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

And we all yearn and burn to join you in straight-size land where colors are bright, selection is varied and you don't have to take out a personal loan just to go clothes shopping! Don't cease business Ann Taylor Loft, it's my dream to visit you someday and not be laughed out the front door. Too old for Ann Taylor? Pish Tosh, you are what you feel, I'm planning to go into my sec9nd youth before I go into my second childhood!?Vava-varoom!

I agree with Matt Z - men pay more for big clothes. I eventually got to the point I had to shop at the "Big & Tall" stores, as I could no longer find clothes that fit anywhere else, including super walmarts. Jeans cost $100 and shirts typically $40-$60. Way more than other places I would normally shop.

Did the article really say "men don't pay more at all"? I feel like it said "plus-size people are being charged unfairly high prices, especially women," and since most men don't need bras at $60 a pop and don't have to walk quite the same fashion lines women do (let's argue about what constitutes "business" and "business casual" for women, especially fat women! that'll be fun! and what is appropriate to wear to a wedding, versus a rehearsal dinner? and how office wear is different from what you wear out in the evening?), I don't see how it's unfair to suggest that women pay a disproportionate share of that price.

I look at how many clothes my husband requires, versus how many I'm expected to have, and ... it's just no contest. Even if men's plus size clothes are marked up at exactly the same rate (and in that one store, it seems they were not), women are paying more. And then you combine that with the "woman tax" on everything else.

Like, I'm sorry that the men felt left out by something in the phrasing of that article, and nobody's suggesting plus size men don't also have a tough time. But when it comes to finding clothes for a fat female-coded body? Dudes, you don't even know.

I'm fine with my clothing costing a little more, but for some brands it is excessive and far beyond the cost of the extra fabric. What bothers me much more is brands that refuse to manufacture plus size clothing because they don't want fat people walking around in their designs, and companies that make plus size clothing but will only carry them online and not in stores. Old Navy does that. Their clothes run big so I can fit into their XXL, but their plus size is only online and that bothers me. The extra cost can be justified.

7 hours ago, AshAsh1 said:

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*

AMEN, Sister!

Actually, I do buy bras online most of the time. Manufacturers assume that when a woman's got plenty of padding, a good portion of that should have gone to her b@@bs. Alas, that is not the case. Even at my highest weight, I was only a C cup, but I really needed a 44 band. Never found that. Had to make do with size 42Cs and bra extenders. But, at least I could find the 42Cs online. Don't know that I ever found them in stores.

On 08/22/2018 at 17:05, Orchids&Dragons said:

AMEN, Sister!

Actually, I do buy bras online most of the time. Manufacturers assume that when a woman's got plenty of padding, a good portion of that should have gone to her b@@bs. Alas, that is not the case. Even at my highest weight, I was only a C cup, but I really needed a 44 band. Never found that. Had to make do with size 42Cs and bra extenders. But, at least I could find the 42Cs online. Don't know that I ever found them in stores.

I’ve ordered online too, but I’ve had to return about 80% of what I ordered. Bras sizes are not universal amongst stores. In fact, Lane Bryant fitted me recently as a DDD, which is crazy considering I’m a C cup at Walmart. And my boobs are substantially smaller since I’ve lost all this weight. I was a DDD at 332lbs.

It seems that there are either far less guys getting bariatric surgery -or- far less that are on the boards. I have to Agree with Matt though, there are no plus sized stores that I know of for men. Yes, there are big and tall formal wear stores, but if it comes down to casual wear, you're typically out of options. Most of your typical stores max out with a 44" waist jean. Walmart does carry wrangler in a size 46, plus a few unheard-of jeans in as high as 50 -- but, it is very rare to actually find them on the shelf. When it comes to shirts, I usually don't have a problem finding up to 2X, but 3X and 4X is few and far between. K-Mart tends to have a bigger selection, but where can I find an open K-mart, LOL?

As far as walmart goes, I think the "fat tax" is $2 or $3 over MSRP

But to be honest, I agree with it. Clothing/Cotton/leather is a commodity, and let's be honest, they could make almost two pairs of 30" waist pants out of a 50" waist. Should the manufacturers have to "hold the line" on pricing? I don't think so. I see it no different than cell phone service where you pay by the data per month, internet service where you pay by the bandwidth, and steaks where you pay by the ounce.

I travel a lot, and I honestly wish that there was a way to pay-by-the-inch (Width) for seats. You either have 17.3 to 18" of width in the cattle class, or something like 24" in the aristocrat section. All I want is a 20" wide seat and go ahead and give me a pathetic 28" pitch...and I'd happily pay for it.

Nevertheless, with the average American gaining some girth, I have to wonder why stores seem to hold the line on Medium/Large and not venture into the larger-than-large sizes. If it's a "negative motivator" to obesity, then why are there dozens of brands of cigarettes when (out here in California) they are banned pretty much anywhere.

I've gotten way off topic... I wish, and I feel that Matt and other men would agree, that there would be a nationwide chain that carries casual clothes (Looking at you Lane Bryant). Even if it was more money, I would shop there simply because I know that I could get a pair of pants and a decent shirt, instead of hoping to find something that will fit somewhere else.

I guess my last point - Getting back to the "Fat tax". As I said before, the commodity and even the risk/reward for creating patterns for a smaller production run (ad infinitum) seems justifiable, but I do think there is a limit to that philosophy. The $2-$3 extra for pants at Walmart is a deal if you ask me, but, if it cost $20 more, or some multiple of the original price, then I would whole-heartedly agree that price gouging was taking place.

How will these stores and companies be able to stay afloat when I no longer pay this" Punish Them" tax? Size 15 Junion, working to make YOU Mine!