'Plus' in the designer fashion world is anything above a 14 and the article hinted that sizes would start there-how far beyond a 14 they will go though is the main issue for me. I would be extremely annoyed if sizes 14-18 were produced and classed as 'plus size', because lets face it, that's normal and average in the UK, there's nothing 'plus' about it and it would make the whole venture seem like a cheap publicity stunt. Although it's unusual in designer or boutique brands, most high-street shops do go up to a 16 or 18, so the idea that these women 'struggle' to find fashionable clothing isn't very realistic.
Other comments turned to the usual closed-minded opinions of being overweight=unhealthy. Should we be promoting plus sizes when it's dangerous and poses many health risks? Well, I can only speak personally and although I'm sure it isn't doing me any favours being this size (although I don't have any proof that it's 'bad' for me)-there's absolutely nothing I can do about it anyway. I'm not eating any differently (if anything less actually), than when I was a little size 12 and nobody had an opinion about my weight, health or eating habits then. Of course I'm not as active as I was, but that's entirely down to illness, rather than my size hindering my athletic ability and therefore why I've put on weight. The idea that 'fat people' sit around all day munching on crisps, doughnuts and fizzy drinks is ridiculous. I'm sure some do, but then so do some skinny girls-what a shocker! Just as I'm sure there are many people my size who are perfectly fit and healthy, because that is just their natural shape. It's not mine, but it's who I am for now and I don't think I should be unable to purchase stylish clothes because of it. How someone like Karl Lagerfeld could be such a genius and such a bigot at the same time is beyond me. SocalAlex provided a very useful quote, which I hadn't been aware of before (although I try to block out most of what Lagerfeld says) When he was told last year that German magazine Brigitte intended to use "ordinary" women in their fashion shoots, designer Karl Lagerfeld branded the move absurd and said that it was driven by "fat mummies sitting with their bags of crisps in front of the television, saying that thin models are ugly." What an ass!I know that many people retaliate by saying being underweight is just as dangerous as overweight. I personally think we need to be more accepting of all sizes. There are some people who are just naturally slim, but of course there are many that claim to be and it's pretty obvious they aren't. I don't really think I need to go into that-we all know what is healthy for us.
Another criticism was that plus sized models are somehow too toned, perfect and in proportion and that's not reflective of the real plus size women out there. Well of course that is the case-they are models! Every size 8 girl in the world doesn't automatically look like Gisele does she? Likewise I don't look like Crystal Renn, but that's why she's a model and I'm not! I am however divided about the use of 'plus size' models in the fashion industry just now. I don't like the idea of using them just for publicity and to try to appease the public over the last few years of the 'size zero' debate by putting one 'larger' model on the runway. Besides, models only have to be a size 12 or over to be considered 'plus size' and although it's a huge difference from the usual stick thin models, it's not exactly 'plus' to us, is it?
The article (and some comments) mentioned that proportions are different over a size 16 and that it's difficult to find a true size that fits most women of that size. They say different people put on weight in different places and how can you dress a full size 18, top heavy size 18 with 14 bottom etc etc? While I understand what they're saying (it is difficult to cut from one block to cater for the masses)-I don't really buy it. Women of any size have to maybe go up or down depending on whether they have big boobs, a rounded tummy, huge hips or are very tall or petite. That's just life and something that affects us all, regardless of being a size 12 or 22.
(Nearly) finally-maiaH said "fat people don't shop"-clearly you've never visited my blog! I'm still the same fashion loving, shopaholic I was 10 years ago, regardless of my size. It's only now that it's more difficult for me to shop-Topshop, Miss Selfridge, Oasis, Warehouse etc are not places that cater for me. Yes I'm angry about it, but it just means I have to shop elsewhere-not that I revert to wearing one-size-fits-all tents and sit and eat all day in a depression (sorry Karl)! I also didn't like that he/she said "people who buy A LOT of clothes care a lot about their appearance, so keep themselves thin" and suggested that fat women lack confidence. Have you seen the amazing fatshionistas out there who blog? I'm also sure I come across as pretty confident and I do care about my appearance, anyone who knows me is well aware of that-those comments are just bull.
I liked this comment from katybird "size 14 plus-size??! How depressing. Anyone who's shopped in Topshop will tell you that a size 14 in there is NOT big...". I hear ya! Philly82 reckons that bigger sizes sell out first on the high-street and shops are left with rails of size 8's "I wish stores would look at sales figures in relation to sizes and order in more of what size flies off the shelf first". This also quashes the theory that bigger sizes don't shop or that demand for bigger sizes isn't there. Of course I don't complain to Topshop staff every time I'm in that there is nothing in my size-I know there isn't before I even set foot in the door! Do we really have to do go through that every day to show there is demand for larger sizes? I think if any of these stores took a look around, they would realise the demand is there-I can't comment on why they are doing nothing about it. I think it's antiquated to suggest that we don't deserve to wear that hot Toppers dress just because we are curvier. I also think that if these shops believe there is a big enough demand for the size 4's (US size zero) that they stock (really?), which is honestly on the 'very thin' end of the scale (no matter if you get there naturally or not), they should balance this out with sizes on the larger end of the scale-and no, a size 16 doesn't count as 'very large' in my book! What I've never understood is those that complain when Nicole Richie, Victoria Beckham, Mary Kate Olsen etc are scarily thin and yet they don't pick up on the fact that their clothing fits them perfectly. People actually make jeans for adults that tiny! A size zero is the equivalent of a childs body, yet high end and high street designers cater for them but it's supposed that if you don't make clothes for 'fat people' they'll be forced to lose weight to fit smaller sizes.
Really finally, what made me laugh and I'm not usually one to point out or discuss a persons dress size, because we all carry weight differently and obviously our height matters when it comes to sizing choices, but the article said Beth Ditto was an 18...really? Really, really? She's never struck me as being an 18-I feel they got that wrong. If she is, what's all the fuss about her then? I'd love to hear your views on any of the topics discussed here. 
Beth Ditto images zimbio, Marc Jacobs A/W '10 images Vogue
