*and shrinking inseams. In HS (circa mid 1980s) petite length slacks were often too long on me, sometimes being as long as 34 (or 2-3" longer than talls are today). Today, without growing one inch taller than I was in HS, I've gone from a petite size 6-8 to a tall 0-2 (when I can find that size). This sort of nonsense may fool all the under 5'5" women who're convinced that their legs "are long in proportion to my torso length", but it simply irritates those of us who know the manufacturers are playing dumb games.
I agree. I rarely if ever wear women's slacks, because I just can't find ones that fit properly. Years ago I just gave up wearing slack for business reasons.
And I only buy men's jeans - those sizes make sense - length and wist - very simple.
Isn't that the truth! I recently gave up on finding a skirt or dress slacks because after trying on everything at the low end of the size rack, they still fell off of me. I don't think of myself as all that tiny, but I guess the world got large around me.
I have the same problem in finding clothes for our 10 year old son. He's on the tall side, and very slim, especially in the hips. Even slim cut jeans don't always fit him. There are lots of generously-cut clothes for chunky kids, but not much for slender ones. It really eats up a lot of time when you can't rely on the labels to be even close to the expected size. Like many boys his age, he really doesn't like to shop either, so it can be quite difficult.
Some of us don't want to wear the same styles that Britney wears, either.
Being petite, and of a certain age, I refuse to wear low-rise jeans and skin tight mid-drift tops.
I did that in the '70s...;o)