Sizing up clothing sizes

The New York Times reports the ghastly news that petites sections are disappearing from high-end department stores, and some short, older, mostly wealthy (these stores are expensive) women are upset.
While stores may appear to be “long obsessed with that Seventh Avenue archetype, the tall, thin, leggy lady,” I can say definitively, as a slender woman who’s 6’2″, they don’t actually make clothes to fit us, either. My inseam is 36 inches. which means the average pair of pants is between six and four inches too short for me. Sleeve length is an even bigger issue– I’ve gotten used to bare wrists.
I certainly have nothing against shorter women, but I can’t help but get pissed off when I read articles like this. Women who are shorter than 5’3″ have more clothing options than many of us on other ends of the spectrum. You can always have clothes taken in and shortened, but you can’t magically extend sleeves and pant legs (or expand waistlines or bustlines, for that matter). So some while short women are whining about not being able to find whole sections of clothing tailored to fit them, I have NEVER seen a section of a store devoted to attire for the long-limbed.
But I’ll also say that I’ve never met any woman who doesn’t complain about finding clothes to fit her body. The traditional sizing system is seriously flawed. It doesn’t work for women of a variety of shapes. Stores that have switched to more specific sizing– a variety of cuts, lengths, widths, etc.– have been met with rave reviews.
This is why I learned to sew. I’m much happier for it.

and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

47 Comments

  1. Hippychik
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 8:04 am | Permalink

    I nearly cried when Petite Sophisticate went out of business (even though they were mostly too matronly). We could argue all day about tall vs. short, but 6’2 women are likely 1% of the population, women under 5’4 are at least a large minority (40% or so? I don’t know). It’s not necessarily that we can’t take up our clothes, but that stores should not ignore such a population. That’s a lesson they are learning with plus-sizes, but what about petite plus sizes? And contrary to your assertion that we’re “wealthy”, a LOT of poor women, including immigrants (mostly Mexican and Asian) are very short, even under 5 feet tall.

  2. Posted May 31, 2006 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    Well, it may be fractionally easier to find plus-size clothing than it once was, try being fat and tall. That’s like the killer combo or something. I’m 5’11 and far, far from slim and I can find clothing at exactly two shops. Which are far more expensive than I can generally afford. (Some of that may be due to the fact I’m in the middle of Louisiana, but. . .)
    I’m seriously considering learning to sew myself. It’s to the point now where when I find a pair of pants that’s actually long enough, it’s noticable. People frigging remark about it, because everyone’s just used to seeing my ankles. And while I have adorable ankles, I’d like to be able to choose when to show them off, ya know? Oh, and don’t even get me started about finding shirts long enough that don’t gap across the bosom. Arg.

  3. Posted May 31, 2006 at 8:42 am | Permalink

    Well, it may be fractionally easier to find plus-size clothing than it once was, try being fat and tall. That’s like the killer combo or something. I’m 5’11 and far, far from slim and I can find clothing at exactly two shops. Which are far more expensive than I can generally afford. (Some of that may be due to the fact I’m in the middle of Louisiana, but. . .)
    I’m seriously considering learning to sew myself. It’s to the point now where when I find a pair of pants that’s actually long enough, it’s noticable. People frigging remark about it, because everyone’s just used to seeing my ankles. And while I have adorable ankles, I’d like to be able to choose when to show them off, ya know? Oh, and don’t even get me started about finding shirts long enough that don’t gap across the bosom. Arg.

  4. Posted May 31, 2006 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    I hear ya. I’m 5’3, but only because my legs are short. My rear end is normal sized, and I have a long torso. The petites section is awesome if they’re stocking burlap sacks.

  5. Durga_is_my_homey
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    This is so weird. Just the other day, I was talking with my mom about how I couldn’t find a bikini that fit my body. See, I’m a size 3-US in the waist (not hips, stupid Britney Spears jeans stores sell!) which is small … but I’m big busted (this always causes a problem for me when I need a dress for a cousin’s wedding because it’ll fit me in one area but the waist needs taking in). So I have the bottoms that are small but the top, erm, makes me look like a model out of bad 1980s soft-core porn (anybody who had put on a bikini top too small knows this) but I can’t switch them around.
    But my ma told me she (who had the form I do) and her tall friend years ago would have the same problems.

  6. Posted May 31, 2006 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    Not only is it impossible to find anything that fits, but at any one time shops stock only the three styles sanctioned by Fashion, of which I hate at least two (e.g. skirts now all have a nasty flouncy frill along the hemline). If you want something in particular – smart shoes without heels, say – you have to lie in wait for years until they become available.
    I really don’t understand it. What if food were sold the same way?
    “Tabasco is out this summer – you won’t find it anywhere.”
    “This season we’ve put cranberries in all our breakfast cereals! No, you can’t buy them without.”

  7. Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    Bizarre sizing anecdote: I’m about dead average in height and almost hourglassed if my waist were a might narrower. Considering my bust, nothing ever fit me. Then I’m smacked with the pregnancy wand, I go to the maternity section and everything is sized for behemoths with pants that’d come up to my shoulders and I could fit a hula hoop in. I meander over to the nondescript “normal” sized section and suddenly I’m able to find shirts fitting both my waist and my bust because they’re fast approaching the same measurement. Either way, looks like I’ll be brushing up on my sewing skills, shopping is too depressing.

  8. olivia
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    Many Banana Republic and Ann Taylor Loft stores sell non-frumpy petite clothes.
    For tops I have to use petites, because of the proportions they’re cut in (I’m very thin up top, and have very small breasts). Bottoms I can just hem, but back when flared pants were the style, it was frustrating because I’d lose the flare.
    What really bugs me is vanity sizing, in which a traditional size 12 is now a size 8 (so shoppers can feel better about themselves and spend, spend, spend). I am not happy about being a size 0 in tops … if they even make those tops.

  9. Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:11 am | Permalink

    For the super-tall out there: There are a few denim manufacturers that offer a “supermodel” length, which, if I recall correctly, is a 36″ inseam (?). Google could probably provide the details. I think J. Crew may also be able to meet your needs.
    MOST clothing WILL require fitting to the body before it will look right. Men take this for granted. MEN’S stores have tailoring services on premesis, and they offer these services for free or at least for a nominal cost. Their clothing is cut to allow for significant alterations.
    If that ain’t enough to piss you off, men also pay less for better qualitiy clothing, and they pay less for dry cleaning too. Also, men’s shirts are available in just about any combination of neck sizes and sleeve lengths.
    I blame the patriarchy. Humph.
    I’m a fashion addict (hard-core!) but even I’ve learned to stop buying things on principle. Instead, I shop at the Goodwill for high-quality vintage quirkies, and in the boys’ section for almost everything else(I make an exception at Target. Love that Issac Mizrahi line). But it ALL goes straight to my tailor before I wear it.
    By the way, if anyone else out there is a clothes horse with a stuffed closet and a frightening VISA balance: If you have three or four perfectly tailored outfits that look great on you, much of your ravenous shopping urge will dissapate and you’ll save a ton of money. Trust me on this: The answer to your fashion prayers will not found at the mall. Your local tailor is probably an independent operator, so help keep him/her in business!

  10. TheTruth
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    Sizing sucks for men too!!! I’m an average sized male (6’1″ 33 inch waist and 35-36 inch inseam) and it seems to me that nobody likes making LONG pants! What in the hell? My neck is HUGE, on the other hand, and I guess fashion dictates that if you aren’t a woman, you have no torso at all because, when I get a shirt that fits my neck, IT IS SO EFFFING LONG. God, I hate shopping for clothes. It’s bullshit and makes me so frustrated.
    But, thank god for MARSHALL’S!!!!

  11. Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    Durga, you and I have the exact same body type. If you can stand shopping from the Victorias Secret catalogue, they do sell bikini tops and bottoms as separates. That is, if you can even stand the thought of wearing a bikini in the first place (it’s the only style of bathing suit I can comfortably wear).

  12. Sally
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    I certainly have nothing against shorter women, but I can’t help but get pissed off when I read articles like this. Women who are shorter than 5’3″ have more clothing options than many of us on other ends of the spectrum.

    The average American woman is a bit under 5’4”. You are, therefore, 10 inches over average, while the petite section exists for women who are one or more inches under. You aren’t comperable to the average petite shopper. You’re comperable to my friend who is 4’8”, and even though there’s a special section for short women, she can’t find clothes that fit, either. You’re comparing apples to oranges. Most women who shop in the petite section are basically average-sized, not unusually short. Slightly tall (like, say, 5’5” or 5’6”) women don’t have trouble finding clothes for people their height, because they’re considered normal, not tall. And they’re no more average than I, a petite shopper, am.
    At first I was really pissed about the department store petite sections closing, but then I realized that I never, ever shop in department store petite sections, and not just because they’re expensive. I think the headline is misleading. The issue isn’t that petite sections are closing right and left. It’s that wealthy short women are taking their business to Ann Taylor, which has cute, fashionable petite clothes, rather than Bloomingdales, which doesn’t.

  13. Katie
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    i am 5’6. i have short legs, a long torso, and a big bust/shoulders from swimming competitively. i have the same problem all not extremely overweight big busted girls have. jeans are another issue. my legs are short. so i can get ankle length jeans from old navy or gap or banana (the only places i like jeans from) but only wear them in the summer bc i wear sandals and flats. i cant wear ankle lenth with any sort of heel. but then regular length always drags when i am wearing flat shoes.
    i wont even get in to the shirt issues i have. ugh.

  14. noname
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    I can only assume these department stores found they could make more money per store area selling other sizes. If there is decent money to be made in petite sized clothing, some other stores will pick up the sack.
    As for all the other size variations described here: what do you want the industry to do? Does anyone here have a reasonable, cost effective solution for this problem?

  15. Sally
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 11:39 am | Permalink

    As for all the other size variations described here: what do you want the industry to do? Does anyone here have a reasonable, cost effective solution for this problem?

    I think that the sizing of women’s clothes should reflect the actual variation of women’s bodies. So, for instance, oxford shirts should be sized according to waist, bust, shoulder and sleeve measurements, rather than just in 4/6/8 etc. or s/m/l/xl. Similarly, pants should be sized by inseam, waist and hip measurements.
    Some online retailers are already doing this, and it seems to be cost effective. For instance, Lands End is doing a huge business in custom clothes. I’m very happy with my custom chinos from Target . It would be nice to see more of that kind of thing.
    I am curious about the labor practices of the custom clothing makers, though, which I suspect are pretty dismal. From a social justice perspective, it’s probably better to buy fewer clothes and have them tailored or altered by someone whom you pay reasonably well.

  16. Posted May 31, 2006 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

    Women who are shorter than 5’3″ have more clothing options than many of us on other ends of the spectrum. You can always have clothes taken in and shortened, but you can’t magically extend sleeves and pant legs
    While I sympathize with your frustration, it’s simply not true that a little custom-tailoring can solve problems for the petite.
    At 5’5″ and with unusually long legs, I can find pants and have them shortened. But my sister, who is 5’2″ and has unusually short legs, has a problem. If the waist-to-crotch relationship in a pair of pants doesn’t work, you’re dead fucked and a tailor isn’t going to help. The secret behind the “petite” label is the shortening of the waist. It’s a proportion thing.

  17. noname
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    “I think that the sizing of women’s clothes should reflect the actual variation of women’s bodies.” – Sally
    That seems right to me, and that is great that they are selling these variations on-line.
    However, how can they do this at a department store where space is limited and stock turnover is key to making money? A designer could manufacture all these variations (another cost issue to consider), but as a customer in a department store, you would simply be replacing a lack of size options with a lack of size options in stock.
    The only way I can see department stores being able to add size options is if they decrease the number of labels and styles they carry. Would shoppers accept this?

  18. DMar
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    I second the custom clothing idea. I’ve been able to find a lot of things online that are unavailable eslewhere. I forget the name of the site, but there is a woman selling oxford-type button up shirts in bra sizes, so you don’t have the button gap at the busom. Very useful for the large-busted.
    Of course, while this is a good solution for those who can afford to pay a little more for clothes (and shipping), and also a good solution for those far from retail areas, this is not going to be as helpful for lower-income women. Which sucks.

  19. the15th
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    At least skirts are “coming back.” I looked for a decent skirt all last winter, and all they were showing was “formal shorts.” How can such a basic piece of clothing go out of style for a whole season?

  20. jonquil
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

    Petite women have shorter arms, narrower shoulders, and a shorter back-waist length than “medium” women. By the time you have changed all those measurements, you might as well have paid a tailor to custom-make the garment. If the shoulders don’t fit, the dress doesn’t fit.
    Basically, everybody’s suffering together. Me, I’m medium-height but have a thick waist, and all the commercial clothes I can find expect me to have wide hips to go with the wide waist.

  21. Posted May 31, 2006 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

    You should come to the UK where I have seen plenty of sections in stores for taller women – there is definitely a “tall” section in Top Shop. As a short person, I’m always seeing things I want and then going ‘oh, look, an extra 10 inches of leg, oh well’.

  22. Posted May 31, 2006 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    My peeve is when a (usually small-scale or somewhat local) designer designs pants that only fit HER body type. I’m totally average all around (a true size 6-8), and am often confounded when I try on a pair of pants and the ass is tight while the waist is huge. Huh??
    You know, most clothing labed “dry clean only” CAN be hand washed. Just do some research about the particular material if in doubt.
    On a somewhat unrelated note, I’m really not pleased at yet MORE hippie skirts this year, along with the knee-length pants.

  23. Traci
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

    Love this post– please allow me to vent without hating me. I am about 5’9 with long legs/arms and a flat chest. Like a model, right (well, maybe not the boobs…)? So I should be able to find all those clothes I see advertised, right? Nooooo! Because pants, if they even make them below a size 4, come up to my calves, sleeves 3/4 down my arms, and– this irritates the shit out of me– why haven’t the manufacturers figured out that if pants are going to have a low rise, shirts need to come down longer!?! I mean, I don’t really want to show off my belly ring at work, ya know! So, I got excited when someone mentioned talls at Lands’ End, and I went to the website. They have, like 5 tall shirts and 3 shirts– wtf? How is that having a “tall collection”? grrr… Any tall chicks have suggestions, particularly for work clothes (on a student budget)?

  24. Posted May 31, 2006 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

    Traci, you’re in luck this season, as tunics are “in.” It’s fashionable among the younger set to layer different t-shirts, so there is much variety in sleeves and lengths.
    A tunic would probably look like a regular shirt on you.
    Old Navy is featuring extra-long t-shirts this season. So is Target. Time to stock up! Unless your personal politics won’t allow you to shop there; in which case I have no idea what to recommend, except the boys’ section in department stores.

  25. Ann
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 2:40 pm | Permalink

    Hedonistic, you’re right on about the tunic trend. It’s amazing for the long-torsoed. For the first time, I can put shirts in the dryer and they don’t shrink to belly-exposing sizes.
    You’re also right that we should campaign for a serious change in women’s sizing. While I understand that it’s certainly not easy for all guys to find clothes that fit, I think women would benefit a lot from a sizing system that’s more like men’s– based on inches, not arbitrary numbers.
    I stand by my choice to go DIY. My sewing machine was less than $200 and has paid for itself again and again– not just in things I’ve made from scratch, but in allowing me to alter otherwise ill-fitting clothes. I mean, how did Eleanor Roosevelt (who was 6 feet tall) find clothes that fit? Probably had them custom-made.

  26. Suzanne
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    I just thought it was amusing they define “petite” as 5’4″ or under while the average height of American women is just under 5’4″ anyway.

  27. elana
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 3:51 pm | Permalink

    Hey tall people. I was at Express the other day and the jeans I tried on where like half a foot too long or something. I sweare.
    Ok maybe not half a foot but insanely long.
    And I’m 5’5 and my legs are average length at least so if these pants were that long on me I recon this might be the time for tall ladies to hit Express.
    Never mind the fact that at my height I am not sure why any pants labled “regular” would be that long on me but…
    Ah Express – which i believe has a history of using prison labor.

  28. Posted May 31, 2006 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

    americans are getting bigger. i found the other day at ross that i, towering over most other women at 5’8″ and 150ish, am now “petite.” hah! i sure haven’t shrunk with age, so i can only conclude that other women are growing.
    for some reason, even years after britney fever, this “petite” lady still can’t find a shirt that covers her damn belly button. thanks for the suggestion, hedonistic, though i’m still peeved at target over denying women their prescriptions.
    zan, my mom calls the phenomenon “gaposis,” and the average female bosom brings it on in i’d say 50% of button-up shirts.
    hooray for clothes manufacturers who are moving away from arbitrary sizes. women are capable of remembering the length of their arms and torsos and such.

  29. p_lucky
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    What kind of a feminist places a priority on well fitting clothes over human and women’s rights?!
    Every single (existant) retailer mentioned in this thread has been complicit in human rights violations through the use of sweatshop labor. Good for these retailers and brands for (starting to) acknowledge the vast array of female body types, but fuck them for collusion in the long running practice of letting bottom-line priorities rationalize oppression. By supporting these companies and brands, you too are complicit in the economic and social oppression of sweatshop laborers – the majority of whom are young females!
    So please, ladies, stand up for your sisters and just say no to sweatshop labor. These women deserve so much more than to be the unfortunate externalities of first world fashion.
    (more info here)

  30. olivia
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

    DMar, the company is Rebecca and Drew. I haven’t been able to wear button-down shirts until I discovered them (the fit models for a standard button-down shirt are B cups, and if you’re larger OR smaller than that exact bust size, you’re shit out of luck).

  31. David Thompson
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 5:30 pm | Permalink

    For a klatsch of self-identifying feminists, y’all cut the fashion industry an awful lot of slack. The bizarre insistence that women’s clothing fit like it was applied with a Wagner Power Brush is the root of most fitment complaints. Most guys don’t bother with that sort of hypersnug bullshit; if you can climb into and out of it without a ton of effort and it doesn’t fall off of you when you stand up, then the clothing has done its job. Insist on a better standard, and take the time to see what’s on the other side of the aisle.

  32. Posted May 31, 2006 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    p_lucky – - I hear you, and that’s why I said “depending on your politics” when I gave my advice.
    I deal with the sweatshop labor problem by shopping secondhand as much as possible. At least I’m “recycling” most of the time. It’s cheap, and it’s fun!!!!!
    I haven’t found a non-exploitative way to buy cotton t-shirts, though. I’m really at a loss. Anyone have any ideas?

  33. anon
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

    American Apparel for cotton t-shirts. Sweatshop-free (in fact great labor practices), but the head of the company has several sexual harrasment suits pending I believe, and in general a little controversial regarding portrayal of women in advertising (great NY TIMES mag piece a couple of weeks ago), so maybe not exactly non-exploitative.

  34. Julie
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

    I agree with some of the other petite posters… I’m 5 foot exactly and trying to find clothes that fit is a nightmare… especially if you want anything even slightly flared/boot cut. Even if you shorten the hem, you lose the look of the garment and just look like crap in it. My personal favorite though? Try finding petite, plus size maternity clothes. What a frigging nightmare that is. I have approximately four things I can wear right now. Not that I think tall women have it much easier. I know my sister is 5’10 and has the same problem as you describe Ann.

  35. Adrienne
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 9:14 pm | Permalink

    I’m 5’2″ and absolutely haaaate this new style of extra-long t-shirts. You tall ladies are in luck this season, though! (Luckily my mother owns a sewing machine and is kind enough to help me with my shirt-shortening mission.)
    50% of the American female population is under 5’4″, per definition of 5’4″ as the “average” female height. The fact that 50% of the population is considered “petite” (aka “not normal”) smacks slightly of racial bias to me; after all, most women who are under 5’4″ are minorities, whereas the average white woman is somewhat taller.

  36. Jane
    Posted May 31, 2006 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    I had the exact same thoughts when I saw that Petite sections were being phased out! I am also 6’2″ with a 36″ inseam. It would be great if stores had Tall sections at all (even if we are only 1% of the population). Land’s End has womens pants with this inseam, but shirts and tops are a different story. I have had good luck shopping the sales in the Men’s department and getting great prices on the frillier looking men’s shirts that don’t seem to sell! I just turn up the cuffs and add a few darts for shaping and they work great!

  37. Posted June 1, 2006 at 4:15 am | Permalink

    I’m 5’10″, with DD boobs and the rest of me to match. Not a small girl, but I have curves, not lumps. Most shops tend to assume that anyone my size is big to the point of not having a defined waist. Clothes either fit my waist and are too tight on the hip, or fit the hip and are too big for the waist. Tops fit my boobs and are too big on the waist. And nothing is long enough. Ever.
    I love my shape, but I’m constantly tempted to lose some weight just to see if it’s easier to buy clothes. :(

  38. Pip
    Posted June 1, 2006 at 6:51 am | Permalink

    Hexy – me too, me too! (but 5’9” and an UK size 32E). Perhaps we should set up a clothing company. I hate the assumption that if you’re curvy, you have no waist. Also impossible for getting shirts that don’t gape.

  39. Pip
    Posted June 1, 2006 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    BTW, I find that the clothes fitting me best are a) those from second-hand shops, made when they were more likely to acknowledge that women had curves – although then always too short b)continental European companies, who do the same.
    On sweatshops – it is very hard to avoid shopping in unethical companies if you are an odd size but I look at the label and buy the clothes made in eastern European countries or Turkey, with better laws on labour, rather than clothes in the same shop made in China etc.

  40. Posted June 2, 2006 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    In an age in which body image issues are so important, I find it incredible that the one taboo is height. Obesity is more respectable than being 5’3″, which is, both in the USA and the UK AVERAGE height. In other words, being normal is the ultimate faux pas. Nice.

  41. Helen H
    Posted June 8, 2006 at 12:35 am | Permalink

    Tall and average folks, shop men’s stores for practical office wear. I (about Ave for my age-a bit busty at 36D, just under 5’6″)have a couple of great button shirts from Men’s Warehouse, tailors on site, who fit them to me — shortened sleaves, tapered waist, bust seams. My daughter (busty, shoulders and tall, 5’11″) gets most of her daily student clothes in men’s departments and alters herself to suit. I found she was right that men’s 32 x 34s fit me well. She goes with a much longer inseam but same waist.

  42. christylea
    Posted February 6, 2009 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    Unfortunately, I think clothing will always be a problem for us ladies. Every time I go to my local shopping mall I see these clothing stores that cater to tweenies, they seem to be taking over like the plague. Nothing in there fits me.
    Much like you, I have begun either making my clothes or heavily altering store bought clothes. Some things I can find fairly easy, others like slacks are very difficult to get in my size.
    Christy
    real estate job listings

  43. oddcincy.wordpress.com
    Posted March 13, 2009 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

    I’m not built like a model, but I have a long torso like you do. Also, hipster jeans are my godsend (little waist and large butt means high-rise jeans have a huge gap at my waist that no belt can touch). So I often have the gap between shirt and pants too.
    My solution? Buy some cheap men’s wifebeater undershirts. Even size Small might be loose on you the first time around, but they’ll shrink to fit you in the wash. Even after shrinking, the length should cover the gap. In your outfits, it will look like a camisole, only it’s longer and you can buy them in multi-packs from Wal-Mart.

  44. JamieT
    Posted April 27, 2009 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    I run into the same exact problem. Why can’t I get any clothes that fits well.. Just because I’m tall? So ridiculous..
    - Jamie, Resveratrol Consultant

  45. james090073
    Posted June 3, 2009 at 3:10 am | Permalink

    I have adorable ankles, I’d like to be able to choose when to show them off, ya know?
    Maryland Logo Design | Massachusetts Logo Design | Kentucky Logo Design

  46. sunzheng
    Posted July 7, 2009 at 3:19 am | Permalink
  47. Anna
    Posted January 2, 2010 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

207 queries. 1.674 seconds