Because finding the right size has become an impossible mission

Sale or not, it’s almost always a hassle to find clothes in your size.

From one brand to another this is not surprising, but within the same brand it sometimes happens… Even when we compare what is comparable, for example two different models of straight cut trousers, we are never safe from one of They. too small while the other definitely too big even though in both cases we would have chosen a size 40! It is as mysterious as it is desperate.

Ready-to-wear, a recent invention that moves faster and faster

Questioning these size variations involves first understanding why and how standardized sizes are bought and sold in stores – and therefore the very principle of ready-to-wear.

The latter remains a recent invention, which began to stutter at the beginning of the 20th century in the West, when until then clothes were mostly made to measure (at home or by seamstresses). From the First to the Second World War, clothing workshops developed in the United States offering “ready-to-wear”: finished clothes, mass-produced, according to standardized sizes.

Comes from 1948 that the idea was exported to France and it spreads little by little. Small clothing workshops are inspired by prestigious houses. Even big designers who don’t want to miss out on this innovation are launching themselves or selling their name in the form of a license to manufacturers who then offer clothes under their own label.

Necessarily, As ready-to-wear becomes popular, we start producing more and more clothes, as quickly as possible, and therefore we lose precision.. And those who buy also forget the reflex to possibly retouch what deserves to be reworked.

A size system that has become incomprehensible

And in all of this, we no longer know what the size number or letter on the label refers to! S for Small, M for Medium and L for Large, that’s a little vague. While numbers like 38, 40 or 42 may give the impression of objective mathematical precision, they are increasingly uncorrelated with the measurements they are supposed to represent…

Yes, they were not chosen at random, we simply completely forgot what they refer to!

Historically, these figures refer half the circumference of the affected body part. For example, a size “40” top refers to the fact that the garment in question can cover a bust with a bust circumference of approximately 80 cm (measurement taken just below the bust, and without inserting the arms into the measuring tape). In other words, for a bust measurement of 80 cm, a top just over 40 cm wide flat could be enough (so around 80 cm in circumference, but we only measure in front, that is) and therefore we label size 40. And since some countries dress tighter than others, for example, This indicative figure may correspond to more or less loose clothing.

But a single number cannot summarize all the measurements of a necessarily unique body ! You can have broad shoulders, a very small bust and generous hips, for example, which means you clearly can’t buy a size 40 with your eyes closed just because you know you have an 80cm chest…

Adding to this already cryptic sizing system is the complexity of navigating a globalized industry where some countries prefer to operate with sizes numbered from 0 to 20, or from S to 5XL, not to mention brands that give names to their sizes (like “Exquise ” for the XS or “Épatante” for the 3XL of the lingerie brand Je ne sais quoi).

Brands play on the psychological effect of identifying with our clothing sizes

The irony is thiswanting to simplify the understanding of the measurements to as many people as possible, behind a number, a letter or a word, we have lost almost all. All the more so since an important psychological dimension is added to the idea of ​​being reduced to a standard dimension, or even identifying with it.

Brands have obviously helped blur the lines playing in particular on the psychological effect of (wanting to) be small in our fatphobic societies that value thinness so much.

Why’they know that many people may tend to identify with a size, brands use it to address the audience they want to seduce or exclude. Flattering some sizes and the customers who own them by displaying them generously and everywhere in the store, and excluding others by making their sizes invisible… This is sometimes also part of the brand identity that a company wants to defend, embody and promote.

This is what Audrey-Laure Bergenthal, CEO of Euveka, a company that creates scalable robot mannequins (so that brands can cut more realistic clothes) explains to the British media. Stunned :

“Each brand has its own dimensions based on the specific marketing stories they want to tell customers. Marks and Spencer’s mission is to sell to a “woman of a certain age”, while luxury brands such as Burberry or McQueen sell to a woman aged up to 30, living in London, who has a chic lifestyle.

They have their own story that they want to tell and this history impacts the body type they want to create clothes for. »

The faster collections come together, the less time we have to check their quality and size consistency.

As for inconsistencies within the same brand, they owe a lot to the acceleration of the pace of collection launches, driven by historic fast-fashion players, and newcomers from what we now call ultra fast-fashion ( Boohoo, NastyGal, PrettyLittleThing, and others Missguided) capable of launching a new mini-collection every week or so.

Result: we want to move so fast that we don’t take the time to check whether the prototypes are well made through quality checks and fittings on a cabin dummy, before replicating them en masse. And we extend the gradation (that is, we add a few centimeters from one size to another) from a sometimes shaky prototype, without necessarily checking on real bodies whether it really fits well or not, as Audrey-Laure Bergenthal also explains Stunned :

“ They produce clothing on an idealistic basis which represents perhaps 1% of the population. Other dimensions are not controlled, are mathematically scaled, and are full of adjustment errors. They would have to completely recreate the pattern, [ce qui sert de base à la création d’un vêtement] but don’t do it. »

Unfortunately, it will be precisely the people with body shapes that are furthest from those of the standard models who will find themselves with clothes of the most questionable sizes. Why brands extrapolate sizes from a standardwithout taking the time and care to check out what it really feels like on the bodies of real people.

Even when we wisely refer to the size guides offered by brands, which avoids many problems, we can therefore end up with clothes that don’t fit us. Gold, It’s not you or your size that’s the problem.. But much of the fashion industry that cultivates our insecurities and capitalizes on them to make numbers.