On Thursday, September 25, 2014 1:21:13 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Thursday, September 25, 2014 8:50:16 AM UTC-7, Kalmia wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, September 25, 2014 10:32:59 AM UTC-4, sf wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 23:36:18 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>
> >
>
>
>
> > > > wrote:
>
> >
>
>
>
> >
>
> > > > I'll tell you what shrank! My pants! That's what!
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> > > Dress sizes have increased, What used to be considered a size 10 is
>
> > > more like a size 2 these days.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Yes, "vanity sizing" rules the day. My wife discovered years ago that,
>
> the more expensive the garment, the smaller the size she takes.
>
>
>
> But back in the 50s, the then National Bureau of Standards helped the
>
> relatively new Ready-to-Wear industry standardize women's clothing sizes,
>
> based on measuring a bunch of real live women:
>
>
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20040409...drawnstds.htm#
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I don't think there were any sizes like 1X, 2X 3X in those days. I can remember dresses usually were made up to size 18, MAYbe a 20. After that, you had to order a tent.
>
> >
>
>
>
> The truly bulky needed "half-sizes."
>
>
>
> > If you are petite, you'll hardly ever find a shop specializing in those sizes. I used to love Petite Sophisticates in the late eighties, but I fear they folded due to the enlargement of Amercian women.
>
> >
>
>
>
> On the West Coast, petites are tailored to fit tiny Asian women.
>
>
>
> But the long-gone chain I remember is the 5-7-9 Shop.

Oh, yeah......I recall they were always on an upper floor, at least the ones I visited.