Between a __ and a __.

Ask a modern woman what size she wears and you’re likely to get an answer that sounds something like “ummm, between a __ and a ___, it depends.” And that sucks. Not that it isn’t hard buying clothes if you’re a guy, but the sizing for men is much more streamlined and well, logical. But in order to understand the differences in sizing and the psychological impact it has on people, we have to understand how we got where we are today.

Standard sizes didn’t used to exist, everything was custom sewn and made for you. For most, clothes were made at home. It wasn’t until the Great Depression that a sizing system came into play. At that time people couldn’t afford to eat, so buying fabric wasn’t their first priority. Also at this time the industrial techniques were improving, making it easier than ever for companies to mass produce products cheaply. And by the end of the second World War sewing your own clothes was out and off the rack was the new norm.

This created the need for a sizing system. So the Works Projects Administration commissioned a large study of the female body in order to create a standard labeling system. Each of the 15,000 women participants were used for 59 distinct measurements of the body. The idea was to use this information to create a system ready to outfit the country.

But there were several problems from the beginning of this new system. The first is that the participants were mainly white women with a lower socioeconomic status because they needed the participation fee. The measurements largely relied on bust size, making the assumption that all women had an hourglass figure. But this is not how bodies work. They are all different, and only accounting for one specific demographic does not create a universal system. Most of the measurements turned out to be much smaller than the true average.

The most disturbing problem is the psychological issues that were noted during the study. Researchers Ruth O’Brien and William Shelton noticed that women didn’t want to share their measurements with shopping clerks. They decided that for a sizing system to work, the government would have to create a numbers based system similar to shoe sizes. In 1958 the National Institute of Standards and Technology released a set of even numbers 8 through 38 that were to represent overall size, and a set of letters and pluses and minus to represent height and width. This study was updated in the 1970s, but it was done with women in the military as the subjects. Not only were they more fit than the average woman, but race was once again intentionally limited. And by the early 1980s that whole standard had already become skewed. Just look at this chart from TIME, the original size 8 is now a size 00.

And this all a result of vanity sizing! What is vanity sizing you may ask? It’s a very profitable marketing tactic used by clothing companies. The idea is simple, if they keep the same number on the label of clothes but make them bigger, customers will feel excited that they can fit into them and buy more product. The problem lies in the fact that brands have taken this idea and created their own internal sizing systems. So a size 4 pants in one store may be a size 6 or 8 in another store. Not only does this make it impossible for people to know their true size, it takes a psychological toll as well.

In preparation to the Dove Real Beauty campaign a study was done on women all over the world. Phone interviews were done with over 3,000 women asking how they would describe themselves. Only 2% of respondents felt comfortable calling themselves “beautiful.” The vast majority opted for adjectives like “natural” or “average.”

The images used in media are mostly of people significantly smaller than average. When people are constantly bombarded with these images they begin to feel normal, making it seem that anything larger isn’t desirable. Like they aren’t beautiful anymore. So when a clothing size that carries a smaller number fits, it makes the consumer feel good. They feel as though they have achieved what the models have. But all of this triumph comes to an end when in another store that same size is woefully too small.  Not only does this crush the moment, but it creates confusion. It makes the question, “what size do you wear?” impossible to answer. All of this comes together to create a toxic environment for self-esteem.

So what can we do to fix it? Well, there’s a couple of things.

Nationally we can create a standard size system that actually works. One based on today’s bodies. Bodies of all shapes, sizes and races. Not the skewed and bias data that was found in the 1940s. This could be one system with variants to describe length and width, or multiple systems based on common body shapes. There needs to be a new culture around sizing, one where psychologists such as Jennifer Baumgartner, PsyD, author of You Are What You Wear, do not have to suggest to people that they cut out the tags of their clothes after they buy them just so they don’t have to beat themselves up daily.

But the most important thing is that companies are kept accountable by the industry and customers alike. If there isn’t regulation preventing brands from turning sizing into marketing, the current trend is likely to continue. We need a system that changes marketing trends. This chart from the New York Times shows just how much of a difference there is between brands currently. And while size is just a number, to most it is so much more than that.

Stateside we can create better education. Young minds are the most impressionable, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Eating Disorders Association and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services show that impressions made in the early stages of life carry the most influence throughout the entirety of adulthood. And that children learn by watching their parents, so the poor body image carried by adults is learned by the next generation. By educating children on body health, emotionally and physically, we can arm kids with knowledge that combats media influence. Showing young people how media is made and the extreme measures that are taken to create damaging images would create perspective. No longer would images be taken at face value and the next generation would shop based on cut and what fits best.

Stylist Bridgette Raes, author of Style Rx: Dressing the Body You Have to Create the Body You Want, says, "The only way not to get hung up on the size you wear is to understand how the fashion industry works and to realize that sizes on a label are essentially useless...Women need to see that when a certain size of clothing doesn't fit them it's not their fault, it's just the cut of the clothing that isn't right for their bodies."

Significant strides in this field have been made thanks to the Body Positivity Movement. Now more than ever the true tactics behind advertising are becoming known to the public. But there’s always room for improvement and education. And a new and improved sizing system and better education for young people are a great place to start.

Ultimately my message is not about clothing sizes and how screwed up they are, although they are and we need to do something about it. I just want you to be a little bit more armed the next time you head to the mall. I want you to know that no matter what the number on a tag is, you are perfect just the way you are. And hopefully someday those tags are just a number without people’s self worth attached to them.