I finally think I have figured out women. All of women’s problems can be traced back to clothing sizes.
I know it seems hard to believe, but you start out with a flawed image of what you really look like. It’s why beautiful women think they are ugly, skinny women think they are too big, and big gals think they look good in spandex.
Women, STOP LYING TO YOURSELVES! Four is not a size; it’s an age, possibly a length “¦
Knowing my measurements gives me a good picture of what I look like and my place in society. It isn’t a pretty picture, but it lets me better assess my environment.
My pants say 38×30 because I have a 38-inch waist and a 30-inch inseam. My coats are size 50 because I have a 50-inch chest. I think that would make me a 9 in women’s sizes. I’m not sure what sort of combination of the Pythagorean Theorem and Einstein’s Theory of Relativity has to meld to come up with the conversion, but somehow it works.
You can’t even be standard on shoe sizes. Women’s shoes somehow get to be rated as smaller than men’s, too. I wear a 13EEEE, that means 13 double-wide, or that my feet are roughly the size of a stretched Hummer. Women’s shoes don’t even go that high. They just get referred to as 7+6(X). Solving for X gets you a free scarf, extra-medium, of course.
Knowing my measurements gives me a good picture of what I look like and my place in society. It isn’t a pretty picture, but it lets me better assess my environment. For instance, knowing my stats gives me a clear idea of which women I should hit on, and which ones will just want to be friends. Granted, there are other factors, like the International Scale of Hideousness, but I have a baseline to work with.
To go back to spandex, here’s how it’s popular: For the sake of argument, I will assume 20 is a large size in women’s wear. Twenty doesn’t seem big as a number. Twenty seems like it should look good in spandex. If it had any actual correlation to something measurable, it might be OK, but it doesn’t.
Hell, if I were a 20, I might even rock the biking shorts. It’s just not realistic. If it were realistic, you would know what a terrible idea it was from the jump. My waist is 38 inches; that’s slightly over 3 feet around. It doesn’t belong in spandex based solely on the math; we don’t even need to go any further into the thousands of reasons it would be wrong.
I thought there was progress being made because women’s T-shirts were available in small, medium, large, XL, and XXL; turns out that was just trickery. They soon introduced X-small and size 0. Zero isn’t even a number; it’s a concept of the absence of something.
I’m sure, by the end of the decade, small will be the old XL, large will be tiny, medium will go to miniscule, small to molecular, and X-small will be listed as SA (subatomic). Double XL will vanish entirely from the female lexicon. It will just be a section of tagless clothes under a sign that says “Not as Small.”