does size matter

Headlines announce Kmart decides to stop using the term ‘plus’ and instead brand these items ‘fabulous sized’. Part of me rolls my eyes and another part of me wonders if this is the disruption that the industry needs.

For years I hovered in the purgatory that exists between ‘regular’ size 14 and ‘plus’ size 16. I didn’t fit in either. There was a short period when I fit into the no longer Additionelle size 12. It was great. I shopped at one store and everything was always on sale because no one really fit that size. Before that it was flip-flopping the aisles at Cotton Ginny where a plus size 12 fit better than a regular size 14 but cost between $5 and $8 more because they used more fabric – no word of a lie this was their rationale for charging larger women more for their clothes. Instead of being honest and admitting they had a captive market with almost no alternative and they could get away with it.

Fortunately the industry keeps adjusting sizes and adding “00” – what used to be size 2. So now I can, mostly, comfortably buy clothes, provided ‘that bitch’ doesn’t get there first and clear out the one size 12/14 that the store has. Although admittedly I most buy knit wear anymore so I have a little give to work with.

I’m not a size warrior. I really don’t care what the label says I just want the clothes to fit properly and be flattering. But what I have never understood is that we know there is a market out there for larger sizes and yet retailers continue to leave money on the table pretending this market doesn’t exist. 

Or perhaps even worse, they shutter this group into online shopping, keeping those larger bodies out of the shops to fit some sort of aesthetic that really shouldn’t exist. And frankly, if you asked most people, nobody is that offended by. Yes I know there are major fat shaming issues out there. I’ve seen it. I’ve heard it. I’ve had it done to me. What I’m hoping to address in this post isn’t this subject. It’s the completely and utter lack of interest in a market that makes money.

Let’s back up for a minute. Buying your clothes off the rack is a relatively new idea. Up until midway through the last century you picked your dresses from a model or a drawing, you were measured and your garment made. If you couldn't afford that you often made your own garments. For centuries prêt a porter was limited to unfitted garments, night clothes and gloves. Simply; your clothes were made to fit you. When ready to wear became prevalent the idea of sizing came into play and suddenly you needed to fit your clothes. But ask any well dressed person and the secret they’ll keep is tailoring. There is no such thing as standard sizing and sizes are designed to make the most efficient use of fabric, not to fit an actual body.

There’s always the fact that conspicuous consumption, the concept of disposable clothing is also fairly new. And it’s an entirely different subject. Not so long ago you had a few well made garments that were expected to last for years. When your good dress wore out a bit you kept wearing it but it was downgraded to day dress or house frock. There is a massive environmental issue surrounding disposal of seldom worn garments and the lack of recycling of textiles but again I’m trying to focus here.

I have a range of friends in a range of sizes. And we all struggle to find pants that fit. Many of my self-proclaimed ‘fat’ friends have taught themselves to sew. Something I also do. However even the pattern industry doesn’t go past a size 24. There, it seems, is no winning.

Does Kmart have the right idea? I have no idea. Kmart isn’t a Canadian entity anymore so my first hand experience won’t be happening any time soon. Does my decision to try to shop in size inclusive establishments make a difference? I hope so, but so many of those continue to only cater to the larger size market via online, so I can’t shop with these friends. Does size designation really making shopping easier or does it just isolate us by labeling us in a negative way?

Am I really going to go out and ask if a shop carries ‘fabulous’ sizes? Or am I just going to ask; why can’t we just say size and get on with it?

malarkey - not really a post

Yes, I know I've been out of touch for awhile. I'll explain at some point, but let's just say I've been playing curve ball with life for a bit and channeling my creativity into another favoured activity - sewing clothes.

BUT, I read this the other day and I say HOOEY. 

First off Canadians have not been slow to adopt online grocery shopping, Canadians had almost no options when it came to online grocery shopping.

Second off, other than Grocery Gateway, which I tried to use once, but because, as we all know, I'm so well trained by Loblaws, I wasn't as familiar with whoever Grocery Gateway was at the time, I didn't find products I knew and just gave up, when online grocery shopping finally started to hit, you had to pick up your groceries. In my area the only Loblaws store participating in the pilot isn't really accessible by TTC - so clearly transit users weren't a target market. The other player is Walmart. No thanks.

As a non car owner, I'd really enjoy the option to have delivery.  Truthfully I'd probably do a large shop every month or so and fill in the rest. The idea suggested here, in this seemingly Walmart sponsored editorial, that people don't want to wait for delivery, I challenge too. I've used grocery delivery before (I had to go to the store to shop and then wait), and because it was cheaper than taking a cab home (!), I didn't find it that cumbersome.

Here's an idea marketers. Consider the suburbs a completely different market. I think you'll see dense urban centres consume in a much different way.

Yes, I should probably work for Loblaws, but I don't want to commute the suburbs.

the grinch who sold christmas

I recently wondered why the heck pimento was so popular in the 50’s and 60’s and a friend’s mother was kind enough to explain that really, it was so nice to have some colour to add to dishes. Remembering, of course, that it’s not that long ago that produce was bought when it was in season and then offered canned or frozen for the rest of the year - well you could buy something called a tomato out of season, but mostly it was a knotty, green, tasteless round thing that was called a ‘tomato’.

Fast forward to about a month ago. Back to school promotions started showing up at my local grocery and drugstore chains (incidentally owned by the same company now). Being neither a child or a parent I was still shocked. Sort of. I did a quick calculation. We were about 8 weeks out from the start of school. Back in my retail days you calculated about a 6 week start to the next big ‘holiday’ event so this sort of made sense. On the proverbial other hand, what kid wants to be reminded of school when vacation is only half way through!

While ranting about this on social media someone pointed out to me that Costco had Christmas out at that time too. Calculating again I pointed out that technically Costco is a wholesaler catering to retailers, so having Christmas gear out in July sort of made sense. Yes it seemed out of place, but for all those who remember the annoying reminder of the ‘Days until Christmas’ sign along the Don Valley Parkway in Toronto all those years; Christmas was always coming.

‘Life moves pretty fast’ and in a consumer driven market, the chase is always on to the next season. But start backing it up, to buyers, manufacturers, designers, colour specialists and really, they’re working in terms of 3 to 4 years ahead, so your 6 to 8 weeks is just the final piece of a very long chain that leads to you picking out that particular tomato red sweater for your bestie this Christmas.

At this point I’m pretty stoked that I managed to work a partial Ferris Bueller quote into a post. I also spent some time trying to track down an image of the old Days to Christmas sign on the DVP and fell into a vortex of old Eaton’s catalogue images and only just came back up for air.

Consumerism requires that we shop when the goods are available, but they’ve also taught us there’s a very slim yet attractive period of the end of season sale and the then not for the faint of heart end of season clearance. But if you leave it too long you’re just plain out of luck. Take it from me - the year my coat zipper busted in February was the year I learned to layer. Now like a good Canadian I didn’t have just one winter coat, but still. And I do know how to sew, so if I was really stuck. Okay, my point was, it’s tough finding a winter coat in February because we’re already into prime spring selling and we don’t wear winter coats in spring. Except maybe in most parts of Canada. Because, after all, all this is based on some sort of completely idealized image of season’s and needs. Now back to the catalogues. Which if they are to be believed - that Christmas of 1908 was one dark holiday.

This is not yer traditional red jolly Santa now is it?

I can't find a single image of the old Countdown to Christmas Sign on the DVP, but the bra page of old catalogues, no problem.

the oh boys of summer

I’m not the biggest fan of children. They require constant supervision, they stink, often they’re unable to deal with their own excrement but occasionally they’re fun. For 20 minutes or so. OK, I might be exaggerating. I’d say I’m more indifferent to children. But when I read articles like this, I’m suddenly an advocate.

Living in a city means noise. Cars, businesses, large vehicles, sirens, parades, the occasional party the spills into the streets because major event has happened, like winning a World Series game. But urban living means convenience, selection and people. It also means compromise. The more densely populated a city the greater the need for politeness, and the big problem with a city like Toronto is that we’re just not dense enough to not act stupidly from time to time.

I grew up on a street in transition. Of the 40 odd houses on our little stretch of street, there were 5 kids. Four of us hung out together for several years. We played ‘Star Wars’ (a sort of intergalactic yelling and hitting each other with sticks), we rode bikes, roller skates (back in the metal wheels days), skateboards and other noisy things with wheels, we yelled for no good reason and no one ever complained we made noise. Looking back it really seemed like we were the ipso facto grandchildren of the street.

Also, we always had access to freezies! Beat that.

Going back to Mr. Noisy Complaints Neighbour; why can’t kids be kids? I get it. Noise travels differently over water, But. If you’re that noise sensitive there is a place where you can exist almost silently. It’s called the country.

I live near a hospital, which does mean sirens. But it also means an emergency ward within walking distance. A couple times a week a refrigerator truck sits outside my window to deliver goods to the local convenience stores. Yes they’re loud but having not 1 but 2 convenience stores steps outside my house are worth so much more than complaining. But who do you think delivers this stuff? It’s not delivered by fairies.

I’m with the kids on this one. Summer is short. Yelling is fun. And if we’d had access to a backyard pool as kids, we would have been in there until we were pruney and mostly made of chlorine. Screaming and hitting each other with sticks all the live long day.

"and a little of that human touch" (springsteen lyrics)

It’s 2015.  We’re in the future of the movies of (some of) our youths, as in Back to the Future was set in 2015. Blade Runner's date is rounding the corner. So while we collectively look to see what fiction imagined, we find ourselves living some innovations that weren’t imagined, or perhaps were not imagined the way they manifested. We do not have driverless cars, but cars that park themselves are here, and Unattended Train Operation (driverless) transit is already in use. 

So while technology continues forward, often the most sophisticated algorithm in the world still doesn’t quite get it.  While I’m always awed that the PC Plus program has a pretty good idea when I need more popcorn, a product I don’t consume on a cyclical basis, there are times when a little decorum and humanity is needed.

The recent episode with Uber comes to mind. In the middle of a rash hostage taking in Australia, Uber’s booking system noticed an unexpected uptake in cab usage – you know from people running for their lives – and the system’s usage metrics kicked in and started upping the cab fees. An innocent enough reaction given circumstances that fall within normal range, but, clearly, in this case a place where a touch of good old human metrics would ‘get it’. Similarly, but quite so crudely, this year’s Facebook ‘year in review’ feature took posts with the most “Likes” and used those posts to create a snapshot of a person’s year. The part the coders failed to get was the sometimes, in a method of support, people - myself included -  will Like a post that isn’t necessarily positive, but in a show of support, say when a goal isn’t reached, or a loved one passes on. 

I consider myself an amateur enthusiast of analytics and the part that I find the most interesting is the story part of the analysis, but in both telling and creating stories, options have to be considered. We all know computer code doesn’t do so well with grey concepts. And truthfully, it’s almost impossible to consider all angles, a human fault, but consideration to how people act and use features should be part of the story here. The Uber example was almost impossible to predict; the idea was the increase cab fees during peak demand times, like the end of Saturday night, or after a major sporting event, or even more vindictively during a transit shutdown or major storm. A concept, not loved, but understood by anyone who tried to rent a car over a holiday or book a hotel room for a major event. But the Facebook situation isn’t that far of a reach, and yes the post is editable, but the articles I found mentioned instances where a loved one who had passed away, was featured in this auto generated post, and understandably was startling to those users.

Most of these systems are pretty ubiquitous. Like the popcorn, or the Amazon recommendations, or that fact that certain government bodies that might be watching my consumption habits in order to be keyed in to my potentially devious plots… unfortunately what they found out is that I buy a lot of makeup and eat a decent amount of pizza. Revelatory, I know!

I had a tersely written, complain-y description of the automated job search filters currently in use. Needless to say, since I’m actively looking for work, perhaps, a bit of human review might make the entire process just a little more fruitful, for both parties.

Similarly trying to track down an answer to a question on a government form used to be a tedious task of being puzzled, reading complicated language on a website and sometimes in a fit of exasperation, calling to listen to options on an automated phone system. Although my last few interactions with government were very human indeed, I was assigned a person who handled my case, answered my questions, and who I talked to each time I needed information. And believe me when I say, it’s rather unsettling to get straightforward, logical answers from your government.

As we mature into this technology - and we all use it. Algorithms suggest what we might like on shopping sites, on movie sites, when browsing for the next thing to read perhaps we, the royal we, will get better at considering situations that may not fit the norm, and require intervention. However when thinking in evolutionary terms, we humans may be the weak link, but I think we’re still best equipped; after all our gray matter considers all the colours.

at what cost?

Someone posited a question on Twitter recently asking what was the worst thing about being single; I know she was looking for emotional and non tangible reactions, but my reaction was that the worst part was the cost.

According to North American statistics (read US because Stats Can isn’t collecting data right now – don’t get me started, it’s a mess) we have officially tipped the scales and now more than 50% of households are now single. This is historically significant. It is socially significant. And it makes me wonder if finally marketers might start to consider changing the way they vend based on this new information. Read small sizes, with proportional price tags.

It’s the old mayonnaise dilemma I have about once a year when I need mayonnaise. The half-sized jar is 30 cents less than the full sized jar, but I will toss out half of the full sized jar, but it’s so much more economical to purchase the larger container. In truth I generally wait until one of them is on sale and then purchase that one. But it leads to the same question. Why am I asked to pay the same rate for half the product just because I’m single (or can’t consume the volume of product in the larger container)? The obvious answer is just to purchase the larger container on the off chance that I might consume more and then I’m not in the position of paying more, but that leads to food waste, which leads to a whole other argument about consumption and here I am still standing in the grocery aisle with a ethical dilemma over a goddamned jar of mayonnaise.

The basics and fun of life are still designed for couples, or more than one person. Rent, well other than me, who has amazingly low rent - I live as if I have roommate in terms of dollars - but for everyone else, coming up with that sum of money every month can be challenging, especially if you’re a woman and still make 30% less on average than a man for no reason that makes any sense. Vacations, while not the basics of life, are not half the cost for a single person, because most of those advertised rates and deals are based on double occupancy. And then there’s the good old ‘because female’ rationale for why things like deodorant, shampoo, razors and other genderfied items are more when you’re a woman than they are when you’re a man. Marketplace ran a show on this.

Sure there’s value in volume and in some cases it makes sense. It doesn’t cost that much more to wrap plastic around 12 rolls of toilet paper than it does 4, so it makes sense to offer it in larger packages. And let’s face it, 4 toilet rolls isn’t going to last all that long, although on the flipside, the toilet roll storage basket in my teensy little bathroom holds exactly 12 rolls, so those monster 30 packs are virtually useless to me. Sure they don’t go bad, but in my surprisingly reasonable apartment, there is very little storage space, and no place to put them until I need them. Ok, ok, I have a freezer and I can take a bigger package of say chicken and wrap it up to freeze and use later. But what if it’s something I haven’t tried and I’d like to try it once before deciding to buy a 3 month supply. Or would like to only heat up half that frozen convenience lasagna so that I won’t be eating it for the next 7 days?!

But this goes beyond marketing and consumables. Let’s talk taxes. Under Harper, a new, albeit controversial, tax break is announced for families. Great if you qualify and you have a family. Sure you’re paying for things I don’t have to consider such as educating someone other than myself, but where’s the break for me joining a gym or taking an exercise class? Only for kids you say? Hmm. They aren’t any. None. You might be able to claim some of your portion of rent under Ontario tax benefits, but so can anyone regardless of marital status. Yes, you get the same crappy education tax breaks of any student, but you aren’t able to claim yourself as a dependent and it goes on. In fact an article in The Atlantic pegged this number in the US as being over $1 Million dollars more to be single over a lifetime. Read it because the numbers are astounding.

Why are these financial penalties for being single? (Which I totally stole from an interviewer on HuffPost.) The more I read on this subject the angrier I became and if you listen to this interview you can heard the opinion of women with much more knowledge of the subject than I have. I don't have a pithy ending statement for this one. I keep trying to form a sentence about considering as a society why we revere marriage so much and why can’t we extend similar privilege to single person households too, but we need to be at a point beyond consideration and be at a point of action.  Let’s start with taxes and work backwards from there.