The first thing that jumps out at one who reads this thread is all the women posting that they ARE SO TEENY TINY that they must wear ultra small clothes (and even those are falling off their teen tiny bodies...), or that size ZERO pants hang two inches too big.

Gee, you must be descendants of the Munchkins or something. What this demonstrates, though, is how far women will go to show that they are "elite", and elite in our society is defined as very thin. It is also helpful if you go on and on about how you can eat anything you want, and never gain a pound, and it is all perfectly natural for you -- YOU, the victim of so much "thin bashing"(you know, like those tragically discriminated against white people, or Christian bashing, or how rich people keep getting snubbed....).

Yeah, right. Of course there are SOME naturally very slender women, even size 000, but it's awfully rare. Most women that size are either A. Asian or B. anorexic (and in denial).

It is worth noting that size 000 clothing compares in dimensions to a child's size 7-8 (except in pant or skirt length) -- in other words, an adult woman who is as small boned and small waisted as a seven year old child. How many of these have you seen lately? Didn't think so.

I respect Juliebird's skill as a theatrical designer. But clothes for theatre are highly specialized and crafted BY HAND for a specific individual, not unlike custom creations by haute couture designers. The vast majority of clothes people wear today are mass produced and bought off a rack at a store. For the last 3 decades, it is rare for anything but a man's suit to be tailored AT ALL. Most women cannot sew anymore.

Though I have worked in a theatre, unlike Juliebird, I studied fashion and clothing history in college, and I have collected clothing for 45 years. I also have saved many of my own clothes (60s-90s) and those of my mother and grandmother. People's memories are dodgy ("I used to wear a size 12!) -- I don't need my memory because I have my own exact clothes.

I also have a lot of other people's clothes -- before 1970, women EXPECTED to have to alter their clothes to fit. That's why old clothes have deep hems, darts, cuffs. You cannot go by the printed size on an vintage garment (if it even has one) because the dress has almost certainly been altered.

MY MAIN POINT: there is not now and never has been any sizing system that anyone adheres to. There is no "absolute size 6" or size 12 or any other size, as if god himself handed absolute dimensions down from Mt. Sinai! Different manufacturers have ALWAYS made clothing that varied in size.

Typically, cheap mass marketers (Target, Walmart) make flimsy clothes that tend to run small. Very expensive chi-chi clothing lines typically run ultra-small (think Prada, Gucci, American Apparel)for status reasons, and to seem "european". The lines that run large, that do have vanity sizing, are the department store mid-level professional clothes (Liz Claiborne, Jones New York, Ann Taylor).

But there is no absolute size, and never was, so comparing anything is worthless. What is CERTAIN is that there didn't used to be a size 0 for adult women! That is newly invented, and clearly to make people like Shazzer and kitchengirl feel superior (even if it requires some serious vanity sizing).

It is also worth noting that in 50 years, women (and men) have gotten taller -- and we have never been healthier or lived longer lives. We have gotten heavier (men more so than women), women's breasts are larger and our waists are thicker. But we have also (more than half of us!) quit smoking. If all that means we require (slightly) larger clothes, so be it and it's time to stop fetishing the number on a size tag.

Yes I know how to spell "especially".

Juliebird has professional expertise on the subject, which makes her comment relevant and worth reading. On the other hand, Fractal just likes to argue with people and insult them in order to puff himself up, no matter what the topic. I'm sure that he fancies himself to be a great intellectual to whom we should all bow down in awe, but honestly, he just sounds like an ass.

Since when is intelligence determined by a person's occupation? I've known stupid college professors and smart construction workers, but I respect anyone who is making an honest living, expecially if they are doing something I can't do.

I have so much respect for stage managers. I used to do it in college, for a local community theatre. First one in, last one out, on every project. Knowledgeable about everything. Supremely organized. And a good shrink to boot.

You are under paid.

Juliebird's a costume designer, idiot. Yes, it involves shopping and measuring people. It's also a demanding, highly skilled, well-paid artistic job, requiring extensive knowledge in design, history, and literature, research, logistics and budgeting, and mad skills at making stuff.

(I know you don't need me to defend you from Fractal, Juliebird, but I'm a stage manager; I have the highest respect for good costume designers.)

I was born tall. Later photos show me at least a head taller than my 11-month younger sibling and all our friends.

That said, by the time I was in 7th grade -- oh so many years ago -- my mom, who had five other kids to cloth -- had run out of options on me. At the time I was 5'7-1/4" and weighed about 112. My elbows stuck out as did my knees. So, mom's now run out of all kid sizes and all junior sizes for me. Think about how ticked off she was that she had to then spend the money on "adult" size clothes for her really skinny 12-year old. Guess what size that skinny kid was wearing in 7th grade? How about a 12?! No kidding.

I'm full-grown now, still thinnish, but not so much (elbows and knees don't stick out: they're now proportionate to the rest of the body) and about 1-1/2" taller. What size do I wear now? Make that an 8. It's not my body that's changed so much. It's the sizes! "Vanity, thy name is...? Oh, got it: A huge benefit to the manufacturers.