or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Retail's prejudice against the slim
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Retail's prejudice against the slim

post #1 of 33
Thread Starter 
As long as we are talking about retail's prejudice against the obese, how about their prejudice against the slim? It is impossible to find a size 36S jacket, or even a size small shirt / polo / sweater, let alone an XS. 14.5 shirts as well are impossible to find RTW. Jon.
post #2 of 33
Quote:
As long as we are talking about retail's prejudice against the obese, how about their prejudice against the slim? It is impossible to find a size 36S jacket, or even a size small shirt / polo / sweater, let alone an XS. 14.5 shirts as well are impossible to find RTW. Jon.
And what about 32" as the shortest sleeve length?.
post #3 of 33
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Quote:
(imageWIS @ April 18 2005,16:01) As long as we are talking about retail's prejudice against the obese, how about their prejudice against the slim? It is impossible to find a size 36S jacket, or even a size small shirt / polo / sweater, let alone an XS. 14.5 shirts as well are impossible to find RTW. Jon.
And what about 32" as the shortest sleeve length?.
Well, its not a good thing, but at least sleeves can be shortened. Jon.
post #4 of 33
Quote:
As long as we are talking about retail's prejudice against the obese, how about their prejudice against the slim? It is impossible to find a size 36S jacket, or even a size small shirt / polo / sweater, let alone an XS. 14.5 shirts as well are impossible to find RTW. Jon.
I toyed with starting this thread--glad you stepped up. [rant] 36S is not only difficult to find, but it's rarely even *made* by many firms. I think BB has one Brooksease suit in 36S, JPress is a little bit better (their tropicals are available in 36S, but I couldn't find anything else last fall), but Southwick RTW doesn't go below 38, and many places that stock Southwick at great prices don't carry anything under 40 anyway. And we can just forget about so many of the really great deals at places like McGee, Orvis, Polo, because even if they make a 36S or a small or XS (rare), they're long gone by the time the sales hit. Okay, Polo sometimes has some 36S, but unless you want black or black pinstripe, forget it. Also, the Small/XS/36S/14.5 clothing, when you can find it, seems like little more than a shortened and re-collared 15.5. I'm not exactly emaciated, but I can't count the number of 14.5 shirts that still billowed on me. [/rant] We had a short/slim thread going right around December or January (basically a compilation of places we could get 36S/14.5 or below), but I've been unable to find it in the archives. Does anyone have a link to it? Also, re: the boys' dept. We could shop there (and I have, on occasion), but what about when you want the quality stuff? not too many makers have canvassed or 1/2-cavassed suits for boys, let alone the nicer fabrics. I remember a BB salesman telling me how lucky he thought I was that I could fit into a boys' Brooksease, thereby saving myself upwards of $200 (and, really, he was right in a sense). But what I really wanted was the beautiful gray flannel across the aisle in the mens' department, a suit that came in 38R at the smallest.
post #5 of 33
Guys you should be shopping in the boys' dept.
post #6 of 33
It is as it is. Whether extremely fat or small and thin, you are going to have problems with buying clothes. I wear a 16.5 shirt with a 36" arm and I find almost all makes extremely baggy. Everything in North America seems to be cut for guys with fat beer bellies. I have the shirts darted and move on. Be thankful you aren't a "normal size" (5'9" and look 6+ months pregnant). It would suck to be normal.
post #7 of 33
This is why American RTW is vastly inferior to European RTW, in which smaller sizes are almost always stocked in boutiques (in great numbers, as well).
post #8 of 33
We should also call this manufacturers prejudice against the slim. So many manufacturers create clothing that is cut really wide. For example, a 15 shirt fits perfectly in the neck but is so big in the arms and torso. (14.5 will not do up on me). Who in the world has a 15 neck with massive biceps and pecs? I notice the same problem for pants. 31 or 32 may fit (or nearly fit in the waist) but is too big in the legs and just below the but (letting out a 30 1.5 inches fits better than taking in a 32 .5 inches).
post #9 of 33
Nonsense... Most of wht I carry in the RTW caters to these sizes. And while I dont have yet many styles in 34S and 36S next season will be different. These are the suits that A Harris rated in this thread. http://66.170.193.77/cgi-bin....;t=4845 Shirts, sweaters etc. are already available in the small sizes. Stop complaining.  Start Shopping... EDIT:  Clod...Wrong thread... Also The suit that DietCookie is wearing in the Reveal yourself thread page 37 is from me... http://66.170.193.77/cgi-bin....;st=360
post #10 of 33
Okay guys, I understand that there is a paucity of stylish clothes made for smaller people, but it's not quite the same as the situation for the obese.  For one thing, if something is too big, it's easier to alter it to fit because you have material to work with.  When something is too small, that luxury does not exist.   As BrianSD mentioned, you can always move into the European or selected American designer lines that are cut for your bodies.  If you're on the other end of the scale, those options become Casual Male and the King Size catalog, both of which are atrocious. The point of the other thread was that salespeople mistreat fat people.  If you can prove to me that someone has seen a small person and treated them badly just because of that in a regular retail environment, then please accept my apology.  But I don't think it happens much, if at all, and the very existence of this thread smacks of a mocking tone towards the struggles of our fatter bretheren.
post #11 of 33
Quote:
Jon.
And what about 32" as the shortest sleeve length?.[/quote] Humm, most retailers stock that sleeve length. Also, the 14.5 in dress shirts. But not enough are sold to enable them to inverntory more that a few.
post #12 of 33
Quote:
Nonsense... Most of wht I carry in the RTW caters to these sizes. And while I dont have yet many styles in 34S and 36S next season will be different. These are the suits that A Harris rated in this thread. http://66.170.193.77/cgi-bin....;t=4845 Shirts, sweaters etc. are already available in the small sizes. Stop complaining.  Start Shopping... EDIT:  Clod...Wrong thread... Also The suit that DietCookie is wearing in the Reveal yourself thread page 37 is from me... http://66.170.193.77/cgi-bin....;st=360
Exactly. If the store you shop at does not carry your size, go to a different store. Nordstrom carries a vast size inventory. Check it out.
post #13 of 33
36 Shorts are the coolest people around..
post #14 of 33
Quote:
36 Shorts are the coolest people around..      
Which kind of puts the topic of this thread and Steven's correct comments into perspective. This issue isnt about slim its actually about short.
post #15 of 33
Quote:
Quote:
(zjpj83 @ April 18 2005,19:55) 36 Shorts are the coolest people around..
Which kind of puts the topic of this thread and Steven's correct comments into perspective. This issue isnt about slim its actually about short.
I don't see chaps who are 5'10" with a 42 inch chest and a 32 inch waist too thrilled with their RTW options either.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Retail's prejudice against the slim