[Rendello]

Interesting visualizations, but I don't understand what the thesis is. To me, the conclusion says:

1. Luxury fashion thrives on exclusivity, which is exclusionary.

2. Clothing size standards do not match diverse body types.

3. There is no sizing standard, and companies size however they want.

[altairprime]

0. All commercial premade adult women’s clothing is made exclusively for a small minority of women with hourglass body shapes.

The number one thesis takeaway for me, that I didn’t realize as a woman even after years of dealing with sizing drama, is that clothing manufacturers exclusively market to hourglass body shape alone — which some might recognize better as “pinup model” proportions. As a non-hourglass along with the vast majority of other U.S. women, it’s quite the shock to discover that megacorps are targeting a fraction of the market (hourglass) rather than the largest segment (rectangle).

[flumpcakes]

I think that must be fashion dependent though? I can think of plenty of women's clothes that are definitely not marketed for hourglass physiques.

[tirant]

I have difficulties believing that what you’re describing is actually the case. Free markets are extremely good at covering many market niches, but free market is exceptional when it comes to cover the majority of the market.

If that majority of rectangular-shaped women existed and wanted to buy rectangular-shaped clothes, we would see brands with that product everywhere.

So either they’re not majority or they are happy enough with the existing product designs so they won’t buy an alternative rectangular design.

[itake]

4. Women are the biggest they have ever been in history.

As a 152lb American male, I weigh 11% less than the average American woman.