View Single Post
  #7   ^
Old Tue, Jun-23-15, 19:33
MPrufrock MPrufrock is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 101
 
Plan: Low carb, low gi
Stats: 210/159/154 Female 68.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 91%
Location: FL
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEm

Here is the original document of industry clothing standards of 1971 , which was withdrawn in 1983, if I have those dates right.

This blog analogme gives some information as to how the size standards came about, and the previous standards. When I was in high school, my mother's clothes,

What I wore as a size 10 in 1973, was the same size as the older clothes from my mother, with a label marked "size 16".


This is fascinating, thank you for sharing. According to this chart, I would comfortably fit in a 14. I have thought a lot about ideals of female beauty in the last 10 years, for professional and personal reasons. The conclusion I have come to is that numbers should not determine self esteem but stay within the realm of fact. If clothing fits, I am happy to buy it regardless of the tag on it. That sizes zero (triple and double too!) exist these days is something of a tragedy. It would seem as if a woman's value increases as she physically occupies less and less space in the world.
Reply With Quote