What Is The Actual Reason behind Lululemon and Lorna Jane Sizes?

[Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 19:19
Last edited 17/11/2017 - 22:59 by 1 other user

What is the REAL reason why brands like Lorna Jane and Lululemon don't stock bigger sizes?

The stats say that something like 50% of people are overweight - that the average size of the Australian female is 14-16 (not exact but roughly).

Lululemon says it caters to AU16 - but there is much discussion on how these are a small fit, more like an actual AU12.
Lorna Jane is the same.

Is it just a status thing?

I know that people have been crying out for these brands to stock bigger sizes - even marginally bigger sizes. And after all an actual size 14-16 isn't necessarily overweight.

Why don't they do this given this demand would increase their bottom line?

Edit: I'll add that I'm not just talking size 20plus, but actual size 14 or 16 in Australia. Amy Schumer was called plus size by a magazine, which she clearly isn't. I think she would only just fit into these clothes. I think they're similar but slightly different issues.

Ashley Graham is considered plus size.
Lululemon clothes would not fit her either.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5083977/Ashley-…

No fat shaming please.
Telling someone it's not healthy to be fat is not fat shaming. It's all the anger, hate, you're a lesser person and don't deserve all the good things life has to offer that's fat shaming.

Edit again: Sorry to airal3rt. I'm in a pretty bad place from prolonged abuse and I can't handle aggressive men very well. I overreacted. Sorry :/

Fashion & Apparel

Comments

        • [Deactivated] on 19/11/2017 - 00:44

          @pogichinoy: It's got nothing to do with self-confidence and everything to do with defensiveness after prolonged attack. My brain snapped because it didn't understand the context of the situation, thinking it was the same old thing I've experienced in the past. Now I understand. I've apologised. And people have been kind about it. Tell me what sustained violence have you experienced lately. How about I judge your reactions on that and call it a first impression. No tolerance for "whingers" is part of the problem. What a sick attitude is that.
          And I'll end by saying domestic violence is our nations shame and it's not all, but mostly, done by men.
          It's not who they are underneath, and they've probably been abused themselves, but these facts aren't wrong.
          Don't reply anymore I'm done with this.

      • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 21:47

        I just wanted to say sorry to airsl3rt above for my defensive comment. I overreacted. I'm not in a good place from years of not very nice behaviour. Sorry everyone.

        Ps. To those above that believe environments of abuse are normal because it's "the real world" - well, life will hand you the result of this.

        • This Guy on 18/11/2017 - 22:19
          +2

          If you need to talk please call Lifeline Australia on 13 11 14

          These volunteers are trained to help you though this tough point in your life. Anonymous strangers on the internet are not trained and will often make things worse.

        • [Deactivated] on 18/11/2017 - 23:33

          @This Guy: Thanks This Guy :) I really appreciate that. The bad responses have made it worse - confirms the original problem really - but the other half have been understanding, and have shown me different, which I am really grateful for.

    • Japius on 19/11/2017 - 19:57
      +1

      I shop at kfc all the time, it’s a great fatties brand

  • GetOffMyUnicorn on 14/11/2017 - 19:46
    +26

    "but everyone deserves to feel good in well designed clothes."

    I agree OP. Having said that most would feel better if they shed a few pounds and bought some regular clothes.

    • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 20:00
      +1

      Agreed. Everyone or most people feel better at a healthy weight, it's life changing psychologically and for your spirit. But behavioural compulsions are a hell of a thing and require the right approach to heal yourself. Till then, no one is actually sh***** than anyone else, everyone deserves to feel and look good in well designed clothes. And also, I'm not just talking size 20, I'm talking a size 14. I doubt an actual size 14 would fit into both those stores's clothes. Having said that, it could be used as motivation to fit into them I suppose.

      • GetOffMyUnicorn on 14/11/2017 - 20:03
        +9

        I couldn't agree more VivE. Having said that it's not terribly difficult to order a salad instead of a burger.

        • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 20:07
          +4

          Unfortunately compulsions/addictions don't work like that, and people's brains work differently from one another - what's normal for one is different for another.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 14/11/2017 - 20:22
          +15

          @VivE: I was massively overweight once and managed to get down to a normal weight. I suppose it was easier for me as my only addiction was laziness.

        • Aniseed Steed on 14/11/2017 - 20:23
          +6

          "Having said that it's not terribly difficult to order a salad instead of a burger."

          If only it was as straightforward as that. The multifactorial causation of being overweight makes it a very complex problem to tackle effectively.

        • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 20:30
          +1

          @GetOffMyUnicorn: Everyone is different - it's definitely not as straightforward as that for most people with long-term weight problems.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 14/11/2017 - 20:32
          +13

          @VivE: There are so many factors, like you said before. One factor is modern day society encouraging the victims and rewarding failure.

        • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 20:56

          @GetOffMyUnicorn: It just doesn't work like that. Shame often causes or propels the problem.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 14/11/2017 - 21:02
          +7

          @VivE: I didn't mention "Shame".

        • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 21:33

          @GetOffMyUnicorn: Yeah you're right, that was in my head sorry :/ I suppose you're right, having bigger clothes does encourage complacency. But I just don't think that's the whole picture.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 14/11/2017 - 21:42
          +10

          @VivE: I didn't mention bigger clothes either…..

        • try2bhelpful on 14/11/2017 - 23:42

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:
          One factor is modern day society encouraging the victims and rewarding failure.

          You want to expand on this comment if it isn't about blaming the person who is over weight?

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 15/11/2017 - 00:35
          +9

          @try2bhelpful: Nope, it's fairly obvious to the masses.

        • try2bhelpful on 15/11/2017 - 00:37

          @GetOffMyUnicorn: it might be "fairly obvious to the masses" from your perspective but you have been downvoted so much that this part of the thread has disappeared. Maybe the masses don't agree with you.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 15/11/2017 - 00:40
          +6

          @try2bhelpful if this part of the thread has disappeared then how did you manage to reply?

        • Quantumcat on 15/11/2017 - 11:37
          +5

          "it's not terribly difficult to order a salad instead of a burger."
          Have you ever smoked? When you quit, was it a matter of, "it isn't terribly difficult to just not light a cigarette"?

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 15/11/2017 - 12:24

          @Quantumcat: Excellent comparison, lol.

        • HighAndDry on 15/11/2017 - 16:52
          +3

          @Quantumcat:

          That's literally what it is. I mean, I get it - willpower is hard. So?

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 15/11/2017 - 17:12
          +3

          @0blivion: My sentiments exactly.

        • Quantumcat on 15/11/2017 - 19:19
          +4

          @0blivion: willpower alone is often not enough when talking about addiction. So it is "terribly difficult". Someone who has never experienced an addiction doesn't have any frame of reference for telling someone else what is difficult or not for them.

          Or maybe compare it to phobias. Do you have anything you're really scared of? Maybe spiders as an example. Say I invited you to pat my pet tarantula. I could say, it isn't terribly difficult to take two steps forward and lift your hand 30cm, but to you it might be nearly impossible, you might be frozen to the spot, maybe you wouldn't do it even if someone offered you $200 to do it. (Insert with phobia of your choice). For me it would be driving up a mountainside. If I had to do it I would be shaking and tearing up too much to actually control the car safely, but you might just breeze right through.

        • HighAndDry on 15/11/2017 - 22:41
          -1

          @Quantumcat:

          willpower alone is often not enough when talking about addiction.

          For anything short of physiological withdrawal that will kill you, yes, willpower is absolutely enough. It's like violence - if it's not working, you just don't have enough.

          Someone who has never experienced an addiction doesn't have any frame of reference for telling someone else what is difficult or not for them.

          That's remarkably convenient. Also irrelevant. So long as it's not impossible, difficult isn't an excuse. Certainly not for something as important as your health.

          Do you have anything you're really scared of?

          Not to the point of a phobia no. But really scared of? Sure. Got over them. Again - so long as it's not impossible, 'difficult' isn't an excuse.

          Honestly, the discussion seems to be not "thin people" vs "fat people" so much as it is "people with willpower" vs "people without willpower", with the first group not understanding how someone can be so lacking in willpower, and the second not understanding that willpower is a thing.

        • Quantumcat on 15/11/2017 - 23:17
          +5

          @0blivion: no argument can make you understand empathy if you lack it completely. I feel a little sorry for you. Relationships must be hard.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 09:37
          +2

          @Quantumcat:

          This is what I hate about people like you - you're so utterly convinced you're right that anyone who disagrees must be flawed or broken in some way. No… I empathize just fine, I just disagree with you.

        • Quantumcat on 16/11/2017 - 10:01
          +1

          @0blivion: You are failing to understand something from another's perspective. Apparently everything is easy for you, and you assume everyone else must find it the same way. You're very lucky, enjoy it.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 10:45
          +2

          @Quantumcat:

          What part of "difficult isn't an excuse" makes you think I think it's all easy? Maybe consider I'm not the one having trouble understanding others.

        • syousef on 16/11/2017 - 21:36

          @0blivion:

          That's literally what it is. I mean, I get it - willpower is hard. So?

          It requires no will power not to eat if you're not hungry.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15654046

        • [Deactivated] on 17/11/2017 - 13:48
          +1

          @Quantumcat: Everything I was scared of, I asked myself why and exposed myself to it more, to understand it and to stop fearing it.

          Of course, I'll not run towards danger/death (thats common sense) but if its an irrational fear, I did my best to conquer it. To date, if you ask me if I have a phobia of anything, I would honestly tell you not that I know of.

          Before you bring in death of loved ones/myelf, no I'd rather that not happen of course but till science improves, I know that is inevitable. Today, next week, next year or 80 years, its going to happen.

        • HighAndDry on 17/11/2017 - 23:58
          +1

          @syousef:

          Hahahahaha… you don't cease to entertain. So you linked to this:

          Satiety dysfunction in Prader-Willi syndrome demonstrated by fMRI.

          There's a genetic disorder that makes people feel hungry! That's actually interesting.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prader%E2%80%93Willi_syndrome#…

          PWS affects approximately 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 25,000 newborns.

          I somehow think this isn't responsible for about, oh, 99.99% of fat people.

        • syousef on 18/11/2017 - 14:07
          -3

          @0blivion:

          I somehow think this isn't responsible for about, oh, 99.99% of fat people.

          Based on what? That you hate fat people? Because I'm pretty sure you didn't conduct a study.

          How common are such things? Can they be passed on genetically?

          How about a whole breed of dog?
          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3571339/So-S-…

          Oh but that could only be dogs right? Wrong:
          https://www.unibas.ch/en/News-Events/News/Uni-Research/Obese…

          What you "somehow think" isn't relevant if you haven't bothered to actually learn about the topic.

          I wasn't being nasty when I said you lacked empathy. You literally seem incapable of putting yourself in the shoes of others, because you'd rather believe that they could be like you if only they tried harder.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 20:51
          +2

          @try2bhelpful: What downvotes? Where?

  • airal3rt on 14/11/2017 - 20:26
    +43

    PS. No fat shaming please.

    "Fat shaming" is not a thing, objective health outcomes pay no heed to your precious feelings.

    • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 20:35

      Agreed. There is an objective truth about health there. But saying you're overweight isn't the problem, it's the shame that comes with it that's the problem. And no one deserves to be shamed for something like weight.

      • HighAndDry on 15/11/2017 - 10:32
        +16

        Shame is internal - no one can force someone to feel shame. If it worked like that, we'd have far fewer criminals AND fat people.

        • saine on 16/11/2017 - 08:49
          +2

          However, internal reactions can be provoked or encouraged by external factors. Take motivation. There is a huge amount of research on what external factors can influence it.

          There are a number of comments on this thread which could encourage shame, including references to laziness, weak will power, attractiveness, etc.

        • HighAndDry on 16/11/2017 - 09:38
          +1

          @saine:

          provoked or encouraged

          Sure, but not absolutely compelled. That's the difference between this and physical injury. If I stab you, you'll bleed. If I try to "shame" you - if you're not insecure, you won't be affected.

    • try2bhelpful on 14/11/2017 - 23:45
      +3

      Size is not, necessarily, about health. There are plenty of size 16 people who are much healthier than people who are size 6; particularly if the size 6 uses cigarettes to curb hunger pains. Sport people, in particular, can be larger sizes due to larger muscle mass.

      • airal3rt on 15/11/2017 - 00:00
        +20

        Size is not, necessarily, about health. There are plenty of size 16 people who are much healthier than people who are size 6

        What kind of inane logic is this? There are chain-smoking drug addicts who are technically "healthier" than a teetotaller who will find out in a few years that they have metastasized Stage IV cancer. That does not speak to their risk profiles of developing all kinds of diseases.

        Sport people, in particular, can be larger sizes due to larger muscle mass.

        Get back to me when you've been injecting roids for a few anabolic cycles and are the spitting image of 'The Rock'. You know what's actually relevant for the wider population? The number of people who scrape into the healthy weight category by BMI but are actually overweight/obese by bodyfat %. FOH.

        • try2bhelpful on 15/11/2017 - 00:15
          +1

          My comment is not insane logic, it is actual fact. If the person who is a size 6 is not eating healthily and chain smoking to keep the weight down, then they will be less healthy than a person who is a size 16. That applies to the general population as well. The other problem is continuous injury due to over exercising. When I hit 30 I excercised every day, ran races, etc and I have never been sicker in my life. I had continuous colds, shin splints, etc and was continually tired and run down. A person who is underweight and over exercising is not, generally, healthier than a person who is a bit overweight. I know people who have diabetes that are very skinny. A lot of what happens in life is due to your genetics and pre disposition to a particular disease. Companies that do not cater to people who are the average size will find themselves out of business. There are certainly ones that have closed down in the last year that fit that category.

      • GetOffMyUnicorn on 15/11/2017 - 00:58
        +7

        Obesity is the biggest killer in Australia, fact.

      • GetOffMyUnicorn on 15/11/2017 - 17:52
        +3

        How are obese people healthier than trim people? lol.

    • ceebee on 15/11/2017 - 22:13
      +15

      Hey, I know you think you mean well, or whatever but as girl growing up, it absolutely was a thing, and people with thoughts like you made things infinitely worse for me, and did not help me be healthier or thinner. And I wasn't fat; I wasn't unhealthy, I just developed quicker than the girls in my school— I was 5'5" (my height now) at 12 years old.

      I was constantly shamed, not just by children, but also by adults who thought they were being well-intentioned, but were actually reinforcing false stereotypes about weight and health. The shit-talk stopped from the kids a few years later when the rest of the girls finally caught up to me, but by then, my self esteem was ragged and this affects me even 20 years later. My feelings aren't precious, I am a human being and I didn't deserve to be judged on my appearance. Especially when I was perfectly normal and healthy. I didn't as a kid and I don't now.

      Lastly, it didn't work. It didn't motivate me to be better, nor did it give me the knowledge to pick up good healthy habits— nobody stopped to teach me those anyway, I had to figure it out myself in time. It wasn't about being healthy, it was all about LOOKING healthy, i.e. skinny. All it encouraged was shame, depression, and a desire to be 'conventionally skinny' at all costs, because my friends who were this were not judged and shamed like I was, despite them being much less active than me.

      And what objective health outcomes? You can't know that by looking at a person if they are objectively healthy. Maybe if the person is morbidly obese, but the thread is talking about a size 14, and that is not morbidly obese. The point is, people are judging by appearance, they see a thin person and a green light goes off in their brain and they think, 'that person is healthy,' they see someone chubby and they think 'that person is a fat lazy c—- that doesn't do exercise,' and they don't know that. Maybe they just had a baby. Maybe they have a thyroid thing. Maybe they work out a lot but have slow metabolism. Whatever. Again, I'm not talking about morbid obesity.

      Besides, studies show that skinny-fat is worse than healthy 'chubby'. Studies continue to show that the underthin are less healthy than the slightly overweight. Yet the prevailing public sentiment opposes this, despite these objective health outcomes. Again I'm not talking about the morbidly obese with very high BMIs, but just things like the Obesity Paradox, which people want to pretend doesn't exist, because again, how can it, because fat people. So your objective health outcomes are not really very objective.

      I'm sorry, and I'll know I'll get downvoted to hell for this, because people here feel very uncomfortable when the fats are not being condemned en masse, but like, comments like this do hurt, they don't make me a better or healthier person, and they don't really solve the problem on the whole.

      • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 23:12
        +3

        Oh preach ceebee.
        I was the same. I'm 1.80cm.
        Growing up you're made to feel like you were fat because you were bigger than other people, but I look back at photos and I was a skinny bony kid.

        "Lastly, it didn't work. It didn't motivate me to be better, nor did it give me the knowledge to pick up good healthy habits— nobody stopped to teach me those anyway, I had to figure it out myself in time. It wasn't about being healthy, it was all about LOOKING healthy, i.e. skinny. All it encouraged was shame, depression, and a desire to be 'conventionally skinny' at all costs, because my friends who were this were not judged and shamed like I was, despite them being much less active than me."

        Just yeah to that.

        I was always a normal weight as a child except for one phase when I was 11, then long periods of being thin and overweight as an adult. I know the whole gambit. Shame grinds it in.
        And I'll just say this, people who shame you, are steeped in shame themselves. Those who are comfortable with themselves think decently of and just want good things for you.

      • Tyrx on 16/11/2017 - 11:43
        +3

        things like the Obesity Paradox, which people want to pretend doesn't exist, because again, how can it, because fat people

        That's because it literally doesn't exist. The report was taken out of context by people that have NFI what they're talking about so they could push the proposition that being fat is healthy. The so called "Obesity Paradox" is simply reverse causation in action as people lose weight before death, and that causes the statistics to become wonky. Studies which use BMI over the history of a patient have always shown that there's a direct link between BMI (both under and over) and mortality rates.

    • skidexa on 16/11/2017 - 18:57
      +1

      What about bullying someone for being fat?

    • syousef on 16/11/2017 - 21:37
      +1

      "Fat shaming" is not a thing, objective health outcomes pay no heed to your precious feelings.

      What a complete bunch of utter BS. People who make fun of, taunt, tease and ridicule fat people have NO interest WHATSOEVER in their health. NONE.

      • GetOffMyUnicorn on 16/11/2017 - 21:44
        +3

        Why are you shouting in caps?

        • syousef on 16/11/2017 - 22:57
          +2

          Because of the disgraceful attitude I see here. People pretending they care so much that they just have to make the lives of fat people hell "for the sake of their health" sicken me.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 18:16
          +1

          @syousef: I didn't see any of the aforementioned. I did see lots of helpful comments and constructive criticism though.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 19:29

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          Look up Dunning Kruger. When you try to use a plough horse to win the Melbourne cup, then beat and bully the horse for failing to succeed, and think that you are being constructive, you're the problem.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 19:34
          +2

          @syousef: I don't think I'm the one flogging a dead horse, lol.

        • airal3rt on 19/11/2017 - 19:34
          +2

          @syousef:

          You of all people citing Dunning-Kruger may be the high-water mark for irony in human history.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 19:35
          -1

          @airal3rt:

          So instead of an argument, you choose a personal attack? Are you trying to actually demonstrate hypocrisy? Because if so, Bravo!

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 19:42
          -2

          @airal3rt:

          Tag team within-the-minute down-voting and bullying. Refusing to consider the plentiful evidence that there are overweight people who aren't the architect of their problems. 95% of diets fail for pity sake. Your argument is simply that fat people are weak. Honestly I would pity the lot of you if you weren't doing so much harm. Congrats though at least one person I know PM'd me a couple of times then shut down their account. Hope you're proud. Score one for team fat-bash.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 19:50
          +2

          @syousef:No point getting mad because most people don't agree with you.

          A quote from the Dala Lama "Do not let the behavior of others destroy your inner peace"

        • airal3rt on 19/11/2017 - 19:51
          +2

          @syousef:

          95% of diets fail for pity sake.

          What? What in the actual f#ck are you talking about? 0% of diets "fail". Your physical shape is continually evolving as a stunningly picture-perfect reflection of what you've put into/done with your body.

          Your argument that diets "fail" is akin to stating "Well I took a couple of showers in October, now halfway through November I smell bad, clearly showers don't work". Your feelings clearly don't reflect reality.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 20:10
          -1

          @airal3rt:

          Really? You've really not even bothered to google it to the point you are unaware of that statistic? I'm shocked. Shocked I tell you.

          https://danceswithfat.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/do-95-of-diet…

          Sticking with diets long term IS HARD. To extend your analogy it's like blaming people who work 16 hour days 7 days a week for smelling and not finding the time to shower. The people who are thin are the ones that generally DON'T NEED TO DIET IN THE FIRST PLACE.

          You can skew the figure by only counting people who are able to stick with the diet, of course, and I bet you can google and find that info too.

          It doesn't change the fact that most people regain the weight by 5-10 year mark. People show off their short term losses and because they've put in the effort try to encourage others to do the same and may even bully those who won't try. Trouble is 10 years later they're back where they started or worse off. (They do however get some health benefits for the period they brought their weight down, so it isn't all wasted).

        • airal3rt on 19/11/2017 - 20:22
          +2

          @syousef:

          You can skew the figure by only counting people who are able to stick with the diet

          You can skew the figure of people who don't smell like sh1t by counting people who are able to stick with the whole showering thing

          It doesn't change the fact that most people regain the weight by 5-10 year mark.

          It doesn't change the fact that most people regain that bad smell by the 5-10 day mark after they stop showering.

          C'mon, you're a parody of yourself at this point.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 20:23
          +2

          @syousef: I lost weight and kept it off by simply eating less food and eating a balanced diet. I think you may be over complicating it!

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 21:02
          +4

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          Talk to me in 10 years. Let's see how you've done then.

          But in any case, extrapolating your own results to "everyone else can do it" is moronic.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 21:06
          +1

          @airal3rt:

          A parody of myself? Mate I've been bullied by people much better at it than you. If something smells bad here it's your pathetic attempt at trolling.

          Horse hockey. Some people stink after 1 days of not showering. Others can go for days before you can smell them. Otherwise you'd have people making money guessing how long since you'd showered. AND it depends on if they've been doing exercise. Your ability to oversimplify everything is amazing. Have you considered that for a circus act?

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 21:09
          +2

          @syousef: Wow, that's extremely negative. I don't see any reason why i'd become fat again.

          Plenty of other people I know have also lost weight using their own willpower and without playing the victim card every 5 minutes. Victimhood is a disease that needs a cure.

        • airal3rt on 19/11/2017 - 21:13
          +2

          @syousef:

          Some people stink…

          AND it depends on if they've been doing exercise.

          Kind of like how somebody's body mass is dependent upon how much food they've been shoveling in their face…

          Gee, it's almost as if there is some kind of parallel I've been drawing between these two scenarios for the last several comments that you still remain willfully ignorant to. Cognitive dissonance is a helluva drug.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 21:20
          +2

          @airal3rt:

          "shoveling in their face" Are you reading what you are writing?

          Have you seen the BBC documentary "Why are thin people not fat?" It puts things in language even you could understand. People can eat the same quantities of food, do the same amount of exercise, and put on different amounts of weight. You simply refuse to accept that. And then you go on about cognitive dissonance? Impressive.

        • syousef on 19/11/2017 - 21:23
          +1

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          I'm sorry you find reality and statistics to be "extremely negative". You have no choice to live in the real world though, so you should probably actually deal with these things.

          I see plenty of reasons beyond your own control that would lead to weight gain. For starters illness and injury, and the realities of aging. The difference between me and you is I wouldn't start criticizing you for the weight gain, despite your current behaviour. People commit suicide over this crap, and for many it is beyond their control. Whether you choose to face that or not changes reality not one bit.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 21:38
          +1

          @syousef: But I haven't critised anyone for gaining weight. I'm the solution, not the problem.

          The fact is most people are overweight because they eat to much.

          In 2016 there were roughly 3000 suicides. How many were food related? Do you have an exact number, nope. Here's one though, Obesity is the number 1 killer in Australia. Making clothes bigger is not the answer, losing weight is the answer!

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 19/11/2017 - 21:42
          +1

          @syousef: I'll just chip in here, the BBC panders to the victims. It's bias is very clear, many call it 'Fake news'. Most people are fat because they eat too much, period.

        • syousef on 20/11/2017 - 07:28

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          The solution? Please stop. My sides are hurting from laughing so hard!

          How many people got less fat because they were bullied? How many got depressed and ate?

          And the BBC panders to victims? Anything you don't like you and that doesn't fit your bias label "fake news" when the only fake thing is your review of a TV show you haven't seen about scientific studies you know nothing about. Go on then. Tell me what you know about the Vermont study. Tell me what you know about Nystrom’s replication of the experiment and how it differed. Don't Google now. That would be cheating.

          If you're the solution, we're in ****ing trouble, because the solution is willful ignorance and bullying!

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 20/11/2017 - 12:21

          @syousef: A small minority got depressed and ate because they have no willpower, easily fixed and pandering to them will only make the situation worse, eat less, exercise more, problem solved.

          "And the BBC panders to victims?"

          Yes, yes it does, I refuse to watch anything on the fake news. Looks like i'm not the only one as viewing figures are tumbling year on year!

          Perhaps if you stopped name calling and swearing for a moment then we could have a decent debate.

        • syousef on 20/11/2017 - 12:46
          -1

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          You refuse to watch anything that doesn't reaffirm your own preconceptions you mean.

          Name calling and swearing? Ha that's rich. I suppose referring to people "shoveling in their face" is your idea of flattery? I guess that's part of your "constructive criticism". Give me a break.

          Here you go. Debate this. Watch this doctor who after suffering his own metabolic crisis is in tears recalling what a jackass he was to a patient.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvB8n6zmA_E

          Let me guess. TED is fake news?

          And this:
          https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/dp5ena/the-crushing-depre…

          Oh no it's Vice. Must be fake news.

          And if I point you to the actual studies? Fake news too?

          The term echo chamber is ideal here!

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 20/11/2017 - 12:54

          @syousef: A link to Vice, more fake news, the people want solutions to problems, not leftist propaganda. Some of the TED talks are OK, some are just utter socialist drivel.

          I never said "shoveling in their face" as this thread clearly shows. That was somebody else. Please check your facts in future before making false accusations against me.

        • HighAndDry on 20/11/2017 - 13:00
          +1

          @syousef:

          When you try to use a plough horse to win the Melbourne cup

          Fat people are plough horses, got it.

        • syousef on 20/11/2017 - 13:01

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          You've just proven my point. Anything I present to you, you will dismiss. You aren't interested in discussion.

        • syousef on 20/11/2017 - 13:03

          @0blivion:

          Fat people are plough horses, got it.

          Either you don't have the intelligence to process a metaphor or the grace to debate without twisting other people's words. Got it.

        • GetOffMyUnicorn on 20/11/2017 - 13:08

          @syousef:
          I prefer Gavin Mcinnes views. (Co founder of Vice).

          "I never said "shoveling in their face" as this thread clearly shows. That was somebody else. Please check your facts in future before making false accusations against me."

          So your not going to apologise for falsely accusing me then?

        • syousef on 20/11/2017 - 13:10
          -1

          @GetOffMyUnicorn:

          Fake news. Not listening. La la la.

  • k-rokfm on 14/11/2017 - 20:26
    +20

    Because as an activewear brand you sell sizes that people will pay for. If you’re a size 20 you won’t pay top dollar for name brand active wear that you won’t fit into anymore in a few months time. You’ll get the cheap crap from Kmart or target that you can wear, not fit into anymore and throw out. Then when you’re closer to your target size then start buying more expensive things

    • [Deactivated] on 14/11/2017 - 20:37

      Thanks good answer :)

      But this can't be the only answer though. Like the first poster said, people wear these clothes for things other than exercise. They're just really beautiful clothes, Lululemon at least.

      • try2bhelpful on 14/11/2017 - 23:46

        Have a look at the Lululemon outlet stores, they seem to have a bigger range there.

      • hmac on 15/11/2017 - 00:05
        +2

        supply and demand. The basic principal

        • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 00:39
          +1

          Thanks for replying but I just can't believe it's that as there is such a demand for bigger sizes and they don't do it.
          It's mentioned all the time when articles come up about Lorna Jane like today.

        • popcornready on 15/11/2017 - 07:08
          +18

          @VivE:

          It’s simple.

          Those brands don’t want you wearing them.

      • HighAndDry on 15/11/2017 - 10:34
        +10

        Have you considered you THINK they're beautiful clothes because you've only seen skinny, healthy and fit people wearing them?

        That's EXACTLY why they don't sell bigger sizes to fat people. The moment they do, they'll turn into that "fat people clothes brand".

        • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 16:31
          +1

          No they're really beautiful by design and feel etc.

        • HighAndDry on 15/11/2017 - 16:33

          @VivE:

          "Beauty" is in the eye of the beholder - which is just a long way of saying it's a bloody subjective opinion. And everything impacts that opinion - that's why companies spend millions of dollars on marketing and branding surveys.

        • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 16:41
          +1

          @0blivion: I love design and things designed well, so I'm going to say that there is some things that appeal instinctively but yeah it is a lot subjective :)

        • HighAndDry on 15/11/2017 - 16:46

          @VivE:

          Fair enough. I've worked in marketing - call me cynical, but I pretty much know that everything is designed to affect and influence consumers subconsciously and subliminally.

        • stemcell on 15/11/2017 - 17:04

          @0blivion:

          Lol beauty in the eye of the beholder… That's what ugly people say.

        • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 17:09
          +1

          @0blivion: Thanks Oblivion. Thanks exactly the kind of information I was after.

        • Laurenlauren on 16/11/2017 - 19:30
          +1

          I love lululemon pants because they're so comfy and their material feels great. I'm not too much of a fan of the rest of their range though.

          Ironically, since having babies (and eating too much during pregnancy and breastfeeding) I'm now too fat to fit into their sizes. Plus, even if they did make my current size, they wouldn't look anywhere near as good.

  • popcornready on 15/11/2017 - 07:06
    +24

    They don’t stock bigger sizes because they dont want bigger people wearing their clothes.

    It’s purely a branding exercise. They are maintaining the image.

    Sure, short term sales increase, but long term it will have a detrimental impact

    • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 16:30
      +1

      Thank you thank you. That's exactly the answer I was after. It's just that there are heaps of people wanting even just marginally bigger sizes. Like heaps. It just didn't make sense not to do it from a demand point of view.

    • [Deactivated] on 15/11/2017 - 16:39

      Do you actually know that though, really?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join