The “Fat Tax” Is Everywhere, From Retail to the Nail Salon

Clothing stores and salons keep charging plus-size customers more.

https://www.racked.com/2018/5/21/17369488/fat-tax-retail-new-look-salon-plus-size-upcharging

Size is a sensitive subject in the clothing business. So when one of Britain’s most popular and affordable clothing giants was found to charge more for plus-size clothing, it was accused of imposing a “fat tax” on women.

“Obviously it costs more to make plus-size clothing because of the amount of fabric used, but if the pricing metric is going to be based on size, then every size should be priced differently."

“If smaller-sized people aren’t getting discounts, then plus-sized people shouldn’t have to pay a surplus."

“We rarely see ‘tall’ and ‘maternity’ editions of clothing being priced differently. It’s cruel and unfair to single out one body type.”

Fashion’s ‘fat tax’: Bigger women furious at having to pay more for clothes

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/fashion/designers/fashions-fat-tax-bigger-women-furious-at-having-to-pay-more-for-clothes/news-story/b170b879bd535dd7bc8d1724e1aaa59e

29 minutes ago, Orchids&Dragons said:

And the label in the coat looks a bit like "Barnum . . ."

*Dying laughing* WHo knew... These are also made for men! Oh I can see this french designer now after the ring leader comment. Balmain is off the scale for anything. $495 for a french logo polo shirt.

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by skinnylife

17 minutes ago, skinnylife said:

*Dying laughing* WHo knew... These are also made for men! Oh I can see this french designer now after the ring leader comment. Balmain is off the scale for anything. $495 for a french logo polo shirt.

Some people have more money than sense! Although, if I were paying $495 just for that stupid logo, I'd want it even bigger so that people across the room knew how much money I had to waste on ugly shirts!

And those men's coats - looks like those pouty boys enlisted in the Continental Army! They have tails! Where are the George Washington wigs?

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by Orchids&Dragons

Yeah it's just a matter of time until mine have embroidery that says.
More Money than Good Sense****I Bought This!
Now that's Truth in Retail to me.?????

So, I'm confused, if men are forced to pay more for 2 categories of dress, and only 1 for women, how is this statement from your title accurate?

My title reflects the news articles I found. I didn't create the news, I just shared it. And when have titles ever represented the content of an article accurately? Titles like this are created to draw readers in. To titillate and confuse, to poke and pester... No reason to blame the messenger.

I have no interest in misrepresenting a title to draw readers in here. What's the prize?

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by Missouri-Lee's Summit

So, I'm confused, if men are forced to pay more for 2 categories of dress, and only 1 for women, how is this statement from your title accurate? "but almost exclusively on women's clothing, not men's" Plus-sized Men also have the added "benefit" of having to pay extra for suits, that pretty much always have to be tailored to fit, another fun additional cost, just to have something they can wear to work.

I'm not sure where I heard it, and I may be mistaken, but I thought men received altering services for free in most places (where they bought their suit), but women were nearly always expected to pay for the same services.

Shoes aren't priced according to size, are they? There's a big difference in a woman's 5 and 11, no? A lot more leather, more bling, more everything.

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by Missouri-Lee's Summit

duplicate post

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by Missouri-Lee's Summit

duplicate post

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by Missouri-Lee's Summit

2 hours ago, Missouri-Lee's Summit said:

So, I'm confused, if men are forced to pay more for 2 categories of dress, and only 1 for women, how is this statement from your title accurate? "but almost exclusively on women's clothing, not men's" Plus-sized Men also have the added "benefit" of having to pay extra for suits, that pretty much always have to be tailored to fit, another fun additional cost, just to have something they can wear to work.

I'm not sure where I heard it, and I may be mistaken, but I thought men received altering services for free in most places (where they bought their suit), but women were nearly always expected to pay for the same services.

Shoes aren't priced according to size, are they? There's a big difference in a woman's 5 and 11, no? A lot more leather, more bling, more everything.

In my experience the tailoring for men's suits is not included in the price.

One thing I will grant - men's suits usually have plenty of fabric to hem the pants. Women's suits usually have very little fabric to work with, making it very difficult for tall women.

Edited August 21, 20187 yr by Orchids&Dragons

2 hours ago, Orchids&Dragons said:

In my experience the tailoring for men's suits is not included in the price.

One thing I will grant - men's suits usually have plenty of fabric to hem the pants. Women's suits usually have very little fabric to work with, making it very difficult for tall women.

I found it! This isn't the exact source I remember (I think it was a fashion documentary on Netflix), but this will have to do. Not a bad source either, I suppose. The only downside is that this is a very dated source.

For many women, finding the perfect dress or outfit is only half the battle. Then, it must be altered.

Women frequently have to pay for such services, though basic alterations have commonly been provided to men at no charge. Stores and tailors say altering women's garments is generally more complicated than it is for men's.

But Saks Fifth Avenue has begun providing basic alterations to skirts and dresses at no charge as part of a settlement of a sex-discrimination suit brought by two California women. Saks no longer charges to hem unlined and unpleated skirts, shorten or lengthen sleeves, take in or let out center and side seams in unlined garments and add shoulder pads to dresses. Previously, each of these services cost $12 to $18.

https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/01/style/fashion-in-fitting-room-a-little-more-equality.html

Edited August 22, 20187 yr by Missouri-Lee's Summit

All I know is no man ever had to pay $60 for a bra who's underside snapped in less than two months, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Those are essentials they are price gouging on but not necessarily increasing the quality of...

I'm a bit taller than the average woman, and there were times that I would have to buy tall pants to get the length I need, and they were often priced $2-3 more than the average length clothes. Now add plus size to the tall length, and it was often $5-10 more than an average size, even in my work clothes which happen to be scrubs, nothing special about them. I hated it but accepted that I was probably paying for the extra material. I always had to shop online to find the sizes I needed, they were rarely available in the stores, so add shipping on to that in some cases.

(Side note here: has anyone noticed that you gain length in clothing when you lose weight? I don't always need to buy talls anymore, I think my clothes hang lower or something, so I can get away with the average inseams more often now.)

I do most of the shopping for my family and it's definitely hard to find other than average sizes in the mens areas too, my husband and youngest son are just over 6 ft tall and it's near impossible to find a 36 inch length, everything stops at 34, so again, have to look online and wait to get them in the mail.

2 hours ago, GreenTealael said:

All I know is no man ever had to pay $60 for a bra who's underside snapped in less than two months, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Those are essentials they are price gouging on but not necessarily increasing the quality of...

Sports bras... I've had nothing but bad luck with fit and function until recently. I'm embarrassed to even say how much I've spent on bras in the last year alone.

Also with the different womens fashion tops, they make sure that just one style is not going to work with every top. Just invested in a strapless bra so I don't have to try to figure out which bra will work with which top anymore.

9 hours ago, ChaosUnlimited said:

Sports bras... I've had nothing but bad luck with fit and function until recently. I'm embarrassed to even say how much I've spent on bras in the last year alone.

Also with the different womens fashion tops, they make sure that just one style is not going to work with every top. Just invested in a strapless bra so I don't have to try to figure out which bra will work with which top anymore.

I wore an H cup, now a DDD

I needed a lot of support (still do) and "they" made me pay for it

Edited August 22, 20187 yr by GreenTealael

On 08/21/2018 at 07:44, Frustr8 said:

And a little more fuel on the ?, here I brought a cord of wood myself. Yes it looks like at Wally World the selection is better. Lets look a little closer. Now what is the shade we're highlighting? Nausea green,baby poop yellow, dead calf liver maroon, indiscriminate gray, let's dump them all together, make a shirt in a print that shouts " I'm fat, I grabbed the first thing I could find" Lets make it with 1 sleeve instead of 2, let's cut the bottom at an angle so it looks like she was mauled by an animal at the zoo! Now if we make any slacks , let's make the pockets,decorative only, a half - inch deep sounds good, let her hubby carry keys and things for her, or she can jam things in a purse, and we will make them ugly too , let's make only 2 sizes, big so everyone can watch her for shoplifting or small so she can't ever get a Protein Bar in let alone money. She already spent $17.99 on a shoddy made shirt, didn't she? She'll spend more, she brought some with her today! Ok back to the slacks, let's make the legs like 2 sausage tubes but make the crotch seam skimpy in the rise and only single stich it with nylon or cheap cotton thread, the nylon will itch, the cotton will break the first time she wears it, time it so it's in an a embarrasing location, like in line at the bank. AND let's taper the legs on the dressier slacks , like 28. inches at the thighs, 8 In at the ankles. Ooh this is fun isn't it? And make them in two basic lengths, one to fit 4ft8in, the other 6ft 3in, that's the only two leg lengths we needed anyway. Fat women only come in one height, short fat blob and excuse me, are you a woman or a transvestite? sizes. Now sizes, let's send in 15 1x(16-18) 5 2X, 2 3X, 1 4X, 1 5X. That way unless she happens to be there when they are unpacked, she's out of luck. And make sure you never use more than a single stitching , those seams will never have much pressure anyway. That will sell like gang busters, Sam Waltons motto. was "if we make it or stock it, they will come." Lets have ours be" Make it shoddy, make it ugly, make it ill-fitting, fat women are gullible and stupid in the first place" . I'm sitting here in a sweatshirt and gym shorts, bought from the skimpy mens department, why? Unbelievable but that's where the pink sweat shirts were, there was enough length in the shorts and they do usually have more 4X in and they have a bigger crotch seam to handle guys," package", no I wasn't granted that package but when I bend over, it doesn't separate my buttocks and finish the job spitting me. where God started. And I'll trade you guys three diagonal cut,shirts, 2 t-shirts in baby poo yellow, and a tube top that the first time I bend over my feminine enhancements fall out for one nondescript grey sweatshirt. You don't want them? Guess what, I don't either! ?

Oh Frustr8, how you hit the nail on the head! Don’t forget that apparently all fat women also want to look like flowered muumuu queens or even better how much I really love wearing shirts with Winnie the Pooh characters on them because apparently all fat women want to wear that crap.

I know I'm getting in here late, and probably too far along in this discussion, BUT....

I agree and disagree with the cost of plus size clothing for men and women. First off, it does cost the manufacturers more for the fabric and labor. Secondly, I think it highly depends on where you shop to see a discrepancy between the cost of regular sizes and plus sizes. For example, Lane Bryant and Torrid are very pricy stores. This could be equivalent to a Ann Taylor Loft or White House Black Market for smaller women. The problem comes in to play that plus size men and women don't have the less expensive clothing store options, for example, like an Old Navy (with the exception of shopping online). And that brings me to another point, why is it that plus sized people are inherently forced to shop online if they want selection? Matt Z is right, the men's section is slim to none as well. Why is it that the plus size section at Target is TINY and mixed into maternity, that is even TINER? Don't these retail stores know that the average US woman is a size 16.

And don't get me started about undergarments for large women. When you can't find your bra size anywhere but Lane Bryant and have to pay $50+ for one, GIVE ME A BREAK...I mean unless you want to order bras online, *rolling my eyes again*

Needless to say, no longer being a plus size woman is the BIGGEST NSV there is. I'm glad I don't have to struggle with which stores will have my size, or pay extra for those clothing options.