September 14, 2005, - 10:01 am
By Debbie Schlussel
Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal had an article about yet another company, Nine West, that is making fashionable clothing for the gi-normous girl crowd. The article is entitled, “For Plus-Size Women, More Chic Choices.”
And that’s the problem. There shouldn’t be ANY “chic choices” for fat chicks. It isn’t hip or chic or cool to be fat. So why are we encouraging it? Everyday, a new chain like Horrid . . . er, “Torrid,” pops up with hammock-halters and thongs the size of the Brooklyn Bridge. Eeuuw!
Another thing: Why is it euphemistically called, “Plus-sized”? There is no such thing. There is fat and there is thin. Plus-sized means fat, plain and simple.
Unfortunately, the Wall Street Journal reports, “the plus-size apparel market is one of the fastest growing segments in retail, with U.S. sales up 4% over the past year to $17.4 billion.”
Remember that the next time you hear Hillary Clinton and other feminists whine about how skinny supermodels are making the country’s daughters become anorexic. Hardly.
The article tells us that “plus-size customers tend to have warmer body temperatures.” No way. You’re kidding.
Other parts of the article of note: the fat fashions are employing more “form-fitting” items. Don’t they mean “blimp-fitting”? There are some “forms” we just don’t need to see too much of. Fat designer “Abby Z” uses a size 18 as her base, from which she relies on three “models” who “carry their eight in different places.” If they worked out and watched what they ate, maybe there wouldn’t be a need for three different configurations of the calorically-endowed.
Time to stop making fat hip. It isn’t.
Tags: Brooklyn Bridge, Debbie Schlussel Yesterday, Fat designer, Hillary Clinton, Nine West, retail, the Wall Street Journal, United States, USD, Wall Street Journal