# Plus-Size Mannequins Are More Than Just a Viral Moment—They’re the Future



## nehimama (Jun 18, 2005)

https://www.glamour.com/story/why-plus-size-mannequins-in-stores-matter

_The fight for plus-size representation in fashion continues to be a long and strenuous one—counting how many curves we see on the runway, keeping tabs of which designers go above a size 14, and asking what could be holding brands back. Still, in recent years we’ve seen more and more fashion companies taking a stand on this issue, both in their products and in the way they portray themselves to outsiders. You’ll notice curvy models in those companies' campaigns and their e-commerce and, in some cases, curvy mannequins in their stores.

A recent effort that hit the mainstream news cycle comes from Nike, which recently announced that it would be introducing plus-size mannequins in stores—first in London, then in the rest of the world. The goal, according to a statement released to CNN, is "to celebrate the diversity and inclusivity of sport,” as well as to show Nike’s plus-size offerings, which were launched in 2017._










More at the link.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

I’m not sure I wanna know how the sausage is made.


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

nehimama said:


> https://www.glamour.com/story/why-plus-size-mannequins-in-stores-matter
> 
> _The fight for plus-size representation in fashion continues to be a long and strenuous one—counting how many curves we see on the runway, keeping tabs of which designers go above a size 14, and asking what could be holding brands back. Still, in recent years we’ve seen more and more fashion companies taking a stand on this issue, both in their products and in the way they portray themselves to outsiders. You’ll notice curvy models in those companies' campaigns and their e-commerce and, in some cases, curvy mannequins in their stores.
> 
> ...


It’s about time. Now if they could realize we aren’t all 5’10” and start designing for those of us who are more of the fun-sized end of the spectrum.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

And not just cut the style to fit but create styles for non models!
And for women that have been pregnant. Seems like that would be a “ good size” market too.


----------



## nehimama (Jun 18, 2005)

It’s about time. Now if they could realize we aren’t all 5’10” and start designing for those of us who are more of the fun-sized end of the spectrum.

"Fun Size" LOL!


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

SLFarmMI said:


> It’s about time. Now if they could realize we aren’t all 5’10” and start designing for those of us who are more of the fun-sized end of the spectrum.


I'm 5'10" and I'll tell you I HATE clothes shopping because there is almost nothing on the racks for women my height. I have to depend on certain brands - especially in jeans/pants/anything with long sleeves - because it's nearly impossible to find things long enough through the leg/arm. Wore men's jeans for the longest time so I didn't have to walk around in high waters. I still mostly wear men's shirts/sweaters/jackets and hoard my rare find of "nice" women's clothing that fits for really special occasions.

Shoes are another nightmare, apparently if you have feet on the larger end of the spectrum and you want to wear something other than styles that you could easily share with your grandmother.

I know the runways are filled with extra long giraffe women wearing beautiful clothing, but the stores most of us shop in really do cater to the shorter sizes. My 5'6" daughter never has problems finding cute things that fit. Which sucks because we can't even share! I get it, I'm in a very tiny (ironically) demographic that makes the clothing companies almost no money, but it's super annoying.


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

Mish said:


> I'm 5'10" and I'll tell you I HATE clothes shopping because there is almost nothing on the racks for women my height. I have to depend on certain brands - especially in jeans/pants/anything with long sleeves - because it's nearly impossible to find things long enough through the leg/arm. Wore men's jeans for the longest time so I didn't have to walk around in high waters. I still mostly wear men's shirts/sweaters/jackets and hoard my rare find of "nice" women's clothing that fits for really special occasions.
> 
> Shoes are another nightmare, apparently if you have feet on the larger end of the spectrum you want to wear something other than styles that you could easily share with your grandmother.
> 
> I know the runways are filled with extra long giraffe women wearing beautiful clothing, but the stores most of us shop in really do cater to the shorter sizes. My 5'6" daughter never has problems finding cute things that fit. Which sucks because we can't even share! I get it, I'm in a very tiny (ironically) demographic that makes the clothing companies almost no money, but it's super annoying.


I have yet to find a store that has anything for the shorter women. I’m 5’4” if I stand up really straight and I do not own a pair of women’s pants that I haven’t had to alter myself. My mother (at just a whisker over 5’) has it even worse. She usually has to buy pants that are intended to be capris and they are often too long.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I’m on the cusp of petite and regular at 5.5 ish. And getting the right length can be a pain. 

My youngest wears a woman’s size 11 shoe. She’s not super tall, she just has a sturdy base. 

I’m glad the fashion industry is getting realistic on women’s sizes.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Hopefully this will spark a trend, and morbidly obese people will dress better when they go to Walmart to stock up on a motorized shopping cart full of chips and soda.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

I find it interesting that the advancment only goes so far. The female plus sized mannequins show the fat areas on the body but if you look up male plus sized mannequins most are shown to be larger but muscular with six packs so no beer bellies, or jiggle breasts and butts.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

SLFarmMI said:


> I have yet to find a store that has anything for the shorter women. I’m 5’4” if I stand up really straight and I do not own a pair of women’s pants that I haven’t had to alter myself. My mother (at just a whisker over 5’) has it even worse. She usually has to buy pants that are intended to be capris and they are often too long.


You bring up an interesting point. I wonder if it also depends on the part of the country (world?) you're in. I remember growing up in the Midwest and I never had problems finding longer pants and shirts/jackets with long enough sleeves, and I do remember my 5'2" mom complaining about everything being too big - lots of big and tall people there. Here in my part of the southwest people tend to run (a lot) shorter, I have a devil of a time finding anything for tall women that isn't also for very large women. Years ago I almost had a meltdown when I was living in Japan and my running shoes had a blowout. I had to have my mom go buy me some and mail them over from the states (life before Amazon!) - I literally could not find any women's running shoes larger than a 6 1/2, even at the military exchange. Men's shoes are just too wide to substitute properly.

I guess it makes sense from a commercial standpoint - as a company/retail store you're wasting money buying/shipping outlier sizes to areas where they don't really get bought up. It is exceedingly frustrating though. If they really wanted to cater to women, they'd start sizing women's clothing the way they do men's - measurements instead of arbitrary and non-standard sizes. Gripe gripe gripe


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

We just watched a show about crash test dummies that have been used for decades.. They are all made in the image and physique of men. The "women" dummies are just cut down versions of males. None of the female physical characteristics have ever been taken into considerations. i.e. pelvis is completely different. Three point seat belts are not designed with breasts in mind. The end result is that all the car safety designs will protect men but women are 73% more likely to suffer a catastrophic injury or death. VOLVO has started using properly designed female test dummies.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Mish, that's funny you mention wearing mens jeans. Until I was a teenager my mom had to buy my pants off the skinny boys clothing racks. Anything in the girls section was way too short. Wal-mart has a brand of jeans that is long enough for me but just barely. Lee Riders used to have a long selection which required a small flip of the hem to keep them from rubbing the ground but the regulars didn't cover my ankles. Then Lee stopped making those good jeans so I don't buy their stuff any more.
Don't get me started on shoes. I have to buy a men's wide. Women's wide shoes pinch too much, they are no better than a mens regular width. 
And what is it with the lack of sizes at these stores? They have 20 pair of size 2 long but 1 pair of 16? I had to go to 3 stores to buy a total of 4 pairs of jeans.
I can't wear most womens size t-shirts. The sleeves are too tight and there isn't enough shoulder room. They make me feel like David Banner turning Lou Ferrigno!


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Danaus29 said:


> Mish, that's funny you mention wearing mens jeans. Until I was a teenager my mom had to buy my pants off the skinny boys clothing racks. Anything in the girls section was way too short. Wal-mart has a brand of jeans that is long enough for me but just barely. Lee Riders used to have a long selection which required a small flip of the hem to keep them from rubbing the ground but the regulars didn't cover my ankles. Then Lee stopped making those good jeans so I don't buy their stuff any more.
> Don't get me started on shoes. I have to buy a men's wide. Women's wide shoes pinch too much, they are no better than a mens regular width.
> And what is it with the lack of sizes at these stores? They have 20 pair of size 2 long but 1 pair of 16? I had to go to 3 stores to buy a total of 4 pairs of jeans.
> I can't wear most womens size t-shirts. The sleeves are too tight and there isn't enough shoulder room. They make me feel like David Banner turning Lou Ferrigno!


That is so funny, I used to go to JCPenney specifically to get the Lee jeans I think you're talking about! They seem to have stopped making them like 10 years or more ago? As teenagers my sister and I totally used to buy men's jeans (she was 5'9" and I was 5'10" at around age 12/13 so we had to skip the boy's section and go straight to the grown men's section, boys tend to have shorter inseams than girls of the same height I've discovered, at least personally), luckily grunge was in at that time so we weren't pointed and laughed at too much. Men's Levis used to be my real go-to, it used to be difficult but doable to find the smaller waist size/longer inseam, I bet it's nearly impossible now with everyone getting larger. After years of being a picky collector I have a good jean stash that should last me a long while at this point if the middle age spread doesn't get too out of control...

Yep, yep on the t-shirts. I used to have so many women's t-shirts with holes in the armpit because I'd rip them just moving my arms around normally - Hulk smash! I discovered how comfortable young men's t-shirts were when my son was a teenager. Wearing a Marvel shirt from the young men's section of Kohl's right now matter of fact. Now my problem is finding any feminine long sleeve sweaters or dress shirts that don't make me look like I'm bad at doing laundry. Most of my sweaters/stretchy tops have weird deformations in them from me habitually grabbing the end of the sleeves with my fingers and holding them stretched out while I go about my business lol

Shoes are terrible. I have a similar problem to yours except I have long, narrow feet. So women's shoes tend to be slightly loose on the sides if they're long enough, irritating but I can deal with it, men's shoes are like walking around with boxes tied to my feet or something if they're the right length. When I was in the military they only had men's sizes in boots, so to this day I still have some pretty gnarly bony bumps on the sides of my feet (heel and sides of the balls of my feet) where they would just slide around and rub, even wearing several pairs of thick socks. You'd think that in this day and age we wouldn't have to be deforming our feet just to have coverings on them. Yay for living somewhere I can pretty much wear flip-flops year round and to most social events, the only saving grace.

*edit - I explain to anyone who says anything about my height out here that it's the corn-fed Ohioan in me


----------



## SLFarmMI (Feb 21, 2013)

Danaus29 said:


> Mish, that's funny you mention wearing mens jeans. Until I was a teenager my mom had to buy my pants off the skinny boys clothing racks. Anything in the girls section was way too short. Wal-mart has a brand of jeans that is long enough for me but just barely. Lee Riders used to have a long selection which required a small flip of the hem to keep them from rubbing the ground but the regulars didn't cover my ankles. Then Lee stopped making those good jeans so I don't buy their stuff any more.
> Don't get me started on shoes. I have to buy a men's wide. Women's wide shoes pinch too much, they are no better than a mens regular width.
> And what is it with the lack of sizes at these stores? They have 20 pair of size 2 long but 1 pair of 16? I had to go to 3 stores to buy a total of 4 pairs of jeans.
> I can't wear most womens size t-shirts. The sleeves are too tight and there isn't enough shoulder room. They make me feel like David Banner turning Lou Ferrigno!


Ugh, don’t even get me started on the whole jeans issue. Last time I went looking for jeans I went to 4 stores before finally giving up and going to the men’s section. Too long (because apparently short men don’t exist) but at least they will last longer than 6 months and don’t have any glitter or words on the butt (because, of course, those of us with larger rears want a big sign on it saying “look at me”.)


----------



## whiterock (Mar 26, 2003)

Had a girl student once. Her jeans were so tight if she had a dime in her back pocket you could tell if it was head or tails. DD had to wear jeans in school because skirts were too short for dress code due to her being so tall.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

Plus-sized mannequins? It's now OK to be overweight and obese making sure women will get diabetes, heart issues, etc,etc. Is this being advocated and supported by the medical insurance companies to assure business?


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Wolf mom said:


> Plus-sized mannequins? It's now OK to be overweight and obese making sure women will get diabetes, heart issues, etc,etc. Is this being advocated and supported by the medical insurance companies to assure business?


I don't think it's a matter of whether it's ok or not, it has become a matter of it is what it is. Clothing manufacturers and retail companies are going to market in a way that attracts the most customers.

One of my best friends since kindergarten was always plus size. She used to have to shop solely at stores like Lane Bryant, which was totally uncool if you were a plus size young person and didn't want to dress like your mom. She's actually mentioned lately how nice it is to shop in "normal" stores and be able to find cute, age-appropriate clothing. 

Secondarily, although it probably should be primarily, she has never enjoyed being overweight. I can't tell you the number of diet and exercise fads she went through when we were younger that continue today, with little success regardless of the huge amount of effort and thought she has always put into it. She's not overweight because she wants to be, and never chose to be, and I'd assume that applies to most people who are overweight. I don't have a problem with her being able to buy cute clothing or see mannequins that look more like her, I'm glad they're doing this. The obsession with being thin and judging people who aren't isn't healthy, mentally or physically, either.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

I think it's great. I think it's realistic.
I clicked on the plus sized offerings in the original post.
It is nice to see how something would actually look on you if you are plus sized.
I guess I am considered plus sized as size S M L no longer seems to apply to me. (Sometimes a L is still a L, just depends on where you shop)


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

The mannequins that have been in the stores for decades do not reflect the shape and size of women anywhere around the world and never have even in the time of our moms. The display mannequins are not the ones used in design houses or factories to created the clothes sizes. 

One major change that has occurred over the past years is the changing of sizes. There has never actually been universal sizing so there is a huge discrepancy in manufacturers sizes. Women's sizes have gotten smaller. A large is now a medium, a medium a small, a size twelve (which was the average and most sold size) is now an eight and we even have size zero. This is because women want to "be" smaller. But it is only the numbering that has changed. The sizing for men has gotten larger because men want to be larger. Men who wore size small or medium underwear or Tee shirts now have to buy large. The stores are full of 1X to 4X and yet it is men who used to wear large or extra large who are wearing them. Of course the larger sizes cost more. This is all a clever game established to meet our desires.


----------



## vicki in NW OH (May 10, 2002)

Yep, another tall gal here who used to buy guy’s jeans to get a longer inseam length, except that the waist was too big and the rear too tight. For a long time I only wore skirts to avoid these issues. Dh is two inches taller than me but has the same inseam length. Sleeves aren’t long enough, and shirts in general aren’t long enough. Tall women’s shirts are practically nonexistent. Three-quarter length sleeves hit me right at the elbow bend, ‘bout drives me nuts. I knit wrist warmers to wear in the winter because the sleeves aren’t long enough on winter coats.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

vicki in NW OH said:


> Yep, another tall gal here who used to buy guy’s jeans to get a longer inseam length, except that the waist was too big and the rear too tight. For a long time I only wore skirts to avoid these issues. Dh is two inches taller than me but has the same inseam length. Sleeves aren’t long enough, and shirts in general aren’t long enough. Tall women’s shirts are practically nonexistent. Three-quarter length sleeves hit me right at the elbow bend, ‘bout drives me nuts. I knit wrist warmers to wear in the winter because the sleeves aren’t long enough on winter coats.


The husband thing - my husband is an inch taller than me but his inseam is 2" shorter than mine, so I can't even steal his pants  I do steal his shirts and jackets though...


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Mish said:


> The husband thing - my husband is an inch taller than me but his inseam is 2" shorter than mine, so I can't even steal his pants  I do steal his shirts and jackets though...


That's the way it is here too. Our kids tease him about having the car seat moved so far forward that I can't even get in the car without moving the seat first. (call me Hightower)

I too, thought I had a lifetime supply of jeans. Then issues with my hip got really bad and apparently jeans shrink in storage. At least that's my theory and I'm sticking to it! 

Large size mannequins are not promoting fatness any more than the size -2 mannequins promote starving yourself. People are getting larger. It's just the way it is. Do most fat or oversize people want to be fat? No. It's not always the result of overeating or eating only junk. Any debates in that regard really need their own thread. Clothing manufacturers need to look at the many differences in female sizes, not the 12 year old Chinese girls making that clothing in the Chinese sweat shops.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Danaus29 said:


> I too, thought I had a lifetime supply of jeans. Then issues with my hip got really bad and apparently jeans shrink in storage. At least that's my theory and I'm sticking to it!


I'm noticing this on the oldest jeans in my stash. I think they shrink more rapidly the longer ago you bought them? Glad to have that confirmed by a second party


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

If you like leggings, American Eagle has several high rise (flattering for the womanly figure) jeggings that come in long. And they are *long*. They're stretchy, comfortable, and flattering. 

I can't wear a hard line waist anymore because of hip problems, and they don't bother me.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Yes, the oldest jeans shrink first. I had a stash of jeanss purchased from the area thrift stores. All cotton, good heavy material, low rise and long inseam. I spent a year wearing sweat pants because of the surgery and afterward noticed that some had shrunk. Even after I started wearing them again some fit and some didn't. Then despite losing several inches off my waist some seemed to keep getting tighter. I know I had worn them because I had just washed them but when zipped they were simply too tight.

I can't spend time trying them on in thrift stores anymore so I bit the bullet and bought new. Not real comfortable and they don't fit like the old ones but they cover my undies. The stupid part is these are too loose, I have to wear a belt to hold them up. Yet the next size down are way too tight, like "I can't breathe or sit down" tight.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

I think plus-sized mannequins are another way to give overweight people a buy-in to stay overweight. Mannequins were never made to reflect people's figures, but were a way to show clothes to their best. They were also skinny so not to take up a lot of floor space.
I'm not for skinny, nor am I a fat hater (except on me as I keep fighting those 15 extra pounds), but I do think people need to be realistic about why they're overweight.

https://www.yourweightmatters.org/portion-sizes-changed-time/


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Mannequins are meant to display clothes so that people buy them. It is good business to be able to display clothes of different sizes. It ain't about the persons weight, it is about getting their money.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

You have to remember, most men will find a brand and a size that fits and they are OK with wearing that as a uniform. So the brands go ahead and put inseam and waist measurements on pants, hoping to lure a guy into trying something different. They are all cut different and fit different, by no means standard.

If the manufacturers market something that is a size "x" and some lady recognizes it as her size and grabs it, then takes it home and it doesn't quite fit right. Then she keeps it, because it's cute, and she might fit into it later, so she goes and buys the same outfit a size different. This affects both the clothing, and clothes storage industry. They have nothing to gain from making a size six a size six. A dude will take it back, or cinch it up with a belt, or drag the bottoms off the legs.

I have seen similar articles promoting "realistic" male models and mannequins. The most disturbing thing I have seen recently, is a survey that women find "dad bod" attractive. You know, the soft around the middle look. What could possibly be attractive about a potential mate that is going to die sooner, have debilitating joint and health issues, that is going to huff and puff tying shoes, and likely sound like a buzz saw when sleeping? As it turns out, the survey came from planet fitness, a fad gym posing as a way to get healthy. They prey upon people's mistaken belief that going to a gym is going to help them lose weight, and they try to promote a "shame free" environment to attract overweight customers. (They sound alarms if you make noise lifting, if you lift anything that would be beneficial to lift in a weight resistance program, noise is going to be a given). Some of them even have pizza day. A lot of them are located near a fast food establishment, some share a building. 

Overweight people keep eating establishments, doctors, gyms, fad diet book writers, and clothing manufacturers in business. You don't think any of those places would do anything to facilitate weight loss do you? The new trend with clothing though, is that as being overweight is more normalized and acceptable now, overweight people are wearing things that at one time overweight people wouldn't have dreamed of wearing. So the manufacturers are responding by offering the less modest designs in plus sizes now.

I'm not promoting fat shaming. Making people feel ashamed is a good way to lead to depression, which can lead to more of the unhealthy eating habits that can keep them in their unhealthy condition. But I find the normalization and blanket acceptance to be a somewhat disturbing trend. Perhaps one of the most disturbing things now, is that while anything approaching fat shaming has become highly unacceptable, "fit shaming" is now a thing. It is so abnormal to look at someone with a normal, healthy body fat index, that pretty much anyone that has such has experienced comments and behavior that would be considered over the top rude if they were directed the other way. Things like "Let the skinny girl in to the table, she needs to eat", imagine if people at a family picnic said "make the fat girl wait, she doesn't need any". It's OK to call someone "beanpole" but "tubby" is a no-no. Someone told my wife, who is nearing a healthy weight after being overweight for most of her life, that she was going to "break bones" if she lost any more weight. The person was overweight and suffering from joint issues. It's a pretty hot topic of discussion in some of the fitness circles we are involved in, most everyone that is somewhat fit has experienced it. The unspoken, yet openly displayed jealousy and contempt is the most prevalent. There have been people that have lost friends, or have been shunned by family. 

Family is the worst, I have experienced this in my own weight loss journey. All of the sudden, when you become living proof that it's not "genetic" you are a threat to them. The only thing inherited in regards to being overweight is learned eating habits and perhaps lack of willpower. The largest genetic factor that predisposes people to being overweight is height. If you ended up being four foot two, and you go out to eat and order the same thing that everybody else is eating, it's setting you up for disaster. Just because everybody in the family is fat doesn't mean you have to be, though. I'm living proof of that, and they simply hate me for it. It was really unbelievable. 

Part of me thinks it was better, when people could look at clothing on mannequins or models, and think about how great it would be if they could wear something "like that". Now they can do so with zero lifestyle adjustments, so it's kind of a form of enablement. Yes, maybe they would feel better about themselves, and that is always a good thing, but I think they would feel better about themselves to an even higher degree if they actually felt good and looked darned good naked in front of a mirror, and could run down to any department store and grab a cute outfit off of the "skinny" mannequins. I don't see this trend doing anything to promote that inward desire to change lifestyle.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I hate to break it to you but "fit shaming" has been a thing long before gyms started opening their doors. Women who worked as hard as men and had the muscles to prove it have been "teased" about those muscles since before my time. And while women's clothing comes in larger sizes now, they still are not cut for those women with athletic bodies and muscles. 

Skinny mannequins have done absolutely nothing to promote being skinny. Fat mannequins will do nothing to promote being fat.


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

Oh yes, you are right. If a woman touches weights, she gets accused of wanting to look like a man. Like weight resistance training worked like that. And double yes, while you can find skinny clothes, it is almost impossible to find clothes if you lift. The pants won't fit your quads if they are tight enough around the waist. The shirts won't fit your arms and neck unless you have a fat guy shirt with enough extra material around the midsection to make a ship sail.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Danaus29 said:


> I hate to break it to you but "fit shaming" has been a thing long before gyms started opening their doors. Women who worked as hard as men and had the muscles to prove it have been "teased" about those muscles since before my time. And while women's clothing comes in larger sizes now, they still are not cut for those women with athletic bodies and muscles.
> 
> Skinny mannequins have done absolutely nothing to promote being skinny. Fat mannequins will do nothing to promote being fat.


There are boutique type stores (mostly online) that cater to very fit muscular women, but they are still few and far between. My youngest daughter's current favorite is called, "Doughnuts & Deadlifts". Lululemon booty shorts also fit her. 

She will occasionally be shamed for how muscular she is... and she'll give it right back.


----------



## wdcutrsdaughter (Dec 9, 2012)

It's kind of a relief to hear that tall woman can't find jeans/pants that fit
I thought it was just my own short person dilemma


----------



## whiterock (Mar 26, 2003)

15 yo grandson. Last year I bought him size 13 boots, his momma just ordered him some size 16


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

barnbilder said:


> Part of me thinks it was better, when people could look at clothing on mannequins or models, and think about how great it would be if they could wear something "like that". Now they can do so with zero lifestyle adjustments, so it's kind of a form of enablement. Yes, maybe they would feel better about themselves, and that is always a good thing, but I think they would feel better about themselves to an even higher degree if they actually felt good and looked darned good naked in front of a mirror, and could run down to any department store and grab a cute outfit off of the "skinny" mannequins. I don't see this trend doing anything to promote that inward desire to change lifestyle.


Were the skinny mannequins enabling or promoting people to be thin? Doesn't seem to have worked if so.

I think the thicker mannequins have about the same chance of making people be overweight/stay overweight as skinny mannequins at making people lose weight/stay thin. None. They are an effect, not a cause.

Also, I find it odd that we seem to expect clothing companies to be the pushers for change in lifestyle. You know the same ones that hire girls who chain smoke and do cocaine so they're not hungry and can maintain the anorexic look necessary to walk the runways and model the clothes in ads/commercials? I'm not sure what lifestyle change the past 100ish years of clothing advertising has been advocating, but I'm pretty sure it's not healthy.

"I actually feel good and look good naked in front of a mirror" said no woman, ever. Even the "skinny" ones. Thanks in part to everyone feeling like they have the right to decide that your body isn't good enough - fat, thin, short, tall, apple shaped, pear shaped, light skin, dark skin, straight hair, curly hair, etc etc. We've gotten to the point that we're all unhappy with the way we look, some (a lot?) desperately, and we just seem to keep wanting to dig ourselves and others deeper into that particular unhealthy lifestyle and pass it on to other people in the form of judgements of all types.

I don't get it.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

^^ Excellent post.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> Fat mannequins will do nothing to promote being fat.


They just cost more to make but serve no real useful purpose.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Different size mannequins display different sized clothes. They facilitate the sale of clothes. That is purpose enough for those doing the selling.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Different size mannequins display different sized clothes.


Really? 

People know what size they need without seeing the clothes on another dummy.

Coat hangers display different sized clothes at a fraction of the cost, and people still have to try them on. 

Larger mannequins are more a social statement than a sales necessity.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

It may serve no purpose to you.

To the store owner is another thing altogether. Visualization of how something looks on a fuller figure mannequin shows a customer how an item hangs or looks on that figure. It sells more items.


----------



## frogmammy (Dec 8, 2004)

whiterock said:


> 15 yo grandson. Last year I bought him size 13 boots, his momma just ordered him some size 16


That's the size shoe my DH wore. Keep the used ones...they're good for clown outfits and decorative flower pots.

Mon


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> To the store owner is another thing altogether. Visualization of how something looks on a fuller figure mannequin shows a customer how an item hangs or looks *on that figure*. It sells more items.


It really tells them nothing at all about how it will "hang" on them until they try it on.
People have bought clothes for centuries without them.

Do these increase sales to "halflings"?: 







If it benefits anyone, it will be mannequin salesmen.
Otherwise the standard size could do the job at no extra cost.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It really tells them nothing at all about how it will "hang" on them until they try it on.
> People have bought clothes for centuries without them.
> 
> Do these increase sales to "halflings"?:
> ...



of all things....LOL
Your picture in the story
https://www.3dotsdesign.com/journal...-retail-increases-sales-between-10-35-percent

"Many customers may have trouble visualizing how an article of clothing will look in real life if it is simply displayed on a hanger. "


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

doozie said:


> of all things....LOL
> Your picture in the story
> https://www.3dotsdesign.com/journal...-retail-increases-sales-between-10-35-percent
> 
> "Many customers may have trouble visualizing how an article of clothing will look in real life if it is simply displayed on a hanger. "


Good catch there Doozie.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

My first job after college was working for our biggest and most upscale department chain. I was always being taken away from my real job and sent to different areas as help was needed - very interesting and I sure learned a lot. 

At one time I was sent as an extra body to the display department. I really enjoyed working on the displays but was not so enthusiastic about helping to dress the mannequins because I was not really in to fashion. The main designer was an amazing young woman from France who really knew how to present clothing - and up sell with the accessories - so it turned out to be very interesting few weeks. 

The only female mannequins we had were the tall, thin, big breasted ones. She however was very clever at filling out shoulders, hips and waists with bunting and tape to showcase larger sized clothes. Even made the feet bigger for a larger shoe or boot. As we were working it was obvious that this was working as a selling strategy as most of the women stopping to watch or ask questions were larger sized and attracted by the outfits she put together for the larger sizes.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

I thought that changing rooms and the mirrors in them solved the fitting problems.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Redlands Okie said:


> I thought that changing rooms and the mirrors in them solved the fitting problems.


Not when you are buying online.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Redlands Okie said:


> I thought that changing rooms and the mirrors in them solved the fitting problems.


Only if you have an extra 3 or more hours to spend at each store trying everything on - for me at least. You can't really tell where a piece of clothing is going to be tight or loose or fall on the stomach/arm/leg on when it's hanging on a hanger. On a mannequin at least you get some idea of whether it's even worth the time to take a couple of sets of identical clothing into the changing room in the hopes that one of the arbitrarily assigned sizes might fit right. On top of the fact that most stores only allow you a small number of items at a time in the dressing room, so it's a long rinse and repeat of finding clothes you want to try on, taking a handful (of often the same thing in different sizes) into the room, undressing, redressing several times in identical items, putting your original clothes/shoes back on, returning the stuff that didn't fit, finding some other stuff that might fit, taking several identical items of that back in with you, taking off all your clothes/shoes... over ... and over ... and over ...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

doozie said:


> "Many customers *may have* trouble visualizing how an article of clothing will look in real life if it is simply displayed on a hanger. "


And many others couldn't care less.
Mannequin salesmen are the main promoters of the concept of fat dummies.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Good catch there Doozie.


Good catch?
It's just being able to read.
Read a little more and you'll discover they *sell* mannequins and retail store equipment.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Good catch?
> It's just being able to read.
> Read a little more and you'll discover they *sell* mannequins and retail store equipment.


Yes, read a little more, like the rest of the statement...

This is particularly true in the case of clothing for women. For instance, mannequins offer an easily relatable view of the positioning of necklines and hemlines.

Or
I saw the picture you provided in the story I posted, either way, I had to LOL.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Good catch?
> It's just being able to read.
> Read a little more and you'll discover they *sell* mannequins and retail store equipment.


I don't see any mannequins for sale.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They just cost more to make but serve no real useful purpose.


Just like the carpet and tile on the floor and the paint on the walls.

It's very obvious you aren't a woman. Women shop differently than men. Women need to "see" how something looks in real life. That's the reason furniture stores have "room" displays, it's why mannequins exist in the first place. You act like someone is spending your money on the things. If you don't like them or the idea don't look. If you really object, boycott the stores using them in displays. Women are the ones buying women's clothing, for the most part.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> If you don't like them or the idea don't look. If you really object, boycott the stores using them in displays. Women are the ones buying women's clothing, for the most part.


None of that really changes anything I said.
"Like" has nothing to do with it at all.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

doozie said:


> I don't see any mannequins for sale.


I have no control over what you "see".
Unless a mannequin is made to your body measurements, you also can't "see" how clothes on a dummy will fit on you.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I have no control over what you "see".
> Unless a mannequin is made to your body measurements, you also can't "see" how clothes on a dummy will fit on you.


The company that wrote the article doesnt sell Mannequins...

When was the last time you needed to estimate the depth of a neckline or the length of a hem when you bought clothing for yourself?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> None of that really changes anything I said.
> "Like" has nothing to do with it at all.


If the larger mannequins boost clothing sales then they serve a purpose. It's a marketing ploy, one which has been proven successful in selling women's clothes. You can voice your opinion about it all you want, it won't change the fact that the targeted sales audience will buy more clothing because of the technique used for that purpose. 

What would really be useful is a bubble butt mannequin. That way large or even average rear women can see that while the skirt hangs to their knees in front, their undies are visible from behind, without them bending over. Sure it looks good on the mannequin, the mannequin has no butt.

I hate clothes shopping with a passion. I prefer to see what it looks like on a body, not a hanger. The hanger doesn't have cleavage which may or may not be showing too freely. The hanger doesn't have a rear-end which seriously affects how a dress or skirt hangs. And on the mannequin you can tell how sheer the fabric would be in real life. (don't get me started on how scarce slips are nowadays!) If it doesn't hang right on the mannequin I know not to drag it into the dressing room and struggle through changing clothes in the middle of a crowded store where the changing rooms are entirely visible to anyone working in the ceiling or slipping a smart phone under the wall.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

doozie said:


> The company that wrote the article doesnt sell Mannequins...


They remodel stores and give advice on what things those stores should buy.



doozie said:


> When was the last time you needed to estimate the depth of a neckline or the length of a hem when you bought clothing for yourself?


I don't need to "estimate" anything.

I can look at a picture or at the item itself and see what it looks like.
I can measure a hem.

It doesn't need to be on a dummy.
Let's not run around this circle again.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They remodel stores and give advice on what things those stores should buy.
> 
> 
> I don't need to "estimate" anything.
> ...


Good for you. I bet all the dresses you buy look awesome and are the right length. And also good to know that all your tops offer proper cleavage coverage. And I'm glad that all your bras offer the proper support.

Buying clothes for women is a very personal experience. Trying on clothing is an ordeal. Sizes are not universal, fit is not universal. Men's clothing has actual *measurements*, inseam, waist, neck, sleeve, all given in *inches*. Not true for women's clothing.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> If the larger mannequins boost clothing sales then they serve a purpose. *It's a marketing ploy*, one which has been proven successful in selling women's clothes. You can voice your opinion about it all you want, *it won't change the fact* that the targeted sales audience will buy more clothing because of the technique used for that purpose.


Yes, it's a ploy. I said that before. It's mainly a "PC" thing now.


> ploy
> [ploi]
> NOUN
> 
> a cunning plan or action designed to turn a situation to one's own advantage.


You're just repeating what has already been stated, and it still changes nothing I said.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They remodel stores and give advice on what things those stores should buy.
> 
> 
> I don't need to "estimate" anything.
> ...


You said read a little more and claimed they sold (in bold) mannequins.

Oh my, I've seen things with necklines that "looked" just right on the hanger, but in reality were quite revealing.
You really just don't get it, do you? LOL


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Danaus29 said:


> Buying clothes for women is a very personal experience. Trying on clothing is an ordeal. *Sizes are not universal, fit is not universal*. Men's clothing has actual *measurements*, inseam, waist, neck, sleeve, all given in *inches*. Not true for women's clothing.


All that's been said more than once.
It's not my fault women won't use inches instead of some secret code for sizes.

It's a first world problem that won't be solved by making bigger dummies.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

doozie said:


> You really just don't get it, do you? LOL


I get that you're just going to say the same things again and again, thinking the end result will be different.



doozie said:


> Oh my, I've seen things with necklines that "looked" just right on the hanger, but in reality we're quite revealing.


We ran around this circle before too.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> All that's been said more than once.
> It's not my fault women won't use inches instead of some secret code for sizes.
> 
> It's a first world problem that won't be solved by making bigger dummies.


Women aren't the ones who set up the sizing system. Women aren't the ones designing most of the clothing. Women have been screaming for universal sizing and better fitting clothing for generations. 

And again, skinny dummies have NOT helped reduce the general size of the female population. Neither have the bony thin Victoria Secret models or tiny Miss America contestants.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> All that's been said more than once.
> It's not my fault women won't use inches instead of some secret code for sizes.
> 
> It's a first world problem that won't be solved by making bigger dummies.


Oddly enough, most women's clothing is not designed, manufactured or marketed by women.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/20/fashion/glass-runway-no-female-ceos.html

Maybe it's not women's fault, either.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I get that you're just going to say the same things again and again, thinking the end result will be different.
> 
> 
> We ran around this circle before too.



You really don't appear to know what you are talking about and it shows.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I'm somewhat of a speed shopper and like the manequins because they may display and item I hadn't noticed on a rack or I may pay closer attention to details that I feel may be flatter.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

doozie said:


> You really don't appear to know what you are talking about and it shows.


You said that before too.
It's your pattern.
I think it's you who doesn't know what I'm talking about. 



Mish said:


> Oddly enough, most women's clothing is not designed, manufactured or marketed by women.
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/20/fashion/glass-runway-no-female-ceos.html
> 
> Maybe it's *not women's fault*, either.





Danaus29 said:


> *Women aren't the ones* who set up the sizing system. *Women aren't the ones* designing most of the clothing. Women have been screaming for universal sizing and better fitting clothing for generations.


I didn't say whose fault it was. 
I merely said it wasn't *my* fault.
Too many people are looking for hidden meanings and not paying attention to what I really said.



Danaus29 said:


> And again, skinny dummies have NOT helped reduce the general size of the female population. Neither have the bony thin Victoria Secret models or tiny Miss America contestants.


That has no relation to anything I've said.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Oh dear. Dressing room mirrors. I don't know anyone who has ever been happy with what they have seen in a dressing room mirror under that lighting. Well, perhaps when we were young and perfect. I recall one woman storming out and throwing the dress she had tried on at the head of the sales woman who was helping her and accusing the store of having installed a warped fun House mirror to humiliate her. Nope. A triple sided view is often not flattering. And of course most husbands always say that we look great in whatever (to protect themselves) so when we do see a back view it is not at all what we were expecting.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

There are reasons they display clothes on real people in advertisements and mannequins in stores and ads as well. It gives you a better idea of how the clothes look in a 360 view. Better than the hanger. Seeing it on other than the skinny old style of mannequins also improves that view. Arguing this opposite of this point is just an argument forthe the sake of arguing.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Perhaps a unbiased mans perspective will help,......


The women I find most attractive and many other guys find attractive,...….


Wear no make up, no fancy hair do and pay little attention to their clothes. 

Jeans a tee shirt or tank top and a hat,...…..


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

shawnlee said:


> Perhaps a unbiased mans perspective will help,......
> 
> 
> The women I find most attractive and many other guys find attractive,...….
> ...


You'd still be surprised at how much time and effort goes into finding those jeans, t-shirts/tank tops and hats for most women, if you expect them to actually fit anyway. I honestly don't really care how they look, but it still takes time to find jeans that don't ride up my rear end, or hang off it, or shirts that cover my arms but don't choke me in the chest/shoulders or billow about like a sail in the wind.

Women's clothes shopping isn't for the weak of heart. Even if you don't care what it looks like, you still want clothes to fit you, if only for comfort's sake. That takes a stupid amount of time to find generally.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Hauling your jeans up every two steps isn't a good time, nor is not being able to breath properly.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Arguing this opposite of this point is just an argument forthe the sake of arguing.


So only your opinion is allowed?
That's funny stuff.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Mish said:


> Even if you don't care what it looks like, you still want clothes *to fit you*, if only for comfort's sake.


Seeing them on a dummy won't tell you if they fit you.
It might attract your attention.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Seeing them on a dummy won't tell you if they fit you.
> It might attract your attention.


Seeing them on a dummy tells me if it's going be cut in a way that I could possibly find a size that fits or that I would want to wear. 

If it's a top: whether it's cut to be tight or loose in the chest, shoulders, stomach, how long the sleeves run and how tight or loose they are, where the collar lands on the chest as to how much/little cleavage will be shown, how long the bottom hem is so I can tell if it's going to land just below the bra, around the belly button, or down below the tops of my pants.

If it's pants: how the waist is cut - are they high waist, mid waist, low cut - and where does that actually fall on a body since all brands vary? How tight or loose the cut is on the butt and thighs, do they stretch in the right places or are they going to cut into your waist but billow around your butt or vice versa? How long the leg is meant to be, are they supposed to fall where capris do, above the ankle, at the ankle, or are they cut to pool around the foot? 

You can tell none of that from folded clothes, or clothes on a hanger. The mannequin gives clues that you would get no other way than randomly grabbing things and trying them on. It's a small advantage but it seems that most of us who shop for women's clothing will take any advantage we can get.

I'd love to hear your experience shopping for female clothing as it seems so different than everyone else's. Maybe you know something we don't.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Seeing them on a dummy won't tell you if they fit you.
> It might attract your attention.


Ding, ding, ding. Just the very reason the mannequins increase sales.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> Ding, ding, ding. Just the very reason the mannequins increase sales.


Mannequins don't have to be a specific size to do that.
You keep losing track of the focus.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

painterswife said:


> Ding, ding, ding. Just the very reason the mannequins increase sales.


Exactly.


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

Mish said:


> You'd still be surprised at how much time and effort goes into finding those jeans, t-shirts/tank tops and hats for most women, if you expect them to actually fit anyway. I honestly don't really care how they look, but it still takes time to find jeans that don't ride up my rear end, or hang off it, or shirts that cover my arms but don't choke me in the chest/shoulders or billow about like a sail in the wind.
> 
> Women's clothes shopping isn't for the weak of heart. Even if you don't care what it looks like, you still want clothes to fit you, if only for comfort's sake. That takes a stupid amount of time to find generally.





Irish Pixie said:


> Hauling your jeans up every two steps isn't a good time, nor is not being able to breath properly.



It is no walk in the park for us, uhm...older gentlemen. 

Most jeans are semi bell bottom and relaxed, IE, saggy crotch,...not looking for skin tight, but a crotch not down to my knees,legs not big enough for 2 legs and non semi bell bottom is tall order,....and do not need a belt. 

Do not even get me started on the sizing...….I have jeans that vary up to 4 inches in the waist and inseam and they are all the same size/inseam...….

The struggle is real and I am not super picky...….


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Irish Pixie said:


> I’m on the cusp of petite and regular at 5.5 ish. And getting the right length can be a pain.
> 
> My youngest wears a woman’s size 11 shoe. She’s not super tall, she just has a sturdy base.
> 
> I’m glad the fashion industry is getting realistic on women’s sizes.


The American fashion industry began getting misleading about 25 years ago when they started lowering their number sizes to increase sales by playing on the vanity factor of some female consumers.

A woman I know who has been 170 pounds most all her adult life told us a few years back that she wished the industry sized women in inches as they do men because since the 1990s although her physical size has remained consistent her clothing size numbers have decreased and she has had to re-calibrate the size numbers as she looked for off the rack clothes in her budget


----------



## barnbilder (Jul 1, 2005)

If women really gave a rip how they looked, we wouldn't need plus sized mannequins. It's all about deception. The size numbers play off of women's vanity. Most women probably wouldn't wear clothes that had their waist size printed right on there, if they were outside of the normal and healthy range. The plus sized mannequins are more deception. It's all about how well an outfit will disguise or accentuate the fact that the shopper has a self inflicted health condition called obesity. That same self inflicted health condition has enough health hazards associated with it that any attempt to normalize or popularize it should be viewed with disdain, but unfortunately, that will not be the case. Imagine a beer commercial that featured drinking while driving, a commercial with a dad sharing a cigarette with his son, or a car commercial mocking seat belt use. That is what plus sized mannequins look like to me.


----------



## Bungiex88 (Jan 2, 2016)

This whole movement is just idiotic and a waste. I can’t belive people out there actually care about something like this it’s almost comical


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Bungiex88 said:


> This whole movement is just idiotic and a waste. I can’t belive people out there actually care about something like this it’s almost comical


I bet you care about things that others are idiotic.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

painterswife said:


> I bet you care about things that others are idiotic.


I look at it this way.... If someone out there hasn't got brains enough to know I'm right.... It makes little difference what they erroneously beleive.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I look at it this way.... If someone out there hasn't got brains enough to know I'm right.... It makes little difference what they erroneously beleive.


When you can't prove you re right, you are wrong.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

painterswife said:


> When you can't prove you re right, you are wrong.


Which is why I can provide proof.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

painterswife said:


> I bet you care about things that others are idiotic.


I care about proofreading.



> painterswife said: ↑
> When you can't prove you re right, you are wrong.


Prove *that*.


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

Shrek said:


> The American fashion industry began getting misleading about 25 years ago when they started lowering their number sizes to increase sales by playing on the vanity factor of some female consumers.
> 
> A woman I know who has been 170 pounds most all her adult life told us a few years back that she wished the industry sized women in inches as they do men because since the 1990s although her physical size has remained consistent her clothing size numbers have decreased and she has had to re-calibrate the size numbers as she looked for off the rack clothes in her budget



And the fashion industry increased the sizes for men to also play to their vanity. Women always want to be smaller (thinner) then they are and me always want to be bigger then they are. Men who always bought small tee shirts and underwear now buy these items which fit the same but are labeled large.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

shawnlee said:


> It is no walk in the park for us, uhm...older gentlemen.
> 
> Most jeans are semi bell bottom and relaxed, IE, saggy crotch,...not looking for skin tight, but a crotch not down to my knees,legs not big enough for 2 legs and non semi bell bottom is tall order,....and do not need a belt.
> 
> ...


I'm with you on that. As I get older I like the relaxed fit in some areas but wish some how they could design a fruit basket behind the fly to hold hanging lower with age parts.

Younger folks think Yelp is an app to rate services but us older guys know that for ages Yelp has been the sound we old guys make before jumping up when we end up sitting down on sagging body parts not meant to swing like a clock pendulum but they do as we shuffle along.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

TMI!!!!


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bungiex88 said:


> This whole movement is just idiotic and a waste. I can’t belive people out there actually care about something like this it’s almost comical


Women get passionate about terrible fitting clothes and how those clothes make them look. It would be different if we just draped furs over ourselves or went around naked all day. It really is very difficult to find decent fitting clothes that look good.


----------



## whiterock (Mar 26, 2003)

There are some people I don't want to see naked. Cover up.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

whiterock said:


> There are some people I don't want to see naked. Cover up.


I wonder if this outfit was displayed on a mannequin that looked like:


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

There is an unwritten rule about never wearing colored underwear under white pants. Maybe it should be posted in clothing stores.


----------



## Bungiex88 (Jan 2, 2016)

Danaus29 said:


> Women get passionate about terrible fitting clothes and how those clothes make them look. It would be different if we just draped furs over ourselves or went around naked all day. It really is very difficult to find decent fitting clothes that look good.


What does a manikin have to do with it then


----------



## Oregon1986 (Apr 25, 2017)

barnbilder said:


> Hopefully this will spark a trend, and morbidly obese people will dress better when they go to Walmart to stock up on a motorized shopping cart full of chips and soda.


Oh my lol


----------



## whiterock (Mar 26, 2003)

NOTE, if you find a motorized cart in the parking lot in Texas after 10 am, do NOT sit on it. especially if you have broken both legs, you can't get off fast enough and those black plastic seats are just a bit cooler than the sun.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Bungiex88 said:


> What does a manikin have to do with it then


It helps some people see more like what the clothes will look like while on their body. It was explained in the article.

whiterock, you were lucky you didn't end up with cart seat melted to your backside. I had an impression burned onto my backside the year I broke my foot. Sure the black seat hides the dirt but OH THE PAIN from setting on one that's been outside in the summer sun!


----------

