Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Tall - or not?

As I have complained about before, I have a hard time finding clothes that fit me. Pants are often not long enough, although there are more and more 32" inseams out there, 33" are better. My shoulders are wide (like a small man's) so tops often don't fit in the shoulders, under the armpits, and the length is often not long enough either. Also, I am not a skinny girl. I will never be a size 6, that's just not how I am built. The lowest I could go, without becoming anorexic, would probably be a size 10. Errr, that is to say, the old size 10. Not the new size 10 that some stores are coming out with that is closer to a size 12. I also have no curves, so if I go too large in women's sizes, or go into the 14+ stores, the clothes hang on me like potato sacks.

If I were to dress on the men's side every time, I would have no problem. I would probably fit men's size small to medium every time, perfectly. Problem is, I DON'T WANT TO DRESS LIKE A GUY! I have no problem with uni-sex clothing when it comes to sports. In fact, I often prefer the colours of the men's clothes to the pastel shaded women's clothes. A pair of running shoes is a pair of running shoes. I see no difference between men's or women's. But outside of sports, I'd like to look a little feminine!

But it is so hard to find something wide enough, long enough, and large enough in the right places... gosh it can be so frustrating to be me. Shoes are just as bad. There is so little choice in size 11.

So, one would think that the obvious solution would be to look in a tall women's boutique.

Cruising on the internet, I came across a site that linked to this site: Thing is, the first site welcomes tall women and then goes on to say you are considered a tall woman if you measure 5'10.

Ummm, I only measure 5'8. Barely. I think it may be closer to 5'7 and 3/4. It's 170 cm anyway. Nope, according to this, if I measure 170 cm, I am actually only 5'7. (Maybe I should just get myself measured again for fun) Not extremely tall in other words.

So, back to the Long Legs site. They have a catalogue for clothing and shoes. I am right in there for shoe sizes. No problem other than the fact that I don't really like any of their shoes. The tops would also probably fit me, except that once again, these seem to be made for tall skinny girls in mind. Don't like many of their tops though, only 3 of them, and they are either too expensive or sold out of my size. But they'd be long enough. One of my problems with empire waists is that the waist, which is supposed to be just under the bust, often falls right across the bust on me. So I seem to be a little long in that area too, or maybe it is the shoulders? Anyway, this would probably not be a problem with the Long Legs tops. I looked at the vests (and there is a really nice burgundy one) and they are mostly 27 1/2" in the sleeves, which would actually fit quite well. 26" would probably be enough, but 27 1/2" is okay. The sleeves would stop about halfway down my hand. Which is fine. Which is great for a coat actually, or a vest, or a sweater.

But the pants? Gosh, they have nothing shorter than 36" inseams! But since pants are usually not the hardest thing for me to find, I guess that's okay.

If only there was a store that sold clothes for athletically built women. Clothes that create the illusion of curves, for those that don't have any. And tops with sleeves that are long enough, for those of us who have monkey arms.