Dear Lane Bryant,
Aug. 31st, 2009 09:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
valis2We've been together a long time, haven't we?
I first met you at the mall, while I was looking for grown-up clothes. You were so liberating! A store where plus-size clothing was the main product, not the afterthought. I went a little nuts, as you might remember, spending a grand over the first two years. I loved your sweaters. It was a match made in heaven.
And we only grew closer. I stopped buying clothes almost anywhere else. I began to understand your stocking cycles. You, in turn, started paying more attention to trends and fashions, and you even started using high-profile plus-size models for your ads.
I mean, there were still some strange moments. Like the time I found that you had stocked three giant racks full of halter tops, and I had to really wonder if you understood your target audience, especially later, when I saw that your clearance section was now overflowing with halter tops. Still, I thought it a momentary lapse of reason. An aberration.
But little by little, these aberrations became commonplace. Slowly but surely, you changed.
I used to find it hard to limit my purchases to under $100. Now I can barely find $100 of clothing to buy.
Let me explain.
I do not need every article of clothing to be in the season's "hot colors." Hot pink and bright turquoise are not my friends. Yes, thank you for the chocolate and the black, but I have enough of that already.
Not every sweater needs a hood. Especially not a nice comfy cotton cardigan marked "sleepwear."
Not every piece of clothing needs to sparkle. I do not want to sparkle. We've had issues with that before, remember? I'm a big girl. I don't need to blind people. And stop with the rivets. A few are okay. More than that, and you start chewing up my washing machine.
I don't mind being a little daring every so often. But a shirt that is so low-cut that you can see the front of my bra? No.
There is absolutely no reason that you need to elasticize the bottom two to four inches of a sweater. Do you understand what that looks like on a plus-size girl who has a bit of a tummy? It is unflattering in the extreme, and very infuriating, especially when the sweater in question is adorable otherwise.
There is absolutely no need to elasticize the bottom two to four inches of your tops. Or put a clingy waist in them, even though the rest of the outfit is about as shapely as a flour sack. An empire waist, sure. But not an across-the-hips waist. You of all people should understand this. One or two shirts, I could understand. But not a significant portion of your offerings.
Speaking of sweaters, when did you decide that all sweaters needed to be either a) shapeless or b) so close-fitting and thin that no shirt can be worn underneath? If these were half of your offerings, I would understand, but when the majority of your sweaters falls into one of these two categories it becomes vexing.
I don't care if everyone is wearing ruffles right now. They are not particularly flattering, and less so on plus-size girls. Adding ruffles to a few blouses is fine. Adding ruffles to the majority? Not fine. I am not a clown. I don't play one on TV.
If the trend (for the past three years, no less) does include lots of patterned tees with funky gothic script and angels and butterflies and heraldic coats-of-arms, then why do you stock only four of them? I have been to major department stores and seen the regular-size departments. They are full of tees like this. Why the ruffled blouses, and not the screened tees? Nearly every plus-size department has more of a selection, including Ed Hardy tees. And why, for two of the four that you are stocking, do you insist on using a regular neck t-shirt and then cutting a four inch slit down the very front? Do you really think that this will lay properly? Do you really think that after repeated washings this will still look good? Also, haven't you noticed that any time you stock screened tees, they sell out quickly? I often can't find my size. Why don't you carry more of them?
Hot pink and orange argyle sweaters? I wouldn't wear one on a bet. I can't imagine anyone in the plus-size world would.
For old times' sake, I tried on your new jeans again, the kind you love to trumpet about. You know, the jeans that are sized according to your own proprietary system. Yes, it's a wonderful idea, but I am still questioning the logic, considering that I tried on the "blue" version, which promises to understand that my hips are bigger than my waist, and yet was disappointed to find that, once again, I could barely get them over my hips because the zipper is so short, and again, they fit like a glove but gave me the most obvious camel-toe ever. This is exactly what happened a year and a half ago. Isn't there any further market research being done? Don't you think it a little odd that you've obviously measured the hip size, but failed to realize that the waist + zip needs to EXCEED the hip size so that people can actually get into them?
Why are so many of your models no longer plus-size? Why can't you stop making the plus-size models pose in contorted positions? I understand that you wish to avoid unsightly bulges, but I would like to see what it looks like without the model grabbing the hem and pulling it away from her, or keeping her lower torso turned ninety degrees away from her upper body.
Do you understand that I went into your store and planned on spending $225, and could barely pick out $140? And that was with buying two black tees that I really didn't even need to buy. I'm really disappointed in you. I thought we meant more to you. Why do you keep getting overexcited about certain trends? Don't you realize that not every trend is flattering on the plus-size? And why aren't you capitalizing on the trends that the plus-size are really wearing?
I think our affair is finally over. We had some good times, but I just can't deal with a hood on my sleepwear and I will not wear a hot pink and orange argyle sweater.
No love,
Valis
I first met you at the mall, while I was looking for grown-up clothes. You were so liberating! A store where plus-size clothing was the main product, not the afterthought. I went a little nuts, as you might remember, spending a grand over the first two years. I loved your sweaters. It was a match made in heaven.
And we only grew closer. I stopped buying clothes almost anywhere else. I began to understand your stocking cycles. You, in turn, started paying more attention to trends and fashions, and you even started using high-profile plus-size models for your ads.
I mean, there were still some strange moments. Like the time I found that you had stocked three giant racks full of halter tops, and I had to really wonder if you understood your target audience, especially later, when I saw that your clearance section was now overflowing with halter tops. Still, I thought it a momentary lapse of reason. An aberration.
But little by little, these aberrations became commonplace. Slowly but surely, you changed.
I used to find it hard to limit my purchases to under $100. Now I can barely find $100 of clothing to buy.
Let me explain.
I do not need every article of clothing to be in the season's "hot colors." Hot pink and bright turquoise are not my friends. Yes, thank you for the chocolate and the black, but I have enough of that already.
Not every sweater needs a hood. Especially not a nice comfy cotton cardigan marked "sleepwear."
Not every piece of clothing needs to sparkle. I do not want to sparkle. We've had issues with that before, remember? I'm a big girl. I don't need to blind people. And stop with the rivets. A few are okay. More than that, and you start chewing up my washing machine.
I don't mind being a little daring every so often. But a shirt that is so low-cut that you can see the front of my bra? No.
There is absolutely no reason that you need to elasticize the bottom two to four inches of a sweater. Do you understand what that looks like on a plus-size girl who has a bit of a tummy? It is unflattering in the extreme, and very infuriating, especially when the sweater in question is adorable otherwise.
There is absolutely no need to elasticize the bottom two to four inches of your tops. Or put a clingy waist in them, even though the rest of the outfit is about as shapely as a flour sack. An empire waist, sure. But not an across-the-hips waist. You of all people should understand this. One or two shirts, I could understand. But not a significant portion of your offerings.
Speaking of sweaters, when did you decide that all sweaters needed to be either a) shapeless or b) so close-fitting and thin that no shirt can be worn underneath? If these were half of your offerings, I would understand, but when the majority of your sweaters falls into one of these two categories it becomes vexing.
I don't care if everyone is wearing ruffles right now. They are not particularly flattering, and less so on plus-size girls. Adding ruffles to a few blouses is fine. Adding ruffles to the majority? Not fine. I am not a clown. I don't play one on TV.
If the trend (for the past three years, no less) does include lots of patterned tees with funky gothic script and angels and butterflies and heraldic coats-of-arms, then why do you stock only four of them? I have been to major department stores and seen the regular-size departments. They are full of tees like this. Why the ruffled blouses, and not the screened tees? Nearly every plus-size department has more of a selection, including Ed Hardy tees. And why, for two of the four that you are stocking, do you insist on using a regular neck t-shirt and then cutting a four inch slit down the very front? Do you really think that this will lay properly? Do you really think that after repeated washings this will still look good? Also, haven't you noticed that any time you stock screened tees, they sell out quickly? I often can't find my size. Why don't you carry more of them?
Hot pink and orange argyle sweaters? I wouldn't wear one on a bet. I can't imagine anyone in the plus-size world would.
For old times' sake, I tried on your new jeans again, the kind you love to trumpet about. You know, the jeans that are sized according to your own proprietary system. Yes, it's a wonderful idea, but I am still questioning the logic, considering that I tried on the "blue" version, which promises to understand that my hips are bigger than my waist, and yet was disappointed to find that, once again, I could barely get them over my hips because the zipper is so short, and again, they fit like a glove but gave me the most obvious camel-toe ever. This is exactly what happened a year and a half ago. Isn't there any further market research being done? Don't you think it a little odd that you've obviously measured the hip size, but failed to realize that the waist + zip needs to EXCEED the hip size so that people can actually get into them?
Why are so many of your models no longer plus-size? Why can't you stop making the plus-size models pose in contorted positions? I understand that you wish to avoid unsightly bulges, but I would like to see what it looks like without the model grabbing the hem and pulling it away from her, or keeping her lower torso turned ninety degrees away from her upper body.
Do you understand that I went into your store and planned on spending $225, and could barely pick out $140? And that was with buying two black tees that I really didn't even need to buy. I'm really disappointed in you. I thought we meant more to you. Why do you keep getting overexcited about certain trends? Don't you realize that not every trend is flattering on the plus-size? And why aren't you capitalizing on the trends that the plus-size are really wearing?
I think our affair is finally over. We had some good times, but I just can't deal with a hood on my sleepwear and I will not wear a hot pink and orange argyle sweater.
No love,
Valis
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 01:21 am (UTC)And I'm not really enamored of Fashion Bug, either. grah.
I do try department stores, but even still, it's hard to find anything up-to-date. LB? Too trendy with wacky trends. Kohl's/Target? Too blah and too shapeless and tacky.
*hugs in commiseration*
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 01:46 am (UTC)Talbot's.
Yes, really. Their petite women's jackets fit me as if custom tailored, and the quality is high. Wait for a sale, but if you need a basic tailored blazer or interview suit, they are *the* best.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 01:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:22 am (UTC)In the meantime, try wearing lowrise jeans in a freaking wheelchair. (I'll see your camel toe and raise you an ass crack you could park a truck in.)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:26 am (UTC)And I do like regular low-rise jeans, but with this butt, they get scandalous quite quickly, so I have to be careful. Being tall means that my shirts ride up. gah.
The thing is, it's like there's this lovely set of places on the internet where I might be able to get clothing, but I hate doing that sort of thing mail-order, you know?
I need to take measurements of my best-fitting shirts and then go searching for clothes based on that.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 11:56 am (UTC)I get my brother in law's shirts online, though. (3X Tall) They don't dress up men's clothes in absurd ways. It just covers his body and everyone's happy.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-02 03:36 pm (UTC)In the meantime, try wearing lowrise jeans in a freaking wheelchair. (I'll see your camel toe and raise you an ass crack you could park a truck in.)
I wasn't sure whether to laugh my ass off or cry over that comment so I did both.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-03 12:33 am (UTC)And I'm sick of the large size bras having extra padding, too. I'm a DDD and I know you will understand that I don't need MORE padding.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:42 am (UTC)If you're comfortable shopping for clothing online, I've always had good experiences with Woman Within, too.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:46 am (UTC)The last time I was there was...hmm...six years ago, though, so maybe I should give them another chance. I just remember that it was during the holidays, and they had an entire wall of reindeer sweaters. Just...no. hahaha!
I get Woman Within catalogs because of a previous resident. They scare me a little, because of the high-waisted tapered-leg jeans with the elastic waists. lol. But they do have a few things that I've almost been tempted to order. Do they have good quality stuff?
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:51 am (UTC)I've only bought tops from WW, never pants. Pants I need to try on before I buy them, because I have a huge stomach and kind of stumpy legs, so I want to make sure they fit all the way down the length. But the tops I've purchased from WW have all been very nice, good quality stuff. They've all been 100% cotton, so I can't put them in the dryer for fear of shrinking them, but that's a function of the fabric, not the supplier.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:56 am (UTC)I'll definitely page through the next WW catalog (they send one every other week, I swear). And I keep thinking Wizarding World, of course, every time I see WW. haha!
(no subject)
Date: 2009-09-01 02:59 am (UTC)Oh good heavens, no. I'm not offended at all. I was just surprised because I love it so much. :-)