The Happy Talent
  • Blog
  • About
  • Popular
  • Education
  • Social Science
  • Travel
  • Products
  • Contact
"It is a happy talent to know how to play."

Dear Tim Gunn: The Designers Are Right. Plus Size Fashion is Difficult, and "No Two 16s Are Alike"

10/30/2016

11 Comments

 
Tim Gunn is trending on Facebook again. This time, it's for a video that reiterates some of the points he made in his recent op-ed: inclusivity is good, more women are plus size than ever, there's money to be made, designers "should" start designing more and better plus sized clothing, and retailers "should" call up Marc Jacobs and demand that he either design for plus size women, or they'll boycott his clothes.

There's a lot we can agree on, here. Inclusivity is important, and I'm sure there's money to be made in this market. But there are also a few things we disagree on. For example:

1. Designers are artists. No one should be telling them what they "should" do.

Maybe for you, fashion is about making money. But for designers, what they do isn't their job. It's their art. Would you tell pianists that they "should" play their music a certain way? Would you tell a singer-songwriter what her lyrics "should" be about? Would you tell a painter what he "should" paint?

No, of course not. Because art is a deeply personal exploration of your creativity and self-expression.

It's also deeply challenging. Just because someone is great at designing handbags, doesn't mean they can design shoes. Just because they can make clothes that look amazing on a size 0-10, doesn't mean they have the know-how to scale those designs up to look great on a size 16. 


Which leads me to my next point -- on which I know we agree, because you've made the same one yourself.

2. Designing for plus sizes is incredibly difficult.

You said it yourself, Tim:

"There is no reason larger women can’t look just as fabulous as all other women. The key is the harmonious balance of silhouette, proportion and fit, regardless of size or shape. Designs need to be reconceived, not just sized up; it’s a matter of adjusting proportions. The textile changes, every seam changes. Done right, our clothing can create an optical illusion that helps us look taller and slimmer. Done wrong, and we look worse than if we were naked."

And again in your most recent video: 

"[Designers] say the plus size woman is complicated, different and difficult, and no two size 16s are alike...The key is the following: it's the harmonious balance of silhouette, proportion, and fit. Right now, most plus-size designs make the body look larger, with box pleats and shoulder pads. Trust that I'm not trivializing the task: it's challenging! Designs need to be reconceived, not just sized up."

Plus size fashion isn’t a simple matter of making things bigger. It’s making a whole different set of things, with different proportions, fabrics and seams. When you tell designers they need to start making plus-sized clothing, you're basically telling them, not only do you have to paint different pictures -- you also have to trade in your paintbrush to be a sculptor.

But say someone does it. Say Marc Jacobs decides to launch a high-end plus-size line... and because it's hard, and he's never done it before, everyone looks terrible in his clothes.

It hurts his brand. And, probably, instead of recognizing his efforts to be inclusive, the toxic participants in "call out culture" are all running around on Tumblr calling him a bigot because he didn't get it right the first time. 
​


3. No size 16s are alike, and designing "for her" is less profitable. 

​To be fair, no size 4s are alike, either. I'm 6'0 and 150 pounds, and I typically wear a size 2-4, sometimes a 6. (Because, yes, sizes vary by brand. But unlike the outraged feminists at Vox, I'm not upset by it. It is what it is.)

One of my best friends is 5'2 and 130. She also wears a size 2-4. 

So, clearly, neither of us looks our best when we dress off the rack. (According to Joan Brumberg's The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls, this might be one reason why girls' self-esteem has plummeted in the last century. Girls look worse in their clothes than their ancestors did.) 
Picture
But literally everyone looks good in yoga pants. 

Because "size" isn't just determined by your weight. It's determined by your bone structure, fat distribution, height, musculature, and many other factors. 

And "size" is also not normally distributed. As I wrote in One Model Tried On 10 Different Pairs Of Size 16 Jeans. Here's Why They All Fit Differently,

While there is a lower limit to how small a woman can be... there's really no upper limit. As a result, many retailers make their plus size to accommodate a larger range of bodies per size. In other words, a size 16 is usually more like a size XXL than an actual size 16. Read more >


Need a visual? Here:
Picture
Saying that the "average" woman is a size sixteen... that's a strange way of thinking about it. Because there's more to profit than averages. There's also the mode. 

Look at this graph. What size/weight appears the most often? In the graph, above, it's pretty clear that women who weigh 120-160 appear the most often -- especially among the younger age groups.

Now, in order to make money, designers/retailers have to make the smallest number of sizes, and the sizes they make need to fit the most people. Lots of people fit into each smaller size. Large people span a huge number of sizes, with fewer fitting into each size. 

And what does "average" even mean? Turns out, it could be no one. Say you have a group of five women, weighing 120, 135, 140, 200, and 235 pounds. Their average weight is the U.S. "average" of about 166. If all the designers started creating for this woman... who in the actual sample could wear those designs?

In other words, basing designs and inventory on an "average" weight is definitely problematic.

Speaking of inventory...

In his video, Tim Gunn encourages retailers to call up designers and say, "We're not going to give you floor space in our store anymore if you don't start making more plus sizes."

Where are all those sizes going to go???

You've got X square feet devoted to Marc Jacobs. Now, in addition to stocking sizes 0-10, which each fit a large number of women... you think retailers can also stock sizes 12-30?

Something's got to go. That can't all fit in the same amount of space that Marc Jacobs already had.

Meaning most retailers can never make that phone call. It doesn't make business sense. 

The exception would be retailers whose aesthetic is more H&M/outlet mall than Bloomingdales/Kate Spade. They will find some way to cram all those sizes into the same small space, at the expense of customer experience.

But if you're a retailer, and you're still in business, it means you're probably giving your customers the experience they want. And chances are, that's not the crappy outlet mall experience. 

This isn't even to mention that plus-sized women look better in tailored clothing. But with the large variations in what a 16 can look like, it's hard to make something that looks good on all or most of your shoppers. 

For example, as I wrote in The Surprising Trait that Carbs and Valium Have in Common,

Excess calories can be stored in the abdominal fat (your belly), or your gluteal fat (your butt). People who store their fat in their belly tend to develop the “apple shape,” and people who store their fat in their butt tend to develop a “pear shape.” Read more >
Picture

So what is the right way to tackle the challenge of a) making more sizes, that each fit a smaller range of bodies, b) making clothing that is more tailored, even though "no size 16 is the same" and c) still making a profit?

This isn't even to mention the fact that the cost of clothing is determined more by materials than labor -- it costs more money to make bigger clothes (duh), and more of your resources get tied up in garments on racks. 

(And, as any small business owner would tell you: inventory is expensive!)
​
​***

The point is, it's pretty ridiculous for Tim Gunn, who presumably has some rudimentary understanding on the fashion industry, to pretend that the shortage of plus-size designs is a moral issue, rather than a business one.

Yes, there are more plus-sized women now than ever. But that doesn't mean that making money off of them is easy. It doesn't mean designing clothes for them is easy. It doesn't mean retailers have floor space to carry more sizes, that each fit a smaller range of bodies. ​

It's clearly a harder problem than Gunn says it is. Like, who here truly believes that there's all this free, easy money just sitting around waiting to be made... and no one's smart or willing enough to grab it?

Moreover, I really don't like the attitude that artists owe us something. Like, what dystopian future is this that people think they get to control other people's art? It's great to be responsive to feedback -- I mean, where do you think The Martian came from? But at the end of the day, the artist decides what and how they want to create.

***

As an aside, there are several retailers and designers who are tackling plus-size fashion, and that's awesome. Modcloth has thousands of quirky plus-size options.
Picture

Lane Bryant has always been awesome -- I don't know why women complain about it. I've bought shoes there, and it was a great experience. 
​
Picture
Picture

​
Michael Kors also has a plus sized line, MICHAEL, that's stylish and reasonably affordable.
Picture
So it's not as though there are no options. Sure, many are only available online. That's true for me, too. As a woman who's 6'0, I have to order a lot (most?) of my clothes online, or have them tailored. 

It's inconvenient, I guess. But, let's be real. The majority of people in the year 2016 do a big chunk of their shopping online, anyway.

That's part of the reason retailers are having such a hard time staying in business.
​
Thoughts on this? Feel free to comment. But keep in mind: if your criticism is that I'm "conventionally pretty" and I have "thin privilege," I'm going to have a hard time taking you seriously. The way my body looks has no bearing on my ability to understand statistics, business, or design.
11 Comments
The Tone Police
10/31/2016 11:31:06 am

Says guy on RIGGED reality show that tells you it's rigged in its own broadcast disclaimer. I bet he is looking to start a plus size line, and this is just early publicity as opposed to a "stance".

" Done right, our clothing can create an optical illusion that helps us look taller and slimmer."

Watch out, Tim! You just body-shamed millions of fativists who don't WANT to look "taller and slimmer". Prepare for the twitter onslaught...

Reply
Christmas loom bands link
12/21/2016 08:58:25 pm

These packs are a great size and include everything you need to start looming. This Disney Jr. Sofia the First ROXO & Rainbow Loom Starter Pack features fiv.

Reply
Sabrina Smith link
12/24/2016 10:57:55 pm

Hi Eva! Very interesting feedback on Tim's video. I'm still processing all of this in order to formulate my thoughts which I'll post on my blog within the week. I'm also a taller woman (my blog is about tall fashion) and I think his thoughts 100% apply to women 5'8" and up as well. Would love to get your thoughts after the post goes up...!

Reply
Eva Glasrud link
4/30/2017 12:30:24 pm

Awesome! I just checked out your blog, and LOVED it. (I don't normally read fashion blogs, so that's saying something -- it was legitimately helpful, especially for a fellow tall lady :P).

Let me know when the post is live! I'd love to check it out!

Reply
http://happyvalentinesday14feb.in/ link
12/30/2016 03:35:43 am

http://happyvalentinesday14feb.in/

Reply
http://ninjaessays.net/ link
2/17/2017 11:21:14 am

It is really an amazing article you have shared here. I like that you talk about this issue. Many people think in the same way you describe these ideas.

Reply
Pakistani Bridal Jewellery link
2/23/2017 02:48:11 am

This was among the best posts and episode from your team it let me learn many new things.

Reply
Fenn
3/19/2017 02:04:25 pm

There is a LOT in your arguments that's just wrong, not just because you call Tim Gunn's knowledge "rudimentary," which is incredibly insulting and untrue. (Although from your education as stated on your about page is true of you.) What you've said about business and floor space is wrong. There is plenty of floor space and size runs are already selling disproportionately. You're right, businesses can make their own decisions. I agree that no one "should" do anything. Pick what you want. But what you said about creating bigger sizes and the different shapes of women is also wrong. Most sizes are created because one pattern is made and then shrunk down or sized up to create the other sizes. This is why very small ladies have almost as many issues as very large ladies. Creating a plus size doesn't require a done more work and all this different creation and whatnot, as you said. It just requires drawing two patterns, which is not cost prohibitive for most designers. Also, the difference in the way women gain weight is the same for all sizes and not unique to the plus size. This is why there are different styles of clothing. Some women wear circle skirts and some wear pencil skirts because they suit different body types. I think you have an underlying bias against fat people. It comes out in more than one of your pieces. I think it would behoove you to consider that when thinking more on topics that affect fat women and clearly don't affect you.

Reply
Eva Glasrud link
4/30/2017 12:27:28 pm

Much of what you said is incorrect.

1. "Although from your education as stated on your about page is true of you."

That wasn't a complete sentence, but I think I get your drift. Cool ad hominem. That was a very presidential (in the worst possible way) "argument," and jealousy looks really ugly on you.

2. "What you've said about business and floor space is wrong."

Actually, it's not. I'm not really sure how to argue this simple fact with you. It's just true. Businesses have a limited amount of floor space. Having more of each size means having fewer different kinds of merchandise. Inventory is one of the most expensive things you can have. This is just true.

3. "But what you said about creating bigger sizes and the different shapes of women is also wrong. Most sizes are created because one pattern is made and then shrunk down or sized up to create the other sizes."

Is Tim Gunn, the designer you expressed so much admiration for in your first sentence, also wrong? Because he said the exact same thing. HE said, and I agree, that designing for the plus size woman is NOT easy. It's extremely hard. So if that pisses you off, go comment on HIS blog.

4. "Also, the difference in the way women gain weight is the same for all sizes and not unique to the plus size."

Sure. Every body is different. But you understand that the bigger the body, the more room there is for variation, right?

5. "I think you have an underlying bias against fat people."

I have an underlying bias for truth. That's why, in person and online, I often find myself arguing with otherwise very intelligent and compassionate people about how obesity is a super complicated problem, and it's pretty narrow-minded to blame it on someone being lazy and overeating. I know personal trainers who think that, and that's horrible. Sure, eating less will help you lose weight. But there are endocrine, microbiome, viral, and other issues that have nothing to do with conscious decision making. I will always defend truth. I will always defend science.

I just think Tim Gunn is trying to oversimplify a much more complicated problem -- perhaps he's gearing up to launch a plus-size fashion line or something. Because I know he knows better. How could he not?

Thanks for taking the time to comment. :)

Reply
Sally Miller link
5/30/2017 01:31:40 am

I really liked your article .Great

Reply
jio plans link
8/3/2017 11:21:19 pm

Also, Jio is venturing to introduce 2 new tariffs with price tags of Rs 149 and Rs 499 which offers 2GB, 60GB data + free voice calls respectively. jio plans This is an incredible idea from Jio once again.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    About the Author
    Picture
    Eva is a content specialist with a passion for play, travel... and a little bit of girl power.  Read more >


    Want to support The Happy Talent? CLICK HERE!
    Support the Happy Talent
    Or Find me on Patreon!
    Picture

    What's Popular on The Happy Talent:
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture

      Want more?

    Submit

    Trending in Dating and Relationships:
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture



    ​What's Popular in Science:
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture


    Playfulness and Leisure Skills:
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture

    Popular in Psychology and Social Skills:
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture

    Categories

    All
    20s
    Adolescence
    Backpacking
    Boredom
    Boredom Avoidance
    Camping
    Career Advice
    Careers
    Communication
    Confidence
    Consent
    Creativity
    Curiosity
    Dating
    Economy
    Education
    Entrepreneurship
    Fearlessness
    Female Travel
    Feminism
    Free Speech
    Gap Year
    Great Products
    Growth Mindset
    Health
    Hiking
    Hitchhiking
    Life Advice
    Meeting New People
    Mental Health
    Mexico
    Mindfulness
    Most Popular
    National Parks
    Outdoors
    Parenting
    Parenting Advice
    Passive Entertainment
    Play
    Playfulness
    Psychology
    Relationships
    Resilience
    Science
    Scuba Diving
    Self Help
    Self-help
    Sex
    Sports
    Stanford University
    Startups
    Study Abroad
    Summer
    Technology
    Teenagers
    Therapy
    Travel
    Yosemite

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
Photos used under Creative Commons from paweesit, Steven Penton, torbakhopper, Theo Crazzolara, edenpictures, Kiwi Tom, Wrangell-St. Elias National Park, Homedust, wocintechchat.com, Ralphman, wbaiv, kg.abhi, Jamiecat *, UnitedWarVeterans, D()MENICK, True Portraits, Neville Wootton Photography, Salvation Army USA West, South African Tourism, phalinn, WilliamsProjects, j_bary, Japanexperterna.se, thephotographymuse, Elvert Barnes, ThoroughlyReviewed, hairy:jacques, joncutrer, wuestenigel, Franck_Michel, jimwerner25, Imahinasyon Photography, joanne clifford, m01229, Antonio Campoy Ederra, Our Dream Photography (Personal), shixart1985, davidstewartgets, couples in nature, Dage - Looking For Europe, jonseidman, andymw91, garryknight, wuestenigel, Rosmarie Voegtli, werner.philipps, Gage Skidmore, Novafly, dinuxm1, Eddie Yip, Prayitno / Thank you for (10 millions +) views, DMahendra, James_Seattle, jamkablam, vanitystudiosphotography, Luiz Gustavo Leme, oki_jappo, Daquella manera, CasparGirl, Mary Anne Morgan, inkknife_2000 (10.5 million + views), homethods, wocintechchat, Hypnotica Studios Infinite, dailyrectangle, Tobyotter, torbakhopper, Kevin Johnston, David Robb, eisenberg_emily, True Portraits, Douglas Pimentel, pmarkham, Noize Photography, rawdonfox, dollen, davidstewartgets, ed and eddie, Ryosuke Yagi, Anthony_Greene, Ruth and Dave, best couples, Jenn Durfey, Cost3l, Orin Zebest, anjanettew, dollen, Editor B, Alexander Day, LyndaSanchez, polosopuestosblog, UpSticksNGo, Agência Brasil, homethods, Find Rehab Centers, Novafly, Deornelas4, buzzern, seefit, C. VanHook (vanhookc), University of Delaware Alumni Relations, Franck_Michel, gordontarpley, Chris Photography(王權), usadifranci, virgohobbs, TheUglySweaterShop, popofatticus, Mitya Ku, Stefano Montagner - The life around me, Official U.S. Navy Imagery, xxxology, Valentina (GaiaPhotography), True Portraits, Lars Plougmann, Scioto Photos, Carlos ZGZ, quinn.anya, anokarina, amtecstaffing, mliu92, sfbaywalk, MakaiylaW, jerseytom55, Ray in Manila, BoldContent, stevenbates, Janitors, True Portraits, dwhartwig, Kuruman, sffoghorn
  • Blog
  • About
  • Popular
  • Education
  • Social Science
  • Travel
  • Products
  • Contact