Fat clothes must
be contagious or so those idiots who design the stores’ layouts obviously
think.
As I tried my hardest to find a classic dress shirt for an interview
recently, I was faced with the realization that every store I entered obviously
feels embarrassed that they carry women’s or plus sized clothing, I mean why
else would they hide their plus size sections? It’s as if each store has this
desire to be an exclusive boutique where nothing is larger than a size 4 and
nothing is cheaper than $89.50. No wait, $89.64, .50 is just too ordinary. This
is not to say that there aren't boutiques out there that sell items my plus
sized butt can fit into, however, the majority of the time
shopping, no matter where, is a serious disappointment for anyone above a size
12.
(If anyone
comments on this post about how I should just lose weight, I will make a voodoo
doll in your likeness and force-feed it Oreos and lard until you cannot fit out
your front door. Save it for someone who cares what you think! This is MY blog,
so I run the show).
As
a disclaimer, I have been every size between a 9 and a
22 over the years, so I am credible in this area. Shopping as a 9 or 12 is way
easier than shopping as an 18 or 22. Why? Well, one, there is a larger variety
of styles and both larger selections and sections for the “regular” sizes. Go into any store and you’ll
notice how LARGE the clothing sections are. Shopping as a larger woman is hard enough but when you shrink our sections AND selections by some stupid formula where you divide our "area" by our weight and then subtract the yearly cost of Weight Watchers, I call bullshit. Then, you take that section and cram it somewhere so it’s out
of the way, hidden from sight as to not offend anyone. Who the hell do you think will be offended? The skinny bitches?! WE DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM.
According to WebMd, “today, the average American woman is
5'4″, has a waist size of
34-35 inches and weighs between 140-150lbs, with a dress size of 12-14. Fifty years ago,
the average woman was
5'3-4″ with a waist size of
approximately 24-25″, she weighed about 120lbs and wore a size 8.” A size 14 is not included in the plus sized
category, however the size and selection for the “bigger” girl shouldn't be diametrically
opposite of the 6s and 8s. Begin to pay attention to the plus size sections,
where they are, how many racks there are. Then begin to pay attention to the
same for “regular” clothes.
So, I visited at
least 11 stores looking for a dress shirt. (I reserve another post at a later
date to discuss why I couldn't find a classic, crisp dress shirt for less than
$50). Some of these stores were SO incredibly biased in where they “hid” their
fluffy girl clothes I had no choice but to write this.
TJ Maxx tried but the two racks that
only included shirts and pants (there were NO plus size dresses anywhere in the
store) are a poor comparison to the at least 40 racks of “regular” sizes.
Target is the worst offender in the hurt feelings department. They
have just tucked their plus sizes right there with the maternity clothes. We
get three racks tops and, whoops that dress you think is pretty? Yeah, that’s
for an expectant mom. Plus...oops one step to the left and you're in maternity.Target’s plus size section is like straddling a state line; plus, maternity, plus, maternity. Honestly, I never shop there. They hurt my feelings years ago with their
obvious hatred of the fluffy.
Belk’s is a new one I will boycott. Now, being from the north, I had
never heard of Belk’s until I moved south, but it turns out to be a close
sister of Macy’s (just to give my friends up north a reference point – oh and
Macy’s hides the full-figured department in their basement). When you walk into
Belk's an entire half of the first floor is both men’s and women’s clothing, and that it is huge - racks upon racks upon rack as far as the eye can see. The
kids and I wandered around for a while, looking for ANYTHING in my size.
Finally, C2 says, “Mom, I think your clothes are upstairs.” Wait, what? No C2,
that can’t be…ALL OF THE CLOTHES ARE DOWN HERE. I hate to admit it but C2 was
right; there they were tucked in behind formal dresses and next to the
underwear.
Steinmart (think Lord and Taylor, New York friends) had one of the largest
selections with the most rack space, however they placed their chubby sizes in
the middle of the store, surrounded by all the regular and petites, kind of
like a bunch of bullies surrounding the fat kid at recess. Another woman
shopping motioned with a sweeping arm gesture to the rest of the store and
declared, “Look at all that! Why can’t they make cute stuff like that for us?
Would it kill them to use a little more fabric?!” See? I am not alone.
JC Penny, we’ll just call it the Sneeze-and-You-Miss-It
Department.
Dillard’s, upstairs, back corner. ‘Nuff said. At least we have our own
dressing room – I mean who wants to witness all THAT?
Kohl’s, oh how I used to love thee. I have stopped shopping there
because they have become very price prohibitive. That and our section bleeds
into the children’s department. Kohl's selections are much larger than most, so
I have to give them two stars for that.
Sears was the only one who tried to represent my full-figured sisters
with equality by placing our section in with the “regular” clothes,
although we were still outliers and fall dangerously close to the shoe department, which last I checked
only carries shoe sizes up to 16.
Cato's is where it's at! We have a WHOLE HALF of the ENTIRE STORE! It's equality (I measured!). We can even use the same dressing rooms!
Cato's is where it's at! We have a WHOLE HALF of the ENTIRE STORE! It's equality (I measured!). We can even use the same dressing rooms!
So, what’s with
all this hiding?
If 14 is average now, the fluffy are going to be taking over very,
very soon, so for the love of God, treat us better! I SAY, {shakes fist in air} IF OUR CLOTHES ARE BIGGER, THEN WE DESERVE MORE SPACE!
