Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    Firstly let me say I really don't know, though I have heard these
    observations before.
    
    Perhaps part of the reason is that *traditionally* women were seen as
    much more fashion conscious than men. A man would expect his shirt to
    still be wearable in 3 or 5 years time (especially back in the days
    of separate collars). A decent dark business suit could be worn for
    20 years or more. However a woman wouldn't be seen dead in last years
    fashions so what did it matter if they fell apart after a seasons wear?
    
    As for size: fashion clothes are (or perhaps I should say were) designed
    to project a designer's idea of fashion. The original was literally
    built on the model, and the buyer would then build patterns to manufacture
    the clothes. These would be based on how the garment looked on a manekin
    and the designer's drawings: if you've ever looked at a designer's drawings
    you know they bear no resemblance to reality. Most succesful fashion
    models conform to a standard shape that has little to do with reality
    either... (remember Twiggy - the person who invented anorexia :-)
    
    Times they are a-changin', but perhaps the clothes manufacturers attitudes
    are not changing as quickly.
    
    /. Ian .\

    *	No consistency.  (People accuse computer manufacturers of the
        same thing, but the computer industry is newer and has not yet
        had time to standardize :-) ).  Sizes are not consistent in the
        least!  One manufacturer/designer's size 8 is another one's size
        6 or size 10.
    
    *   I'm really small.  When sizes come in S-M-L, the smalls are
        too big for me!  I need an X-S, but no one ever carries this
        size!  And today's fashions have all of these shoulder pads
        built in and the cut is *way too large* for anyone of normal
        size!  Let alone a small woman.
    
    *   And hey, why we're in here, *more* examples of blatant sexism
        come to mind.  Ever wonder why it's more expensive to get a
        skirt hemmed or a pair of women's slacks hemmed than a pair
        of *man's* slacks?!  Which reminds me that it's more expensive
        to have haircut for a woman than for a man in most places! 
        Arg!!!!  Death to all sexist capitalists! :-)
    
    	    -Ellen

    Re .2, that is certainly true of size S-M-L.  When they come marked
    that way I know I'm out of luck because size S is usually too big.
     Also, the clothes that say "one size fits all".  What a joke. 
    They hang on me like a tent!
    
    I am wearing a size 5 skirt which fits me perfectly.  I couldn't
    hitch the size 3 skirt in this style.  Yesterday, I tried on a
    different size 3 skirt and the waist hung to my hips and the skirt
    dragged on the floor!
    
    Lorna
    

    Re: .0
    
    My understanding is that there are (at least!) three independent
    systems for sizing women's clothes, with the even-numbered sizes
    being one system, odd numbered being another, and "half-sizes"
    still a third (plus I suppose the sizes coded in inches that are
    for the "queen-sized woman", which makes four!)  Chaos!  And the
    quality seems to be very poor, even in the high-priced lines.
    
    But I will point out that though I agree with the premise of .0
    (women are expected to put up with a lot of crap in clothes),
    all is not sunshine in the men's world.  (But that would be a topic
    for MENNOTES!)
    
    And as for haircuts - I can't remember the last time I saw a different
    price posted for women's and men's haircuts.  Certainly none of
    the places I have gone to in the last ten years have been so
    obnoxious.
				Steve

I've had this same beef about women's shoes for years. I'm flatfooted and
have wide feet and there's no way my feet will fit into any of those shoes
designed for women. What?! They think all our feet come to a point or something?
How do women get their feet into some of those things? I couldn't wear
high heels even if I wanted to (I hate them and won't go near them anyway).
Unless I wear boys' basketball sneakers or some other sort of sneaker, wearing
shoes is a painful experience for me, which is why I go barefott most of the
time.

Bahama Mama

    Large-sized clothes for women have also become a big business recently.
    Several years ago large women sized  40 - 46 were pretty much limited
    to cheap department stores, and Lane Bryant.  All of a sudden
    manufacturers and retailers realized that women over size 18 didn't 
    want to wear housedresses and polyester pantsuits in black and navy
    blue all the time...in fact, some of them wanted to buy career
    clothes!  And were willing to pay for them!  
    
    Lane Bryant used to seem very stuffy.  Now it seems as though it
    is meant to appeal to people under the age of 17--most of the clothes
    I saw were bright yellow or turquoise, or had gaudy pictures all
    over them.  
    
    Even though there seems to be a good selection now, larger women
    usually have to pay top dollar for quality clothes.  
    
    And for women over size 48, finding clothes in a store is almost
    impossible.  Most of the stores carry 38-46, with a few in sizes
    48-50.  Finding clothes over size 50 is very rare, although I heard
    that one store in New Hampshire caters exclusively to the over size
    48 crowd.  Yet large men's clothing stores generally carry a good
    selection up through size 60 - something.  And many of the large
    men's clothes are sized for large and short//tall and thin//large
    and tall.  Women's clothes never seem to be sized this way, so
    consequently, few tall and "queen sized" women can ever shop in
    the same store.
    
    Holly (veteran of size 48 before losing a lot of weight!)
    
    

    Buying womens shoes is even worse.  I wear size 11 AAA and some
    of the shoes that I have been shown weren't fit to be taken out
    of the box.  The first problem is finding a store that carries sizes
    beyond size 10.  I love it when I ask "do you carry size 11AAA?"
    and they reply "no, but we have 10B" . No wonder women have so many
    foot problems, the sales people aren't trained  properly.  After
    finding my size, I have to fight for a style that is wearable. 
    I am not comfortable in 2"heels or in flats, I like something in
    between. Usually when I find a pair that is comfortable, I buy one
    in every color.  I also do not want to drive 60 or 75 miles to buy
    shoes. 
    The places that I have been buying shoes from over the years have
    changed a lot.  I used to be able to order additional pairs once
    I found a pair that I like, but now if they aren't in stock  your
    out of luck.

This will undoubtedly be my favorite topic!  

My gripe is with womens' shoes in particular, although I see the poor
design of shoes as an extension of women's fashion in general.  I do
believe, though, that things are getting better on the fashion front,
sizing in particular.  This makes me hopeful for the future of shoes.

In the past 10 years womens' clothing has become more like mens', i.e.
built for real people to do real things in and not just suitable for
pedestal-sitting.  I have no problem finding high-quality clothes but
I am also not opposed to paying a lot of money for them.  (I do realize
that women pay more than men for clothing, right across the quality
spectrum, but that's a topic for a different reply.)

To the best of my recollection, 10 years ago we women had 2 choices
for jeans:  fitting into Wranglers size 6/8/10/12/14 or buying mens' jeans.
the former was good for people like me with a waste and hips, the latter
was good for people like me who are on the tall side.  Neither was just
right for me.  Today jeans' manufacturers are making them for women with
waste, hip and inseem sizing.

Also, 10 years ago it was hard to find a decent pair of womens' slacks that were
well made and had pockets and belt loops.  That is not the case today.  Not
only is there a plentiful supply dress slacks, but they are also fairly
functional!  (I have cut down on the need to carry a purse everywhere by
making clever use of pockets and things that clip on to and hang of of belts
and loops.)

Five years ago the new breed of designers were making clothes for those up
to size 12.  Not so today.  Routinely go up to 14 and sometimes even 16.
There is also a new type of store that caters exclusively to size 16 and over.
And these stores carry business and casual clothing that is very fashionable
-- no more "polyester housedress" clothes.

I know these changes are a drop in the bucket but at least forward momentum
has been established.  I think women need to get more demanding about what
they will spend their hard-earned money on.  Some of us also need to get
into the business and actually make change happen.  (My personal long term
goal in life it to work on changing the design of womens' shoes from within
the shoe industry -- there, I said it, I am finally out of the closet!)

....Margaret

    You struck a cord here!  I have given up on womens shirts.  I but
    mens shirts size 14.5 in pastel colors.  Some of the ones I've found
    I can't imagine on a man in the first place.  I also used to do
    a lot of sewing and tailoring, so I solve the problem of suits by
    buying expensive stuff-at the end of the season-with something wrong
    with it.  I have a $350 suite that I got for $100 because the sleves
    were set incorrectly.  With about 4 hours of work I saved $250!
    
    Also, have you ever noticed that mens cotton turtle necks cost less
    than womens?  I defy you to tell the difference without the label!
    
    P.S. Mens oversized jackets (dolman sleeves, pads, etc.) are no
    different than womens - except they fit better!
    
    Sally
    

    Men have problems too ! A perfect fit pair of pants
    on me would be a 35 w - 29 1/2 inseam. Try to find those
    ANYwhere ! :-) Somebody gave me a ^&*$%  metric body !!

    Re: .5
    
    Steve, my daughter (12 years old) just had a permanent and hair
    cut done yesterday... The cost to me was $50.00.  I went down the
    road when looking at prices for her,and found I could have it done
    for $20.00 at Fantastic Sams... but after checking out their
    reputation, most woman said they would never go back after being
    there once... Other places were charging up to $75.00, and this
    is all for the same haicut,and same perm!!!  I finally decided to
    take her to my hairdresser, since I knew his reputation, although
    I didn't want to pay that much for a 12 year old. when I was checking
    out hair prices, I was amazed to find out that there were different
    prices for men and women...  I realize womans hair is longer, and
    that is really what the price difference is based on... but there
    was a difference.
    
    Re: Shoes...
    
    I have found that if you can find a Hush Puppies store, (some Red
    Cross Shoes stores carry the same shoe under a different name),
    they have pumps that come in odd sizes, along with the normal sizes.
    The pumps are VERY comfortable, run about $48.00 per pair, but
    last forever.  I have been wearing mine for 3 years now, and am
    just now having to have a new heel put on my black and blue pairs
    (I wear them the most)... they have no *real* pointed toe, but looks
    sharp on.  The heel is just the right walking height.  I have had
    more people ask me where I got them, and they have come back to
    say thanks.
    
    As for other clothes... Try Caren Charles if you can find one in
    your area.  They seem to have nice clothes for work, and play. 
    If you can wait until their sales, I would recommend it.  I have
    gotten some nice $250.00 suits for $75.00 by waiting. They only
    carry up to a size 18 though, and they do their own alternating
    (my last one was free of charge).
    
    Gale

    Re .11:
    
    Aha!  haircut and perm.  That's probably the difference.  You
    and I can probably have a haircut for the same price; but few
    men get permanents.
    
	-Neil

    re .12:
    
    Lots of places charge more for women's haircuts than men's haircuts.
    I ask them when I walk in.  If there's a difference in price, I
    tell them that I'm not going to get my hair cut in a place that
    uses gender as a guideline for price and walk out.  It's incredibly
    satisfying to do this!!

    BTW, my hair is pretty short.  My original guess is that this wasn't
    done because of hair length, but because of capitalism ("charging
    what the market will bear").  If it was done because of length,
    then I should be able to argue for a discount because of my hair
    length, right?  (Wrong. :-( )
    
    	-Ellen
        

    re: .13
    
    Agreed.  Hair length is not the issue.  A few years ago, I had my
    hair in a short-short, nearly military cut.  My (male) SO had beautiful
    long (well below the shoulders) curly hair.  My crew cut price:
    $20.00.  His Farrah Fawcett-style layered cut price: $12.00.  Gender
    was *obviously* the difference, and is in fact the reason they stated!
    I haven't returned there although the stylist (male) was excellent.
    
    Rita
    
    

    re: .12
    
    In case the other replies haven't cleared it up, the difference
    is *just* the price of a haircut. The perm, of course, makes the
    price even worse.
    
    At L&L at the Pheasant Lane Mall, Joe's cut cost $16, mine $22.
    Same person, same sequence of steps. It was a Sunday, and I was
    desparate :-)!
    	Mez

    Great Clips has one price for haircuts.  $8.00
    
    Spence

    re haircuts:
    
    Four years ago, the day before I interviewed at DEC, I went in to
    get my haircut. At that time it was down well below my shoulders.
    The place I went told me they would have to charge more because
    it was so long. 
    
    		 /
    		(   ___
    		 )  ///
    		/

     re .17:
     
     I used to have the same experience;  some years ago, when I was
     finding a compromise between being a long-haired, anti-war radical and
     earning a living, I'd get charged extra for haircuts because of my
     hair length.
     
     These days, now that Nature has given me a sparse style of coiffure,
     I have to pay as much as people who have a full head of hair.
     
     --Mr Topaz 

Well, at last I finally got the last laugh. Went out looking for sneakers
last night. Per usual the women's sneakers were too narrow for my flat feet.
Men's don't come in size 6 very often. So I went into the little boy's
dept. and found a nice pair of size 6 that were real comfy. The same exact
pair in men's was $12 more expensive. So I saved $12 because I have weird
feet. I have one thing to say to shoe designers/manufacturers/etc.....



I fart in your general direction...

Bahama Mama

    I know you all must feel size wise. I wear a 3/4 dress and I have
    the damnest time finding a suit in that size and when I do the price
    is ridiculous. I refuse to pay over $100 for a suit. Most of the
    jackets are too big and I have to tailor them regardless. I would
    love to be able to afford to hire my own designer. (New York? Yes,
    I'd like to speak to Calvin, yes Calvin Klein, he designs all my
    clothes personally.) 
    
    
    :-)
    
    Sunshine

    re haircuts etc:
    
    Back when I was in Britain I went to the same barber for many years.
    Then came the day when the elder partner retired. The younger partner
    decided to diversify, and hired a female stylist and offered "unisex
    service".
    
    He would still do a haircut for 50 pence, (went up to a pound about
    4 years ago), but anything other than short back and sides or a razor
    cut was classed as "styling" and cost 10 guineas (�10.50) ...
                                                
    However I have to admit that he only had one price list, regardless
    of sex.
    
    /. Ian .\

    re.20  Where were you when I wanted to go into fashion designing?
     I wanted to design clothes for the not-so-easy-to-fit figures,
    mens and womens and keep the price down.
    
    But, here I am in Digital....

    re.22
    
    Let's make a deal you can design my clothes and I will wear them
    as a model for your line!
    
    You could use DEC tech to help in designs!!
    
    Can't you just see a label inside of a suit saying (Manufactured
    at MLO1-5 BADGE #XXXXXX)???????
    
    :^)
    
    SUnshine
    

    I usually wear a comfortable, sensible, leather oxford.
    
    About 9 months ago I went into a Payless Shoe Source, and told them
    I wanted a new pair like my old pair.  The salesmen told me that
    they didn't have women's shoes like that any more, but had something
    identical in the men's department.  I bought them, and boy did that
    salesman do me a favor!  I have been wearing them almost daily since
    I bought them, and they are nowhere near wearing out.  The women's
    "identical" oxfords would wear out in about 3 months.  I am going
    to look in the men's department again next time (if they ever do
    wear out :^)).
    
    Elizabeth
    

    My wife wears, almost exclusively, boy's clothing.
    
    Well, except for the bra.  8-)
    
    Blue jeans, flannel shirts, unisex t-shirts, socks, tennis shoes,
    hiking boots, cowboy boots, even panties (can I use that word?).
    Unisex drawers or the bikinis that I buy that are a little too large
    for me.  She has hips, I don't.  About half of her panties are made
    for women, but they are cotton and durable.  None of that frilly
    fragile crap.
    
    As a friend once told me, she isn't in them long enough to notice
    if they are sexy or not.  
    
    See where my mind goes with a wife on 2nd shift.  8-)  Well, its
    been a whole 5 days, golly gee!  I get to see her tomorrow. 8-)
    
    Spence

    Imagine a basic, indispensable color for clothing. Say, navy blue.
    Now imagine that all the manufacturers at once decide to quit
    selling things in this color. Crazy, huh?
    
    Well, has anyone tried to buy a reasonably stylish pair of women's
    shoes in navy blue this spring?
    
    Guess what, there aren't any! They're not making navy blue shoes!
    
    I can't imagine manufacturers of men's clothing getting away with
    this.
    
    					Val

    Have you tried buying *any* dark brown shoes in the past six
    months?
    						Ann B.

    This isn't exactly womens clothes, but I have been trying to buy
    orange curtins for my kitchen.  When I relocated I now have more
    windows.  Some desigers have decieded orange is no longer an in
    color.  I dont't want peach or melon or any of the "new"colors.
    Everything in my kitchen goes with orange, and I really dont want
    to change my color scheme.  I spend a lot of time in my kitchen
    and I would really like to have it the way I want it.
    

    	Well, this doesn't fit with the bitching tone of this note,
    but...
    
    	Last week I bought 3 pairs of shoes (all real leather uppers)
    1 white, 1 navy blue, 1 pink (what can I say? I got radical. :-) I've
    never had pink shoes before and I have a lot of pink in my wardrobe.)
    Total cost ~$36.  All three pairs are comfortable, with medium to
    low heels and look like they will be quite durable.  
    
    	Maybe you're just looking in the wrong place?

    	Maybe I was just incredibly lucky? ;-)
    
    tlh
        

    I think people who wear "normal"sizes really can't relate to those
    of us who don't. I take my daughter shopping and there are 10 shoe
    stores and 25 dress shops for her to choose from in a large shopping
    mall. I am lucky if there is 1 shoe store and 1 dress department
    for me to shop in and if so there is usually no selection. 
    My sister wears a 9 1/2AA shoe.  There are only 2 or 3 shoe
    manufacturers who make 9 1/2. She is offered 9B and 10AAA, one to
    short and wide, the other too long and narrow.  She is a school
    teacher and is on her feet all day, why would she want a shoe that
    doesn't fit? I don't understand the (logic?) of the sizing.

    Re .25, your description of the style clothes your wife likes to
    wear is almost enough to make me want to break into a rendition
    of "I enjoy being a girl!" :)
    
    (Even if they're only on for 2 seconds I like lace.)
    

    When I can't find what I want at stores I can generally find it in
    a catalog.  You can find nearly everything in nearly every color and
    size in a catalog.  I've been shopping through the mail for several
    years and been real happy with it.  The easiest way to get on the
    mailing list for catalogs is order something from one.  To get
    started, check Vogue and Cosmopolitan.  Each magazine usually has
    one or two pages of catalogs you can order for a nominal fee.
    Another place to look is Walden books.  Lately they have been
    selling various types of catalogs.  By the way, there are LOTS OF
    catalogs of women's clothes.

    Mike

    Mike makes a VERY Good point.
    
    I have catalogues titled "Avon Fashions" and NOW Chadwicks of Boston.
    I am on a "junk-mailing" list that is developed because I ordered
    something from Lilian Vernon products and that company gives my
    name to "several" mail=order companies.
    
    Needless to say, even with the clutter of mail, I really enjoy the
    clothes catalogues.  I've ordered alot from "Avon Fashions (they
    are affiliated with Avon (New York) but are located in Virginia,
    I think.)
    
    Best thing: I ordered a bathing suit from Avon and NO, it isn't
    yours whether it fits or not.  They put this sanitary strip in the
    bottoms of the suit with a warning right on it.  If you remove the
    strip, the suit is yours.  If you don't, you can return for the
    correct size or refund.
    
    Isn't that a step in the right direction.  Does anyone know if the
    stores are doing this?  It would make me "very" happy to know this
    as I need several suits for the boating season coming up very shortly.
    
    Ta ta (a break in the weather is upon us now)
    
    :-) Cathy

    I have tried catalog shopping, but have found that clothes shopping
    has not been successful. I have had to return 80% of the items for
    various reasons ie: quality, improper fit, color. I think fit has
    been the biggest problem. Then there is the problem of repackaging
    the item and going to the post office. The post office is open from
    8 to 5, I leave home at 7:15 and return home sometime between 6
    and 10. I work my part time job on Sat. 
    I think that ,as I stated earlier, if you are an average "normal"size,
    shopping isn't a problem, catalog or shop. The choices just aren't
    there for people who need special sizes. 
    

    I envy folks who wear "normal" sizes.  I wear a size 16 tall - or
    14, or 18, or 20 tall, depending on how whatever-it-is is made.
    I have shoes that fit perfectly that are a size 9 1/2B - also one
    pair that is 12B.  Ycch!  Most of my clothes come from tall-girl
    stores (since I can get away with the casual clothing I perfer here
    at casual DEC!); even though I dislike shopping, I always buy things
    if I see a decent tall-girl store, since there are precious few
    of them.  Shoes are a lot worse, at least here in New England where
    most people are of English descent and have small feet: most women's
    shoe stores here do not carry shoes over a size 10, which usually
    won't fit me (in Iowa, where I was born, there are a lot of people
    of German descent, who tend to have longer feet, and shoe stores
    usually carry up to an 11, which usually fits).  I'm just under
    6 feet tall, and weigh about 200 lbs.  One of my good friends has
    a tougher time than I do: she is fractionally taller than I am,
    and weighs about 120!  The size she usually wears is a size 6 Tall.
    Now, Tall sizes, even in stores devoted to women of our heights,
    usually start at a 12T, which pratically drops right off poor Linda!
    She works about 60 hours a week and definitely doesn't have time
    to make her own clothing (me, neither, although I used to).
    
    Know what scares me?  NO ONE makes maternity clothing in Tall sizes!
    If Linda or I ever decides to have a baby, I/she will have to wear
    only bathrobes...
    
    I happened to go shopping once with a very tiny friend (she is about
    4'1"!) in a store that had hand-made Mexican clothing - very cute
    and folksy, good stuff for folk-dancing costumes (we are both dancers).
    EVERYTHING in that store was "one-size-fits-all"!  We tried a few
    things on, anyhow, but nothing fit either of us!
    
    I never had much luck with mail-ordering clothing, and shoes are
    worse.  Not only is it hard to tell what the mail-order sizes mean
    with respect to reality, but it is even harder to tell if the item
    in question is going to turn out to be of unacceptable quality once
    it arrives.  I've sent back lots of pairs of shoes, and lots of
    skirts.  I do still mail-order things like house-slippers, bathrobes,
    and other non-critical-sized things like that - simply because it
    is easier than shopping for these things.
                                                  

    I find stores for "larger size" woman rely heavily on polyester
    (yuk), and that the quality is mostly poor (unless it's something
    by a major manufacturer or designer - few and far between). There
    is a small, woman-owned company in (where else?) California, which
    makes only natural-fiber clothing in a LARGE range of sizes. Yes,
    it's mail-order, but once one gets to know which size fits best,
    it's easy, cuz ALL of their clothes are sized the same way.
    
    The sizes run from XXS(36-38 bust/40-42 hips) to XXXL (64-66 bust;72-74
    hips) - Their line is LIMITED, but the quality is excellent.
    
    Herewith, the address:
    
    Making It Big
    P.O. Box 203
    Cotati, CA  94928
    

    re .2, which I entered a couple of months ago:
    
    >*   And hey, why we're in here, *more* examples of blatant sexism
    >    come to mind.  Ever wonder why it's more expensive to get a
    >    skirt hemmed or a pair of women's slacks hemmed than a pair
    >    of *man's* slacks?!
    
    In the Spring 87 Massachusetts NOW newsletter, this item:

    MCAD Accepts Greater Springfield NOW Case Against Clothing Stores

    Greater Springfield NOW learned in March that the Massachusetts
    Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) has accepted their complaint
    against area clothing stores that charge women more than men for
    tailoring alterations.  The suit sites Sears, Penny's, Steiger's,
    and Blake's stores with violation of Masschusetts law which prohibits
    discrimination in public accomodations.
    
    Greater Springfield NOW decided to take action on this issue after
    chapter activist Maxine Garber and her husband received differential
    treatment at the local Steigers outlet.  Both Garber and her husband
    purchased pants at the store.  Bother required that the pants be
    shortened.  However, Maxine Garber was charged for this service,
    whereas her husband was not.
    
    'Why should we accept this practice which is based only on gender,
    not on the price of the item purchased or the intracy of the
    alterations,' said Meanette Vermes, President of Greater Springfield
    NOW.  Added Vermes, 'We all have ignored this practice for years.
    We decided the time for ending this insult against women is now.'
    
    Vermes wrote a letter protesting the policy to store owner Albert
    Steiger, Jr.  Steiger responded in a letter and in media interviews
    that this policy has frequently been reviewed and reaffirmed.
    Different charges for alterations for male and female clothing are
    'standard industry practice' according to Steiger.
    
    Indeed, Greater Springfield NOW has learned that many other clothing
    stores do have similar policies which discriminate against women.
    Chapter members surveyed other local stores and found that for
    alterations in pant length Penny's charges $2 for men and $3 for
    women.  Blake's charges nothing for any kind of alteration of men's
    apparel, but charges women for all alterations made.  At Sears,
    men are charged a nominal fee for alterations to clothing purchased
    for under $20 and receive this service for free if the amount of
    the purchase is higher.  No tailoring service, however, is provided
    for women at Sears.  Greater Springfield NOW also identified several
    stores, such as Anderson-Little, which do not charge either men
    or women for alterations.
    
    The MCAD has served the clothing stores with the discrimination
    complaint.  An investigation and hearings will begin within the
    month.  If the Greater Springfield NOW complaint is upheld, this
    discriminatory practice would be outlawed in Massachusetts.
    [end of article]

    	-Ellen

re: .39:

Women's clothing button "backwards" because it is assumed that the
woman's maid will do the buttoning for her.

Martin.

        As I read the history of costumery, the right-over-left of
        women's clothing was the oiginal design, but was reversed for
        men to enable them to get at their swords. As women didn't need
        swords (being protected by men), they retained the older style.
        Simliarly, pants are more suitable for riding on horses (unless
        you are *real* tough like the Scots), and thus became the norm
        for men. Women were spared the indignity of riding horse-back,
        or if they were of the adventerous type, were offered the more
        challenging side-saddle.
        
        Martin's explanation may be more correct, but I am a little
        skeptical. After all just as a lady was expected to have her
        garments buttoned by her maid, the gentleman would have his done
        by his valet, or could borrow a handy maid for undoing his
        buttons in a pinch.
        
        In any event, the origins of many of the differences in the
        practical aspects of dress between the sexes was based on
        considerations that do not apply as much today, either due to
        the shortage of swords and maids or because women are as likely
        to need or want a sword or horse a man is. Still, the traditions
        of these bygone days remain to confound and confuse us and to
        give us something to talk about when the weather is dull. 
        
        JimB.

    
    I was watching a game show the other day (forget the name) and
    they asked the question about women's clothing buttoning the
    reverse of men's clothing.  Their response: it was assumed that
    the maid would dress the woman.
    
    But as you say in .41 there could be other reasons
    
    lori

    On the other hand, some cleaners charge more to dry-clean a man's
    sweater than a woman's. I wear man's sweaters because they fit,
    but I told the cleaner they're woman's sweaters (which they
    are, because they're mine...)
    
    					Val

    My cleaner was charging more to launder women's shirts. I like 100%
    cotton oxford cloth, button-down collar shirts. I have some women's
    and some men's shirts in this style. The cleaner wanted to chage
    more to do the women's than the men's. I asked why, and was told
    that they put the shirts on a form and steam them, and women's shirts
    wouldn't fit on the form. I am a large woman. He was a slight man.
    I asked if _his_ shirts fit on the form! Point for me.
    
    Ball in his court. He says they couldn't put silk or "fancy" dress
    blouses through the laundering process the men's shirts go through.
    _I_ say if I brought in a silk or fancy dress blouse, I wouldn't
    ask for medium starch in it, either! 2 - 0, me.
    
    They charge me "men's" prices to launder my oxford cloth shirts.
    But why did I have to spend the time and energy to explain the logical
    and obvious?? *sigh*
    
    Dawn
    

    Re: 40
    
    Nothing in my closet buttons backward except the mans shirt I got
    at a flea market to wear while painting. Everything else buttons
    just fine.  I haven't had a problem for 40+ years.:-).

	re: maids valets and swords...
        
        I have always been told the story this way (I guess I can blame
        it on my nanny...)
        
        In earlier times when gentlemen had valets, and ladies had maids,
        the servant helped the master or mistress to dress. However it matters
        not one iota which way clothes button if you are buttoning them
        on somebody else. It was usual for an individual to make final
        adjustments for themselves in front of a mirror.
        
        However children would often have their clothes "tidied up" by their
        mother before appearing in company... girls dresses (as opposed
        to women's) fastened at the back, and boys' jackets obviously at
        the front. Since gentlewomen rarely did this chore, it was convenient
        to have men's (or rather boy's) clothes fasten in mirror image of
        the mother's clothing.
        
        Swords were either worn on a dress belt outside all clothing, or
        occasionally under an unfastened jacket. The side the jacket fastened
        is quite irrelevant. In any event by the time tight buttoning (of
        waistcoats if not top coats) had become fashionable anybody carrying
        a weapon belt for defense as opposed to display, carried a sword
        at the left and a pistol (or more than one) at the right hip. Again
        left right symmetry is irrelevant if you want to stay alive. 
        
        However I suspect that just as spelling was a matter of personal
        taste, at one time the direction of buttoning was also. I have heard
        it said that it was not until Beau Brummell made an art of male
        fashions that the present pattern became "set". Certainly prior
        to Brummell it was not considered proper for a gentleman to fasten
        his outer coat when indoors. I have seen many dress jackets from
        the late 18th early 19th century that had no buttons at all being
        tailored to hang correctly without need of such proletarian
        fastenings. (Remember also that until Brummell it was most distinctly
        improper for a man to appear in polite society wearing anything
        so common as a pair of trousers... britches and hose were de rigeur).
        
        /. Ian .\

    I have found four good mail order companies that stock shoes in
    sizes up to 13.  They have a reasonable selection, and prompt refund
    or replacement policies.  I can supply addresses if anyone is
    interested.
    
    I would like to find more stores (locally or mail order) that stock
    clothing for tall women.  I am 5-11 and usually have minimal success
    finding long sleeve blouses that come to the wrist.
    
    Nancy
    

    Welcome to the club....
    
    I don't like buying mail-order shoes, although I've done so
    infrequently (especially for winter boots), because shoes sizes
    seem to be pretty fictional (even more so than other sorts of
    clothing), so I end up sending a lot of them back many times until
    I get shoes that fit.  I wear shoes that are size 9 1/2, 10, 10
    1/2, 11, or 12 (one pair of winter boots), depending on how they
    are constructed.  I'd rather go into a shoe store and try them on;
    it's much easier.  However, most shoe stores in New England only
    carry women's shoes up to size 10, which is usually too small (in
    the Midwest, where I was born, most stores go up to size 11, which
    is usually big enough - a lot of people of German descent with long,
    narrow feet).  There is a tall shoe store that is sort of near
    Chinatown in Boston, so I make a point of going in there when I
    need Chinese groceries.  I don't know the name of the street it
    is on, but it is near the Provident bank,building (one block away
    from the Chinatwon direction, I think) and a block from the Common,
    and it is on the second floor of a building on the corner.
    
    I expect that you live in New Hampshire, since you are on SQM::,
    so this may not be of much use...  There is a tall store in the
    Shopper's World mall in Framingham called Kelly's, but I seldom
    go there because it is VERY expensive.  It's OK if you don't mind
    paying $40 a piece for jeans, and even more for blouses.  Also,
    they seem to have clothing for the EXTREMELY tall woman - if I am
    going to have to retailor the sleeves and hem of a fitted jacket
    because it is too long, while I admit that it is sort of fun to
    have that problem for a change as well as being simpler than trying
    to lengthen the same jacket, I really might as well make the whole
    thing myself.  I don't mind so much taking up the hem of my jeans.
    
    The best one I have found
    is called Barbara's Talls; they have a store in West Springfield,
    MA, and one in West Hartford, CT.  Neither place is anywhere near
    where I live (next door to HLO2, where I work), but since Paul's
    mother lives in West Hartford, I get to that store fairly often.
    I sure wish they also sold shoes!
    
    Lane Bryant used to carry tall clothes as well as fat clothes, but
    the local one does not any more (don't know about their Boston store;
    I am not fond of shopping, so I never go there).
    
    I used to sew most of my own clothes, but I don't have time these
    days the way I used to (also, the sewing machine is not working
    right and I haven't figured out exactly what is wrong with it -
    bobbin tension will not stay adjusted).
    
    Hope this helps!
    

    Coward Shoes in Washington Street at Downtown Crossing.  Also
    mail-order (they're hq'd in NYC).  Reasonable quality, selection,
    & price up to at least 12EEE.
    
    						=maggie
    					  (wi' guid scots feet)

    I have just discovered a factory outlet store at OLD SHREWSBURY
    VILLAGE at the intersection of Rt9 and Rt20 that carries a modest
    selection of larger sized womens shoes. 

    You might find this tactic works if your size isn't too far out of the
    ordinary.
    
    I don't have a particularly large foot, but it is wide.  And I grew up
    in Montana, where there are not a lot of stores to choose from. I used
    to patronize one particular shoe store that carried the kind of shoes I
    liked. 
    
    Often the reason a shoe store doesn't carry uncommon sizes is that it
    doesn't know whether it will be able to sell them. If you are a regular
    customer, the store knows that it will sell a certain number of that
    size and will carry more of that size.  If you're a good customer, the
    owner may even order a particular style with you in mind. 
    
    --bonnie

    I was SOOOO frustrated yesterday, I could scream.  I spent my entire
    lunch hour and 3 hours after work going to shoe stores to purchase
    a size 7.  That's right, a size 7 shoe.  That is a very common size
    amoung women and they were difficult to find.  I saw plenty of 8's,
    9's, and 10's.  One store, Brookfield Shoe in Milford had the color
    I needed but not my size.  I went to the Westboro store and then
    didn't even carry that shoe.  
    
    Anyways, I have this outfit to wear out tomorrow night that has royal
    blue, emerald green, buttercup yellow, white, black and 
    fuscia (it's a tropical print).  So, I settled on patent 
    leather black, paid $32.95 for them and can only think of 2 other 
    things to go with them.
                                        
    I only wish I had a bigger foot.  I would havev found the right
    pair at the first store I went to.  And it fit my budget.
    
    grumble ;-{

    Perhaps if you were to invest in various shades of eye shadow or
    nail polish or a little row of multi-colored earring studs up your
    ear we could forgive you your black patent shoes... but you'd still
    have to get permission from the nuns!
    
    just kiddin'
    Marge ;^)