6 ms·
It’s more of a sizing / build shape thing that keeps some amount of separation in product lines. I wonder if we can come up with better, non-gendered names for
by dcwca 8y ago
It’s more of a sizing / build shape thing that keeps some amount of separation in product lines. I wonder if we can come up with better, non-gendered names for common body builds.
- humanrebar 8y agoAlso with respect to makeup, facial hair and jobs that involve sweat.
- mrstumpy 8y agoIt's quite simple. There are two common body builds (with some variation): male and female. It's gendered because of genetics. Why do we need to complicate matters?
- spork12 8y ago100% agree
- pessimizer 8y agoThat discounts some pretty radical variation on the (cis) female side (and some minor variation along the same lines on the (cis) male side.) Not all women have breasts, some women have huge ones, Not all women have hips, some women have huge ones. Right now we do male/female, tall/short, short-limb/long-limb, fat/thin. It'd be nice if shirts and pants varied in standard breast and hip measurements, too, but thus far in society the number of SKUs required hasn't worked out.
- cimmanom 8y agoMen at least can get shirts with shoulder, chest, and waist in any combination of proportions. Women just have S/M/L, never mind that not only do our waists vary in thickness relative to our shoulders and hips but we have an enormous variety of boob sizes. Men never have to worry about the buttons of their shirts busting open across the chest. For many women, that's a constant struggle if they want to wear something that isn't 3 sizes too large in every other dimension.
- jschwartzi 8y agoI'm a man and I still have trouble finding things that fit my chest without requiring $60.00 in tailoring everywhere else. I can't count the number of times I've found a shirt that I love and been between sizes because of my chest and shoulders.
- cimmanom 8y agoAren’t men’s shirts produced with independent chest/shoulder/waist/neck measurements?
- tormeh 8y agoLol no. That's what a tailor is for. The logistics of stocking clothing stores don't work out with that many combinations so humanity is stuck with XS-XXXL.
- cimmanom 8y agoMaybe it’s just the catalogs that offer that? I remember from childhood my mom ordering my dad shirts from Lands End using those measurements.
- chongli 8y agominor variation along the same lines on the (cis) male side. Minor variation? Look at some pictures of real people. Here's Brian Shaw (with Arnold Schwarzenegger on the left) [1]. How about NBA legend Spud Webb? (next to Manute Bol) [2] By the way, Spud Webb would be considered average height for a man in over 50 countries. [1] http://upl.stack.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/09182618/Brian-Shaw-STACK.jpg http://upl.stack.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/09182618/Bri... [2] http://i.imgur.com/ZE3SeaP.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ZE3SeaP.jpg
- chongli 8y agoThere's more variation within the categories of men and women than there is between them. Matters are complicated because life is complicated. The gender bins may exist because of biology but the contents of each bin do not. The fact that we paint baby boys' rooms light blue and baby girls' rooms pink is completely arbitrary, and in fact used to be the opposite.
- matt4077 8y agoAs a tall but very thin man, I am convinced the clothes of a random northern European women would tend to be a better fit for me than those of a random US man, with something like 80%+ probability. That's partly because pants that are too wide just don't work, where can always put on pants that are too short and declare it the current italian style. So my question is: is obesity genetic in the same way that genitals and breasts are? And, if yes, why have these populations seemingly diverged with the mutational speed of fruit flies at the Hanford Site?