Pro-tip for those of you who have never been shopping as a plus-size woman in the UK: there are very few places on the high street for women over a size 16 to buy clothes. The shops we do have are treasured failsafes when we spill soup down our shirts and need a replacement fast, and until this week, New Look had been one of them. The fashion chain’s Curves section (what one of my plus-size compatriots calls “fat fucker paradise”) was a high street haven.

But as we’ve learned since, it’s not quite the accepting sanctuary we thought it was. That place we could go to with our smaller friends and actually buy something, instead of just awkwardly looking at the scarves, has been charging us extra. The discrepancies in pricing between larger and smaller sizes have been met with anger by customers who feel discriminated against, as well as the usual prejudice from those who think plus-size people shouldn’t be allowed to exist. So much anger, in fact, that New Look has been quick to splutter about “reviewing the pricing structure of our plus-size collection in a way which works for our customers and our business”, in a bid to shut everyone up.

Whenever the debate about plus sizes starts, there are two areas of concern – what about the strain plus sizes place on businesses, and what about the strain plus-size people are putting on themselves/the NHS/seating on public transport? These are concerns that never change with each new debate, or make a difference.

“More mass = more material = more money” has come up a lot during this round. Yet the fact that New Look doesn’t charge extra for its Tall range doesn’t back that up. Maria Wassell, who noticed the price discrepancy (and used to work in retail with a plus-size brand), called the business arguments “basically rubbish”. As did Emily Sutherland, features writer for fashion trade journal Drapers. They’d know.

New Look is reviewing its prices. Photograph: newlook.com/PA

If you’re plus-size, you know that those who have a problem with plus-size people aren’t going to be placated by the business facts. Because they’ve got lots of other things fuelling their concern. The traditional health concerns for individuals, or our impact on the NHS, or they just think we look icky, or that we’re lazy and awful and should look after ourselves better; they can do it, why can’t we. The chairman of the National Obesity Forum, Tam Fry, believes having to pay extra for clothes provides an incentive for women to lose weight; that women “will think seriously about staying in shape” because of it. This view has not been met kindly.

Fry has form on this point: he stepped in to defend TV presenter Lizzie Cundy last year when she said plus-size people should be charged more for their clothes, but those who are bigger for health reasons could show medical prescriptions to qualify for discounts – presumably if they are well-behaved and don’t eat too much cake. A bizarre, hilarious, unworkable idea, and Fry’s suggestion of “[sorting] the deserving from the undeserving” matched it in ridiculousness.

Being charged extra for being bigger is no incentive to slim – it’s an obstacle to be dealt with, and plus-size people already manage to clear other such obstacles every day without losing weight.

There’s the world we don’t quite fit into, the judgment, the TV and advertising that pretends we don’t exist, the dearth of products for us on the high street. We still exist despite these things. The New Look pricing obstacle? We’ll stay big despite it, and we’ll shop elsewhere. Or maybe we will lose weight (for a myriad of other reasons) … and still shop elsewhere.

Plus-size people are growing in numbers, and are a good investment for businesses – we’re loyal to the brands we have, because we don’t have many. We deserve loyalty in return. For those of us who found a haven in New Look, we should be able to shop for clothing at the same price as our smaller counterparts. Otherwise all we’re left with is an incentive to find another store.

• Phoebe-Jane Boyd is a content editor for an online media company