2024 Fashion On The Ration Challenge

Laura_Elsewhere

PipneyJane said:

My bet is that nobody talked about “middle age spread” in the 1950s.  

< gets off soapbox >

- Pip 

1883, it started being used, acc’g the OED…

”1883 What my irrepressible cousin Bob coarsely terms ‘the middle aged spread’, has only not begun because I am one of the lean kine and incline to scragginess rather than to Rubenesque fleshiness.

Nat. Temperance Mirror”

But afaik, there certainly was a known thing of people gaining round their middle once past young adulthood- there’s a light-hearted reference to not being able to do up her wedding dress ten years later, in a Sue Barton book published well before the war, amongst many other refs in books, newspaper articles, etc. 

The term may have been used less but the term ‘matronly’ is literally the word for “the larger size of a woman no longer in young adulthood” and I suppose ‘portly’ and ‘stout’ were equivalent for men, ie never used about young men (‘husky’ is the codeword in our 1902 Sears Roebuck facsimile catalogue, as in shirts for husky youths!).

Laura_Elsewhere

Stature is determined partly by genetics, but it isn’t only nutrition and exercise that make up the rest of the determining factors: physical health and emotional distress during developmental years can both affect adult stature by slowing or interrupting bone growth.

The advent of the NHS combined with the nutritional advantages of rationing means that the post-war Boomers were a good bit taller than previous generations in Britain. The fact that we’re shrinking again is a worrying thing imo… 

I think @Cherryfudge is right about food deserts where you can’t buy decent fruit and veg or even any at all, maybe just tins if you’re lucky- and at two to three times the price of a big supermarket miles away… and walking isn’t always safe, of course…

but we’ve to stay off Politics so back to 1940s we go! 

PipneyJane

Laura_Elsewhere said:

PipneyJane said:

My bet is that nobody talked about “middle age spread” in the 1950s.  

< gets off soapbox >

- Pip 

1883, it started being used, acc’g the OED…

”1883 What my irrepressible cousin Bob coarsely terms ‘the middle aged spread’, has only not begun because I am one of the lean kine and incline to scragginess rather than to Rubenesque fleshiness.

Nat. Temperance Mirror”

But afaik, there certainly was a known thing of people gaining round their middle once past young adulthood- there’s a light-hearted reference to not being able to do up her wedding dress ten years later, in a Sue Barton book published well before the war, amongst many other refs in books, newspaper articles, etc. 

The term may have been used less but the term ‘matronly’ is literally the word for “the larger size of a woman no longer in young adulthood” and I suppose ‘portly’ and ‘stout’ were equivalent for men, ie never used about young men (‘husky’ is the codeword in our 1902 Sears Roebuck facsimile catalogue, as in shirts for husky youths!).

Oh yes! I’d forgotten about “matronly”.  However, I’d never really associated that with weight gain, more with the fact that women’s bodies change shape during pregnancy.  (Bigger breasts, etc.)

Which Sue Barton book, please, @Laura_Elsewhere?  Sue Barton is the reason I became a nurse.  At the age of 10, I read Sue Barton Student Nurse and everything clicked into place.  I have all the books.  (Interestingly, the last two were published in 1949 and 1952, but there are no references to antibiotics in them, although I wonder if that was what was used to treat Bill’s TB,)

- Pip

Laura_Elsewhere

@PipneyJane, it’s the one where she returns to nursing while Bill is in the TB sanatorium, hence why she gets out her old uniform dresses. I love those books!! 

Have a look at some 1939s knitting patterns that specify being for ‘matronly’ figures- the illustrative photos show women who are distinctly a much larger size all over!! I don’t think I recall the word being used about young women- it was for middle-aged women.

And think of Granma in the Giles cartoons- almost a cube in shape! My great-grandmothers were both very stout, probably about a modern size 22-24 like me, or a bit bigger given that they would be wearing sturdy corsetry under their clothing.

The triple-drug therapy was discovered in 1956 by John Crofton’s team in Edinburgh, but the individual meds had been used unsuccessfully for long enough to make it worth trying the triple-drug approach… which so nearly eradicated TB… very sad…

maryb

I think a lot of working class women did get pretty large.  Think of all those old photos of doughty ladies in their crossover pinnies chatting on the doorstep.  Whether it was the hormonal effect of having several children or, more likely, filling up on cheap carbs to leave the more nourishing and expensive food for the men and children.

Back in the days of Simpsons of Piccadilly. DH used to look for a DAKS suit in the sale.  He was looking through the racks and they had 40L,40R,40S and 40PS.  He asked one of the very superior sales assistants what 40PS meant.  “It’s Portly Short Sir”he replied.  DH instantly pretended to look at the 40 regular!  He wishes they still did Portly Short!

Sarahspangles

maryb said:

I think a lot of working class women did get pretty large.  Think of all those old photos of doughty ladies in their crossover pinnies chatting on the doorstep. 

I’m instantly imagining Cissie and Ada (Roy Barraclough and Les Dawson) adjusting their bos-ooms.

My family were mostly working class until my parents’ generation. I’d say the ladies who were overweight or obese were 50% genetically predisposed that way and 50% eating (and drinking) the wrong stuff. Irrespective of how hard they worked in or out of the house. I have some sympathy, if within living memory your community had been hungry, and you yourself had had a family with small children to get through rationing, being able to feed people nice things felt like a positive.

One of the British sewing pattern houses had different pattern grading for ‘Misses’, and then over time that became the default. As well as 8 - 10 - 12 I think there were odd numbers for more mature shapes.

basketcase

Sarahspangles said:

I’d say the ladies who were overweight or obese were 50% genetically predisposed that way and 50% eating (and drinking) the wrong stuff. Irrespective of how hard they worked in or out of the house. 

One of the British sewing pattern houses had different pattern grading for ‘Misses’, and then over time that became the default. As well as 8 - 10 - 12 I think there were odd numbers for more mature shapes.

I think there was also the fact that awareness/treatment of thyroid problems wasn't as common as it is now - or perhaps isn't caught as soon. eg The last time I saw anybody with a goitre was as a child in the late 50s.  (Probably partly due to more frequent use of iodised salt, which we always had). 

Also underactive thyroid problems are common in my family.  Mine and my niece's were treated fairly early, my mother's wasn't even recognised until later in life.  Partly, I think, because putting on weight later in life was accepted as 'normal' so many cases would be missed.

I remember the "odd number" pattern sizes.  It never occurred to me that they were for more mature shapes!  I always assumed it was a practical thing for in-betweeners who had to buy "large 12/small 14" sizes or alter patterns up or down so they'd fit.  Very enterprising, as it attracted people who could sew, but not change patterns - not to mention SEPs (Standard English Pear-shaped) who had to put up with tight skirts, or... ahem... loose tops with standard patterns.

Sarahspangles

basketcase said:

Sarahspangles said:

I’d say the ladies who were overweight or obese were 50% genetically predisposed that way and 50% eating (and drinking) the wrong stuff. Irrespective of how hard they worked in or out of the house. 

One of the British sewing pattern houses had different pattern grading for ‘Misses’, and then over time that became the default. As well as 8 - 10 - 12 I think there were odd numbers for more mature shapes.

I think there was also the fact that awareness/treatment of thyroid problems wasn't as common as it is now - or perhaps isn't caught as soon. eg The last time I saw anybody with a goitre was as a child in the late 50s.  (Probably partly due to more frequent use of iodised salt, which we always had). 

Also underactive thyroid problems are common in my family.  Mine and my niece's were treated fairly early, my mother's wasn't even recognised until later in life.  Partly, I think, because putting on weight later in life was accepted as 'normal' so many cases would be missed.

I remember the "odd number" pattern sizes.  It never occurred to me that they were for more mature shapes!  I always assumed it was a practical thing for in-betweeners who had to buy "large 12/small 14" sizes or alter patterns up or down so they'd fit.  Very enterprising, as it attracted people who could sew, but not change patterns - not to mention SEPs (Standard English Pear-shaped) who had to put up with tight skirts, or... ahem... loose tops with standard patterns.

I can remember people referring to ‘Derbyshire neck’ rather than goitre. We also had Cerebos iodised salt in the cupboard, my mother said that if we ate vegetables all from one locality (granddad’s allotment!) there was a risk. There must have been someone in the family affected at some point for her to say that, though we’re a Yorkshire lot.

I found a reference to odd-numbered sizing. I’m astonished to see that originally a size 8 was literally the size you would make for a child that age! Though a modern 8 will no doubt be larger.

http://midvalevintagepost.blogspot.com/2012/06/history-of-sewing-vintage-pattern-sizes.html

Laura_Elsewhere

One of the problems with numbered sizing is that different makers of clothing as well as sewing patterns used different schemes. I can't remember who or what now, but I have seen interwar patterns sized with the number meaning the waist in inches, and others with the number meaning the bust in inches and still others with the number meaning the hips- and of course that might vary within just one maker for eg skirt or blouse, so you might buy a 36 blouse pattern to wear with your 42 skirt... 
Children's sizes I think were always age-average, same as nowadays- you buy children's clothing in a size called "age 6-8". It's still fairly variable- I actually buy children's cotton-rich school tights, and cut off the tops and hem thge cut leg-edges to give me long over-the-klnee socks. Given that I am an adult size 22-24, it really REALLY makes me wonder about their "age 10-12" schoolgirls' legs...!!!!! (Yes, I know there's stretching involved but all the same- it baffles me that they fit!). 

In public health terms, the late 19th and early 20th centuries are renowned for mass malnutrition in Britain, much of which was due to the poorest people in urban settings living mostly on potatoes & margarine and bread & margarine with buckets of sweet tea and occasional fish and chips, but not much else, literally- the Boer War triggered the 1904 Report into the Physical Deterioration of the Nation, which in turn led to the 1906 legislation introducing the first school meals- which themselves were frequently porridge, or bread and dripping or bread and margarine. So you do get a lot of older people who are obese, from exactly the same causes as many nowadays- eating a diet that is sufficient in calories but insufficient in nutrients. 

basketcase

*Sneaks in quietly at the back*

It's just occurred to me, I've been MIA for most of the year - for reasons I won't go into here.  I have been following various thread, but not contributing.  I've now achieved the anatomically challenging feat of kicking myself on the rear and am back on track.  I hope...

My only clothing spend of any kind this year has been 4 3/4 sleeved, one-size cotton tops in different colours.  I think that's a total of 20 coupons?  As Winter's approaching I'm considering buying another oodie.  And maybe making a start on using some of my pre-war stash of yarn.  Neck-warmers/dickies seem to be a good bet.  They're small (so I should get one or two finished before next summer! 🤣) and useful for putting under V-neck/crew-neck jumpers etc