This Chart Just Proved That the Size You Wear Means Nothing

Share
Tweet
Pin It
Share
Tweet
Pin It
Have you ever tried on a pair of pants that fit you perfectly, only to feel disappointed when you look at the tag and see that the size is a larger one that you expected? You may know logically that the number printed on the tag on your pants has nothing to do with your worth as a human being, but sadly our body-policing society can sometimes make us feel like smaller is better. Now, a new chart from The Washington Post has finally shown us how arbitrary clothing sizes really are, so don't even bother trying to measure up.

You may have heard that Marilyn Monroe wore a size 16, which may have been true - but in reality, her size 16 was actually more like a size 8 by modern standards. "Vanity sizing," or creating sizes that are larger but with a smaller number attached, has become a common practice in today's fashion industry. In fact, it's why the "double zero" size was born - if people want to feel "thin," might as well put them in a size that isn't even a real number.

Here, The Washington Post shows just how much sizes have changed over the years:Vanity sizing is just more proof that our society has a seriously messed up view of our bodies. We shouldn't aim to be the smallest size on any chart: we should aim to treat our bodies well so that they can carry us through whatever life's adventures await.

Next time you're out shopping, grab a few sizes, and pick the one that fits best. As this chart proves, size really is just a number.
Want More? Like us on Facebook
Gallery | Stars Whose Body-Positive Outlook Totally Inspires Us

MORE CELEB SCOOPS

Show Comments
Join Our Newsletter
Stay fetch. Sign up for The Cray, our daily roundup of all things buzzworthy. From Kylie Jenner's trendsetting style (btw, puberty goals AF) to life-changing tech news (tweeting an emoji to order a pizza #YES), The Cray is all you need to impress the squad.
Privacy Terms