Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsO7

Letters to Fashion87

February 06, 1987

I was incited to write after perusing the article on large-size fashions.Your script did not go far enough in detailing the plight of the large woman to obtain clothing. Specifically, I would like you to consider the woman who is Size 16 and above and wants to get pregnant. You would think from shopping anywhere in Southern California that if you are greater than a Size 14, you just don't get pregnant.

I was a Size 20 when I got pregnant with my first child. No, and I emphasize no, maternity shop carried any pants or dresses for me above a Size 16. . . . I had no recourse but to haphazardly sew a few clothes. You see, I don't sew. Furthermore, you cannot even buy patterns above a Size 18 in maternity fashions. The myth is perpetuated: Large-size women don't get pregnant.

Also, large-size women must not nurse their babies. I could not purchase a Size 46E nursing bra anywhere. . . .

In my desperate need for maternity clothes, I looked as far north as Santa Barbara, as far south as San Diego, west to the ocean, and east to Lancaster. The year I so needed these clothes was 1985.

It is now 1987, and I am considering having another child. However, I now wear a Size 22. Maternity shops have not changed. They still do not carry clothes for a large-size woman. I know I am not the only woman in Southern California who wears greater than a Size 16 and who is, or wants to be, pregnant.

It's about time we spoke out to the fashion industry that takes our hard-earned dollars and does not consider our real needs. KATHY ROTHERAM

Sylmar

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|