggy on these details, especially where girl's clothing goes, since I have a strapping 10-year-old boy who is tall enough to fit into a size 12 and beyond...

The Punisher · Post by **The Punisher** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:55 am

XS, S, M, and L shirts seem too small for me, i aint fat, but it just doesn't feel right. So i wear XL or XXL. Baggy pants are good too, not sure about the jeans though, havent worn baggy jeans, i think i will soon though, because my current pants are thin and when im skateboardin, they get torn.

Brynn · Post by **Brynn** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 1:08 am

[QUOTE=dragon wench]Speaking of XXL, has anybody else noticed that sizes seem to have gotten smaller? At least they have for women

[/QUOTE]
Yeah, my favourites are the one-size things. It's so logical to expect a top of a certain size to fit every woman

(Let alone that that only size is usually S or for adults... Fighting against anorexia, eh?)

Adahn · Post by **Adahn** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 3:40 am

1 Size fits all rules

You got 1 size fits all underwear, 1 size fits all jeans, 1 size fits all t-shirts, gloves, socks, shoes everything!

Brynn · Post by **Brynn** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 5:43 am

Yeah, that's right, according to this logic they should produce one-size shoes too

ik911 · Post by **ik911** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:03 am

Slippers....

Monolith · Post by **Monolith** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:22 am

I usually buy XXL shirts, although I'm not that tall. The reason is obvious: you get more cloth for the same price.

At least where I buy those shirts. And I like wearing baggy clothes in general.

ik911 · Post by **ik911** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 6:23 am

[QUOTE=Monolith]you get more cloth for the same price.

[/QUOTE]
Boy, are you misled. Less is more!

jopperm2 · Post by **jopperm2** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:04 am

It really bothers me that they start so young with the skimpy clothes for girls so young.

After puberty they can go naked for all I care, but before I think it's very inapproprite. You can even buy thong underwear for toddlers now.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:09 am

dragon wench wrote:Oh joy! And here I was thinking I was being seduced by conspiracy theories again!

Yes, one could always hope!

I actually find this really disturbing, especially since it obviously starts so very young. I recently read an article stating that girls as young as 5 are claiming that they "are too fat." In addition to the various media onslaughts that contribute to anorexia the downsizing of girl's clothing surely cannot help...

I too find it disturbing, especially since it seems that the representatives for the clothing manufacturing view this is a totally uncritical way as "just fashion". There is no thought whatsoever at the effects. In the meanwhile, like you point out, we see an increasing number of small children already conditioned to refer to themselves as "too fat" and reports describe how anorexia, bulimia and other eating related disorders are increasing among preadolescent girls - and also boys. Eight year old girls dieting...it's really depressing. At the same time, obesity among children is also increasing. It is obvious that we humans cannot handle the excess of food we have in the Western world creates.

Btw, I just saw a new report (not a research report, it was in the newspaper) that in the UK, teenagers have started using anti-wrinke creams too stay young...

Adahn · Post by **Adahn** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 8:55 am

[QUOTE=C Elegans]Btw, I just saw a new report (not a research report, it was in the newspaper) that in the UK, teenagers have started using anti-wrinke creams too stay young...[/QUOTE]

It's official our world is - **** -