4 ms·

A filter list by garment type that lets you filter out dresses and blouses?

by BaseballPhysics 4y ago

gardenhedge 4y ago
So then you get trousers. One made for a male body and one for a female body...
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  Let me filter by style, waist, hip and in-seam. Frankly, that'd be a hell of a lot more useful. Maybe I'd actually be able to buy something that fits...
  - chucksta 4y ago
    Vanity sizing would still mess with your dream, which is the real issue with finding the right size.
    - BaseballPhysics 4y ago
      That's why I mentioned measurements not vanity sizes. Give me waist, hip, and in-seam in centimeters or inches and let me filter by picking ranges. That's infinitely more useful than gendered S/M/L "sizes".
      - gardenhedge 4y ago
        No it is not. You would end up getting styles aimed at the wrong gender..
      - chucksta 4y ago
        Vanity sizing means the items is listed as a smaller size than it truly is, changing the units doesn't change anything. They can still say its 28" when its really 30".
tablespoon 4y ago
> A filter list by garment type that lets you filter out dresses and blouses? That's ridiculous. You're making things a thousand times more complicated for no good reason besides ideological performance. It reminds me of how, in ancient China, once a new emperor was crowed, everyone was supposed to stop using the characters in his name in written documents (i.e. re-spelled a bunch of stuff). Classical gender is actually a pretty good solution to a lot of practical problems.
- BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  > You're making things a thousand times more complicated for no good reason besides ideological performance. Cool, I had no idea you were able to peer inside my brain and tease out my inner thought process. Thank you for explaining to me that I didn't actually think the idea through and am just operating on what you classify as "ideology". It's strange because I thought I just wanted to be able to find what I want. Like, if I want a blouse, I want to filter for blouses. If I want a t-shirt, I want to filter for that. I thought that I thought that searching by sex is just a proxy for what I'm actually trying to find and that providing more granular filter options, and more accurate descriptive data about garments that could be used for searching and so forth, that a shopping service would be more useful, not less. But, hey, you obviously know me better than I do, so my bad.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    >> You're making things a thousand times more complicated for no good reason besides ideological performance. > Cool, I had no idea you were able to peer inside my brain and tease out my inner thought process. Thank you for explaining to me that I didn't actually think the idea through and am just operating on what you classify as "ideology". I don't need to peer inside your brain to understand your proposal makes things far more complicated for me, and there's no reason to drop classical gender as a classification except for ideological reasons. > It's strange because I thought I just wanted to be able to find what I want. Like, if I want a blouse, I want to filter for blouses. If I want a t-shirt, I want to filter for that. And if you pair this with dropping gender as a classification (the context of this thread), now you're expecting people to be very familiar with a lot of clothing jargon, so they can use that jargon as a proxy for gender. An even then, it breaks down. For instance: men's and women's t-shirts are typically not interchangeable. It's also an idea that is over-optimized for a particular kind of online search, and breaks down for physical retail (in more than one way). There's nothing wrong with adding the criteria you propose to a classification system that includes classical gender, and it would be a great improvement, but it's not a substitute for gender.

A filter list by garment type that lets you filter out dresses and blouses?

gardenhedge 4y ago

So then you get trousers. One made for a male body and one for a female body...

BaseballPhysics 4y ago
Let me filter by style, waist, hip and in-seam. Frankly, that'd be a hell of a lot more useful. Maybe I'd actually be able to buy something that fits...
- chucksta 4y ago
  Vanity sizing would still mess with your dream, which is the real issue with finding the right size.
  - BaseballPhysics 4y ago
    That's why I mentioned measurements not vanity sizes. Give me waist, hip, and in-seam in centimeters or inches and let me filter by picking ranges. That's infinitely more useful than gendered S/M/L "sizes".
    - gardenhedge 4y ago
      No it is not. You would end up getting styles aimed at the wrong gender..
    - chucksta 4y ago
      Vanity sizing means the items is listed as a smaller size than it truly is, changing the units doesn't change anything. They can still say its 28" when its really 30".

tablespoon 4y ago

> A filter list by garment type that lets you filter out dresses and blouses? That's ridiculous. You're making things a thousand times more complicated for no good reason besides ideological performance. It reminds me of how, in ancient China, once a new emperor was crowed, everyone was supposed to stop using the characters in his name in written documents (i.e. re-spelled a bunch of stuff). Classical gender is actually a pretty good solution to a lot of practical problems.

BaseballPhysics 4y ago
> You're making things a thousand times more complicated for no good reason besides ideological performance. Cool, I had no idea you were able to peer inside my brain and tease out my inner thought process. Thank you for explaining to me that I didn't actually think the idea through and am just operating on what you classify as "ideology". It's strange because I thought I just wanted to be able to find what I want. Like, if I want a blouse, I want to filter for blouses. If I want a t-shirt, I want to filter for that. I thought that I thought that searching by sex is just a proxy for what I'm actually trying to find and that providing more granular filter options, and more accurate descriptive data about garments that could be used for searching and so forth, that a shopping service would be more useful, not less. But, hey, you obviously know me better than I do, so my bad.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  >> You're making things a thousand times more complicated for no good reason besides ideological performance. > Cool, I had no idea you were able to peer inside my brain and tease out my inner thought process. Thank you for explaining to me that I didn't actually think the idea through and am just operating on what you classify as "ideology". I don't need to peer inside your brain to understand your proposal makes things far more complicated for me, and there's no reason to drop classical gender as a classification except for ideological reasons. > It's strange because I thought I just wanted to be able to find what I want. Like, if I want a blouse, I want to filter for blouses. If I want a t-shirt, I want to filter for that. And if you pair this with dropping gender as a classification (the context of this thread), now you're expecting people to be very familiar with a lot of clothing jargon, so they can use that jargon as a proxy for gender. An even then, it breaks down. For instance: men's and women's t-shirts are typically not interchangeable. It's also an idea that is over-optimized for a particular kind of online search, and breaks down for physical retail (in more than one way). There's nothing wrong with adding the criteria you propose to a classification system that includes classical gender, and it would be a great improvement, but it's not a substitute for gender.