BROOKLYN_BORN   26,350
SparkPoints
25,000-29,999 SparkPoints
 
 
BROOKLYN_BORN's Recent Blog Entries

I’m a ‘C’ - No longer a ‘D’ - Maybe I can even be a ‘B’?

Sunday, December 02, 2012

Gee, that sounds like breast reduction surgery. No, that’s not needed here. It has nothing to do with weight either. It’s my TRIVIA SCORE! 75% for November and 70% since I started. I started VERY badly.

I wrote awhile ago that although it made me aware of how much I didn’t know, I was determined to keep at it without using an “open book” or “open Google”(not that there’s anything wrong with that as Seinfeld would say).

I’m very stubborn and tenacious so I just started reading more articles and taking some quizzes. I’ve learned a lot from reading blogs too, not just the featured ones, but those written by friends and friends of friends. It is amazing how one person’s post leads to another and adds to my base of knowledge. I’ve become aware of some inspirational personal stories too. We’ve taken some different routes on the same journey. See you all at the finish line!

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

BOILHAM 12/3/2012 8:51AM

    You are such an information junkie. I know someone else like that.
If you don't mind, I hope it's a very long time 'til I see you at the finish line!

Report Inappropriate Comment
KANOE10 12/3/2012 8:50AM

    Trivia quizzes are good fro the brain..I don't do them, but hope you enjoy them. I do the sme as you..read other blogs from friends of friends.

Report Inappropriate Comment
JODROX 12/2/2012 11:24AM

    I'm not so good at the trivia either, but I keep at it. I figure I learn a lot even when I'm wrong. And I too refuse to cheat :)

Report Inappropriate Comment
SUZYMOBILE 12/2/2012 10:49AM

    The thing is, though, there isn't any finish line! (Well, other than the one all of us reach.) That has been an eye opener for me--that this is a lifelong journey.

I hear you about learning from others here, all the time! I've discovered, on our maintenance team, that I've never "really" been maintaining in the way I want to. I reach a low goal weight, over and over, then bounce up from it, over and over. The bounces aren't that big any more--no more than 7 pounds--but my new idea of maintenance is going to consist of staying right AT that goal weight. Thus the change in my tracker. I still don't know exactly how I'm gonna do it, but it should be interesting. Hmm. There might be a blog in this insight.

Thanks for making me think, even on a weekend!

Report Inappropriate Comment
COCK-ROBIN 12/2/2012 9:27AM

    You're doing great! I give you an A.

Report Inappropriate Comment
COCK-ROBIN 12/2/2012 9:27AM

    You're doing great! I give you an A.

Report Inappropriate Comment
FITFOODIE806 12/2/2012 8:50AM

    ha! I thought this was about bras! Nice work improving your score through learning.

Report Inappropriate Comment
WILSONWR 12/2/2012 8:34AM

    I'm doing about the same as you (72% overall). I asked one of the people who was at 100% for the month how she did it. You guessed it - Google! Google gives you the exact same question (with answer) at some of the SparkPeople message boards. I guess I could do well that way also, but I just wouldn't learn anything. I'll just have to work towards the "B" the old fashioned way!

Report Inappropriate Comment
MAGGIE101857 12/2/2012 7:28AM

    I thought I knew a lot until I starting doing the trivia and quizzes. Learned otherwise!!! Congrats on an improved "report card"!!!!

Report Inappropriate Comment


My 5K report, thanks to JODROX (and she doesn’t even know what she did)

Saturday, December 01, 2012

Yesterday I reported on my fall Thursday night just walking out of my granddaughter’s school in the dark. I banged up my elbow and the same knee that had rehab from July-October.

I thought the fall really ended my plan for the 5K this morning – the ONE race I never miss – our town’s Christmas Classic.

I have to thank JODROX for my attitude check. A few weeks ago her status read.
“JODROX is ill prepared for today’s 5K. I won’t be breaking any records today. LOL”

I realized that she was absolutely right. It was time for me to practice what I preach.

I’m a big supporter of this race for myself, my family and our church. The local paper called us the “runningest church in town.” I have always enthusiastically encouraged people to register and maintained that it’s not how fast you run or walk. The important thing is to get out there.

It’s a killer course. . It starts with 1.25 miles downhill and we make up the elevation in the next 1/3 mile. Whew, then we’re only half done.

I felt a bit stiff when I woke up, but nothing really hurt. I ran/walked a comfortable pace and finished in 32:15 not my best, but not my worst either. It was my worst time on that course in 2008 which was the wake-up call for my weight loss journey.

I even got 2nd place in my 65-69 age group.
There were only 2 of us in that category. LOL
See, ladies – hang in there and outlast your competition.

Thank you all for your get well wishes and healing thoughts yesterday.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

LOLATURTLE 12/3/2012 11:47AM

    Way to go! I'm glad your knee was feeling well enough!

Report Inappropriate Comment
KANOE10 12/3/2012 8:52AM

    Great job on running even if you were not in perfect form from your fall. Woo Hoo,.

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
JODROX 12/2/2012 11:18AM

    Hey - way to go!!! I'm so glad I could be an inspiration to you! All that matters is we get out there and try and do our best. Now you've inspired me right back!!

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELIAMINER 12/2/2012 9:03AM

    You are such a motivator! I thought of you when I went out today and decided to jog instead of walk. Thanks!

Report Inappropriate Comment
KANDOLAKER 12/1/2012 11:09PM

    Outstanding - what determination you have. So very impressive! Congratulations to you!!

Report Inappropriate Comment
DAISYBELL6 12/1/2012 8:48PM

    I'm very glad you were able to complete your race with your attitude adjustment. Great Job!

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
CHANGINGHORSES 12/1/2012 7:43PM

    Way to go! You were a winner as soon as you got out there and did it! A winner right from the start, many others would have let that be an excuse.
emoticon emoticon emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
WATERMELLEN 12/1/2012 7:13PM

    What an impressive accomplishment! Good for you: love that "second in my age category" win!!

Report Inappropriate Comment
WILSONWR 12/1/2012 6:51PM

    What a trooper! Way to tough it out and complete the 5K. Congratulations!

Report Inappropriate Comment
SUZYMOBILE 12/1/2012 6:32PM

    OMG, OMG! I knew you'd do it!! I'm so excited!

Report Inappropriate Comment
COCK-ROBIN 12/1/2012 5:31PM

    And I hope you get better. This is a great accomplishment for you as well.

Report Inappropriate Comment
COCK-ROBIN 12/1/2012 5:31PM

    And I hope you get better. This is a great accomplishment for you as well.

Report Inappropriate Comment
COCK-ROBIN 12/1/2012 5:31PM

    And I hope you get better. This is a great accomplishment for you as well.

Report Inappropriate Comment
ALLISON145 12/1/2012 5:07PM

    Good on you! So proud!!

Report Inappropriate Comment
BOILHAM 12/1/2012 2:40PM

    Glad you decided to do the race and had a good time. Plus, you won a 2nd place. wink-wink. Way to be tough!

Report Inappropriate Comment
PMRUNNER 12/1/2012 2:12PM

    Yay! Glad to hear that you felt well enough (bodily and mentally) to run!

Report Inappropriate Comment


Oh no, a fall!

Friday, November 30, 2012

That’s FALL, not fail. Not a nutrition backslide, a hard fall on my knee and elbow. Last night leaving an event at my granddaughter’s school, we were walking in the dark down the long driveway when I slipped off the steeply banked blacktop and landed in the gravel. I fell hard on my elbow and knee, the knee that’s just had 3 months of rehab. This is why I never run in the dark. Obviously I shouldn’t even walk in the dark.

Once home I cleaned up the bleeding knee, iced both knee and elbow and complained a lot. The good news, I suppose, is that I didn’t break anything. What lousy timing! I planned to run a 5K on Saturday.

So I don’t have a lot of words this morning, not printable words anyway. I’m mad at myself for not watching where I was going, not paying attention etc. etc. Once again I’ve injured myself and once again I didn’t do it running, playing any sport or working out, just being clumsy.

Be careful out there!

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

JODROX 12/2/2012 11:25AM

    I'm so glad the fall didn't ruin your run! These things happen. Can't really avoid it, unfortunately.

Report Inappropriate Comment
KANOE10 12/1/2012 7:25AM

    Hope you are feeling better soon! I am glad you were not hurt.
emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
MJZHERE 11/30/2012 11:32PM

  So sorry! Lousy to be hurt no matter how it happens. Prayers for a speedy recovery.

Report Inappropriate Comment
HDHAWK 11/30/2012 6:13PM

    I'm sorry you got hurt, but I'm glad it wasn't worse! Heal quickly!

Report Inappropriate Comment
ROOSTER72 11/30/2012 4:34PM

    I would have lots of words - but none of them decent enough to be typed!
So sorry to hear about your fall - it can happen to anyone. Take care, and you will be back to normal soon.

Report Inappropriate Comment
FITFOODIE806 11/30/2012 1:35PM

    I hope you feel better soon. That sounds awful.
emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELLISTA1 11/30/2012 12:20PM

    How frustrating. Hope it's a quick recovery!


Report Inappropriate Comment
KANDOLAKER 11/30/2012 11:44AM

    Sorry for your fall, and that you will be missing the 5K! That stinks. Hope you recover quickly!!

Report Inappropriate Comment
CALIMAN1 11/30/2012 11:37AM

    Ouch, I can so relate as I did have a fall while running, in the dark...but that leg healed quickly and I got out there and ran the same path as soon as possible to get the "head part" right.

I hope you recovery quickly and that you are out there running again soon!

Report Inappropriate Comment
DAWN14163 11/30/2012 11:01AM

    Ouch. Hope it all heals quickly. emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
SUZYMOBILE 11/30/2012 10:17AM

    Oh no, Mr Bill! I could feel the whole thing happening when you described it. My skin even hurt!

I hope you didn't do any damage that will keep you out of the 5K, but I'm sure you're babying it and icing it, and won't risk running if it feels stiff and sore. (I mean the knee, more than the elbow, obviously.)

Report Inappropriate Comment
HFAYE81 11/30/2012 9:53AM

    Oh no! I'm always doing stuff like that. I'm glad you weren't badly injured emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
PMRUNNER 11/30/2012 9:31AM

    Oh no! Hope you heal quickly and back on track! emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
LOLATURTLE 11/30/2012 9:31AM

    OUCH! I hope you're feeling better soon!!

I feel your pain, a little. My first ever running event was a mud/obstacle 5k. I twisted my ankle IN LINE FOR THE BAG CHECK. I'm not even kidding. Got to the race, checked in, got my bib, sprained my ankle. I was so, SO mad at myself.

I sprained that ankle badly when I was 13 and it's never been the same. Every so often I "roll" it again, but never as badly as the first time. It had been AGES since I'd rolled it, so of course I'd do it not during the race, not after, but RIGHT before. Grrrr!

Report Inappropriate Comment
LAURIE5658 11/30/2012 9:28AM

    Doh! So sorry about your mishap but don't let it shake you. Heal fast and get back out there.

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
WILSONWR 11/30/2012 9:25AM

    You and I certainly know how to injure ourselves in ways that most wouldn't believe. Hope you get better soon!

Report Inappropriate Comment
BOILHAM 11/30/2012 9:08AM

    I'm sorry you had a fall! Ouch! But, I'm kind of glad it didn't happend during a run.

That can be devasting to your belief system. My DW quit running after she had fallen twice, once in training and once during a race. No amount of encouragement from me could get her to run again.

I wish you a speedy recovery, my friend.

Report Inappropriate Comment
LEB0401 11/30/2012 8:55AM

    Oh my goodness! How unfortunate, I'm sorry.

I hope your skin was the only thing damaged emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELIAMINER 11/30/2012 7:49AM

    Bad: Fall and probably no 5K. Good: You are strong and muscular, factors that probably kept you from breaking a bone. Also, the cruise next week to give you time to heal! Thinking of you and hoping you heal quickly.

Report Inappropriate Comment
COCK-ROBIN 11/30/2012 7:33AM

    Wow, I hope it heals up soon.

Report Inappropriate Comment
TINAJANE76 11/30/2012 6:39AM

    Oh no, so sorry to hear this! This kind of thing happens to all of us from time to time no matter how careful we try to be. Hope you're on the mend and that everything's feeling better soon.
emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment


Does Ethel Mertz look fat to you? How about Ralph Cramden?

Thursday, November 29, 2012

This is related to my blog entry yesterday. I love the old TV shows, the ones that remind me of my youth. Today I woke up at 5 am, a bit too early for me. While I drank my coffee, I turned on the TV to find an episode of “I Love Lucy.”

Remember Ethel? - Lucy’s sidekick? Ethel’s weight was a running joke on the show. Looking at her today, she’s positively slim!

Lucy was followed this morning by “The Honeymooners” – the classic spin-off from the Jackie Gleason show. Now Jackie was definitely obese. Back then though, his weight was considered so extreme it was always mentioned in the scripts. Being paired with the extremely slim Art Carney emphasized the theme. According to his biography at 5’10” he occasionally dieted to 180 lbs, but his top weight “approached 300.” He would be a good candidate for SP, but he also would have lots of company. He wouldn’t even be our “biggest loser.”

Neither of these actors would even get a second glance on the street today, at least not for their weight.

Checking further, I learned that Lucille Ball was reported to be a “perfect size 12” according to her studio. That’s equivalent to a size 4 in today’s world of vanity sizing. She was 5’7” with weight varying from 115 to 132 lbs. Ethel (Vivian Vance) was 10-15 lbs heavier. It isn’t true that she was contractually obligated to maintain that difference.

Two recent articles (msn and huffington post) report that seeing larger people make us feel better about ourselves. The fashion industry entices us to buy more by slapping smaller sizes on ever larger clothes.

I believe in a positive self image. I have many qualities of which I’m proud that have nothing to do with my height, weight, body type or degree of attractiveness. However, Lucy, Ethel and I would have worn the same size. Calling me a size 6 instead of a 12-14 is just an attempt at false self esteem.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

JODROX 12/2/2012 11:31AM

    Such an interesting observation. I wish clothing manufacturers used universal sizing. I just had a lesson in extreme vanity sizing when I needed a size 6 in a skirt I had my eye on......... I've never worn a 6 in my life, and I don't now either! If I had bought it, I'd have from 6 to 12s in my closet -- how crazy is that? I understand a slight variation in brand sizing, but 6-12?! That's nuts!

Report Inappropriate Comment
MOMMACASSEY 11/29/2012 3:16PM

    I remember seeing something about how Marilyn Monroe, who is considered to be physically perfect by so many people, wore a size 12. I don't know if that is relatively modern 12, or the 12 of her era, now... I know that looking at pictures of her and looking at pictures of myself when i wore a size 12 (which was, admittedly, a number of years and pounds ago) she looks much more slender. I wonder what her size would be, now.

I love those early-morning Lucy episodes. I've seen many of them, lately, being awake at that hour feeding my little one. I never realized there was much worthwhile difference between their sizes. I remember watching the show as a kid, and wondering what Fred's problem was, talking about how much Ethel ate, when he clearly could stand to push away from the table a little sooner, himself. To me, the clearest difference between the couples was their ages, and I think that has more to do with the Mertz's experience in burlesque, and with Fred... I never thought Vivian Vance looked old enough to be his wife.

Report Inappropriate Comment
-DYET- 11/29/2012 2:35PM

    Calling me a size 6 instead of a 12-14 is just an attempt at false self esteem - I like that a lot!

No, neither one of them were fat. But, i completely understand what you are saying here. It is really sad what society is doing

Report Inappropriate Comment
BOILHAM 11/29/2012 2:23PM

    Not only are sizes changing to fit our egos. Our attitudes about what is healthy and attractive are being changed to suit our egos too. Overweight people who are famous are cionstantly encouraging us to not worry about weight and be happy for what we are. I respectfully disagree with all of them. It's not attractive to me, and certainly not healthy.

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELLISTA1 11/29/2012 1:41PM

    Have you ever seen Lucy's old movies (before she was on TV)? She was a gorgeous, slender glamor-girl. On TV she was already in her 40s (that was OLD, then!). I'm sure Vivian Vance was cast because she made Lucy look good, and as someone else wrote here, her clothes were frumpier, and her husband was certainly frumpier! And it is true that "the camera adds ten pounds." So today, in order to look thin on camera, actresses are positively scrawny in real life.

This self-image thing with the sizes is the same thing as the pervasive cosmetic surgery I see around me all the time. There are little tiny women in their 50s-60s-70s whose faces look totally weird because nothing moves. They dress beautifully, in very small sizes, but their self-esteem is dependent on what they think is a youthful image. It's a matter of choice whether or not to have cosmetic surgery, but it is also wrapped up in issues of confidence, relevance, and environment.



Report Inappropriate Comment
GLADGAD 11/29/2012 1:37PM

    I'm glad you pointed tihs out, because I oftentimes see old shows and it strikes me at how not fat those actors are compared to today's body sizes. When I was in high school in the mid 70s, I wore a size 5. I was 5'2" and weighed about 95 lbs. Today I am 5'3" and weigh around 123 lbs and take a size 6. I laugh because I know it's only because the industry has changed the sizes; I just wonder what 1976 size I would be in 2012.

Report Inappropriate Comment
LINDAKAY228 11/29/2012 11:58AM

    Yeah, remember the super model of years ago Twiggy? As for clothes, I have to try them on because one brand a size can be a whole lot different than another brand. I will be happy when I get down to 145 to 150! That's where my dr says I should be.

Report Inappropriate Comment
LOLATURTLE 11/29/2012 11:30AM

    I had to go look at some pictures of Ethel to remind me. I wasn't picturing her as "fat", and what do you know! She isn't! It just looks to me like she naturally has a slightly rounder face than Lucy, and they dressed her in a slightly more "frumpy" style.

If you're interested in how sizes are created look for some articles about "fit models." It's pretty interesting actually.

If you look at clothes in different sizes, or have been a variety of sizes in your life, you can see some pretty eye opening clues as to the assumptions made by clothing manufacturers. Most "regular" women's sizes (~8) assume an hourglass body shape, but not an extreme one - waist slightly smaller than both hips and bust. They assume a "straight" shape for small sizes, 00 to 2 or 4 (I have friends in this size range who are either hippy or busty and they have just as much trouble finding clothes that fit as I do.). For plus sizes they assume an "apple" shape - big stomach smaller bust. This is a problem for me because I'm the opposite - big bust small stomach (well, relatively anyway). So I can usually find pants (though sometimes ones that fit in the hips gap at the waist), and stretchy tops, but dresses and fitted tops are a huge problem. I haven't worn a button down shirt... ever, actually. If I ever want one I'll probably have to get it custom made.

There may be some interesting developments in sizing/shaping of clothes in the future, possibly moving towards universal sizes. Check out the NYT article "One Size Fits Nobody: Seeking a Steady 4 or a 10." Interesting stuff!

Report Inappropriate Comment
HFAYE81 11/29/2012 10:11AM

    I remember those jokes about Ethel's weight! I never understood them, she looked normal to me.

Report Inappropriate Comment
SUZYMOBILE 11/29/2012 9:10AM

    You're right! I think of Ethel as "normal" and Lucy as being the glamour girl, model type.

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELIAMINER 11/29/2012 8:45AM

    Wow, love these facts! I can picture Ethel in my mind and envision the difference between her weight and Lucy's, but I wouldn't have called Ethel fat. Funny that if she was 10 pounds heavier than Lucy, Ethel and I would weigh the same in the low 140s, and I am at a healthy BMI. I recall when Farrah Fawcett came into fame and was 5'7" and 110 pounds. She looked so bony and even painfully thin, but she was considered an ideal.

Report Inappropriate Comment
WILSONWR 11/29/2012 8:22AM

    I wonder if the same is true in men's sizing? I'll have to get my tape measure out...

Report Inappropriate Comment
1935MARY 11/29/2012 7:47AM

    I love old shows too. When you watch TV then you didn't think about if they were fat. Today we are judged on to many things, weight,looks, money, color etc. Now if you are 5'7 and don't weight 100 lbs. you are fat. Why do people want to look like they are starved to death. I think being to thin ,looks bad and makes you aged. I guess I am being judgmental. I think size of clothes vary with who ever designed them.

Report Inappropriate Comment


An exception to vanity sizing. Simplicity patterns tells it like it is (or was)

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

This blog began as a description of my unsuccessful search for a long holiday skirt. I decided I could make one inexpensively like I used to do long ago.

On the Simplicity website I found this post from a frustrated customer.
”I got a fantastic pattern, Simplicity/Threads 2758. I was in the middle of cutting out the pattern when I discover it’s not true to size! I just found out that it’s 4 sizes off, that my normal pant size of 14/16 is actually a 20/22 or more in Simplicity sizing.”

For some time I’ve considered the effect of vanity sizing in masking the supersizing of society. Personally, sizing creep did me no favors as it allowed me to gain 30 pounds while continuing to wear the same size. This is important to the fashion industry. Making women feel good about themselves allows companies to pad their bottom line as we continue to pad our own bottoms.

Suddenly, here’s a company bringing us a dose of reality. They haven’t changed their sizing. The measurements/size are the same as they were in 1960.
What does this mean for me? As I shop off-the-rack I can now buy a size 6 instead of the size 10 I wore in 1968. Even after my weight loss I’m still 13 lbs more than back in 68. Checking the average measurements for a size 6, I find 36-28-38. Yep that’s me all right – a size 6.

Now what if I decide to make myself a new dress or skirt. What if, like the poster on the website, I buy a size 6 pattern. The measurements there: 30 ½ -23-32 ½. Oops!
The sizes of off-the-rack clothes and pattern sizes were once exactly the same. I bought size 10 dresses and made a few of my own from size 10 patterns.

The fashion industry has research to prove that women are more likely to buy if there’s a smaller size attached. Sizing creep has produced some ridiculous results. Since the old size 8 is now a size 0, the very small woman, who would have worn the old size 6, now is called size 00. If this continues, how many zeros can they fit on a size tag? What’s the alternative, negative numbers?

Still, I don’t understand the disconnect? Are women who make their own clothes less vain than those who don’t? Are they willing to buy patterns according to their measurements because the final product won’t have a size tag in it anyway?

One solution would be to forget arbitrary sizing and just sell womens’ clothes based on actual measurements. Efficient yes, but how many women want to sort through a rack where their actual waist or hip size is prominently displayed?

Finally, for the record I would have to buy a pattern size 14 to match the measurements of an off-the-rack size 6. Much as I hate sizing creep and believe it fosters false self esteem and is adding to our obesity problem, there’s some vanity in me too. I admit, I’d rather call myself a 6. However, I must keep reminding myself that it’s not real. It’s just a consequence of the supersizing of America.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

MOMMACASSEY 11/29/2012 3:03PM

    I went for a long time not knowing what my size was because I started wearing men's jeans instead of women's, and I'd always worn large and XL size t-shirts. The thing about men's sizes is that they are based on the measurements... Only recently, I started trying to get out of my frumpy look and into women's clothes again, only to find that I had gone from size 10/12 to size 18/20.

On the other hand, my toddler is wearing anything from a 2 to a 5, depending on who made it. I find it incredibly frustrating that not only are sizes creeping around, but that they seem to be perfectly arbitrary--no one designer or producer is making sizes the same as any other. It makes it so frustrating to shop, I've just about decided to stop trying to look feminine and to go back to just large t-shirts and men's jeans again.

Women need to relax. All this reminds me of the line from the movie "The Devil Wears Prada" when Emily says, a little grudgingly and a little proudly, "I'm one stomach flu away from my ideal weight." I don't think there should be a size 0 at all--to me, that means that it fits, perhaps, a hanger. Which reminds me, again, of someone saying once that clothes they make nowdays look best on a hanger, and that's why women are trying to look like clothes hangers.

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
FANGFACEKITTY 11/29/2012 2:39PM

    I laugh at it now. Today I am a size 2/4...yet I am still 15 pounds heavier than when I was 20 years old and a size 6/8. Whatever. I'd much prefer to buy clothes like the men do, based on my actual measurements so I would know exactly what I was getting without having to try on every single item before purchase because of all the variations in what a size is supposed to be. Clothing sizes, like weight, are just numbers and I try to keep in mind that how I feel is more important than a number on a label.

Report Inappropriate Comment
MJZHERE 11/28/2012 2:50PM

  Forget the second hand stores and sizes - I am completely lost trying to find what fits there (I can't judge at all by looking). Then the sizes differ from store to store, and among the brands. I am so fortunate I was given a pile of clothes - most fit- because I am not having fun shopping. Glad to see that I haven't lost my mind - even when I was younger, in the 120's, I wore size 12 and 14's - I think skin and bones my hips won't be smaller than 35 (and then my waist was 24). In fact, I started to get really worried about my DD as an adult as she kept telling me smaller sizes when I would pick her up clothes.

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELLISTA1 11/28/2012 11:52AM

    I didn't know Simplicity was still in business. I didn't know people still use patterns to make their own clothes... My mom made all my clothes when I was a child (in the 50s!) and I learned to sew too, but stopped when fashions changed and store-bought clothes became so much less expensive. I used to love looking through the thick pattern books at the store (Simplicity, McCalls, Butterick). As a young woman I was a size 8-10 and I was pretty tiny!

My solution to the size problem now is to buy everything from the same company: J Jill. I wear their size XLP (extra-large petite) and I know anything in that size is going to fit me --- til I get smaller, that is!
emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
LOLATURTLE 11/28/2012 11:52AM

    Definitely interesting. I think there are limits to what people will accept, though. It has to be gradual size creep or it doesn't work.

I discovered the last time I lost weight that Lane Bryant vanity sizes above and beyond the "normal" vanity sizing going on! When I got into an LB size 18 I was excited to shop at other stores only to discover that fitting into LB 18 means not yet fitting into Old Navy 18 or department store 18.

I just noticed HFAYE81 also mentioned this! When LB resized all their pants 2-10. I was irritated because I had to figure out what "size" I was all over again. I asked the salesgirl what was up with that and she got all gushy about it "Isn't it GREAT?? I've never been a size 6 before!" I just looked at her. Because, what??? Just because the tag said "4" didn't make me any smaller.

It was even more confusing because they have three "shapes" of pants, but that part I wish ALL stores did! I am "blue" which is the biggest difference between your waist and hips (small waist big hips). "yellow" is slightly bigger hips than waist and "red" is same size hips/waist.

They don't have the 2-4-6 pants anymore, so I'm guessing the quick jump in vanity sizing didn't please too many customers.

Comment edited on: 11/28/2012 12:42:22 PM

Report Inappropriate Comment
HAYBURNER1969 11/28/2012 9:20AM

    Yes, since I still wear a size 2-4 (like I did in high school 30 years ago), I wondered where would I shop now for clothing in the size I needed then? The children's department, I guess. I noticed at Wal-Mart the other day when buying underwear for my daughter that they have bras there up to 36". Maybe that's where I need to start buying my bras now, since finding a 32B is not easy. Although I guess I must be a little vain too, because I really don't want to buy a bra named "Growing Up with Bali."

Comment edited on: 11/28/2012 9:28:55 AM

Report Inappropriate Comment
SUZYMOBILE 11/28/2012 9:15AM

    Thanks again for a terrifically well informed blog! You know, of course, that because I shop at Goodwill, where the clothing can be any age, I'm assaulted with a wide range of sizes, all of which fit me--from 1.5 to 11!

The really sobering part of your blog is the question: What next? How many zeroes will they have to add on to make women feel good about themselves? How about the 450-lb woman who died in Hungary because they couldn' t find an aircraft big enough to return her home to her usual medical care? In the future would she be a size 14?

Report Inappropriate Comment
HFAYE81 11/28/2012 9:08AM

    How interesting! I noticed this when buying patterns for Renaissance dresses earlier this year. I for one would rather have universal sizing, my vanity can get over it (I'm a "20"). Its a pain to order clothes when you don't know how the sizes fit you. A few years ago the plus store Lane Bryant resized everything, a 14 was a 2, a 16 a 4, an 18 a 6, you get the idea. Luckily they dropped that confusing b.s. pretty quickly.

Comment edited on: 11/28/2012 9:11:41 AM

Report Inappropriate Comment
COACHMOMMY 11/28/2012 9:06AM

    Funny, I just experienced that this morning. My sister's friend has clothes of all different sizes from all different eras (they're both in their early 60's, but don't tell anyone!). She has very expensive taste and very nice clothes. My sister gave me a bunch last year that were too small for her friend. Not sure how old they are (they look brand new), but I put on a suede skirt this morning and noticed it's a size 14. I buy size 8 & 10's off the rack now. I'm about the same weight I was 20 years ago (but before kids!) and back then I was a 12/14.

I must admit too, it was nice after I lost my weight buying size 8 & 10's, but sizes don't matter as much, especially since you can be a different size at different stores. It's very frustrating buying clothes for 3 teenage daughters!

Report Inappropriate Comment
PMRUNNER 11/28/2012 9:06AM

    Maybe they can convert to actual measurements, but use the metric system instead of inches! No one really knows the metric system anyway, so folks could get the right size and still be blissfully ignorant of the actual measurements!

Report Inappropriate Comment
OPTIMIST1948 11/28/2012 9:02AM

    This -- THIS is an interesting blog. I have "known' about sizing creep, but this is the first time I've heard an intelligent discussion on the topic that isnt whiny or pompous.

The sad part is that I'm also finding the same thing as many of your commentators. Sizng isnt accurate in the stores. I have to spend more time shopping because I dont know what size I fit into in *this store* as opposed to *that brand*. And for someone like me that hates shopping, its a real BORE!

Report Inappropriate Comment
WILLOWBROOK5 11/28/2012 8:49AM

    It is interesting, for sure. I am now getting into size 4, plus I need short length for my pants and it is becoming a challenge at times to find something that fits. 6 is often the smallest size on the racks, which makes no sense. I thought finding 3X's could be hard, but now I'm wondering what the women who are smaller than me do. I guess shop in the juniors section, which I haven't done since college and so the sizes there are a true mystery to me.

Report Inappropriate Comment
LEB0401 11/28/2012 8:47AM

    YES! We should go the Euro way and have sizes based on measurements, not relativity. It's so much easier to buy jeans based on your waist measurements, tops based on your bust. It seems to me that only the expensive retail stores (like Guess) are doing this.

Even in 5 short years the sizes have inflated. I'm now the same weight I was freshman year, but as I shop in the same stores as I did before, I find I have to size down. I got burned pretty badly when I bought some trousers without trying them on.

Report Inappropriate Comment
CELIAMINER 11/28/2012 8:41AM

    Thank you for putting sizing creep into numbers. Since my closet contains clothing that fits ranging from a size XS sweater from Ann Taylor to a size 14 pair of jeans from Macy's, I get very frustrated trying to shop. I miss being able to order cute clothes from catalogs, especially when they are on sale, but I don't want to take the expensive (postage/shipping) chance I will have to return/exchange them or the even more expensive chance that they can't be returned. I have to try *everything* on now. While it's gratifying to be able to try on clothes without tears and gloom descending on me, I'd like to be able to head to the dressing room without three sizes of everything to cover my bases.

Report Inappropriate Comment
MISSUSRIVERRAT 11/28/2012 7:32AM

    I was sewing a cobbler apron from a pattern that I used to use about 50 years ago.
It is a family tradition to make these cobbler aprons (more fitted than regular aprons). The size is "medium" , for sizes 12-14. Converting that size to today's sizes it would be about an 8-10 or maybe even smaller. I have to bear this in mind when I sew for some of the average sized adults who would saythat they think that a medium would be the right size for them.

Report Inappropriate Comment
KANOE10 11/28/2012 7:11AM

    The fashion industry is definitely catering to vanity. Great blog.

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
AZMOMXTWO 11/28/2012 7:10AM

  Why do we need to lie to ourselfs
I am fat that is the end of it I just need to get my weight under control and go from there
I do not need to be told that I am smaller than I am to feel better

Report Inappropriate Comment
ONEKIDSMOM 11/28/2012 6:53AM

    Yep! I have seen this phenomenon. One of my favorite examples is my mother's wedding dress. She was wed in 1949. She wore a calf-length (midi) satin gown that was fashionable at the time. In a size 16.

My kid sister wore it at her wedding in 1989. It did not need to be altered. At the time, she was a size 10, I think, on the rack.

I tried it on when I was at a point where off the rack I was wearing an 8 tight, and it fit me tight.

It is what it is. Bottom line, every time I look to purchase, I have to check the sizing charts, and base it on my measurements!

Report Inappropriate Comment


First Page  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Last Page