Look here at this man saying what men shouldn't have the courage to say in a public forum:
http://www.endthemadness.org/ under POSITIVE dating experiences, go back to November of 2009 to see how "Jacob" writes, "
| Posted by: | Jacob |
| Subject: | In Defense of the Dress Size Question |
| Body: | Dress size is not a madness question! Most of the girls who have lower dress sizes are more attractive. I am not attacted to girls with high dress sizes, so why should I force myself to marry someone I am not attracted to? It seems to me that most size 2 girls are more attactive (to me at least) in comparison to girls who are size 6. Eva Longoria, known to many people as the most beautiful woman in America, is a size zero. Men look good when they are big and strong. For women, it is the opposite, and that means a low dress size." Yeah, well, I wonder how "big and strong" Jacob is to be making demands and here is the ultimate point. Eva Langoria does not dress modestly. If all Jewish women were size 0 or 2 (don't even get me started on calling size 6 unattractive) and running around half naked, I guess the guys would be attracted to us, right? Personally, it was easier to stay small when I wasn't dressing tzanuah. There's not really an incentive to work hard to be tiny since I'm supposed to be covering it up anyway. That brings me to a whole 'nother point. I can't even tell you how many men have asked me to dress in a manner not tzniusdik for them. |
guest poster:
ReplyDeleteNot that there are that many muscular frum men. I live across the street from a beit midrash. The men I see are mostly slightly to very overweight, a few have tall, thin builds. Most of those are younger guys, I don't see too many guys more than a few years out of college looking like that. I actually see the women that come to shul on Shabbos overall looking more in shape, even if they are not super skinny.
The issue with dress sizes and physical build is pretty silly in isolation. One's bone structure, body composition play a huge role in size. Just like for men, certain body types gain muscle much easier and look bulky. Compare what Olympic weight lifters and swimmers, skaters, or runners look like. Both are very fit and have strong muscles, but their body types are very different. The swimmer or runner even if he tried the same regime as the weight lifter won't go anywhere near in size. Doesn't mean the swimmer is less active person.
I don't think most men really know the difference in the measurement. For anyone that does any sewing, they know in a the difference between size 0 to a size 6 dress/skirt is all of an extra three inches of fabric (or side by side it's 1.5 inches since the fabric is doubled for front and back of an outfit). If one adds an elastic waistband that makes sizing even more flexible.
Don't believe there's so little difference, then google a dress size measurement chart. Or better yet go to the women's section. Find two skirts of same design, just different sizes, compare the waistband. The big factor left out in size charts is height.
Take 2 women with same measurements, one is short, one is tall, they will look completely different. It's going to be hard for a healty average size, much less a taller girl to squeeze into smaller sizes that petite woman wear. And even if the tall/average woman is thin enough to wear an average petite woman's close, the skirt will be much shorter on her.
A female personal trainer (not a bodybuilder on steriods, just a very well toned woman) is not going to be a size 2 unless she is very, very tiny in height. So I'm guessing the guy that likes size 2 women, pretty much likes short girls or wants a woman of average height with an eating disorder and not a very in shape healthy woman.
guest poster:
ReplyDeleteFor women only. Photos on this site are of everyday women, so not Orthodox modest at all. Otherwise it would be good for men to see the difference of sizes between real woman at different heights and weights.
http://www.mybodygallery.com/
A size 2 at 5 ft looks completely different that a size 2 at 5'5" of course. The shorter woman at size 2 has a more curvy build and compares to a 5'5" of larger size. Makes sense as the BMI would be comparable (though BMI has its limits to compare too).
I looked at that gallery. There are women whose bones are sticking out at size 8. I actually was able to get a pair of size 8 pants on last night but they were tight. That's the thing with wearing skirts. I can't tell so much when I'm gaining and losing. When you wear jeans, you know right away, but in a jeans skirt, I had no idea I had gotten this much smaller in the past couple months even though some people have told me I was looking slimmer.
ReplyDeleteI agree with skirts, there's less of a feel factor. Often if wearing pants, one will feel more 'full' after a bit meal, but skirts are much roomier. Especially true for women who tend to gain around the hips, the skirt is forgiven for quite a while. Ditto for weight loss as well.
ReplyDeleteOne size chart I really like. Scroll to the bottom of the wiki article for catalog sizing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_standard_clothing_size
This is really great, traditional mail order outfits (not stores with online ordering) and some designer houses use these sizes since they are more flattering. Women will feel better and buy more if the size is labeled smaller and there are less returns due to size issues if the cut is larger. A catalog size 6 is almost a standard 12!
I just looked at that article, I find it grossly inaccurate.
ReplyDelete"With the average American woman's height at about 5'4" (163 cm), both standard and catalog size ranges attempt to address a variety of weights / builds as well as providing for the "shorter-than-average" height woman with "petite" and "half-sizes". However "taller-than-average" women may find their size-height addressed by manufacturers less frequently, and may often find themselves facing issues of slightly too short pant legs and sleeve cuffs, as well as waist lengths."
No, WAY!! I'm 5-4 and pant legs were very very frequently too long for me when I wore Pants. I often have to wear Petite even though I'm average height on the nose. When I was younger and used to shop with my tall sister (like 5-7 or so) she never had any problems, legs were usually perfect length for her.
I don't know how you figure a catalog 6 is a standard 12. I looked at catalog 6. It's W: 26, H 36.5 and standard 12 is W:30 and H: 41 but standard 6 is W: 26.5 H: 37.5
ReplyDeleteAll of these run smaller than real clothes. I was wearing 5 Juniors for a while and I can tell you my waist was never even close to the 26 inches they give. According to this, I was a 11 and 11's were falling off me.
With pants, often they do generally make longer for tailoring since one's hem would depend on if planning to wear flats or heels with the pants. It used to irk big time that in nice shops, tailoring for men is in included in pricing but it's charged for women. At 5'6" I generally didn't have much of a problem off the rack if I wore pumps with a small heel or bulky sneakers.
ReplyDeleteSkirts are much harder for taller women since what would be knee length on an average woman would often be a few inches shorter. I have tall friends that have big problems finding something that is around knee length.
Standard sizing refers to the sizes on patterns. As a seamstress, I can tell you that the patterns I buy are a good 2-3 sizes up from what I am in "ready to wear." For example, a woman who wears a size 4-6 in ready-to-wear usually is about a size 10-12 in patterns.
ReplyDelete