My cousin is about 1.53m tall and, while not fat, quite chubby with large breasts. We often went shopping together this summer and it was really hard to find things that fit her.
There were shirts and pants made for small people and also shirts and pants made for chubby people, but there was almost nothing for her.
We bought the same dress, it’s long for her and short for me. She has to wear a shirt under the dress, because it exposes too much of her breasts, I’ll have to take it to the tailor to change the straps so they don’t fall down and show everything.
But yeah, back to my cousin. We went shopping for a bra… And, oh wonder, there were no bras for her. While there were enough C cup bras (which is a lot for her size) there weren’t any bras that fit her. I don’t know how that’s possible, but aparently it is.

And about the designers thinking large sizes will make them look cheap:
In Switzerland, and to some extent also in Germany, being overweight is still considered a lower-class problem. (Note: I’m not saying it is. It’s just considered as such.)

About fat in general: we have a situation where the average is not the ideal. It’s the skewed distribution again. The “norm,” society’s mental image of a woman who’s a “normal” weight, is quite a bit below the actual average. And you don’t have to be slothful or gluttonous to be a size 12; a “healthy” diet and regular exercise won’t make everyone thin.

Now, you can understand that as Kate Harding does, and argue for fat acceptance. But the other side of the coin is simply that it takes a pretty extreme diet/exercise regimen to look ideal: think never having a sandwich again. But it can be done, and I’ve seen it done.

As in everything, I think we need to cultivate personal independence. If you’re interested in making a physical transformation, then do it, accept that it’s challenging, and don’t be embarrassed by your choice. If you’re not interested, then be sane and happy about who you are. (Men seem to be good at this; I’ve had male friends who cheerfully refer to themselves as fatasses and then put all their energy into their great jobs and relationships.) It ought to be about choice; choice cuts both ways.

So, even if the average woman wears a size 12, there are fewer people buying the size 16 than the size 8. Each additional size a store carries brings it less in revenue.

You don’t have the right to clothes that fit, frustrating as that may be. I’m short and I have to hem my pants, and sometimes take them in at the waist. I recognize that there’s a whole ‘nother level of prejudice against fat people (though I am convinced that weight is less immutable than most people think, that’s no excuse for treating anybody like less than a person.) But capitalism produces what’s demanded. It’s not retailers’ fault if they can’t profit on the kinds of clothes you’d prefer.

Laura, over at dressaday.com I have suggested to apple-shaped women who want nice clothes to try on quality maternity wear. It’s an excellent choice for apples, because it’s clothing designed for women who are widest in the middle. It’s not a matter of “unfair” or “limited” or “manufacturers SHOULD be making clothes for…” – It exists. In many price points (so it can be found without ruffles, appliques, etc. cluttering the clothes). And the target market is the apple shape. It isn’t “giving up” for apples to shop in maternity wear; it’s a solution. There are price points everywhere from Target, through Pea in the Pod for professional wear. Also, if you are actually that straight through the waist, I would encourage you to try on men’s trousers; they are designed for a figure which is NOT nipped in. It’s not a “failure” of some kind, of ANY kind, if you can find attractive clothing that fits you via non-traditional sources. You might even want to check out men’s jackets. Who will care what the source for your black or grey or pinstriped pantsuit is? And sturdy casual clothing can be found in men’s work clothes: Carhart, white summer trousers courtesy of chef’s wear, etc.

Dan, I think you’re correct; once you are sufficiently outside the standard size or shape, it is, at the very least, unlikely that you will find something that fits to your satisfaction in a chain store, unless it is a chain store that caters to your particular size/shape. It is also much less likely that you will find clothes on sale. I know that I do see ads for stores that specifically target Big and Tall Men, and it would seem to me that that might be a source for you – I know that I see suits being shown, so there is certainly more than just casual wear being offered. I would suggest that, unless you are holding out for John Lobb made-to-measure shoes, you may want to do some more searching on the internet: there are more custom shoemakers out there than most people seem to realize.
Part of the frustration, I think, that is being experienced by everyone here and many more as well, is caused by the fact that the ready-to-wear market is really not that old. It’s not. In the long history of people wearing clothing, centuries upon centuries, the general ready-to-wear market didn’t really start to exist until the early 20th century. Sears Roebuck and Montgomery Ward sent out their catalog offerings, but the quality of what was offered permitted people to make alterations, if necessary, and some companies provided partly-made clothes: skirts that were not stitched up the back, or ready-made skirts with a blouse-length so that the buyer could make the top to fit. And in terms of women’s clothes, at least, there was a certain standardization in that the clothes were being made to fit over standard-sized support garments: a corset gives a ready-made standardized torso shape over which to fit a garment.

Even standard-sized patterns are a relatively recent development. People, rich, middle-class or poor, either made their own clothes or had them made (yes, even the poor), or they wore other folks’ hand-me-downs and were grateful to have them. Ready-made clothes didn’t really take off in Europe until after WW II, because the quality of the clothing, and the fit, was so poor. America had a head-start on manufacturing standards, although European designers had the consumer appeal.
All clothing is affected by the fit model used by the manufacturer; yes, she may have a 38” bust, and you may have a 38” bust, but maybe the fit model is a B cup, and maybe you are a D cup; that absolutely will affect how clothes fit. In addition, perhaps you carry most of your 40” around the hips in your backside, and the fit model carries it in her hips, from side to side. The result is you need to find a manufacturer with a different fit model: regardless of your going up a size or down a size, the shape of the garment will not fit you.

Clothing shapes matter, too. It’s not just a matter of what will be most “flattering” to the wearer, it’s simple math: if you have a waist which is significantly smaller than your hips (10” or greater), you will have a much harder time finding, say, a straight skirt that fits you properly, because most people do NOT have waists 10” or more smaller than their hips, and therefore manufacturers are generally not cutting straight skirts with those measurements in mind. You will find it easier to find a skirt to fit if you look at gathered skirts, or at gored skirts, or at circle skirts. (These skirts will also be more flattering to you.) It is very difficult to cut trousers to fit someone with a large waist/hip difference; it’s almost impossible to do it without darts. If you look for trousers without darts, you will therefore be much less likely to find a pair that fit you well. If you buy a pair of mid-to-low rise trousers, they are MORE likely to fit you than a pair of trousers that hits at your natural waist, because the further down your hips that the waist of the trouser hits you, the LESS difference in measurement there will be between the “waist” end of your trousers than your hips. If, on the other hand, you have a very linear figure, with less than 6” between your bust, waist and hips, you are more likely to find a man-tailored or boyfriend jacket to fit than you will a jacket with a very nipped waist or peplum.

I know it isn’t what most people want to hear, but I strongly urge you to consider changing the way you expect to acquire your clothing. People really don’t have the “right” to cheap, disposable clothing. The only way cheap, disposable clothing can exist is because other people (often women and children, often in Third World countries), are not being paid a living wage, by which I mean a wage on which they can live in the countries in which they live. Just because it costs less to live in another country than it does in the U.S. does not mean that the workers are being paid enough upon which to live in that country.

That said, I am very concerned about the significant number of Black women who are seriously and dangerously obese. White women are creeping up on the scales as well, but, obesity has long been a serious health concern in the Black community. Big and beautiful? How about, a healthy weight where I can move about on my own power without struggling.

My income puts me in the lower classes, and my tailor is an awesome woman who runs her own successful business and gainfully employs several other women. I believe she gives them benefits too. My experience has not been that it costs a lot to have clothes tailored – most jobs have been under $15. And I would rather patronize her and have a smaller wardrobe than sport all the latest fashion trends, which may or may not have been made by exploited women in other countries. From a historical perspective I think it’s worth noting that ready-to-wear clothing is a relatively recent development. It seems to me like women have never had so many immediate-gratification clothing options for such a relatively low percentage of income (please correct if I am wrong). And yet from reading the comments it seems like hardly anyone is “able to walk into clothing stores…and find clothes that fit.” So I’m not sure that lobbying for more mass-produced standard styles and sizes is the answer, especially considering the clothing industry’s impact on women & children around the world. Kinda off-topic…

PS I hear you on the wide-leg pants, my thighs laugh at regular leg cuts.

I can’t congratulate you on your powers of deduction, however, because they’re kind of weak. Generalizing your experience out on the whole of overweightdom is a reach at best and kind of self-satisfied at worst. It’s a bold move to start diagnosing things like denial and unhappiness from a distance. You don’t need a “101-level education” to speak to your own experience; you do need a fairly big pair of balls to speak to others’.

There is this, though: I don’t remember who made it, but just one time, in just one place, I found a company that almost got it. They had a cute little camisole with a shelf bra and spaghetti straps for probably 2-6. After size 6, they had wider straps – just wide enough to cover bra straps. After size 12, the straps got even wider and the neckline got a little higher to accommodate a bigger bust. Sure, they didn’t really account for large-busted tiny women or small-busted larger women, but they did recognize that a) plus-size women also like to look cute and b) clothes have to change slightly as they get larger.

Thus: More structured skirts, please. Lined pants. Tilted waistlines that are higher in back. Wider straps. Blouses with darts. There are companies that do this and don’t charge a fortune for their clothes; don’t tell me it can’t be done. Oh, and how about a little bit of lace or a cute pattern or something on a larger bra? Just because it has to be functional doesn’t mean it can’t be pretty.

I’ve talked about this with women before, because the men’s store I frequent has free tailoring on most purchases, and free or cheap tailoring afterward. In fact, some things (e.g., slacks) have to be cuffed to fit. A lot of women really like this idea, and I’m kind of surprised that there’s no similar model for women. But it definitely is not a one-size-fits-all solution, pun intended:

1) Clothing has to be made to be tailored well, and that isn’t cheap: The stitching has to be good, there has to be extra cloth at the seams and for that matter the cloth has to be good. The men’s store I shop at has many virtues, but low prices are not one of them. I shop there because I’m large enough that the rest of retail (including, especially, used/vintage clothing) is a wasteland, not because I enjoy paying their prices.

2) This is not a problem for men’s clothing generally, but any translucent or sheer fabric could be tailored at most once.

3) Because of 1), I get by with 3 pairs of pants and 6 shirts (3 short sleeve, three long), and some heavy work clothes from the local farmer’s supply. I expect them to last for 10 years or more (that is one advantage to the tailored stuff: it’s better made, so if you take care of it it lasts as long as you want it to). That’s fine with me, but if it’s not fine for you then tailor-to-fit is not the answer.

It is a nice option to have, though, especially for formal wear. I’d bet that the first women’s clothing store to try it would be pleasantly surprised. They’d have to find someone who offers clothing made with good stitching and extra fabric, first. I imagine the designers would pitch a fit at the idea of some tailor somewhere modifying their precious designs.

I think that part of the problem is that there’s this ideal that clothing should drape like a curtain over the body, which implies a very particular and fairly unusual body type. Clothing that is more structured or designed to wrap around the body instead of hanging from the shoulders and hips works a lot better on a lot of people, male and female.