I'm a pretty big bloke, 6ft 4, but I try and keep myself pretty fit by running, cycling, gym etc

I just feel like some kind of oversized freakaloid at the moment, shops just seem to stock clothes for 12 year old skinny EMO kids I am sure...

I have always been a 36 - 38 waist, and a 34 inside leg etc, and just cannot get high street jeans and trousers in my usual sizes to go anywhere near me..!!

T-shirts I have to buy XXL and they look skin tight, shirts I have to buy now with extra-long sleeves because they are always too short...

I have always been a size 10.5 - 11 shoe, now I am having to buy 12s

I am early thirties, so I think a growth spurt is out of the question....

Are clothes sizes really getting smaller? Or are we all (me) getting fatter and just need the excuse....???

this seasons cuts in men's wear are fairly streamlined.

(don't cha know )

Nope I agree with you and this is something I noticed about 4/5 years ago . I'm 5ft 11 and 14 stone and like you could not believe that I had to buy XXL in tracksuit bottoms.

My line is that trousers in certain shops are made for skinny buttless boys.

But it's about choosing the right shops.

Personally I think clothing for men and women is much much tighter than it used to be. Which can be a good thing

The problem seems to be that a lot of the fashionable clothes are designed for young people and for young people's shapes. I usually get jeans in the US because all the ones over here are too skinny, too low cut, etc. Also, if you buy cheaper clothes, one of the reasons they're cheap is that they skimp on the material, so they tend to be tighter as well.

I don't know about menswear, but a size 10 of today isn't what it was 10yrs ago.

I have the same problem, 36" waist, 46" chest, have to buy XXL t-shirts or I look silly, jeans are a nightmare, I only buy from ASDA now as all other fits are far too tight around the thighs.

Certainly ladies sizes have been getting larger and are about twice the size they were 50 years ago when women were tiny compared to today. I think it depends where the clothes are made and for which market - if you are buying clothes made and labelled somewhere like China in mass production for the world you will find XL may not be as large as standard XL is in the UK and USA - first, they are cheaply made so they cut every corner possible including making the garments tighter to save fabric and second, the British and Americans are the fattest people on the planet so our XL people are XXL to most other countries. When I am in the States I take small or medium and in Europe I take medium or large.

Now you mention this I have seen an unusual amount of butt cleavage this week on women. Builders beware - you have some serious competition out there!

I almost posted a similar question here in the last day or so but mine related specifically to shirts. They dont seem as long as they used to be making me more like a builder when the shirt comes out.
No comments about shirtlifter please.

Completely agree. In my late teens/twenties I was a size 8/10 - Late 70's/80's. My weight has varied a bit over the years but I am now able to wear a 10 comfortably (even 8 tops recently) but am nothing like the size/weight I was at that time. Personally I think size 10 now would have been a at least a size 12 not that many years ago.

MB

my answer would be for you to change your name to Ulysses38.

for women it depends where you shop. Size 10s in Next, M&S are very comfortable fits on me, but if I go to Topshop or H&M I find there is no allowance for hips. Jeans fit around the waist but I can't actually get them fastened as they are too small for my hips and bum. The jeans sizes have got smaller even in the past year Everything is cut for undeveloped teenage bodies. Seems silly to me as clearly people over the age of 20 have more money to spend on clothes.

Also in the 1950s one reason women wore smaller sizes was because they still wore corsets or girdles which hold you in.

Yeah true. Top Shop are particularly bad for smaller versions of the sizes! I think overall, the sizes are bigger though.

I went to H&M on Friday. Saw a pair of trousers I like which I decided to buy. Now I am a size 14, definitely a size 14, in fact I can still fit in a few size 12's. So I took a size 14 in the changing rooms and tried them on. I couldn't even get my leg in them. So I went back out and got a size 16, tried them on and they wouldn't do up. In the end, to the mirth of my OH I had to go with a size 18 which fit perfectly.

After a shopping experience today, I'm convinced clothes are getting bigger. I tried on about 10 coats (all different shops), all huge on me. Although its odd, as my mum last year also tried loads of coats on and they were all to small. And I wouldn't say she was large. Shes only a size 14. So maybe the larger sizes are getting smaller, and the smaller sizes bigger....soon it'll be a one size fits all on all items!

On a recent survey the found the greatest discrepancy in vanity sizing occurred in men's jeans Strangely enough, with regard to the contents of men's jeans, for once men were claiming to be far smaller rather than far bigger than they actually were.

In asda and primark my jeans are waist 32, but from Burton, Topman and other high street shops they are waist 28.
In asda and primark I buy tops which are for 13 year olds (their size S are huge for me) but from the high street I can fit into a size S

I am sure in the 70s and 80s a size 10 could fit a size 14 at M&S.

In the 90s, their sizes became more snug.

I was a size 12 in the 80s and frequently wore size 8-10 in some stores, I even had a size 6 item. I rarely wore above a size 14 even when I was heavily pregnant. Strangely enough, my body measurements pre pregnancy were the same as a size zero but felt a size 12 fitted my body shape - hourglass. My waist was a size 10 but my hips were a size 12.

I became a size 14 in the 90s and the size 14s became very snug, in the 80s I could have got away with a size 12. I know that because I inherited some of my mother's glamourous hand me downs that were a size 12, I am still an hourglass shape, just a size bigger. I find most cuts suit a straight boyish body shape. I think they changed the cut in the 90s and I am sure someone in the industry told me they made the sizes smaller in the 90s.

Clothes are getting smaller, and so is the print in the newspapers.

I was discussing this with a friend the other night (he a merchandiser for a high street store) he says that all the standard sizes are made to specific sizes.

I wanted him (or anyone for that matter) why a medium sized shirt I bought 10 years ago stil fits perfectly well yet I have to buy XL or even XXL shirts these days. My chest size is not wildly different, I'm no fatter than I was.
So whats changed?

Maybe you shop in the wrong shops? 34 leg is not uncommon at all! and most shops' xxl t-shirts are for 47" to 50" chest (arnold winning mr olympia had a 47" chest)