I vowed I wasn't going to get myself sucked into this conversation, but here I am. Body shape, weight, fit of clothes etc is a huge trigger point for me and sends my self-esteem into the garbage way too easily. I'm horrible at comparing myself to others and wishing for this or that body part, and I wish I would not do it.
Anyways......what I don't see in this discussion is the issues that come with finding clothes for a fit, athletic body with some muscle development. Zara and J Crew models look like they've never seen a gym in their life. Same with Club Monaco. Skinny, flat chested knock kneed hipsters in gorgeous clothes. Someone please kill me now. In all seriousness, even at my skinniest of a few years ago when I was wearing 0's and 2's, I had trouble, and still do, with blouses, blazer sleeves, and even some long-sleeved knit tops fitting my arms properly. I work out with weights, am quite strong , and have toned and well-developed shoulders, biceps and triceps. I also run, walk and spin, and do countless squats and lunges - so I have developed quads, and hamstrings. I wear (relatively) small sizes, but often have trouble getting the more fashion forward lines and cuts to fit. That to me is as frustrating as having trouble with natural body shape issues. And I'm no steroid crazed juiced-up bodybuilder, just a normal looking woman who happens to work out a lot. Why are manufacturers still cranking out clothes for a body type that hasn't existed in ages?

An interesting point. Do designers, manufacturers and retailers, tend to design around and promote clothes that are more likely to fit a standard size model? These are the people who are being used to advertise the clothes, yet except for plus size and older models, they tend to fit a specific demographic physically that is not the norm.
I think it is true that it is more likely that one can visually see the clothes better on straight, thinner figures. You don't see the curves and if it's a print it's easier to see the print rather than how curves affect the print. Model figures are more likely to not visually get in the way of the garments that are being advertised and sold. However, how does that then relate to the reality that there's a wide variety of figures that these clothes have to fit?
One thing I do like are companies that have a variety of silhouettes for various types of figures, straight, curvy, plus size, petite and tall. I've also found that certain retailers are more likely to "get my fit" in terms of physical characteristics.
Sometimes I think it's a matter of what's in fashion at that time. I have thinner legs and not much in the way of hips. I love skinny jeans, some of which fit more like straight leg pants for me. I remember a period of time when retailers appeared to assume that all women had more of an hourglass shape. I had trouble finding pants that didn't look like gauchos, and more than once found myself getting jeans from the boy's department. Another reason why I appreciate retailers who offer choices. I think I would have found lots to wear in the 1920's with the straight silhouettes and I think the 1950's, with the cinched waists - not so much.

Echoing Janet - the "petites" section generally skews classic and preppy over RATE UWP! It's hard to find all styles across all size ranges.

Lisap, don't feel bad about your shape - specially not because of this post. I understand how frustrating (and bad for self-esteem) is the feeling of "not fitting", but my point was exactly that the clothes have the wrong fit, not us. I think there are beauty in all shapes and despite what is considered beauty or what is not (that is a rather complex question that could render a entire new post) there are women in all shapes and sizes, so clothes should have more diverse fits and sizes to reflect that.

What I'd like to see is measurements more like men's clothes (32/33 or 41/34 or whatever sizes) as opposed to random letters & sizes that are never the same across retailers. I wonder what J Crew & Zara's items would look like if they were created using the same numbering system as a Lane Bryant size S or Target L or insert brand here. An added measurement for rise in pants as well. Low, medium & high are frusterating!
Then a curvy, petite, balanced waisted momma like myself could shop with relative confidence.

While I agree that they pin the clothes on mannequins and models so that they look more tailored, it is also true that my straighter (not necessarily skinnier) friends have it easier when it's time to shop for clothes. My 5.7", 110Ibs friend buys her clothes online and hardly ever exchanges or returns anything. She orders a Small and that's that, and she never looks like her clothes don't fit. She has a smaller bust and hips, so it's just more probable that her clothes will fit overall because there are less variables. She can also get away with buying -gasp- bikini sets where the two parts go together.

My not-so slim/straight friends, or even myself (a slim but curvy woman) have it a lot, lot, lot harder. It's funny though, because I have heard the 'but everything looks good on you!' way too many times. It doesn't, but I'm just patient and good at finding stuff that fits my shape.