# the size-zero controversy



## Dr. Feelgood (Jun 14, 2009)

_Vogue_ editor Alexandra Shulman criticizes designers for providing unrealistically small clothing for fashion shows. The story is here.


----------



## ssflbelle (Jun 14, 2009)

Interesting article. I agree 100% and always have. 
I even thought it was so ridiculous when Lane Bryant, Roaman's etc used skinny models to show larger size clothing. What really gets me mad is that there is not a standard size for all the clothing. For example, just this week I received 2 shirts both the same size. One fits the other does not. When I looked at the label there were 2 different designers. Now I have to go through the expense I either sending one back or maybe I will bring it with me to the bash and see if any one wants to buy it. It is so frustrating. Thanks for the article and letting me rant.


----------



## ThatIsThat (Jun 14, 2009)

While I understand the frustration with this, I also don't understand why many people on Dimensions are soon keen on bashing and hating size-zero's, or women who are very thin. From what I've read on here, oftentimes being fat is a lifestyle choice, and that one of the main goals of Dimensions is to promote size acceptance. I'm just confused as to why that acceptance isn't extended to people of all sizes, even if being very skinny isn't considered attractive by most of us on here. 

After meeting some of the models at this past fashion week, you can tell that that's just their genes, just as sometimes being overweight is in someone's genes, and I think it's unfair to demand that these girls gain weight, just as it's unfair to expect those genetically disposed to being fat lose weight.

Furthermore, high fashion is about the clothes, not the women; it's about the art of it. Whether good or bad, one of the best ways to present many clothes is on a hanger, and thus designers choose models that are like living hangers. Many designs just don't look good on girls with some extra meat on them, but I would not say that designers should change the way they make clothes because of this. High fashion is meant to inspire and be a medium of creative expression, and not everything seen on the runway is supposed to be wearable, necessarily.

With that said, if *I* were editor in chief of Vogue, I would feature plus size models in Old Hollywood type gowns because, let's be honest, they tend to rock them better than the very slim girls. We must also remember, though, that fashion magazines like Vogue need to sell their product, and part of that is showing women what they want to see, and it seems that a lot of buyers don't want to see women that are closer to the "average"; it's a method of escapism, in some ways, I think.

Just my two cents. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone with any comments... I certainly did not intend to.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 14, 2009)

The issue I have is not that some women are extraordinarily skinny, because as you pointed out that is sometimes just how their body is determined to be. The problem is that because that's ALL the designers and magazines show, it creates an atmosphere of "this is the only size that is acceptable". You say "buyers don't want to see women that are closer to the average", but I think it's more that the "skinnier is better" idea has been pushed so strongly on women in the first place. The media is where most people GET their guidelines for what is societally ideal, and any attempts to reduce the pressure to match a single body image need to start there.


----------



## mithrandirjn (Jun 14, 2009)

Yeah, I tend to see that people's issue isn't usually with the models themselves, it's with the designers and the media that seem to espouse them as the lone standard for beauty.

It IS obnoxious when people get "hated on" for being any size...though a person opens themselves up for it when they bash other people over their sizes, like if a runway model was quoted as bashing big people.


----------



## superodalisque (Jun 14, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> While I understand the frustration with this, I also don't understand why many people on Dimensions are soon keen on bashing and hating size-zero's, or women who are very thin. From what I've read on here, oftentimes being fat is a lifestyle choice, and that one of the main goals of Dimensions is to promote size acceptance. I'm just confused as to why that acceptance isn't extended to people of all sizes, even if being very skinny isn't considered attractive by most of us on here.
> 
> After meeting some of the models at this past fashion week, you can tell that that's just their genes, just as sometimes being overweight is in someone's genes, and I think it's unfair to demand that these girls gain weight, just as it's unfair to expect those genetically disposed to being fat lose weight.
> 
> ...



i agree with you myself and i'm an ssbbw. even when designer's do there are complaints. either that or nobody notices John Galliano, Jean Paul Gaultier, Viktor and Rolf, Vivienne Westwood , Elber Albez for Lanvin and a host of others. when there is she isn't fat enough. she is too fat. 

we have something to do with it too. we have proven with our numbers that even in catalogs we ourselves prefer buying the same items when the model is thin. what does that say about us? the reason the buyers don't want to see it on a fat model is because we've have already told them numerically how we prefer our models to look in marketing studies. so why should they bother with a BBW model if we won't? where are our write in campaigns to get them etc...? and also many of us don't even have the courage to go into a designer shop just to buy accessories. we are the ones who have to make our presnce known and stop relying on thin people to fight our battles for us. you want a fat model? ask for her, demand her. and then buy what she wears. the fashion industry is not a charity.

but you are wrong about fashion designers and whether thier fashions look good on big women. big women who can afford haute couture look gorgeous in it. talented designers do it all of the time. they are masters and its ridiculous to believe they can't do it. it has been done and done well. designers make couture for all comers. some of them even look at it as an exquisite challenge to dress large women. Elber Albez of the fshion house Lanvin has real clothes for real women close to his heart. but i doubt he wants to foot the bill for 4 times as much $900 a yd fabric for his runway shows. its mathmatics and not aesthetics but people are afraid to say it because they don't want people to know how thin the margins are at these well heeled fashioned houses. penny pinching does not go with thier image.

most of thier couture dollars actually come from the middle east. many of those women are BBWs. its the mass produced prete a porte designs that are limited in size. they have to make it for a defined group--the women who usually buy thier clothes off the rack and can't afford couture generally. and since its off the rack they can't take the risk of trying to sell to someone that numerically appear to be a small part of thier market.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 14, 2009)

superodalisque said:


> we have something to do with it too. we have proven with our numbers that even in catalogs we ourselves prefer buying the same items when the model is thin. what does that say about us?



Do we?  I know I personally tend NOT to buy something if the model is thin, especially if it's at a plus size specialty store. There's two parts to it - first, if the model is thin, I have no goddamned idea how the outfit is going to look on me.





The model in this Lane Bryant suit is a lovely woman, but she's maybe a size 12 at most, and that suit is going to look WAY different on my body than hers. The pic gives me no idea how the suit copes with side rolls or digging in at the thighs or that little bulge right at the underarms, and that's stuff I need to know when buying a suit. 




This picture (from By Ro Designs) gives me all that information, and the use of a larger size model is really sort of positive and affirming for me. When a plus-size specialty store like Lane Bryant uses size 10-12 models, it feels like they're saying "well, it's okay to be 'bigger', but not that big!"

I dunno, I guess I feel such a strong pull toward sites/catalogs with larger models (and I do avoid shopping at plus-size boutiques with thin models) that it really took me by surprise to hear the statement "we've proven that even BBWs prefer buying things if the models are thin". Are there studies on this? I'd be really interested to look into it further.


----------



## mszwebs (Jun 14, 2009)

I totally get where SuperO is coming from.

She's right, an i'm pretty sure that there was a study or something done not that long ago. 

And while I think that its great that you choose not to buy from such stores, Teleite, I DO and for many of the reasons you mentioned. 

Number 1, women are not built alike, but especially day women. From a monetary perspective, its ridiculous to ask a company to display ALL their products for the many shapes that we come in. 

A dress that SuperO wears isn't going to look the same on me, even though we're close in size. How do I know? Because she gave me a dress. And it looked great... But different than it looked on her. Its easier to disply for the masses and show the CLOTHES, on women who are of a uniform size. 

Number 2, and this is the harsh reality here, not everything is going to look GOOD on every body type... And the designers and retailers are banking on the fact that we're going to see a dress designed for a pear and buy it because it looks good, even though we may be an apple. 

Its shrewd, but its smart, and it has paid off. 

I might not but something if I can see that i'm going to have roll issues or my back fat is going to be pouring out the sides. 
As a super sized woman, seeing a dress on someone who is a size 22 or even a 26 isn't going to help me much anyway. 

Perhaps mainstream plus size retailers should have a section on their sites where fat women could upload pics of themselves IN some of the outfits... Real women in real clothes, to show that the can work and look great... But even that is taking a marketing risk. 

Lol I don't know. I'm all over the place on this, so I apologize. Plus, i'm posting from my phone which isn't helping. 

I'm just saying that a lot of times, I can gauge better what something will look like on ME, without someone else's rolls in the way, especially if the look nothing like me.I'd rather look at the drape of the fabric than than be distracted by how I think someone else looks in something.


----------



## superodalisque (Jun 14, 2009)

Teleute said:


> Do we?  I know I personally tend NOT to buy something if the model is thin, especially if it's at a plus size specialty store. There's two parts to it - first, if the model is thin, I have no goddamned idea how the outfit is going to look on me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i love it that you look for women your own size. i think its important. but the reality is when you do marketing and look at the spreadsheet most women don't function that way.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 14, 2009)

mszwebs said:


> I'm just saying that a lot of times, I can gauge better what something will look like on ME, without someone else's rolls in the way, especially if the look nothing like me.I'd rather look at the drape of the fabric than than be distracted by how I think someone else looks in something.



That makes sense  I have a harder time picturing how something will look on myself, which is why I try to stick to the sites with larger models, but if you're better at visualizing it makes a lot of sense to see the item with less distraction. And I see what you mean with the marketing aspects, with getting women to buy stuff that's really designed for another body type... I just don't LIKE it, heh. I guess this is why I'm not in sales 

Edit (missed SuperO's post):


superodalisque said:


> but the reality is when you do marketing and look at the spreadsheet most women don't function that way.


Yeah, I guess the things Mszwebs said just hadn't occurred to me at all - I can see how it works, but it totally took me by surprise to hear it.


----------



## ashmamma84 (Jun 14, 2009)

superodalisque said:


> i agree with you myself and i'm an ssbbw. even when designer's do there are complaints. either that or nobody notices John Galliano, Jean Paul Gaultier, Viktor and Rolf, Vivienne Westwood , Elber Albez for Lanvin and a host of others. when there is she isn't fat enough. she is too fat.
> 
> we have something to do with it too. we have proven with our numbers that even in catalogs we ourselves prefer buying the same items when the model is thin. what does that say about us? the reason the buyers don't want to see it on a fat model is because we've have already told them numerically how we prefer our models to look in marketing studies. so why should they bother with a BBW model if we won't? where are our write in campaigns to get them etc...? and also many of us don't even have the courage to go into a designer shop just to buy accessories. we are the ones who have to make our presnce known and stop relying on thin people to fight our battles for us. you want a fat model? ask for her, demand her. and then buy what she wears. the fashion industry is not a charity.
> 
> ...



Spot on. It might be an ugly, hard truth...but, it still remains. And for me, I never go by a model's measurements to judge what an item will look like on me; knowing what I do about fashion it just doesn't make alot of sense and would cause me alot of unnecessary upset. Because let's face it, even plus size models are a certain height/shape and I'm willing to bet most fat chicks don't resemble them. And yes, they have to be able to fit sample sizes as well. It's just a part of the business. Models aren't there to be representative of the masses, plus or straight sized.

Money talks. If we think there is a niche or want to see something, we really do have power in numbers. We can show people better than we can tell them. It's time for us to put up or shut up.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 14, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> While I understand the frustration with this,



This is a great post.. I totally agree. (snipped it for space reasons)

High end fashion design is not supposed to be for the average woman.. like Cherchez said, it's a type of art.

As far as buying clothes only when they show larger models... well, I might do that.. but then I'd have about 5 things hanging in my closet. I'd love to do that - I'd love to support truly plus size models. However, I can't afford to do that when I need to buy clothes and my options are limited as it is.

Okay, editing again.. also as mszwebs said, a bigger model wouldn't necessarily give someone a good idea of what it's going to look like on them. Everyone's body is shaped differently, everyone carries the weight differently, etc. I think this is even more true for plus size girls. I have a really unique shape (I'm pretty much all belly) so showing the same pair of jeans on a size 28 pear isn't going to help me.


----------



## exile in thighville (Jun 14, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> While I understand the frustration with this, I also don't understand why many people on Dimensions are soon keen on bashing and hating size-zero's, or women who are very thin. From what I've read on here, oftentimes being fat is a lifestyle choice, and that one of the main goals of Dimensions is to promote size acceptance. I'm just confused as to why that acceptance isn't extended to people of all sizes, even if being very skinny isn't considered attractive by most of us on here.
> 
> After meeting some of the models at this past fashion week, you can tell that that's just their genes, just as sometimes being overweight is in someone's genes, and I think it's unfair to demand that these girls gain weight, just as it's unfair to expect those genetically disposed to being fat lose weight.
> 
> ...



this is correct, though i dissent insofar that sure, "High end fashion design is not supposed to be for the average woman," but it's myopic to play 100% devil's advocate when it's clearly only _for_ One Type of Woman. using your large amount of money to remind the average citizens you are better than them because you need only appeal to the upper 1% to survive is not high fashion (or art). it's one type of high fashion (or art). it would be like calling charcoal the only legitimate way to draw, and spending a huge amount of money cultivating the charcoal industry and telling the public so. it's not just art and runways. the reality is that it can't all be art and some of it (most of it in fact) is an industry. the industry isn't appealing to the (buying) supersized bloc (not a large percentage either, but more than the size zero percentage) either, so what gives? a supply that refuses the demand is useless. so i detest these useless designers and wish their enablers to go broke and hungry.


----------



## moore2me (Jun 22, 2009)

You think size zero is bad? I was sitting in my dentist office one day for an appointment and the office manager was ordering scubs for the staff. She asked a new girl what size she wore so the managerr could complete the order form.

I heard the new girl say "I wear a size zero, extra small!" 


I thought " Size 0, XS - Yowza !!! "


----------



## Hathor (Jun 22, 2009)

I love fashion magazines and high end clothing. Can I wear it? No. Do I want to? Usually not.

I like buying from the plus size retailers who actually show women close to my size modeling them. I know what looks good on me. I can generally tell how the cut of a shirt or pants will look because my mom sews and I know how to look for how the grain of fabric runs-horizontal or vertical. 

Besides, I'm a lover of accessories. :wubu:


----------



## jonah-uk (Jun 22, 2009)

moore2me said:


> You think size zero is bad? I was sitting in my dentist office one day for an appointment and the office manager was ordering scubs for the staff. She asked a new girl what size she wore so the managerr could complete the order form.
> 
> I heard the new girl say "I wear a size zero, extra small!"
> 
> ...



don't you think she meant that as an alternative - i.e. Size 0 if they come in numbered sizes, XS if they're in the S/M/L etc sizes?


----------



## moore2me (Jun 22, 2009)

jonah-uk said:


> don't you think she meant that as an alternative - i.e. Size 0 if they come in numbered sizes, XS if they're in the S/M/L etc sizes?



Perhaps you are right Jonah. It's just that I have absolutely no experience in those sizes. It's like asking me what the color blue smells like.


----------



## IrishBard (Jun 22, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> While I understand the frustration with this, I also don't understand why many people on Dimensions are soon keen on bashing and hating size-zero's, or women who are very thin. From what I've read on here, oftentimes being fat is a lifestyle choice, and that one of the main goals of Dimensions is to promote size acceptance. I'm just confused as to why that acceptance isn't extended to people of all sizes, even if being very skinny isn't considered attractive by most of us on here.
> 
> After meeting some of the models at this past fashion week, you can tell that that's just their genes, just as sometimes being overweight is in someone's genes, and I think it's unfair to demand that these girls gain weight, just as it's unfair to expect those genetically disposed to being fat lose weight.
> 
> ...



I concur with the above statement


----------



## mel (Jun 22, 2009)

On a side note.. I love the black swimsuit


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 22, 2009)

Size 0 and XS are the same size essentially. I only know because I have friends that small. I was friends with a girl Christina for awhile that wore a 00 and XXS which is even smaller than a 0/XS. So tiny!


----------



## Tania (Jun 22, 2009)

> the reality is that it can't all be art and some of it (most of it in fact) is an industry. the industry isn't appealing to the (buying) supersized bloc (not a large percentage either, but more than the size zero percentage) either, so what gives? a supply that refuses the demand is useless. so i detest these useless designers and wish their enablers to go broke and hungry.



Absolutely agree. It gives the impression that industry gatekeepers are missing the point. :/ Human females on average are getting bigger in much of the world, yet the models used to present the products which are ostensibly intended to clothe them (in concept or in reality) are getting smaller? 

I think it's perfectly appropriate for designers to have the "right" models to showcase their collections to best advantage, whether conceptual haute couture or more pragmatically-concocted pret-a-porter. However, I'm not sure that such a narrow - heck, singular! - dimensional range needs to be so pervasively enforced throughout an entire industry. Further, no matter what the context, ALL the models do not need to be size zero for straight-sized clothes to be presented correctly, or even to present a compelling consumer fantasy. At least two insiders interviewed for the article made the excellent point that even haute couture catwalk models weren't always so small, which begs the question - has the basic focus of the fashion industry really changed that much in 20 years? Have human women gotten that much thinner? Probably not (although, I wonder what's become of the "woman as muse" thing - I remember when certain models and high-profile clients inspired the designs, as opposed to the designs dictating the dimensions of the model), and no. 

I get that life is easier and cheaper when you can widgetify your methods of presentation and reduce your materials expenditure. If you know what you'll be dealing with in advance, patterning is simpler and you don't have to bother with dozens of model fittings. So, the widgetification explanation is valid for broad-scale fashion samples that will be modelled and photographed many times over on an international basis. But, Shulman - who ought to know - feels that the models who fit the samples don't always show the clothes off to best advantage. That smacks of penny wisdom to me. Sure, slim models sell fantasy, but if the models don't suit the design, or appear extremely and unappetizingly thin (Shulman mentions startlingly-placed bones, &c.), you run the risk of turning off consumers. Also, I agree that many - even most - consumers need to see at least an ounce of themselves in the equation if they're going to be compelled to buy in. Sometimes a tall, size 0 model will be able to personify the perfect fantasy AND bridge the identification gap. Other times, not so much. 

Further, the zeroification of the model corps kind of flies in the face of the whole "high fashion is art, and art makes no compromises" thing. The same frame is not going to suit every painting, just as the same model (or model dimensions) won't suit every fashion. To be sure, the "giraffe" types may be perfect for some or even many pieces, but they won't be right for everything. Why should restrictive industry norms dictate artistic expression?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 22, 2009)

I think it really depends on what type of fashion modeling you're referring to.

There's modeling, like say, in a Macy's catalogue, and then there's modeling for Karl Lagerfield (Chanel) on the catwalk at New York Fashion Week. The first is meant for the everyday, average consumer.. those models are tall and thin but generally average looking, even if they are way thinner than the average person. The second is just not meant for the everyday person.. who here plans on spending a few grand on a Gucci dress for their next Christmas party? No one? Oh, right.. that's because the average person doesn't have thousands upon thousands to drop on designer shit.. very few people do. High fashion modeling isn't targeted towards the average consumer (with the exception of pure entertainment value) and therefore it's way less important that the high fashion models appeal to the general public. Being super thin is considered the "ideal" body shape for most people, especially people who are in the spotlight.. models, actresses, singers, etc. and it just so happens these are the people who are also able to purchase this stuff. Why would they put a size 8 model on the catwalk if they are trying to sell to people who wear a size 2?


----------



## Tania (Jun 22, 2009)

> I think it really depends on what type of fashion modeling you're referring to.



This is true; however, the ideas at the top shake down to the masses, and model size trends generally reflect that to a degree. 



> High fashion modeling isn't targeted towards the average consumer (with the exception of pure entertainment value) and therefore it's way less important that the high fashion models appeal to the general public.



It's not just pure entertainment value, though; the intent is to use haute couture excitement to sell bridge lines, accessories, shoes, and cosmetics to the closer-to-average types. They want to entice people to desire the steak, even if all they can afford is the sizzle. This is why I wore Chanel makeup almost exclusively for like ten years. It's also why I still wear Chanel perfume almost exclusively now. ;D

Further, I'm not sure your average filthy-rich person is really any different than your average middle-class person when it comes to physical ideals - we're all weaned on the same media images. Further, it's the middle class kids that always seem to get caught in the dramatic anorexic dreamchasing cycles (been there, bought the t-shirt...even though it wasn't xs).  And in the U.S. at least, we're all kind of expected and even encouraged to be petit-bourgeois versions of our wealthier, more socially-consequential counterparts in goals and tastes. It's the American dream, baby!



> Being super thin is considered the "ideal" body shape for most people, especially people who are in the spotlight.. models, actresses, singers, etc. and it just so happens these are the people who are also able to purchase this stuff. Why would they put a size 8 model on the catwalk if they are trying to sell to people who wear a size 2?



As SuperO mentioned, a pretty high percentage of couture clients are not actually famous, or even super-small.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Jun 22, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> ....From what I've read on here, oftentimes being fat is a lifestyle choice, ........




Being fat is rarely a "choice" let alone a lifestyle choice. Granted there are a small minority who purposefully gain - but the truth is, most of us are fat through no fault of our own. 

If you think for a second that we choose fatness, and all the discrimination, bigotry and difficulties that come with it, you are very sadly mistaken. 

That doesn't mean that we hate being fat - it means that we didn't choose to be fat.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 23, 2009)

In short, next time I see a large percentage of plus size consumers purchasing high end designer clothes, we'll discusss whether or not plus size models should be on the runway. Until then..


----------



## mszwebs (Jun 23, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> In short, next time I see a large percentage of plus size consumers purchasing high end designer clothes, we'll discusss whether or not plus size models should be on the runway. Until then..



WOW.

That is offensive...not to mention COMPLETELY FUCKING RIDICULOUS.

I had a better response than that, but I'd probably get a Dimensions vacation.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 23, 2009)

mszwebs said:


> WOW.
> 
> That is offensive...not to mention COMPLETELY FUCKING RIDICULOUS.
> 
> I had a better response than that, but I'd probably get a Dimensions vacation.



I don't see why that's so offensive or ridiculous.. it boils down to who buys what. Why would they market to a demographic that doesn't purchase what they're selling? 

Like I said before, since a large percentage of people who lay down thousands of dollars for designer clothes are either 1. rich or 2. famous or 3. both, they're more likely to be in the public eye and falling into societal expectations of beauty, i.e. thin. Also, theres been plenty of studies that show that being fat is often times a class issue (lower classes having higher percentages of fat people.) I'm going to venture to say that MOST lower class or middle class people don't purchase Chanel, Gucci, etc. etc.


----------



## Weeze (Jun 23, 2009)

now, what are really need are fatties modeling the clothes for us at walmart.

damn straight.


----------



## mszwebs (Jun 23, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> I don't see why that's so offensive or ridiculous.. it boils down to who buys what. Why would they market to a demographic that doesn't purchase what they're selling?
> 
> Like I said before, since a large percentage of people who lay down thousands of dollars for designer clothes are either 1. rich or 2. famous or 3. both, they're more likely to be in the public eye and falling into societal expectations of beauty, i.e. thin. Also, theres been plenty of studies that show that being fat is sometimes a class issue (lower classes having higher percentages of fat people.)




First of all, I think that you really need to take a gander at HOW things come out of your mouth. 

Your matter of fact, and apparently expert commentary is off the mark in a couple of ways. 

There are fat women on this board who DO purchase high-end plus size clothing, and implying that they don't deserve to have any kind of representation on a run way is really shitty. 

ALSO, it indicates that I, as a fat woman who is neither rich or famous, shouldn't even bother with high end couture, because, well shit. I'm just fat and poor and I'm not cool enough to buy it anyway, even if I had the money. Ho fucking hum.

Maybe you feel that way, but I have a higher opinion of myself.


----------



## Tania (Jun 23, 2009)

I don't think anyone was demanding that the A-list couturiers hire plus-sized models for their couture shows. 

There's a big difference between "plus sized" and "larger than size 0."


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 23, 2009)

mszwebs said:


> First of all, I think that you really need to take a gander at HOW things come out of your mouth.
> 
> Your matter of fact, and apparently expert commentary is off the mark in a couple of ways.
> 
> ...



If I gave a shit about how things came out of my mouth, I would've fixed that by now. I never called myself an expert.. just giving my opinion on this message board, like always.

High end plus size clothes is one thing.. I'm not saying that people don't buy that and I'm not saying that there shouldn't be plus size models reflecting that.. I was simply referring to the high end fashion discussion which I believe started with Cherez. I'm talking Gucci, Prada, Louis Vuitton, etc.. the places where size zero runway models are prevalent. It's not just fat people who don't buy it.. it's everyday, regular people who don't buy it. Can we at least agree on that? Whether I'm a size 2 or 28, I'm never going to own Chanel because I just don't have the cash for it.. I'm middle class and live in suburbia and work two jobs so I can go to college. That's about it. I don't have 5 grand to buy a designer dress. 

It's been proven that there is a higher percentage of fat people in lower and middle classes as opposed to upper.. and if there is less fat people in upper.. and upper are more likely to buy designer clothes.. that means.. less marketing (or none) directed towards fat people since they're trying to market to the people that will be more likely to purchase.. I'm just putting pieces together here.


----------



## exile in thighville (Jun 23, 2009)

mszwebs said:


> WOW.
> 
> That is offensive...not to mention COMPLETELY FUCKING RIDICULOUS.
> 
> I had a better response than that, but I'd probably get a Dimensions vacation.



it's not offensive, but it is ridiculous. i've been arguing with a few people tonight, and no, i remain unconvinced that if a well-off member of this board threw money at gucci for a dress that they wouldn't refuse their business for either their image or unwillingness to accommodate dimensions they're unaccustomed to manufacturing. there are businesses like nightspots and country clubs that refuse patrons rich or not because there's an image and audience they want to uphold. you can point to whichever celebrity you like as an exception here, but fame and money are different. if beth ditto obtains a gaultier dress it's because gaultier needs her endorsement more than they need her plethora of detractors' (for the moment in the sun anyway).

we don't have much of a way of knowing, no, because for proof we'd need someone rich, not famous, and inclined towards gucci. for my argument i point to middle-class fashion companies' unwillingness to supply their heavy demand (old navy removing plus size sections from walk-in stores say). why do we think even more pretentious and selective companies that are competitive and have an image to uphold like any celebrity would be MORE flexible?


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Jun 23, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> It's been proven that there is a higher percentage of fat people in lower and middle classes as opposed to upper..



Has it? I've wondered about this for a long time, but I haven't been able to find any studies that have been done. If you know of any, please PM me -- or post the link, if it's on the Internet. (I think a lot of people on Dims would be interested in this; otherwise, I would've PM'd _you_) Thanks!


----------



## exile in thighville (Jun 23, 2009)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> Has it? I've wondered about this for a long time, but I haven't been able to find any studies that have been done. If you know of any, please PM me -- or post the link, if it's on the Internet. (I think a lot of people on Dims would be interested in this; otherwise, I would've PM'd _you_) Thanks!



while this is probably true i'm still gonna give thatgirl a hard time and [_citation needed_]


----------



## msbard90 (Jun 23, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> In short, next time I see a large percentage of plus size consumers purchasing high end designer clothes, we'll discusss whether or not plus size models should be on the runway. Until then..



If there were "high end" designer clothes that actually fit me, I'd be first in line. I'm sure there are a lot of us who would as well. I don't know any woman that wouldn't love a nice designer outfit! It is also difficult to imagine myself wearing designer clothing because of the way it is modeled. I know that if a fabric is not going to stretch, there is no way it is going to fit me. I think it would be lovely to see more plus size models that are actually of a larger size than 12; it would most certainly inspire us to buy the clothing. The little models are intimidating. I THINK PLUS SIZE MODELS SHOULD DEFFFFFFFINNNNNITTTTTEEEELLLLYYYY BE ON THE RUNWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## superodalisque (Jun 23, 2009)

though she is being a bit blunt i agree with that. not a lot of big girls i know are ready to plunk down a few thousand for even prete a porte let alone 100,000 for a couture gown.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 23, 2009)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> Has it? I've wondered about this for a long time, but I haven't been able to find any studies that have been done. If you know of any, please PM me -- or post the link, if it's on the Internet. (I think a lot of people on Dims would be interested in this; otherwise, I would've PM'd _you_) Thanks!





exile in thighville said:


> while this is probably true i'm still gonna give thatgirl a hard time and [_citation needed_]



There's been some threads on it on this site but I don't feel like finding them. Googling something along the lines of "fat class issue" gives you lots of results. Here's one - http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/the-wage-effect-of-fat/ and another - http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/127891 and another - http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/...eir-weight/?partner=rssyahoo&emc=rss&apage=32 etc etc you get the point.



msbard90 said:


> If there were "high end" designer clothes that actually fit me, I'd be first in line. I'm sure there are a lot of us who would as well. I don't know any woman that wouldn't love a nice designer outfit! It is also difficult to imagine myself wearing designer clothing because of the way it is modeled. I know that if a fabric is not going to stretch, there is no way it is going to fit me. I think it would be lovely to see more plus size models that are actually of a larger size than 12; it would most certainly inspire us to buy the clothing. The little models are intimidating. I THINK PLUS SIZE MODELS SHOULD DEFFFFFFFINNNNNITTTTTEEEELLLLYYYY BE ON THE RUNWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



You're so lucky you have thousands of dollars to lay down for Gucci and Dolce and Gabanna stuff. Unfortunately, I live in middle class suburbia and work two jobs so I can pay my car payment and save a little for college. It took me 20 minutes yesterday to decide if I should buy a 20 dollar bag from American Eagle because it was over my limit of 15. 

The best thing about this thread is that some people are so incredibly offended by my comment about most fat people not laying down the money for designer threads yet in the local SSBBW thread people were incredibly offended because I made a comment about Walmart being trashy and OMG DON'T DISS WALMART.

Wait.. are you buying Route 66 or Coach? I'm confused.


----------



## mszwebs (Jun 23, 2009)

superodalisque said:


> though she is being a bit blunt i agree with that. not a lot of big girls i know are ready to plunk down a few thousand for even prete a porte let alone 100,000 for a couture gown.





thatgirl08 said:


> The best thing about this thread is that some people are so incredibly offended by my comment about most fat people not laying down the money for designer threads yet in the local SSBBW thread people were incredibly offended because I made a comment about Walmart being trashy and OMG DON'T DISS WALMART.
> 
> Wait.. are you buying Route 66 or Coach? I'm confused.



Actually, how you said it pissed me off more than what you said.

It was dismissive commentary that was meant to be - or at least look as though it was meant to be - the end of the subject.

If that was not your intent, then even though you don't "give a shit" how things come out of your mouth, expect people to be offended, no matter what you say.


----------



## vcrgrrl (Jun 24, 2009)

When I shop, I'd like to see the clothes modeled on women my size. When the clothes are on someone a lot smaller, they are going to look different. Until the fashion industry changes their rules and the way they operate, people are always going to think they have to be a size 0 or even smaller. That's really scary.


----------



## Cors (Jun 24, 2009)

Size and measurements don't say much about how a dress looks on you. I imagine this to be even more true for bigger girls because the variations in body shape are much more pronounced. Even if the designer carried bigger sizes in their ready-to-wear lines, those who can afford it will still choose haute couture because that is the only way to ensure fit, unless you have "ideal" big girl proportions. 

I am a size 0 and can fit into runway samples (which go on massive sale at the end of season) but I don't exactly look good in most of them. They are clearly cut for someone with the same BWH measurements but is much taller, with broader shoulders, longer arms, smaller boobs, wider hips and my shape actually ruins the look of the more tailored or artsy garments. 

I know a number of ladies who can, and regularly splurge on ready-to-wear designer gowns. Most of them are slim, but there are certainly more 6s than 0s.


----------



## msbard90 (Jun 24, 2009)

lol i would love to splurge on that stuff haha if only i had 1000's!!!!!! Lol if there were something really really nice for plus size women, I think I would save up for it. Definitely.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 25, 2009)

mszwebs said:


> Actually, how you said it pissed me off more than what you said.
> 
> It was dismissive commentary that was meant to be - or at least look as though it was meant to be - the end of the subject.
> 
> If that was not your intent, then even though you don't "give a shit" how things come out of your mouth, expect people to be offended, no matter what you say.



Sorry I didn't reword it to your liking?



msbard90 said:


> lol i would love to splurge on that stuff haha if only i had 1000's!!!!!! Lol if there were something really really nice for plus size women, I think I would save up for it. Definitely.



Haha, I know how you feel. Honestly, I have bought designer stuff before. I bought a pair of Coach sneakers two years ago for 110 bucks and I seriously clean them with special cleaner every single time after I wear them because I'm so afraid something is going to happen and I'm like noo I have 110 bucks invested in these!

I'm not saying fat people are especially cheap or something.. just that the AVERAGE person doesn't have the cash for this stuff. Chances are, the majority of people buying high fashion items are rich and/or famous.. and I would say those who are rich/famous are more likely to be thin simply because they're more likely to be able to 1. afford personal chefs and personal trainers and surgery and all that other stuff people use to get skinny and 2. are in the spotlight more than the average middle class person and therefore feel even more pressure than us to be skinny.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 25, 2009)

Cors said:


> I know a number of ladies who can, and regularly splurge on ready-to-wear designer gowns. Most of them are slim, but there are certainly more 6s than 0s.



Yeah, that's probably true.. but let's face it.. 6 is still thin. It may not be model thin but it's still way thinner than I have ever been and way thinner than I will ever be (or want to be, for that matter.)


----------



## Buffie (Jun 25, 2009)

There are a lot of skinny chicks who don't buy designer junk either. As much as I love the art of high fashion and couture, I don't blame them. Most of that shit is overpriced - like way way WAY overpriced.

*Note, when Buffie says "designer" she's talking about the mass-market types who do mostly ready-to-wear. Like the ones who have lots of ads in Vogue, Bazaar, Elle, InStyle, etc. Like Donna Karan, Calvin Klein... know what I mean?

Sure, a bit better quality (with some designers) than discount chain brands, but not like 999% better.

Whatevs though. So designers want to cater to the super thin? I'm a believer in marketing to whomever willingly buys your crap. Isn't that what you have to do to survive in business?

For the record, I'm one of those size-acceptance people who clearly thinks fat is cute but I support a person being kind to themselves and their body, even admiring their own body, no matter what size they are. So I guess you could say I'm an All-Size Acceptance person.

We spend too much time and effort disliking ourselves for a freaking ton of different reasons. That's junk. We're not perfect and it's totally ohkay. Perfect doesn't exist and even if it did, no group would ever universally agree on what "perfect" looks like.

Celebrate who you are just because you can. As Cartman says, "Whateva, I do what I want!" Doesn't have to be like a huge celebration either, not every single day anyhow. LoLz Small self-affirmations count and they really help in maintaining a positive attitude if practiced regularly.

Believe it or not, Cartman-isms have a pretty strong fat-pride message, even if he insists he's "not fat, just big boned." Exhibit A - Kyle and Stan rag on him endlessly calling him fat-ass and talking about him being fat in a very negative fashion, but Cartman is impervious to it (most of the time). He is high on himself no matter what and I get the impression Cartman would have the same self-image and ego at any size.

You're not hallucinating - I just admitted a cartoon character plays in active role in my personal inner-dialogue. Wow. That's... potentially embarrassing. But I'm among friends, so no worries!


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 25, 2009)

Buffie said:


> As Cartman says, "Whateva, I do what I want!" Doesn't have to be like a huge celebration either, not every single day anyhow. LoLz Small self-affirmations count and they really help in maintaining a positive attitude if practiced regularly.
> 
> Believe it or not, Cartman-isms have a pretty strong fat-pride message, even if he insists he's "not fat, just big boned." Exhibit A - Kyle and Stan rag on him endlessly calling him fat-ass and talking about him being fat in a very negative fashion, but Cartman is impervious to it (most of the time). He is high on himself no matter what and I get the impression Cartman would have the same self-image and ego at any size.
> 
> You're not hallucinating - I just admitted a cartoon character plays in active role in my personal inner-dialogue. Wow. That's... potentially embarrassing. But I'm among friends, so no worries!



According to my friends, I sometimes do a pretty good Cartman impression, except I don't even try to.. I just do weird voices sometimes and occasionally, it comes out as Cartman.

I'm probably going to regret admitting that on the internet but I'm over it haha.


----------



## Buffie (Jun 25, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> According to my friends, I sometimes do a pretty good Cartman impression, except I don't even try to.. I just do weird voices sometimes and occasionally, it comes out as Cartman.
> 
> I'm probably going to regret admitting that on the internet but I'm over it haha.



LoLz How can I bribe you to sing me a few lines of Elvis' "In the Ghetto" as performed by Cartman? :happy:


----------



## Surlysomething (Jun 25, 2009)

In her letter, Shulman wrote: "Nowadays, I often ask the photographers to retouch to make the models appear larger."

I never thought i'd live to hear that one. Haha.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Jun 25, 2009)

Buffie said:


> LoLz How can I bribe you to sing me a few lines of Elvis' "In the Ghetto" as performed by Cartman? :happy:



Haha, it's not gonna happen!



Surlysomething said:


> In her letter, Shulman wrote: "Nowadays, I often ask the photographers to retouch to make the models appear larger."
> 
> I never thought i'd live to hear that one. Haha.



I remember reading an article about Crystal Renn (my fave plus size model) and she said that when she used to be a regular model she essentially didn't eat and yet exercised like 6 hours a day and I remember her saying that a lot of photographers had to ask her to stick her stomach out because she looked so emaciated yet her agent still kept pushing her to lose weight. Crazyness. She's gorg now.. not that she wasn't attractive then because her face was obviously still pretty.. she was just so sickly looking.


----------



## kioewen (Jun 25, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> Why would they market to a demographic that doesn't purchase what they're selling?


Why would that demographic purchase what they're selling, when they're not being marketed to?

People don't seem to get it -- these designers don't _want_ fuller-figured customers. Money does NOT trump prejudice. It's exactly like restaurants that used to cater to "whites only." They didn't want black money. These designers don't _want_ to see curvier women in their outfits. People are accustomed to thinking in monolithic "corporate" terms, but what it really comes down to in the fashion industry is individual hate-filled designers/editors/photogaphers who discriminate against larger women any way they can.


----------



## kioewen (Jun 25, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> After meeting some of the models at this past fashion week, you can tell that that's just their genes, just as sometimes being overweight is in someone's genes, and I think it's unfair to demand that these girls gain weight, just as it's unfair to expect those genetically disposed to being fat lose weight



Sweeping generalization. The following is more often the case:



thatgirl08 said:


> I remember reading an article about Crystal Renn (my fave plus size model) and she said that when she used to be a regular model she essentially didn't eat and yet exercised like 6 hours a day and I remember her saying that a lot of photographers had to ask her to stick her stomach out because she looked so emaciated yet her agent still kept pushing her to lose weight.


Drug use is rampant, truly epidemic, among models, precisely in order to keep weight down to unnatural levels. Eating disorders are the norm, not the exception, hence the (true) story about modeling agencies with signs over their bathroom stalls, "Please don't vomit in our toilets." At least three models actually died of their anorexia. Countless more live a life of perpetual starvation masked by cocaine, heroin, etc

There is no reason why fashion should be allowed to use models who, studies have shown, cause and exacerbate negative body image and even fuel full-blown eating disorders among women.

If it's fair to ask models to lose weight, then it's fair to ask models to gain weight. And if being a larger size is unnatural for them, they should do something else, and different girls should be hired.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 25, 2009)

Saw this article from the WSJ and thought that it was very interesting, and pertinent to this discussion. 

Dressing Women Of A Certain Size


----------



## Surlysomething (Jun 25, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> Saw this article from the WSJ and thought that it was very interesting, and pertinent to this discussion.
> 
> Dressing Women Of A Certain Size




Great article.

_"Certain people have said, 'This is not our image,' " says Mr. Shoji. "But I said, 'We can sell it -- why not? ... We aren't doing art -- this is commerce.' "_

And earlier in this thread it was said that fashion is art. Couture more specifically I assume. So this quote is interesting as he's an actual designer who sees the commerce in his 'art' and decided to market it. Beautiful dresses.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 25, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> Great article.
> 
> _"Certain people have said, 'This is not our image,' " says Mr. Shoji. "But I said, 'We can sell it -- why not? ... We aren't doing art -- this is commerce.' "_
> 
> And earlier in this thread it was said that fashion is art. Couture more specifically I assume. So this quote is interesting as he's an actual designer who sees the commerce in his 'art' and decided to market it. Beautiful dresses.



Well, it also addresses another issue that we touched on -- the snobbery of high-end fashion designers who do view their frocks as art:



_Perhaps more important, fashion-industry people are often fixated on their own ideals of beauty. Many designers just don't want to see their clothes on big people -- and many stores are complicit, displaying tiny sizes and keeping larger ones in back. Paige Adams-Geller, a former fit model for many high-end jeans manufacturers, told me in March that she urged designers to consider how their clothes would look on a woman who wore, for instance, a size 10.

*"And the designer would say, 'Well, I don't want someone who is that size,' " she said, " 'They shouldn't be wearing my brand.'* " Ms. Adams-Geller turned that into a profitable business, Paige Premium Denim, selling jeans for up to size 28 -- or "4X." "I'm like, there's a lot of people out there that size with money to spend," she said._

I was surprised to see this, actually ... as I'd thought that fashion designers were just as business-savvy as other retailers. If the money is there, they're fools for not taking advantage of it (and of us, with those $$$$ price tags).


----------



## Surlysomething (Jun 25, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> Well, it also addresses another issue that we touched on -- the snobbery of high-end fashion designers who do view their frocks as art:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Exactly. That's what I was sort of getting at. I don't think there is fat/skinny money out there. Just MONEY.

You know about money, right? Aren't you rich?


----------



## kioewen (Jun 25, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> Exactly. That's what I was sort of getting at. I don't think there is fat/skinny money out there. Just MONEY.
> 
> You know about money, right? Aren't you rich?



No, it's NOT about money. That's what the article is saying.

The quote contradicts your point, and the point that others were making, and supports the opposite. Most designers and high-end clothing labels are NOT prioritizing money at all, but their own discriminatory vision. They are actively discouraging full-figured women from being their clients.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 25, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> Exactly. That's what I was sort of getting at. I don't think there is fat/skinny money out there. Just MONEY.
> 
> You know about money, right? Aren't you rich?



Yes. I'm loaded. 

Only problem is, it's not with $$ 

Fashion Bug is a stretch for my budget.

I'd be as likely to purchase high-end designer "art" on a hanger (supposing it would even fit, that is) as I would be to take a huge chunk of our life savings, dump it into a pile, and light it on fire just to watch it burn. But clearly, there is a market for plus-size designer clothing. What morons they are for not taking advantage of it.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jun 25, 2009)

kioewen said:


> No, it's NOT about money. That's what the article is saying.
> 
> The quote contradicts your point, and the point that others were making, and supports the opposite. Most designers and high-end clothing labels are NOT prioritizing money at all, but their own discriminatory vision. They are actively discouraging full-figured women from being their clients.




Yeah, thanks. I got that.

I'm thinking it's too bad they don't view it that way. Money is money. But to them their 'fashion' is all about status.


----------



## Cors (Jun 25, 2009)

It still makes me sad that Paige's Plus line was never carried on her official website - only Nordies and it has been discontinued for a while. Apparently her jeans (amazing quality, flattering cuts, washes and pretty pockets) weren't too popular with big girls. Sure, some rave about the fit but the truth is that most of the stock simply ended up on Nordstrom Rack for a fraction of retail (USD180-250).

She did try but hey, but not enough people aren't buying.


----------



## exile in thighville (Jun 25, 2009)

kioewen said:


> Why would that demographic purchase what they're selling, when they're not being marketed to?
> 
> People don't seem to get it -- these designers don't _want_ fuller-figured customers. Money does NOT trump prejudice. It's exactly like restaurants that used to cater to "whites only." They didn't want black money. These designers don't _want_ to see curvier women in their outfits. People are accustomed to thinking in monolithic "corporate" terms, but what it really comes down to in the fashion industry is individual hate-filled designers/editors/photogaphers who discriminate against larger women any way they can.



yeah.yeah.


----------



## olwen (Jun 25, 2009)

Surlysomething said:


> Great article.
> 
> _"Certain people have said, 'This is not our image,' " says Mr. Shoji. "But I said, 'We can sell it -- why not? ... We aren't doing art -- this is commerce.' "_
> 
> And earlier in this thread it was said that fashion is art. Couture more specifically I assume. So this quote is interesting as he's an actual designer who sees the commerce in his 'art' and decided to market it. Beautiful dresses.



Yeah, I liked the article too.



thatgirl08 said:


> Sorry I didn't reword it to your liking?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have spent $125 on new balance sneakers out of necessity. They're often the only ones in a sneaker store that come in wide widths and the style that does come in wide is kinda ugly. I've only done that twice, and you better believe I wore both pairs till they fell apart, literally. I've since learned to either buy men's sneakers cause they tend to be bigger or buy them online for > $60 but < $100. They're always new balance tho.


----------



## exile in thighville (Jun 28, 2009)

kiolwen


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 28, 2009)

One of the images of high fashion that is being marketed is the idea of "cultivation." Rich women consider themselves cultivated particularly old money. Within the concept of cultivation is physical cultivation meaning that one practices self-denial to project a mystique involving exercise ritual and dieting. Rich women consider cultivation an integral part of their character. Fat women represent the antithesis of cultivation in the fashion industry.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 28, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> One of the images of high fashion that is being marketed is the idea of "cultivation." Rich women consider themselves cultivated particularly old money. Within the concept of cultivation is physical cultivation meaning that one practices self-denial to project a mystique involving exercise ritual and dieting. Rich women consider cultivation an integral part of their character. Fat women represent the antithesis of cultivation in the fashion industry.



Sounds like that old tradition of Chinese women binding their feet.


----------



## Hozay J Garseeya (Jul 13, 2009)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> While I understand the frustration with this, I also don't understand why many people on Dimensions are soon keen on bashing and hating size-zero's, or women who are very thin. From what I've read on here, oftentimes being fat is a lifestyle choice, and that one of the main goals of Dimensions is to promote size acceptance. I'm just confused as to why that acceptance isn't extended to people of all sizes, even if being very skinny isn't considered attractive by most of us on here.
> 
> After meeting some of the models at this past fashion week, you can tell that that's just their genes, just as sometimes being overweight is in someone's genes, and I think it's unfair to demand that these girls gain weight, just as it's unfair to expect those genetically disposed to being fat lose weight.
> 
> ...



reading this was really an eye opener. Not that I am interested in Fashion . . . it's just a very sound point of view. 

Thank you for sharing.


----------

