What's Up With All of the Tiny Vintage?
And why we need to stop saying "everyone was just smaller back then"
There’s a known imbalance in the world of vintage: there is just more clothing available in smaller sizes. The bigger you are, the harder it is to find good vintage.
You’ve probably heard the sentiment that people were “just smaller back then.” My question is always: what people, and back when? While science does show humans getting taller and larger over time, it’s not nearly enough to account for the available vintage clothing options. Fat people have always existed. There have been plus size bodies for as long as there have been bodies, so what the heck happened to everyone’s clothes? The answer lies mostly in youth, culture, and fatphobia. Emphasis on the fatphobia. Repeating that “everyone was just smaller back then” is seriously lacking nuance. The real answer is a much more complicated.
So why is there so much extra small vintage, and so few plus sizes?
Reason #1: A lot of the surviving vintage was made for and worn by very young people.
We only have access to vintage apparel that has managed to remain in wearable condition for many years, and this often just comes down to a piece not being used much. Clothing made for younger people is the least likely to have been worn repeatedly for years on end, because people outgrew it in both size and style. Many of the most well-preserved vintage garments were saved specifically for their sentimental value. A lot of the special events that these kinds of outfits would have been bought or made for happened while people were in their teens or 20’s, or even younger.
Much of the lovely, beautiful vintage formal wear that we see sold today was once worn at high school dances, sweet sixteens, or at weddings where the couple, the bridal party, and many of the guests in attendance were likely in their mid 20’s or younger. In the 1950’s, the median age for a first marriage in America was 22, and even by the 90’s the median age was only around 26-27. Like most of us, I don’t wear the same size at 32 that I did at 22, or even at 26. And there’s a good chance that I’ll be a different size by 42, 52, and onward.
Reason #2: Fatphobia has caused survivorship bias.
Aside from those rare instances of a hidden stash in an attic or barn, most vintage clothing was saved with intention. This means the original owner, and maybe a few people after that, cared about keeping the garment in good condition. There are many reasons for this: value, sentiment, pride, the idea that the piece could one day be passed down and worn again. The sad truth is, our society has conditioned many of us to believe that fat bodies aren’t bodies to be proud of. This is obviously far from the truth, but that kind of thinking definitely didn’t encourage larger people to hold on to their clothing with fondness, tenderness, and the hope to see it worn again by someone in the future with a body just like theirs. On top of that, much of the vintage that is saved has been assessed, selected, and preserved by a select few with the money, power, and resources to do so. Collectors, museum curators, fashion historians, and others were more likely to overlook plus size garments.
One of those reasons being…
Reason #3: Plus size fashion has long centered about obscuring or disguising the body.
Though there are some amazing brands out there doing the hard work of changing the game, the plus sized fashion landscape has been pretty bleak for a really long time. The available styles can be weirdly limiting or outdated, and are often most concerned with “flattering” or “slimming” the body through dark colors or optical illusions. Retailers have long been sending a pretty clear (and gross) message: if you’re fat, your main priority should be to look thinner.
Not only does this mean that a lot of the plus sized vintage wasn’t very appealing, but also that much of it didn’t survive because it just wasn’t as pretty or exciting as the options for straight sized people. When your wardrobe is full of sad, drab, pieces because those are the only things you can find in your size, why would you or others care about saving them or passing them down?
Of course, there have always been plenty of plus sized people who have fought the odds and found ways to express themselves regardless of the many hurdles. Look no further than musician and fashion icon Cass Elliot. She dressed fabulously, frequently photographed wearing some of my favorite 60’s and 70’s trends like sequins, feathers, and psychedelic prints. She always looked so cool. However, most of her clothing obscured pretty much her whole body. She often wore loose fitting dresses, draping caftans, and long tunics. Her wardrobe definitely includes some dream vintage pieces, but is noticeably missing the trends her thin contemporaries wore - halter tops, plunging necklines, body-hugging jumpsuits. In the world of plus size vintage, muumuus and maxis are much more plentiful than skimpy, sexy styles. The lack of options are unfairly restricting to people who want to express themselves in ways outside of the “acceptable” styles for their body type.
For the people who decided to wear whatever they wanted, often the only real option was to make it yourself, or to have it custom made. While making or commissioning your own clothes can be amazing and rewarding, it also includes its own set of challenges. One of the biggest trickle-down effects of this in terms of vintage is collectability. Labels and branding play a huge role in how people date and identify vintage pieces, and it can be much harder to do with a homemade garment. A piece with no labels is much more likely to be overlooked, and unfortunately that also means it’s much more likely to wind up in a landfill.
Reason #4: Many of the vintage clothing styles that are the most desirable now were only made in youth sizes.
So who were eye-catching, fashionable clothes made for then? Oftentimes, they were specifically and only for young people. The further back in time you go, the more that gender roles and societal expectations played a role in what kind of clothing was manufactured for who. Most styles that would be considered super trendy were made for and marketed to the youth because fashion was seen as frivolous and immature. More revealing clothing was typically limited only to younger women, as it would be seen as inappropriate for an “older” woman or (god forbid) a mom to look too hot. Even today, many fashion trends are considered “for the kids.” Younger people are more likely to experiment with their wardrobes, to try new things, and to seek out forms of unique self expression through clothing.
People are largely expected to dress more seriously and more suited to their assigned roles in society once they enter adulthood. In most vintage eras, men were expected to work, while women were expected to be married mothers and homemakers who dressed nicely but modestly. Some of the most desirable vintage brands, like Gunne Sax, were only ever made for young women. The label made clothing that fits up to a 36” bust and 30” waist, about a modern medium, and even then the “larger” garments by the brand are less plentiful and harder to find. If you’re looking for vintage suit sets, modest dresses, classic coats, or other more mature items, you’ll have better luck. But chances are, pieces in loud prints, unusual silhouettes, or with lots of decorative details are more rare, more expensive, and only in a smaller size.
We’ve all heard outdated “fashion rules” like no mini skirts after 30. Things have clearly changed, coming from a 32-year-old mini skirt wearer, but true flexibility and freedom in our clothing is something we’re still working on today.
Reason #5: People owned significantly fewer garments, and were more likely to repair, reuse, and recycle their clothing.
The number of individual garments each person owns now is absolutely bonkers compared to how little clothing people owned in the past. Fast fashion has only existed for about 20 years now, and with it a revolving door of clothing through everyone’s wardrobes. The further back in time you go, the more likely it was that someone had a small collection of very worn garments that were repaired, altered, and handed down. This type of wear and love is the most honorable thing we can do with our clothing, but it doesn’t bode well for a piece lasting decades in great condition. Larger garments would have been worn for much longer, accommodating bodies that change with life, and would also lend themselves to a wider array of alterations, hand-me-downs, or other secondary uses. The fabric from a mother or older sister’s larger skirt could be re-made into a young girl’s skirt, while a smaller garment wouldn’t make as much sense for repurposing. The chances of a larger item were much higher for being taken in, altered, or otherwise completely remade.
Reason #6: Brands and designers have a long history of refusing to dress fat bodies.
The fashion industry has always been highly fatphobic, and there have always been fewer options available for people in larger bodies. Since the emergence of the ready-to-wear market in the US, there has been a bias towards smaller bodies, with many companies ignoring plus sizes entirely. The secondhand market is reflective of what is available to buy new, and there is a significantly smaller pool of things to choose from when you are over a certain size. When it comes to luxury clothing, particularly couture and high-end designer, there are usually an extremely small quantity of pieces produced in an extremely limited range of sizes. Vintage Chanel doesn’t exist in a Size 28 because new Chanel didn’t exist in a Size 28. Samples or runway pieces were only ever made in a few very small sizes.
Custom designer garments were most often made for models, celebrities, or the otherwise very wealthy and privileged, and it isn’t a coincidence that many of the biggest stars were also very thin. Because plus size clothing has always been in more limited supply, this also meant that mending, repair, and repeated wear was even more important for people in larger bodies.
One of my favorite podcasts ever, Articles of Interest, recently did an excellent episode on plus sized fashion that I highly recommend. The episode was made with Ronald Young Jr of Weight For It, and includes interviews with a bunch of very cool plus sized business owners and creatives.
Though we can’t actually change the selection we have available to us now, it is important to understand how we’ve ended up here. If you wear plus sizes, all of these issues are nothing new to you. I’m sorry our society is like this. If you aren’t plus size, here are a few things you can do:
Avoid purchasing plus sized garments with the intent of altering them into a much smaller size. It’s one thing to take in the waist on a pair of pants by an inch or two, but a whole different ball game to “flip” a perfectly good 4X skirt into a Size 8 mini dress. The options are already severely limited to those above a certain size, especially secondhand. Don’t make it worse.
If you sell clothing, label the items you sell accurately. “Oversized” should be applied only to garments that are designed with the intention of fitting loosely when worn by the size they were made for. A true oversized garment takes into account construction details like shoulder width, hem length, and cuff size, to create drape and volume in the right places. A garment that is tagged a Size 2X shouldn’t be marketed or categorized as an “oversized” garment for someone who wears a Size XS-M, and describing it as such is intentionally excluding the people the piece was actually created for. Not only is this disrespectful, but it actually makes it harder for people to find things in their size! And this isn’t to say people shouldn’t wear clothing in a variety of sizes - I myself often size up because I’m more comfortable in loose clothing. However, it’s a personal choice to wear something as a loose fitting garment, and it doesn’t mean that the garment itself is “oversized” to other people.
Support plus sized vintage sellers! Dealers that specialize in plus size vintage are doing the important work of finding and preserving pieces that are in more limited supply. If you wear a straight size, there are tons of ways to show your support without buying plus sized garments: positively engage on social media, leave good reviews for brick-and-mortar shops, purchase accessories or home goods. A few that I personally love are Berriez, Goldie's Vintage, Armoury Shop, and Plus BKLYN.
Thank you for reading another issue of 1-800-VINTAGE! I’m so glad you’re here. I’m officially in full blown prep mode for the Manhattan Vintage Show next month. It’s one of the best vintage events in the country, and I’d love to see you there! You can buy your tickets here. Still debating on the topic for next week’s letter… dating vintage via origin country? A fiber deep dive? A chat about personal style? Let me know what you want to hear from me in the comments!
For full access to the 1-800-VINTAGE archive and future paid content, you can upgrade your subscription for the price of about one NYC chai latte per month. If you can’t right now, that’s okay! There will always be about one free letter a month, so stay tuned for the next one. See you soon!
Thank you so much for this. I feel like I have this conversation a lot with customers of all sizes, but have lacked the detailed nuance like this to really get to the heart of the issue. 🩷
Another thing is people wore girdles and other intense shapewear back in the 60s and before. There is a reason why 1950s dress that otherwise fits has a teeeensy waist. And it's not because people had naturally tiny waist back then.