In article >,
Robert Klute > wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:24:09 GMT, Cindy Fuller
> > wrote:
>
>
> >You didn't read Jane Brody's column a week or two ago. The trend is
> >actually the opposite of what you describe. A women's size 8 today is
> >what used to be a size 12 20 years ago. The higher end clothing
> >manufacturers have initiated "vanity sizing", to satisfy women who want
> >to claim they're still a size 8 despite the middle aged spread.
>
> Amazing. Perhaps it is regional. Out on the left coast I have found
> the opposite. When I wear exact measure clothing (16-1/2 x 34 shirts
> for example), or the M shirts I purchased 25-30 years ago (yes, I still
> have some that were packed away and brought back out recently) the
> clothes fit. Yet, went I try on new relatively sized shirts the M tends
> to be tight and I need to but L.
>

Mens' and womens' sizes are entirely different animals. The SO had a
hard time finding mens' small shirts when we lived in North Carolina,
Dallas, and NY. Because of the large Asian population here in Seattle,
we've had a much easier time finding shirts that fit him.

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me