The long and short of it

[lnr]

Wiggle.co.uk advertised a pair of cheapish cycling shorts in size 16-18. I'm a reasonably solid size 18 in most clothes, but figured I'd risk it. They arrived yesterday so I tried them on this morning. They're a nice comfy fit. However they're labelled inside as a size 16 and on the cardboard tag as a size XXL. Is it any wonder people get confused over women's clothes sizes?

Comments

[pseudomonas.livejournal.com]

I still can't work out why men are vectors but women are scalars.

[mobbsy.livejournal.com]

Because you can't cross an elephant with a mosquito.

Er...

[aendr.livejournal.com]

Well, there are a fair few size 22s in my wardrobe which don't fit me, being too small, and 18s which do (yay, as they didn't 2 months ago, being too small.) They're made by the same people, so they don't even have that excuse.

[j4.livejournal.com]

Sounds like the sizes in that shop that closed down -- Birds? something like that -- where we tried stuff on and they said their "XL" was a size 16. Mind you the whole small/medium/large thing is even more rubbish than the 12/14/16 etc. sizes -- nobody knows whether they're "small" or "medium" or "large", it's all so vague.

I tried on a skirt today which said size 16 on the label, and then on the other side of the label "To fit waist: 28 inches". Have dress-sizes really changed that much since the 1970s (which is when the skirt looked to date from)?

[lnr]

Bloody hell, that's scary. I fit in some modern 16s and my waist is more like 38 inches!