Discussion
  • Read More
    RicwashKelly Faircloth
    3/30/16 7:18pm

    $12.99 for a 96 page advertisement of clothes I will never be able to afford that won’t look right on my small boobs, large gut, big booty body?

    Bish please!

    All I need is a dress (Hopefully lavender, definitely not purple. Purple on a woman with a big gut and a big booty looks disturbingly like a grape.) for my sister’s wedding in May. Her colors are purple and lavender, my daughter is in the wedding, and as the sister of the Bride, and the mother of the flower girl, I have to look NOT hideous in any of the tastefully professionally done pictures.

    I know this magazine isn’t going to have a damn thing in it that is even somewhat useful.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      MallorieRicwash
      3/30/16 7:33pm

      I am the owner and designer of a customizable, ethical, affordable clothing line - www.smartglamour.com - and we are releasing a new mini collection of spring/bridal-ish/special occasion dresses in a few weeks. Would be happy to chat with you!

      www.smartglamour.com

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      JustPeachyAgainRicwash
      3/30/16 7:49pm

      So true. That model on the cover is beautiful, but it seems like all plus size models are very hourglass-shaped.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    DiosabellaKelly Faircloth
    3/30/16 6:37pm

    Lane Bryant is so confusing to this fatty. 90% of the time when I visit the store, everything is frumpy and awful. Then, twice a year, they store is overrun with great shit, but just twice a year.

    Worse yet, Lane Bryant stuff is always sized so weird. I’m sure it works for some folks, but I feel like a chubby toddler trying on my mom’s grown up clothes as everything hangs two feet longer than it should.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Snake PersonDiosabella
      3/30/16 6:41pm

      and the quality is akin to forever 21 but for gap prices

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      LostAnotherBurnerPasswordDiosabella
      3/30/16 6:44pm

      If I could just get a heads up for the 2x/year when it’s full of awesome stuff, and could skip the rest of the year’s ugly shit- Is that so much to ask?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ClaudiusBlaudiusKelly Faircloth
    3/30/16 6:48pm

    If I have to read things like “CHIC AT ANY SIZE!!!!!!!!!!!!!” ever again, I will be forced to poke my eyes out. Why is this still a thing? Statements like this, plastered on magazines etc., are postured like it should be accepted as a “happy surprise!!!” by anyone who doesn’t fit strictly defined standards of size and beauty. Like—SURPRISE, YOU MIGHT NOT BE VIEWED AS A GROSS POTATO BY SOCIETY IF YOU BUY THIS SHIT!! BE GRATEFUL!!

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      katekatekatekatekateClaudiusBlaudius
      3/30/16 7:34pm

      Came here to say just this thank youuuuu

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      batbogeyhexClaudiusBlaudius
      3/30/16 7:44pm

      Tangent: just yesterday I was watching a video by The Young Turks about the networks refusing to air the LB lingerie ads.

      Oh. My. God. The comments.

      Dude Nation vented it’s spleen. Somehow, the models contentment and confidence was tantamount to being ordered — by a batallion of naked land whales with AK-47s— to immediately conjure up a boner over the fat girls in lingerie.

      So many commenters (with masculine avatars) hooted virtually over Ashley Graham (the cover model on Glamour) “getting tired after two punches.” Graham is majorly into fitness. She could probably outlast most of the scandalized dudebros in the comment section in a kickboxing class.

      One more time: GUYS? I HAVE NEVER DEMANDED ANYONE FIND ME FUCKABLE. NOT ONCE. EVER.

      But guys ages 16 to 60 have felt that they just need to let me know that my fat, jogging body makes their dicks go limp.

      Ironic, really. Medium-sized women advertising underwear in sexually confident postures = Fat BitchesTM forcing me to date them. Guys giving me unsolicited advice on the degree of my hideousness while running and circuit training? They aren’t forcing anything on me. (Other than the imperative public service announcement about how my fat is killing me and costing them money. Except, you know, it isn’t.)

      Thanks. I feel better now.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Snake PersonKelly Faircloth
    3/30/16 6:38pm

    Interesting that they chose a billowing dress in the wind, which makes her look just a tad bigger without sacrificing her conventional attractiveness.

    What I’m saying is...can we please have a size 20, 22, 24 cover model? One with belly fat and a protruding ass and maybe without a sharp jawline? I’ll start believing that Lane Bryant believes “plus is equal” (just gagged) when I start seeing women who actually do look like me in their advertising.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Snake PersonSnake Person
      3/30/16 6:43pm

      OH AND ALSO “chic at any size!” is so fucking patronizing.

      Make chic clothes. Make them in my size. Make them affordable. I will be chic in those clothes at my size. Just like I’m chic right now.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      batbogeyhexSnake Person
      3/30/16 7:46pm

      Oh no. Because showing women that size in fashionable clothing might burn the eyeballs of men who think anyone who isn’t masturbation material needs to put on a mumu, sit in the corner, and cry over the many boners they’ll miss out on by being disgusting and lazy.

      Or so the internet tells me.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Dust for VomitKelly Faircloth
    3/30/16 6:33pm

    great, so when the $12.99 pamphlet doesn’t sell well, they’ll say, “look, plus size doesn’t sell”.....

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ladylaurathelibrarianKelly Faircloth
      3/30/16 9:56pm

      See, this shit drives me up a wall because, as others have said, it’s so goddamn patronizing—but more than that, it’s fucking expensive! Like, my issue isn’t that cute plus-size clothing doesn’t exist. It does (it didn’t until about 5-10 years ago, but let’s let that go for the mo). But I can’t afford it. Like, if I routinely had $60-90 MINIMUM to spend on dresses or jeans, sure, I could find good stuff several places. But I don’t! I’m a part-time employed full-time grad student who still needs to look professional. I don’t need to spend an hour online narrowing down an already small field and then putting three dresses that MIGHT look good (of which I can SORT OF afford one) on my credit card and wait 3-5 days and try them on and have them suck and send them back. I want to be able to walk into Old Navy and pick up three ten-dollar dresses, two pairs of 50% off leggings, and a pair of flats on a weekend for $60 like 85% of everyone else on goddamn earth.

      It’s really discouraging when I let myself understand that the fat stigma is that strong in design/marketing because holy living fuck Old Navy could get themselves out of whatever hole they think they’re in IN ONE QUARTER if they just stocked 2x-4x of the same clothes in their stores. Like, you got up to 20—JUST KEEP GOING. You too, Payless—make wides available on all your lines (esp. American Eagle and Brash) and double-order the 9-12W and you’ll have to stash the profits in motherfucking Gringotts to keep up.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        The Obsidian Orderladylaurathelibrarian
        3/31/16 12:55pm

        This what i’ve been having to do lately, spend $300 on my fucking credit card, just in the hopes that one of the 5 items I picked will fit and that I didn’t waste money on shipping. I’ve had to send back all of my last three orders from modcloth, and they take over a month to process the refund. I’m about to stop buying from them all together. If it’s forever 21, you’re fucked and just get a store credit, which yeah i always need more leggings but everything else is such a gamble. I can’t even buy bras at lane bryant anymore, because they don’t stock big enough bras to fit me in the store. If I want a bra today, I have to drive to the big fancy mall in town, and pick between the two bras Nordstrom will have in stock in my size.

        I literally have a box in my closet of clothes I thought would work but ended up not being to wear or return for various reasons. I’m about to sell it all on ebay to try to make some of the money back, but lord knows I’ll probably only get a quarter of it back because the shit wasn’t worth it to begin with.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      OwldressedascheshirecatKelly Faircloth
      3/30/16 6:58pm

      I’ve basically just given up on trying to look stylish and I’m now either wearing t-shirt and jeans or athletic wear (I go to the gym, so I give myself an excuse to wear it whenever I want).

      I also feel that the plus-size industry has really, I don’t know, sold out to a certain body type. In straight sizes, you have to be model thin to look great and in the plus size world, I feel there is pressure now to be voluptuously full figured and tall. I’m not built like Ashley Graham but I wish I was which is no different than wishing I looked like Kate Moss? Either way I still feel like shit about the way I look.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        pygmypossumOwldressedascheshirecat
        3/30/16 9:08pm

        Yep! She’s the conventional hourglass. Not a thing wrong with it, she’s gorgeous and sexy as hell to me. But it’s just ONE body type, and not one all of us have.

        It’s all so difficult.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        BabyGotFrontpygmypossum
        4/05/16 2:22pm

        I don't think fashion models are a good people to try to emulate, regardless of size. I'm not plus-size but I don't look like Chanel Iman, Kendall Jenner, or Kate Moss. And I never will. And that's ok!

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      Chester the DogKelly Faircloth
      3/30/16 6:41pm

      When will plus size clothing stop being a niche market that deserve special editions of magazines? It deserves to be called clothing and plus size models should stand right next to non-plus size models because the more we put a label on stuff the less we are helping remove stigmas.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        DashleyinCaliChester the Dog
        3/30/16 8:28pm

        If Glamour had ovaries as an organization, they’d hire a staff and publish a quarterly (with the option to go monthly if it’s especially successful) fashion magazine that’s geared toward plus-size women in its models and featured fashions that otherwise doesn’t mention size at all. No patting themselves on the back, like literally just a magazine that looks exactly like every other women’s magazine, but with fashion content for sizes 14 and up, featuring a diversity of bodies.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        ThermosSeekerDashleyinCali
        3/30/16 10:20pm

        I kind of disagree. I think plus size fashion should be in the regular magazine all the time. And not just one page by a popular fashion blogger. If the look is boho chic or upscale equestrian or Biker style business casual it should be shown on straight size models and plus size models posing down together. If they do that I will get to see a variety of looks on a regular basis and seeing size and shape diversity will help re calibrate the public’s eye on how women look. In my opinion, a lifetime of looking at media in which all the women have a similar size and shape has been detrimental. If all the women we see held up in the media look the same it is easy to think that anyone that looks different looks wrong.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      thecatsaysmooKelly Faircloth
      3/31/16 12:52pm

      $12.99 on newsstands? For a mere 96 pages?

      Plus size shoppers are used to paying more for less, so this fits right in with the rest of the fashion industry

      Reply
      <