https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes Style Advice for Fashion Lovers en-US Mon, 06 Apr 2026 00:03:15 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/search.php https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1305549 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 22:56:53 +0000 Nicole D 1305549@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Best of luck with your Smythe blazers ladies. &nbsp;And thanks for the book recommendation gradfashionista! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1305204 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 16:31:42 +0000 Janet 1305204@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Interesting book recommendation, gradfashionista, and thanks for reviving this old thread. Interesting to me, as I am about to try a Smythe blazer for the first time (the black and white one from NAS). I ordered a size up from my usual size, so we'll see how that goes. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1305176 Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:47:54 +0000 gradfashionista 1305176@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I realize this is an older thread, but I just wanted to say that I appreciated reading everybody's contributions!! I'm waiting for a Smythe jacket in the mail, hoping that it fits, and was surprised to find that the size charts seemed reasonable.&nbsp;</p> <p>Somebody made the point that it's easier to design smaller-sized clothing because of the greater predictability of weight distribution; or conversely, the more weight you gain, the less predictable your measurements will be. Excellent observation!!! That makes a lot of sense.&nbsp;</p> <p>My reason for chiming into the discussion was to recommend the book the "Science of Beauty" to whoever was slightly offended by the link between weight and socioeconomic class. I recall it being mentioned and substantiated in the book.</p> <div><div><div><div>&nbsp;</div></div><div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div></div><div></div></div></div></p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1158030 Wed, 05 Feb 2014 00:58:28 +0000 shiny 1158030@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>No, handbags don't fit everyone! Do not get me started on that topic. LOL. I want the look of a big handbag but it has to be scaled to 5'0 tall me.&nbsp;</p> <p>For the record, I've got very similar width measurements to Angie, but she's 6 inches taller... and a lot less squishy than I am. A glance at the Smythe size chart seems to indicate the size 2 would fit me, but I know better.&nbsp;</p> <p>I'm in marketing so I totally get the business justification and process that clothing manufacturers go through to make these decisions. That said, emotionally as a consumer I understand the flip side as well, and quite acutely.&nbsp;</p> <p>A good marketer builds a "buyer's persona" ... that is smart.&nbsp;</p> <p>But as a consumer it sucks to be categorized and profiled like that.&nbsp;</p> <p>It can work if the clothing is awesome and fits my self-view - or better, my self-aspiration... problem is, I am&nbsp;not frumpy and boring and conservative...&nbsp;&nbsp;like most petite offerings seem to suggest.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157979 Wed, 05 Feb 2014 00:26:08 +0000 Suz 1157979@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Nicole, you have a brilliant attitude!&nbsp;</p> <p>I think it's often a painstaking process of trying brand after brand until we find the ones that do "get us."&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157929 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 23:23:45 +0000 Nicole D 1157929@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I am loving this discussion and I wish I could thank each of you individually for your wisdom and insight, as well as just plain sharing your experience with sizing and fit. &nbsp;I really love when GARMENT measurements are given in an online offering, such as on "The Outnet" (I also love how they preface the measurements with the line:"We measured this garment for you" - why thank you!). &nbsp;And many other sites have live chat whereby one could possibly ask for a measurement.&nbsp;<br />It is interesting to hear about others being "sized out" and I agree that it hurts less if I remember the phrase (I think I first heard it here) :"That piece just doesn't get you!" &nbsp;There are so many brands that I love that I can find my size in: DVF, Vince, EF, and on and on. And I must admit that I can usually find shoes that are gorgeous and in a wide range of sizes for me.<br />And best of all: handbags fit no matter what my waist measurement is!&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157874 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 22:18:19 +0000 Gigi 1157874@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>As a person who is sized out at the lower end extremely frequently, I do wonder about what role a more international customer base will play. For instance, Asians are quite a bit shorter and more slender than Americans, so will sizes start to shrink to accommodate these other groups? (FWIW, I haven't seen much shrinking but have seen the opposite.)</p> <p>I do think that it would be nice to have things more like the men have them, though. Years ago I was shopping with my brother and complaining that the jeans were all gappy at the waist because I needed a larger size to accommodate my hips. He said nonchalantly, "Why don't you just get a smaller waist size?" I had to explain to him that women's clothes don't come that way--you have your basic sizes, and that's it. He had no idea. I have been told that some designers tried doing the same thing for women some years ago, but it didn't go well. It seems like we are seeing a new incarnation of that now with the various "curvy" fits in pants. Thank God! It's not even a matter of body fat sometimes but of skeletal structure.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157776 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 20:24:08 +0000 Trishalee 1157776@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I just find it interesting that people have problems on both ends of this issue. &nbsp;If you aren't "normal" you are going to have to work hard to build &nbsp;your wardrobe. &nbsp;It is sort of reflective of our society-anyone who falls outside the norm will struggle to find their path. &nbsp;I think that is part of the reason why I like this site so much-there is no "normal", &nbsp;everyone focuses on people as individuals and what works for them. &nbsp;Thanks for that!!! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157754 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:48:54 +0000 Alexandra 1157754@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Accurate size charts, yes. I would also like to see specific measurements for each garment, either for each size or at least for the middle size. I'm talking about measurements such as shoulder point to shoulder point, across bust at bottom of armhole, etc. Because even if the size chart is accurate, it gives no information about how each specific garment fits - how much ease is in it. That's one of the things I like about Lands' End - you can call them for measurements of the garment you want in any size. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157745 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:44:08 +0000 catgirl 1157745@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I bet those sizes shop more because they have a better selection! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157741 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:41:52 +0000 Angie 1157741@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Ironkurtin makes an excellent balanced argument, which for me is probably at the heart of it all. IK, I echo your words by a billion percent.&nbsp;</p> <p>I'll add that US sizes 6 to 10 are the most <b>BOUGHT</b> sizes in the US retail market. It's not the average size of the American woman - that would be a size 12/14 and at a height of about 5ft 3.5 inches - but research has shown that&nbsp;size 6 to 10 women do a lot more shopping than other sizes. So that's possibly why size specifications and collections&nbsp;are skewed to those sizes.&nbsp;</p> <p>Of course, the question remains (as IK pointed out)&nbsp;- would retailers actually make more money if they covered more sizes?&nbsp;That's the trillion dollar question.&nbsp;</p> <p>Aviah Mariah, I am with you on size specifications online - at the very least - needing to&nbsp;be accurate. *sighs*</p> <p>&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157740 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:41:48 +0000 Suz 1157740@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Dana, thanks for that info on the Owens stuff. That makes sense. Very interesting that it would vary between the tailored pieces and the knits, but then knits are super forgiving.&nbsp;</p> <p>On men -- Mr. Suz definitely does have serious problems finding clothing that fits him well. I mean, serious. He is a slender ectomorphic kind of person with narrow, rounded shoulders and a smaller neck than most men. He also has relatively long legs for his height. He fits most sweaters okay, but has an awful and I mean <b>AWFUL</b> time with many shirts and jackets and a reasonably frustrating time with pants. He orders more clothing online than I do and sends more of it back. So it's not always easy for the guys, either, especially if they are slightly different from the normal fit models. And he <b>is</b> an American man. Well, Canadian now, but born in the good old US of A.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157728 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:37:05 +0000 catgirl 1157728@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>It seems like there could be designers who restrict their designs to a DIFFERENT size range - equally limited but not the middle sizes. I would love to design a fashion forward line for shorter women - where are the wide legs, cuffs, proportionate long blazers, etc? And similarly what if a designer catered only to larger sizes? </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157719 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:30:02 +0000 ironkurtin 1157719@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>You know, I think profit does drive designers, but profit isn't always within mass-market parameters, if you know what I mean.&nbsp; Would Smythe make more money if they offered plus-size jackets?&nbsp; I don't know; Suz did a rundown on what that would mean in turns of tailoring and fit model costs, etc., and it would obviously cost a fair bit of money and time -- something a smaller label like Smythe just may not be able to accommodate.&nbsp; Possibly they have found the sweet spot for money in/money out and expanding into other realms would tax their resources without returns.</p> <p>As for men, I do believe men's clothing is more flexible and forgiving in terms of body shapes. I have yet to meet any man who frets about being an hourglass, pear, apple, triangle, or rectangle.&nbsp; They don't have as wide a variable in hips and hips to shoulders, plus they don't have the same variation in garments that have to work together.&nbsp; Yes, some are taller, some are finer-boned, some are fatter, some are slimmer, but the basic body shape just doesn't change that much.&nbsp; </p> <p>Also, there is also a much bigger tradition of bespoke for a truly lovely men's suit for those rich enough to afford them.&nbsp; Plus - when's the last time you saw a suit sale without free tailoring?!</p> <p>I'm sorry to hear the anger and frustration from larger women about labels not designing for them.&nbsp; If it helps, most designers don't seem to be designing for me, either, seeing how many clothing items out there I find hideous and/or ill-fitting. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157700 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:05:00 +0000 Thistle 1157700@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>As a person who has been sized out of many lines, I am glad I can find some that cater to me and want my money. Others, who have been overtly obnoxious to those over size 8&nbsp;will never get my hard earned dollars even if I see those sizes again (looking at you Ambercrombie and Lulumon).</p> <p>Of course, I have to say, I think most of this is garbage. Why can they make clothes for the average American man but not the average American woman? Are American men, on average,&nbsp;the same size as Arab men? Really?&nbsp;If not,&nbsp;how can the fashion industry make clothes for American men and Arab women? </p> <p>And do American men really spend so much more on fashion that they can be catered to&nbsp;but American women can't? </p> <p>If profit truly is the motive behind fashion decisions, with the rise of China in influence and consumer spending power, I can only hope that those of us without Asian frames will continue to be able to find items that fit us and our style goals. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157481 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:27:07 +0000 abc 1157481@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Suz, when I have time I will go back and read the series. Thanks for giving the article some additional context. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157479 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:25:35 +0000 AviaMariah 1157479@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Thank you Angie for your explanation and I definitely see where it's an advantage that sizes aren't customized. &nbsp;But it would be really nice if companies would post accurate sizing charts! &nbsp;I think I've had more luck ordering the correct sizes by reading YLF posts than by reading most size charts! </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157476 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:24:18 +0000 ironkurtin 1157476@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>@Suz - it's Rick Owens' much more structured jackets that are cut this way.&nbsp; They're meant to shape the body, not shape TO the body, if you know what I mean.&nbsp; My back and shoulders looked amazing in that jacket.&nbsp; It just hurt to wear it.</p> <p>I believe his knitwear, which was what was featured in his latest show with the multiple body shapes, is much more forgiving. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157457 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:08:54 +0000 Suz 1157457@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Yes -- the designers' fit models might be closer to their actual customer base. Or what they imagine their customer base to be.&nbsp;That's exactly one of the points made by the author of the link that Alexandra gave -- I think not in that article but one of her other ones, she refers to this.&nbsp;</p> <p>But are they always right about their customer base? That's the thing. Maybe they're not, and if they designed for a different size/ shape their clothes would sell as well or better.&nbsp;</p> <p>What those articles do explain, though, is why it's not as simple as just offering a bigger size of the same item. And even though she is talking about plus size, there is probably a point before that where you might need to start using a different fit model. And again -- it might come down to body type/ frame size as much as anything.&nbsp;</p> <p>I have heard rumours that Club Monaco was originally conceived/ designed with the Asian market in mind. The clothes are&nbsp;cut smaller and narrower than the big mainstream US stores like BR or AT.&nbsp;</p> <p> </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157450 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:00:49 +0000 catgirl 1157450@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Sona, interesting! And at the other end, the petite section of most department stores is often "comfort wear" and frump city too with not a trend or update in sight. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157443 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:58:02 +0000 Sona 1157443@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>This is from the LA times from 2009. I am quoting it as a newspaper such as the LA times&nbsp;is unlikely to have not done their research for this article: <p>"When it comes to shopping, the average American man has it made. At 189.8 pounds and a size 44 regular jacket, he can wear Abercrombie &amp; Fitch, American Apparel or Armani. Department stores, mall retailers and designer boutiques all cater to his physique -- even when it's saddled with love handles, a sagging chest or a moderate paunch. In menswear, shlubby is accommodated.</p> <p>But the average U.S. woman, who's 162.9 pounds and wears a size 14, is treated like an anomaly by apparel brands and retailers -- who seem to assume that no one over size 10 follows fashion's capricious trends."</p> <p>&nbsp;I heard Karl Lagerfeld in an interview once that the 'average' consumer of high end clothing&nbsp;brands was an Arab woman. Perhaps high end designers are catering to a larger/different consumer base than the average US woman. I am not sure what size&nbsp;an average Arab or Japanese woman fit but I did find his comments very interesting.</p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157424 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:44:17 +0000 Anonymous 1157424@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Definitely frame size plays a role too. I am large-framed, and that is going to dictate what I fit. I found it really confusing when I first came here to see people who nominally have the same measurements as me who wear different sizes than I do (usually much smaller), but I think ease and frame size are the two main factors, and the rest flows from that.</p> <p>It was a revelation though when I realised I would never have a tiny waist just because that is not how my body is shaped. For some reason (and you'd think I would know as I deal with skeletons all day, and morphological variation) I didn't translate that out into real people. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157415 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:36:23 +0000 catgirl 1157415@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Add to Suz's excellent analysis the issue of bone structure. I am small boned, but not fine boned, if that makes sense. And as we have discussed before, I am petite from the front aside from shoulders but deep from a side view. So people often comment on how "tiny" I am when really it's almost like an optical illusion, because I have the markers of a petite person (short, skinny wrists and calves) but in reality I'm a lot more substantial. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes/page/2#post-1157371 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 14:50:29 +0000 Suz 1157371@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Also, Dana's point reminds me of another, opposite one. Lately, she's been virtually sized out of one of her favourites -- Eileen Fisher. It's a good illustration of how the sizing issue works the opposite way as well.&nbsp;</p> <p>I do find it kind of ironic that Owens would design so narrow considering that recent campaign supposedly honouring and celebrating all body sizes and shapes. I wonder if the new line is cut as small or if there is more versatility in the pieces allowing them to work for a variety of shapes?&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes#post-1157368 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 14:47:58 +0000 Suz 1157368@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>The tone of Alexandra's link sounds defensive, I suspect, because it is part of an ongoing conversation and series of articles that the author has written to address precisely the issues that Nicole raised: What is going on with designers? Are they discriminating on the basis of size? Why would they do that?&nbsp;What is going on with sizes? Is there "vanity" sizing? And so on.&nbsp;</p> <p>From what she says, and reading between the lines, it sounds as if she has been frustrated with some comments she's received and she's trying to address the issues those people have raised. I think that can lead to a bit of acerbity at times. Not trying to excuse the author, but if you read the series you see more of the context.&nbsp;</p> <p>And I do think that what she says is pertinent. She describes the history of sizing, the reasons that some manufacturers choose this or that fit model, and the complications of fit (which go well beyond simple bust/waist/hip&nbsp;measurement, as every one of us here knows from personal experience.)&nbsp;</p> <p>To go back to the original question about Smythe and Theory -- I don't know what their rationale is or whether it's right or wrong. But whatever the reason,&nbsp;based on everything we've seen and heard on this thread,&nbsp;it sounds as if they are brands that are&nbsp;difficult to fit for women who<b>&nbsp;</b>have IT tendencies. </p> <p>They are simply cut for a smaller <b>frame.</b> That's not about weight, per se. Or even about measurements. They just won't feel comfortable on a body with a larger frame. It has to do with armhole placement as much as anything else, I suspect. Also the width of the back.&nbsp;</p> <p>It's not to say that they are an impossible fit for ITs. Una wears Theory and she is an IT. <b>BUT</b> she is an IT on the smaller end of the size scale and has to size up considerably to make the brand work for her.&nbsp;</p> <p>Meanwhile, a&nbsp;pretty pear in the same size range might fit very nicely indeed&nbsp;into the jackets in her regular size or one size up&nbsp;(assuming the hips were okay). Someone with a more rectangular shape might also fit them. Take Raisin, for instance. For her, Smythe is pretty TTS.&nbsp;</p> <p>Meanwhile, the reverse is also true. Nicole mentioned she can wear some of Theory's items -- I am guessing maybe some pants, dresses, skirts, sweaters, or tops with less snug tailoring might work very well on her body type.</p> <p>Put those same pants on a pear...or even a relatively slim hourglass like me -- and <b>YUCK</b>. I do own and love an older pair of Theory pants...but alas!! They changed the fabric, the cut, and apparently,&nbsp;the fit model this year.&nbsp;With the current crop of Theory pants -- I can get them on (if I size up...and I do have to size up) but they look horrible on me and feel worse.&nbsp;</p> <p>It's sad, but they're just not cut for my body.&nbsp;</p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes#post-1157366 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 14:43:00 +0000 ironkurtin 1157366@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>As we all know it isn't just sizing but proportions of the sizing that make items fit or not fit.&nbsp; I can wear anywhere from an XS to S to 4 to an 8 in jackets in US sizing but cannot possibly fit into what I am told is an Italian 4; I need more like an Italian 10.&nbsp; And each one may look weird or awesome, it just depends on the cut and whether they cut it for smaller shoulders or whatever. </p> <p> In Rick Owens I take the largest size he makes for my shoulders - he cuts EXTREMELY narrow. The one time I tried to size down I actually got broken blood vessels in my armpits.&nbsp; But I'm not going to curse Rick Owens for forsaking me... it is what it is, and there are LOTS of designers out there. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes#post-1157340 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 14:23:41 +0000 abc 1157340@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I skimmed the article and perhaps it provides additional clarification. I couldn't get past the tone nor the "I can't" attitude. The article would be a lot more helpful if it was written in a neutral fashion laying out the "arguments" with less attitude and negativity. New plus lines have been added throughout history and it can't be an entirely insurmountable task as the article seems to want you to believe. I was disappointed I couldn't make it through because I'm very interested in the business aspect of any subject, fashion included. Perhaps I'm biased though as I used to fall squarely in the plus size arena. </p> <p>And now that I've lost weight I fall in that space Sona mentioned that the article leaves out - the 10/12/14 range. </p> <p>Let's keep it polite as Sona suggested. Thx to all for the discussion. </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes#post-1157315 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 13:40:11 +0000 Sona 1157315@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Andrea: your link talks mainly of plus sized women not women at the size 10/12/14 range.</p> <p>Also if you are going to post a comment such as:</p> <p>"Studies show that more affluent people tend to be thinner than those in the lower socioeconomic strata. Hence the prevalence of smaller sizes in high-end stores and larger sizes at the lower end. "</p> <p>please- either link to the 'studies' or be forewarned that a comment like this is going to rear some heads.</p> <p>Lets keep this discussion polite and yes diplomatic please.</p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes#post-1157296 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 13:07:59 +0000 Suz 1157296@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>Fascinating links, Alexandra. I remember being directed to this site before -- it's a fund of information. Seems she agrees with Angie's preference for non-standardized sizing as both more realistic and ultimately more fair.&nbsp; </p> https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/topic/smythe---why-no-larger-sizes#post-1157292 Tue, 04 Feb 2014 13:03:41 +0000 viva 1157292@https://youlookfab.com/welookfab/ <p>I'd just like to add that being able to create this conversation right off the blog post is so very cool. LOVE. </p>