I don’t see the point in doing men’s vs women’s clothing sizes. Surely there’s a big enough variance in size and shape between individuals that it would be more useful to size based off of measurements of body shape?

Take shoes for example. Why is a uk men’s size 10 so wildly different from a UK women’s size 10?

All it seems to achieve is making shopping for clothes difficult for anyone that doesn’t fit into the expected body shape for their gender and make it hard to find well fitting clothes outside of specialist shops.

    • Lazylazycat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      It isn’t about style. Women’s sizes (e.g. 8, 10, 12) originally came from codes based on the variations between hip, waist and bust measurements.

    • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      It’s a shortcut for measurements.

      It’s easier to shop “Men’s L” or 32x32 pants than remember a lot of measurements.

      I think it’s different if you want your clothes to fit a specific way, but for my shopping I want to minimize the time spent shopping and get “good enough”. That’s how we end up in minimal measurements.

      I think ideally we’d have both sets: the minimal measurement and the maximalist ones for the same garment.