If you’ve ever bought clothing, and I’m betting that you have , you know that it’s just not safe to pick something up off the rack and buy it without trying it on. Of course this is way more of an issue for women than it is for men – men don’t need lots of darts in their trousers or shirts to fit around curves.

That is for a whole bunch of reasons, and none of them have anything to do with the size and shape of YOUR body, and have absolutely zero to do with the number on the label sewn into the clothing.

The first reason is to do with manufacturers’ standards. Every clothing designer and manufacturer uses their own ‘block’ patterns. These are basic templates for all the basic styles of clothing, and everyone has their own small variations. Many years ago when I was about 20, I did a pattern-making course and drafted my own blocks onto light card, which were then used as a basic template to make everything else. I was really really careful in my measurements, but my blocks were slightly different to those of the woman working on the next bench. Now a 1/4″ or even 2mm variation in each seam can add up to a big difference in the overall size of the clothing item. Which is not a problem at all when you’re making your own patterns and your own clothing to fit YOUR body – but is a huge issue when you’re mass-producing clothing for potentially thousands of people.

The second variation comes in with the designer. What is comfortable and or/flattering for one designer is restrictive and ugly for another. Or baggy and beautiful, whatever the current trends are. But one designer may like an extra half inch at the waist, another might prefer 3/4 of an inch. Note that’s a designer’s individual preference, influenced by we know-not-what, and has nothing to do with the size and shape of your body. This difference is called design ease, and varies hugely, even across clothing bought from the same design label or store.

I’m imagining that blocks are now stored in computer systems and designers produce their patterns digitally, and are then printed into card or paper and then cut out ready for placing on fabric.

And it’s in the cutting that the next size variation can come in. Even if the blocks are now laser-precision cut, there will be variations. Introduce a human cutter and there’s more variation again. I’m not saying the differences are huge, but they add up over each process.

Next the pattern goes to the cutting room. Fabric is layered over and over, and a massive cutting knife something like a bandsaw is used to cut along the outline of each pattern piece. I’m told that there are millimeters of difference between the cut size of the top piece of clothing and the bottom on. Again just tiny variations, adding up.

Next, more human imperfection in the sewing room. The machinists blast though vast numbers of clothing items each some, many are ‘piece-workers’ which means they are paid by the completed piece. Naturally they want to get through these pieces as fast as possible – wouldn’t you? Even if they are salaried, they still are human and with the closest attention, there will be millimeters of variation in their work.

At the end, one size 10 and another size 10 will be slightly different, one will be slightly bigger than the other.

And here’s a really interesting bit:

the designer or the factory chooses what label they put onto the garment – it might say size 8, it might say size 10. It might even say size 2. The point is, you won’t know how it fits your body until you try it on.

I have bought outfits where I’ve had two size labels difference between the bottom and top, and I’m actually reasonably evenly-proportioned.

Now you’d think in this day and age, with all our amazing digital technology, that we’d be able to rely on our clothing being a reasonably accurate fit.

All of the manufacturing reasons above is one set of reasons that this can never happen. Another is your actual basic body template. For decades we’ve believed there are three basic shapes – the apple (round tummy), the pear (heavy bum and thighs), and the hourglass (hips and shoulders in even proportion). But in 2007, TV style gurus Trinny Woodall and Susannah Constantine released a study they’d done which showed there are TWELVE basic shapes for women:

apple, hourglass, skittle, vase, cornet (cone), lollipop, column, bell, goblet, cello, pear, and brick. They also suggested what styles would be most flattering to each shape.

I’m fairly sure that manufacturers don’t cater for the three basic shapes – just the hourglass. They surely don’t cater for 12 shapes! How can they? It’s just not possible to sell affordable clothing when they’d have to produce all the size and colour variations they offer, across 12 different body shapes.

And of course, ‘affordable’ is a BIG factor. To make clothing fit even the three basic body shapes there would have to be more darts, more buttons, more detail in general. That costs time and money and that cuts into the bottom line. What incentive is there for manufacturers to change? They’re selling their clothing anyway – we are all torturing ourselves emotionally and physically to make their clothing fit us – why should they change?

Andy why does any of this matter anyway?

In the past, I have tended to get depressed about my body because the lovely dress or top or skirt or trousers look bloody horrible when I actually put them on in the changing room. Many times I’d head right out of the store to the nearest icecream shop for a sundae if I felt hopeless, or to the pharmacy for some protein bars to shift that problem area, if I felt hopeful.

When all I really needed to do was say – aw that’s a shame this style doesn’t suit my body shape, I’ll keep looking. I know most women say instead: my body is at fault because it does not fit this lovely thing I want to buy.

Funnily enough this only became an issue when mass-market clothing became common, during the 20th century. Before that most clothing was made either at home, or by the local dressmaker or tailor. It didn’t matter then what your size or shape was, the person making your clothing simply measured your body, and made the clothing to fit. There was no “Official Body”, as Naomi Woolf calls it.

Governments the world over are trying to find a way to get a manufacturing standard that will actually work. Laser-measuring of the body size across the population is now possible – translating that into manufacturing will be the trick.

And the key to helping women stop finding themselves wanting, when it’s really the clothing sizing itself that’s really at fault. A recent Spanish government study (the largest of its kind in the world) found that 4 in 10 women had trouble finding clothes that fitted them properly, and that women aged 19 – 30 had the most trouble, because the clothing was usually too small! The government is introducing a new standard, and their clothing labels will now report the design size for height, hips, waist and chest.

Mostly what I’d like you to take from this reading is – you are unique. Your body is unique. Your unique body was formed singly, uniquely. It was not mass produced. Clothing is mass produced, there’s nothing unique about chain store clothing. You probably need look in a few shops to find something to fit you, and that’s not your fault, there is nothing wrong with you. The only thing you need to change is your expectation that you need to change anything, let it go…. and be gentle with yourself while you learn to do that.