fox: little cartoon self (doll)
fox ([personal profile] fox) wrote2008-06-23 04:22 pm
Entry tags:

dudes. DUDES. what, if i may ask, the fucking fuck?

So I just got an e-mail from [livejournal.com profile] sanj, talking about shopping, as we sometimes do. Not trying to buy this dress at full price, she says to me, but I'm watching like a hawk for when it goes on sale.

Here is the dress. Nice dress. Will look great on [livejournal.com profile] sanj. But does anyone besides me see the SERIOUS GLARING PROBLEM with this thing?

Note please that this is a merchant that declares "Sophisticated Style, Size 12+", and that in the URL for this item we find that we're in the directory "plus-size-clothing". We will skip over the rant about how if you're going to create a boundary between "plus" sizes and "regular" (or, as I like to call them, "minus") sizes, size 12 shouldn't be it, and look in the size bar for this particular dress.

The smallest size available is "0X (10-12)". ZERO-X, y'all. NOT-XL. Why would you offer this in a "plus-size" line? If you've set aside a place where the "plus-size" have to shop by themselves, isn't it, forgive me, at least rude and possibly even cruel to clutter up their options with "not-XL" sizes? And THEN there's the fact that they wouldn't have such a thing if some size 10 somewhere hadn't felt driven out of the minus-size department.

I can't decide on whose behalf I'm angrier -- the perfectly normal and happy fat chicks or the medium-sized girl who thinks (a) she's fat and (b) that's bad.
thalia: photo of Chicago skyline (Default)

[personal profile] thalia 2008-06-23 09:48 pm (UTC)(link)
I dunno... did you look at their size chart? According to that site, a size 10 is approximately 42-34-45, which I think is traditionally plus size-ish. (I mean, I'd wear an 8 by that chart, and I'm not an 8 in any store I've discovered.) I think their numbering might be goofy, but I don't think the sizes they carry are unusual.

And I'm kind of disappointed, because they had some seriously adorable dresses.

[identity profile] emila-wan.livejournal.com 2008-06-23 11:19 pm (UTC)(link)
What constantly pisses me off is that the designers have separate "plus" and "regular" categories at all. Why can't clothes come in ALL sizes?

And don't get me started on plus-size design flaws. These idiots apparently believe that because my hips and breasts are big, I must necessarily have a neck opening big enough to fit a baby hippo through.

[identity profile] panjianlien.livejournal.com 2008-06-23 11:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Kiyonna has always deliberately tried to appeal to the "between size" market as well as the 18+ market. Since they are targeting an urban, more or less upscale buyer, they are trying to cover the bases on the sizes trendy boutiques selling "misses" sizes don't tend to sell. This has been the case since they went into business about 6 (?) years ago.