This was not the only one that was like this on the website. One t-shirt even had as much as an $8 difference. I am in mixed minds about this, because yes it does mean extra material to make a larger size, but is it really fair to punish fat people for needing a larger size? Not to mention, If you as a skinny fat go to get a smaller size, you put yourself at risk of people telling you your t-shirt is too tight and being ridiculed for back fat. I just don’t understand why they can’t just offer larger clothes at the same price as smaller sized people? Is it because their profit margin is lessened by the extra couple dollars it cost to make the t-shirts? Probably. But compared to the fact that if a fat person finds a store that sells clothes which fits and that they like, and where they aren’t charged more than a person, chances are they will gain a customer that comes back again. I don’t know, I don’t get it. I know it’s thin privilege, but part of me is saying “yeah, but the extra material costs”, do mods have any light to shed on this?

———-

Mod note:



We’ve talked about this before, and the $2 extra for plus sizes is apparently built into the big wholesalers of shirts before they even go to print. Others have mentioned that the actual cost of extra material is only pennies on top of the price, and others argue that the plus size ‘tax’ is about economies of scale (which I don’t buy given that the average size woman in the US is an XL).

I think t-shirt companies – in this case, the wholesalers – charge fat people extra because everyone else does, and stop at one size over 'average’ while going three (and sometimes more) sizes under average because everyone else does. It’s built into the system. And it’s going to change slowly, if ever. But being pissed off about it and especially writing emails/letters of protest to places that charge more for larger sizes will help change things more quickly.

-ATL