This rant is Inspired by some comments Syntagma made in the Fashion Crimes thread, to the effect that the sizes that fit her can range from 3 to 9.
This has been one of my Pet Peeves since I was a teenager: the complete lack of sizing standards for women's clothing.**
We have all seen inexperienced or careless eBay sellers, for instance, who list an item as size "L" - what does "L" mean? For that matter, what does "10" mean? Or "3?" or "24?"
We all know the answer to that question: It depends on where you go and what brand you are buying. In other words, it means absolutely nothing.
With no standards, each manufacturer, each retailer, whoever pays to have the size label sewn in, is free to put anything there they wish.
In my own personal experience, in just the course of a few months, for instance, I have seen the term "XL" applied to tops with bust measurements ranging from 34 to 48!
So I guess the eBay sellers who don't put the measurements could be considered a sub-Pet Peeve, part of the larger Peeve that Syntagma, and you, and everybody else, should be able to count on a size 6 or 13 or 18W or 12P referring to actual dimensions and measurements of a garment, whether we are shopping at Wal-Mart in our local mall or the most foo foo designer boutique on Rodeo Drive or anywhere in between.
We should not have to try on 6 different sizes of something to see what size is "ours" according to this or that particular manufacturer or designer or retailer.
Jeans that are labelled 4Petite should have the same inseam and waist and hip measurements whether they are Sevens or Levis or Sears' House Brand.
This is not a new thing. Although since there is no standard whatsoever, there will be exceptions, but generally speaking, the custom in the industry is to insult women by putting smaller size labels on more expensive clothing.
So as Syntagma points out, her size in cheaper clothes is likely to be a higher number than the item that will fit her in a costlier line.
As if she, or you, or any of us, are stupid enough to believe paying a higher price for clothing will make us smaller!
But I bet everyone who reads this can confirm what she says.
There is even a term for it: "Vanity Sizing."
Go to the high end retailer and you can be a size 2. But go to Wal-Mart, and suddenly you have ballooned to a size 12!
Add to this the closing of the quality gap between clothing sold at "low end" and "high end" stores that has taken place over the last few decades, and the insult becomes even more blatant!
(But that is a whole nother rant, which at some point, I will probably commit)
As regards this particular Pet Peeve, however, I will close by observing that with all the things that are regulated and legislated in this country, there is no excuse for not having even the most basic and common sense standardization of clothing sizes, so that Syntagma and all of us, if asked what size jeans or sweater or dress we wear (especially if asked by a friend or family member who is on their way to the mall a week or so before our birthday)
we can answer with ONE number, instead of something like "Well, in Brand Z, I wear a 6, except for their new GottaHave line, and in that I need the 4 Long, but if it's Brand Y, I take 8 Short, and..."
**(While mens' sizes are not standard either, they get something of a break since so much of their clothing is sold by measurement - chest for suits, waist and inseam for pants, etc. - But in the land of S-M-L they are in the same boat with us!)
This has been one of my Pet Peeves since I was a teenager: the complete lack of sizing standards for women's clothing.**
We have all seen inexperienced or careless eBay sellers, for instance, who list an item as size "L" - what does "L" mean? For that matter, what does "10" mean? Or "3?" or "24?"
We all know the answer to that question: It depends on where you go and what brand you are buying. In other words, it means absolutely nothing.
With no standards, each manufacturer, each retailer, whoever pays to have the size label sewn in, is free to put anything there they wish.
In my own personal experience, in just the course of a few months, for instance, I have seen the term "XL" applied to tops with bust measurements ranging from 34 to 48!
So I guess the eBay sellers who don't put the measurements could be considered a sub-Pet Peeve, part of the larger Peeve that Syntagma, and you, and everybody else, should be able to count on a size 6 or 13 or 18W or 12P referring to actual dimensions and measurements of a garment, whether we are shopping at Wal-Mart in our local mall or the most foo foo designer boutique on Rodeo Drive or anywhere in between.
We should not have to try on 6 different sizes of something to see what size is "ours" according to this or that particular manufacturer or designer or retailer.
Jeans that are labelled 4Petite should have the same inseam and waist and hip measurements whether they are Sevens or Levis or Sears' House Brand.
This is not a new thing. Although since there is no standard whatsoever, there will be exceptions, but generally speaking, the custom in the industry is to insult women by putting smaller size labels on more expensive clothing.
So as Syntagma points out, her size in cheaper clothes is likely to be a higher number than the item that will fit her in a costlier line.
As if she, or you, or any of us, are stupid enough to believe paying a higher price for clothing will make us smaller!
But I bet everyone who reads this can confirm what she says.
There is even a term for it: "Vanity Sizing."
Go to the high end retailer and you can be a size 2. But go to Wal-Mart, and suddenly you have ballooned to a size 12!
Add to this the closing of the quality gap between clothing sold at "low end" and "high end" stores that has taken place over the last few decades, and the insult becomes even more blatant!
(But that is a whole nother rant, which at some point, I will probably commit)
As regards this particular Pet Peeve, however, I will close by observing that with all the things that are regulated and legislated in this country, there is no excuse for not having even the most basic and common sense standardization of clothing sizes, so that Syntagma and all of us, if asked what size jeans or sweater or dress we wear (especially if asked by a friend or family member who is on their way to the mall a week or so before our birthday)
we can answer with ONE number, instead of something like "Well, in Brand Z, I wear a 6, except for their new GottaHave line, and in that I need the 4 Long, but if it's Brand Y, I take 8 Short, and..."**(While mens' sizes are not standard either, they get something of a break since so much of their clothing is sold by measurement - chest for suits, waist and inseam for pants, etc. - But in the land of S-M-L they are in the same boat with us!)
call me a size 6. Of course in some cases, it is prudent to buy the 8, and once it has had a visit to one's Personal Fabric Care Center, it will come out of the dryer a 6 
Either that, or if it's a thick fabric, they will end up looking bigger than they actually are and who wants that?
