The office wardrobe has already changed. Sure, there are still many companies which require people to wear suits, but many more have gone the route of “business casual” (or, as I first learned back when I was 11 or 12, “smart casual”). You are seeing more polo shirts or twin sets and khakis or even denim. There are still rules, and in many cases, one can wear just about anything unless it’s athleisure, sleepwear or has anything offensive. It’s a different world. However, many businesses have not changed. I’m not talking about stores like J.Crew or Zara. I’m talking about places like Brooks Brothers.

Now, I LOVE Brooks. And they DO have a more casual line, Red Fleece. In fact, I have a few Red Fleece pieces in my closet. I also have items from their regular line. However, I’ve more or less been living on t-shirts and leggings (see Instagram pic above). Unless, of course, I have a pre-production meeting or a shoot. Then what I wear will fall into the business/smart casual category. I’ve also found that lately, what I wear is more likely to be from small(er) businesses, especially Canadian ones, than large, global corporations. And Brooks is neither a small business nor Canadian.

But that’s not the point of this piece. The issue is this: many businesses just don’t care that things have changed. In the case of Brooks Brothers, the issue is they’re still trying to cater to a more formal business person when they REALLY should be focusing on their Red Fleece line. That’s what more people are wearing to the office these days. And some people (not me) feel brands only cater to them if models LOOK like them. I don’t see too many East Asian models in Brooks ads, but it doesn’t mean I won’t wear their clothes or that Brooks isn’t for me/speaks to me (I never understood that – why does a brand have to have people who LOOK like you to SPEAK to you/make it okay for you to shop there? It isn’t skincare/colour cosmetics, it’s clothing). Size matters more.

For years, I’ve learned to deal with the fact that I’ll never see models my height, so to determine if something works for me, I just have to try (or buy petite). I’ve complained about it before, and even kept a blog (it’s been inactive for years, but you can still read old posts), but I’ve kind of moved on, after trying for years. It was and still IS like preaching to the choir. However, I DO perk up when I see that a model is under 5’5″. Especially one who is 5’3″ or shorter. She doesn’t even have to be slim. A small, Toronto-based sustainable fashion brand recently started featuring a model who is 5’3″ tall. She’s not slim like me – in fact, I think she’s probably around a 10 or 12 – but featuring HER helps me determine length on non-petite specific clothing. I get a better idea of whether a midi dress REALLY IS a midi dress (or something closer than a maxi). But many larger brands, brands who can very well afford to pay for different sized models, aren’t doing that. Why? Because they want to keep things the way they were and just don’t feel like innovating. They’re not looking at what people want so they could improve. It’s an ego thing. Victoria’s Secret, who filed for bankruptcy protection, didn’t really bother to feature (too many) models of differing sizes and abilities in their shows. That’s not what customers want. To stay alive, you need to reflect that. It doesn’t take a genius to know that.

And it’s not just big businesses. A couple of months ago, a small-ish, well-known Canadian women’s brand had posted on social about needing help to stay alive. However, their main focus still seems to be suits. I wanted to support them, to purchase one or two outfits, even, but there was just nothing I could wear for a lockdown, work-from-home lifestyle. Suits just don’t work for me, not even for formal video conferencing meetings. They ended up getting the funding they needed to continue operating, but the truth is, if they don’t start changing their products, they’re not going to remain competitive. If they don’t remain competitive, then, well, they’re not going to survive. It sounds harsh, but it’s simple. It’s business Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. Those who aren’t marching along with the consumer just aren’t fit.

We all need to be supporting small businesses, but only those who care about a consumer’s needs. I’d much rather support slow fashion, especially slow fashion brands who use diverse sizing AND features a size diverse range of models than the standard 5’10”, size 2, twenty-something. That’s not me. That wasn’t me when I was 25, either.

It’s not just regular, everyday workwear. Formalwear (yes, we still need it) needs to better represent sizing as well. Brides who are larger, for example, may have more difficulty finding gowns. I’m tiny, and though I had much more choice when I was looking over 10 years ago, I have to admit that the majority of gowns were too overwhelming on my short, petite frame. I didn’t have much to pick from either. And yes, since brides come in all shapes and sizes (just like non-brides), we need to see a more diverse size range of models (and other types of formalwear as well. We can’t forget that weddings have guests, even these days, where the guest list is in the double digits rather than 100+). And I don’t want to hear from designers that they want to focus on their “muse” as I did from a well-known Canadian brand a few years ago. Yes, that comment hurt – way worse than a sales associate giving me attitude because I wasn’t a Mandarin-speaking “Crazy Rich Asian.”

But many companies continue to ignore what people want. And they’re suffering the consequences. And unlike some people, I’m not mourning their loss. Staff can find other jobs, perhaps even in different industries – there are so many new and exciting things popping up and they can be trained if they don’t already have the skills. If the company itself doesn’t evolve, they’ll just be stuck, and, are, frankly, a waste of space. Nostalgia can exist in photos, video and in our hearts and closets. Think about typewriters. Are we still using them? Do we, in 2020, expect someone applying for an executive assistant job to know how? Doubt it. I was surprised when a supervisor wanted me to fill in a form using a typewriter in 2008 (and wondered why I wasn’t able to do it on my desktop. I THINK fillable PDFs existed by them (PDFs definitely did), but I don’t remember). Same goes for the fashion business. And I haven’t even had the chance to go into e-commerce and social media. But that’s not really an issue with fashion but restaurants which cater to some cultures. I’ll get into that another time, though.

I know I sound harsh, but we have to be harsh. We have to ensure our society can move ahead. This is like Survivor (goodness, is that STILL ON?). Only those who manage get to stay on the island. Otherwise, you’re gone.

The post Want to Survive? Fashion’s Gotta Follow the Consumer appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.

Over the years, I’ve discovered many other petite bloggers, like Jean Wang (who used to blog under the name, Petite Asian Girl). People like Jean became true blue influencers, even appearing in campaigns for stores like LOFT. I didn’t have that kind of luck, but I STILL stand by the fact that height doesn’t really take much of

We can’t ignore the fact that the fashion world completely dismisses height. Sure, you have petite sections in stores like Banana Republic and Ann Taylor, but they tend to be at the back corner section (and fairly hidden online. They don’t get their own section on the top menu while plus does). Department stores are either getting rid of (some got rid of petites a long time ago) or combining petite sections with regular – a big mistake, in my opinion. I get that they believe it makes people feel more “included” – but that’s really more for a size (as in number or letter) issue, not height. When you’re in a hurry, you’re NOT going to be looking for the letter “P” next to a size, you’re just going to be looking for the number itself. Petites, unlike plus, need their own section and it needs to be better promoted. But like us in general, our voices are dismissed. Maybe tall people just can’t see us (though I know of a very petite size inclusivity activist who only half acknowledges (if at all) the issue).

It’s vital that ALL issues relating to inclusivity be taken seriously and equally. But they’re not. Sometimes, activists will say that they acknowledge them, but in reality, it’s really a dismissal. The question here is why? Especially when SO MANY CELEBRITIES ARE UNDER 5’4″! So you’re not going to acknowledge (and I hesitate to mention her) Kim Kardashian? Reese Witherspoon? Both are around 5’2″ from what I understand. I get that Kim isn’t known for being super-sophisticated, but STILL. They are there, and they seem to pull red carpet looks off well.

So here’s what I don’t understand. As short people, our proportions are different from those who are taller. If designers are able to custom/tailor/make gowns look amazing on a 5’3″ celebrity, why can’t they make RTW clothing for us? Why are we stuck, at best, with mall brands who either regulate things online (just like plus) or in a corner of the store? And at worse, they’re boxy clothing that even women over a certain age (and at 40, I suppose I’m AT that age (or close to it)) won’t touch. And that’s considering how they complain or make excuses about not being able to make things look good on larger people.

For regular store brands, including aspirational lines, premium denim and the like, yes, proportion is an issue. I was at a store recently, trying on a pair of jeans. The pair of jeans was labelled a 24 waist and was supposed to be “super skinny.” Tried it on, and not only was it at least half a size too big (not surprised – premium denim, which typically uses waist measurements, vanity sizes just as much as mall brands), but it certainly wasn’t “super skinny.” It was also pulled up a little higher than it probably should be, showing that the rise is not quite proportioned for someone who is 5’2″ or so with a shortish torso.

So what does the above paragraph mean? That designers who are saying that it’s “hard” to proportion things for larger clients (and thus won’t make anything over a certain size) are okay with people who are my size? It’s technically MORE DIFFICULT to proportion things for US, regardless of height! It isn’t just hemming, after all. This SHOWS that it’s about aesthetics. People my size are more “appealing” to look at based on social conditioning. DUH.

Anyway, as I’ve said time and time again for over a decade, I REALLY WISH body image/size inclusivity activists would look at height issues more seriously. Even if they “acknowledge” the issue by telling us to our faces, they seem to “forget” about us in less than a second. We’ll still be regulated to the back corner or online if no one does anything. It’s a fresh new decade, so let’s make the 2020s about height as well.

The post Height and the Size Inclusivity World appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.

But there are no longer restrictions.  I don’t mean disclosures, but more about actual restrictions – what I could/couldn’t say.  Yes, I was once asked to write something just to make a company sound good.  However, I was also told it was a review.  Only being positive is NOT what I call a review.  It is called an ad, or, in this case, an advertorial.  The whole assignment left a sour taste in my mouth and I can’t believe that blog network even allowed it to happen.

I have to be honest here.  I actually STILL went ahead with the assignment, but only because it was for a beauty store, and I like beauty stores.  I would have turned it down if it had been for anything else (e.g. scents or a BBQ restaurant).  However, it was one of the WORST experiences I ever had.  First of all, the store didn’t even know I was coming.  Really?  I checked, double checked and even TRIPLE CHECKED the location and time.  They weren’t prepared for me, either, so I just stayed for five minutes and left.  I contacted the blog network, and they apologized.  I really don’t know WHY I even stayed with them afterwards – I wasn’t really making much, anyway – but I did.

That wasn’t the only bad experience I had while blogging as DelectablyChic! (or its predecessor, Prospere Magazine).  I once interviewed the owner of a salon who only wanted to talk about HER salon.  I always ask people what makes THEM stand out from their competition, but she circled around the question, only wanting to talk about how great she was and not mentioning any differences.  Yes, your’e amazing, but HOW?  Her English wasn’t the best, but not bad enough that she didn’t understand the question.  And if she didn’t, she could have asked me to clarify.  Or get an interpreter.

I also didn’t like feeling forced to review items I would be VERY biased towards.  I’m not your “typical” fashion or beauty blogger.  I don’t wear A LOT of product, for example, and am very critical of any looks that are very “weird” (e.g. blue or green lipstick, hair colour that doesn’t fall in the blonde/red/black/brown/grey ranges).  And it’s a fashion show or clothes are lent, I will NOT be talking about anything too avant-garde.  I’m sorry, but I’m a conservative, preppy type…with MAYBE a little bit of a hipster vibe.  I DON’T do that kind of thing if it’s a gift.  And I will most definitely be VERY CRITICAL about it.  Not because I don’t “understand,” but because I won’t think it’s practical for most people.  I’m about practicality.

When I started writing, I wanted my blog in a serious manner, like a proper journalist, writing for a mainstream publication.  However, that wasn’t what I felt smaller brands wanted me to do.  They just wanted me to PROMOTE, rather than REVIEW.  However, that wasn’t the feeling I got some of the time.  Everyone needs both positive and negative feedback.  And negative feedback is the only way for brands to improve and widen their customer base.  And don’t they want that?  The more money they make, the more successful they’ll be, right?

Image by Rafal Olechowski/ShutterStock

The post Blogging for Me and Why I Like it More appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.

All is not lost, however, as I have found some new favourites.  They include:

Trudy Ann’s Chai and Spices:  Exactly what they are!  Delicious teas such as vanilla and apple pie (no artificial ingredients!) and spices for Indian/Indian-inspired cooking (butter chicken, chana masala, tandoori, etc…).

Chocolat de Kat: Delicious, bite sized chocolate bon bons in a variety of different flavours including vanilla, latte and Earl Grey tea.  They also sell larger “seasonal” pieces such as bunnies in the spring.

Attilo’s Fine Foods:  I’m not sure if I can consider these guys a “new” as I first met them at a farmer’s market last summer.  However, I had only tried their oils and vinegars – and they make more than that!  While I had seen their olives and pasta sauces, I had not tried or seen their risotto mixes.  The online store (both on their own site and at the show website itself) presents a three different flavours (arrabbiata, sun dried tomato and porcini mushrooms), but you can get additional flavours at the show.

La Parelle:  A line of reversible bags – colour on one side and black on the other.  They come in a variety of sizes and styles and YES, you can put your entire “life” (i.e. wallet, phone, keys and lipstick (if you wear that) in it.  They’re also very light – I’ve found that many bags use extremely heavy leather (I’m not always looking for a workout and I’m sure most people feel this way!).

Crooked Tree Fine Foods: Gluten-free, dairy-free spreads made from a mix of cashews and almonds in four different flavours.  If you’re into spicy, the chipotle is the one for you (I thought it had more than a bit of a kick, but I can’t handle “true” spicy foods.  I tell people the hottest I can go is “Anglo medium” if you know what I mean.  It’s not too PC, but it sounds better than “white person medium”).  However, if you’re more like me, stick to parsley and chive or lemon and garlic.  Turmeric and lemongrass is very good as well.  In addition to spreads, they also have crackers made from almond pulp and a crunchy topping, perfect for yogurt, salads or desserts!

The post Some New Discoveries at the One of a Kind Spring Show appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.

DaLish Cosmetics’ skincare products

Dolls from Birds Love Bees

The One of a Kind Show isn’t only about food.  In addition to DaLish (featuring their skincare line in addition to make-up), other skincare brands, such as Crosswind Farms (which, as usual, has two spaces:  one for their skincare and the other for their goat cheese), are back, as well as numerous fashion and gifts.  Some favourites include 3rd Floor Studio (here for the second half) and local handbag designer, Uppdoo – known for their interchangeable inserts.  There are also many cute greeting cards, including a very hipster-esque ones by Flakes Paperie.  And if you’re looking for something for kids, Birds Love Bees, which I highlighted last spring is back.  What I love about them is the fact every single doll is unique, just like people are unique!

The One of a Kind Show runs until Sunday, December 3.  Tickets can be purchased online or at the door.

The post One of a Kind Show: Holiday 2017 Edition appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.

Ms. Dauxerre’s book

As you can see, modelling is far from glamorous.  In fact, it can be downright cruel.  We all know that models are often not treated very well, but how badly are they treated?  Often they had to wear shoes much too small for them – Ms. Dauxerre had to walk wearing shoes two sizes too small!  Talk about blisters!  Ms. Dauxerre also had an awful allergic reaction after wearing a designer’s clothes – to the point that she wasn’t able to audition the following day.  And keeping within the size a designer is looking for not only means dieting to the point that one is much too small for one’s height, but there are restrictions on the amount of exercise (basically zero) as well – at least according to the book.  Muscles aren’t considered feminine looking, according to the book (wait, do these designers know my maternal grandmother??!!!).  Then there are the super-early shoots, temperature issues during shoots and, of course, the lack of food.  Or decent food.  Even if models are fed (say, at a preview for media), they are often not given the same type of food as guests.  Ms. Dauxerre also talks about pay and how models are often “paid” in clothing rather than money itself.

This book definitely serves as a warning to young women (and men, too) who want to become models.  It’s not how it’s portrayed in movies and television.  And definitely not something parents should really encourage their kids as something to pursue.  Unless, of course, changes are made.  Changes such as sample sizes.  If models need to be very tall, then wouldn’t it be better to have larger sample sizes?  At 5’10”, one will appear to be just as proportionately thin in a size 8 as a petite woman (who is, say, 5’2″ or 5’3″) who wears a size 0 or 2.  And the runway “ideal” of not being muscular or athletic doesn’t “fit” the Hollywood ideal either – the “fit” look has been “in” for YEARS.  Wonder Woman was NOT the catalyst!  If designers complain about having to dress larger sized celebrities like Melissa McCarthy, then shouldn’t they also do so for smaller actresses or musicians (I find that body image activists forget this too.  I have reminded them numerous times, yet they seem to either forget or even dismiss my comments.  I guess they don’t want to hear anything from a smaller woman)?  The non-muscular look is not exactly the ideal.  And I have also never heard designers complain about having to dress shorter people.

One thing that needs to be noted is that Ms. Dauxerre was modelling some seven or eight years ago and things have improved…slightly.  For example, models in France must now present medical notes indicating they are not too thin to work.  However, we often hear that designers STILL refuse to use a broader range in sizing.  Is it really that difficult to change?  Or, if they DO prefer to use smaller sized individuals, just use shorter models.  The only reason why agencies are full of very tall, very young and very thin models is because that’s what they have on their roster – because that’s what designers are looking for.  It isn’t up to the agencies and scouts, it’s up to the designers.  And if a designer can dress the very petite Lady Gaga (5’1″ or so), they can dress Chrissy Metz from This is Us.  Oh, and please treat models better.  Feed them.  Give them a place to sit while they’re waiting.  Let them warm up if the location is too cold.  AND FOR GOODNESS SAKE, PAY THEM!!!  Like REAL MONEY.  Because complimentary clothes, shoes and bags don’t pay the rent.  They only clog up closets.

The post The Fashion Industry, Model Cruelty and Eating Disorders appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.

Just two pairs of my shoes

It’s no different for clothing.  I had a Holt Renfrew gift card and was eager to spend it before it expired.  So off I went to the store.  I found an item which I liked very much and asked for my size.  Unfortunately, it was not available at the location I went to.  The only store which carried a small was in Edmonton, which meant that it needed to be shipped over.  I asked if extra small was available, and the associate claimed that extra small didn’t exist in the line.  I wasn’t sure about that, but went along with his claim as I was fairly interested in the dress (a wrap dress, which can be altered easily) – the purchase could always be reversed if a smaller size is found.  At the end, yes, extra small WAS available, so the dress was “returned.”  As the brand was leased, I wasn’t able to use the gift card anyway (I ended up buying skincare products with said cards)

A closer look at the size!

Holt Renfrew has been lacking in smaller sizes recently.  This isn’t something I understand, as Holt’s is supposed to compete with Saks and Nordstrom and both carry a larger volume of clothing smaller than a size 4 or 6.  The market is there – in Toronto, especially.  Luxury stores in Toronto (and Vancouver) have a sizable East Asian clientele, who are typically smaller-framed.  Of course, most are not sizes 0 or 2, or even size 4, but more from the demographic would be on the smallest end of the size spectrum than other populations.  By carrying fewer small sizes, then Holt Renfrew is losing business to its competitors.  It’s Business 101.  This isn’t just clothing, but shoes as well.  And the shoe issue is more difficult than clothing as most brands don’t even MAKE my size.  I’ve come to terms with that, and I just don’t bother shopping from those brands (no use complaining.  They’re not going to care when it’s such a small demographic).  Their loss.

So why don’t I shop exclusively in Asia?  Because I live in Canada and rarely make trips over the Pacific – my last trip to Hong Kong was in 2011.  And while Asia may have more items in my size, I am not interested in purchasing online and having to pay expensive shipping and duty charges.  And that’s IF they even ship here (and not to mention, take credit cards with a Canadian address).  Of course, my other option is to go vintage, but one also needs to be able to style vintage clothing so that it won’t look too…costume-y.

I know that I shouldn’t be ranting like this.  As a small person, I have “size privilege.”  However, we are talking about business and demographics in this case.  I know the bulk of Holt Renfrew’s customers are probably in the sizes 6-10 range, and thus, they need to these individuals’ needs.  However, if more people skew these sizes rather than, say, 10-14, then more people are also going to be looking for sizes 0-4.  And despite my so-called “privilege,” being “too small” also puts one at a disadvantage, whether people who skew larger understand or not.  Stores just don’t order enough, and if you get there “too late” – even if the item isn’t on sale yet – you are out of luck.  And usually, the pieces aren’t even all that old.

The post Shopping and the Difficulty of Finding Small Sizes appeared first on Cynthia C. Mintz.