Evening star., 1936-01-09
New Standardization Dresses indicated
PROPORTIONS of Women
Have Changed With Each
Succeeding Generation
Gentle Conspiracy Between Manufacturer
: and Customer Responsible for Much
of the Confusion.

women's measurements, nor Is the
labelling of the models systematized
in any way. This Is too bad, for it
results in losses all along the line.
and therefore 1t Is with real relief
that one hears something is really
going to be done about it at last.
or COURSE, determining clothes
sizes on a wide, standardized
scale will be no easy task. Women,
according to statistics, change meas
urements and proportions with every
new generation-as bear witness the
tremendous shoe sizes now stocking
the shops, compared to the ''fours and
"threes" of our parents era. Between
1896 and 1905 statistics show that
women have increased nearly 6 inches
in waistline circumference. and other
measurements have changed in a
similar manner. ParadoXically, wom-
en- are slenderer than they used to
be, but certain parts of the feminine
chassis have altered on the large side.
In spite of all these difficulties. the
approach toward obtaining authori-
tative data on average sizes should not
be impossible of attainment. Scien-
tifically, it could be done with far
better results than those produced
by the time-honored Bauman forms.
These little gems of physique were
originally made from the measure
ments of very few women, chosen,
more or less in the grab-bag manner.
AS outstanding changes in the ladies'
figures appeared, the forms were
patched or pared here and there to
roughly conform with the newest sill
houette.
ONE trouble has always been. Of
course, that both the manufac-
turer and the customer idealize wom-
ems size and shape. The model for
all fashion plates and patterns is slim
and willowy and accordingly most
ready-made frocks are constructed
along these lines, with the result that
the majority of them can only be
worn by slim young things of II to 10.
If the manufacturer does make the
effort to build his gowns for comfort
and not for speed, the customer must,
as a general rule, be fooled into buy
ing by label representing the gar
ment as several sizes smaller than it
really is! So between the two there
has arisen a gentle conspiracy Of the
,strich and sand nature, which Is
rapidly becoming a menace.
The importance Of fit and proper
sizing is at last being recognized. for
tunately. The Bureau of Standards, I
am told, is sending out questionnaires
to manufacturers and retailers to
ascertain the average dress measure
ments now in use. Later they plan to
hold a conference where they hope to
fix the specifications of the different
sizes. The purpose of all this is to
establ basis of understanding for
the guidance of producers. distributors
and users in order to eliminate con-
fusion resulting from a diversity of
measurements and methods. and to
provide uniform method for guar
anteeing correct sizes.
When all this is accomplished every
body is going to- feel lot happier
about buying and selling clothes. But
the women themselves have got to
really help, too, by not kidding them
selves" or encouraging the retailers
and manufacturers to kid" them by
refusing to face the fact that they are
stylish stouts" or omnibus editions"
In is no disgrace to be either-every
one to her type-and there is no sense
in not admitting it-especially when
far more satisfactory fit and appear
ance when the gown is purchased.
Large feet crammed into small shoes
look twice as blythe same holds true
of large torso jammed into tight,
inadequate dress.
Too many of us are welded to the
old-type standards by which our
mothers bought their clothes-it Is up
to us to realize that our contours
change with the times, and that the
sizes so popular in her day are no
more standards of perfection now
than that the pompadour holds pre-
cedence over the curly bob!
If you wish advice on your indi-
vidual household problem write to
Betsy Caswell, in care of The Star,
incIosing stamped seIf-addressed en-