What is it with this “extended size” nonsense.

I was at a Columbia Outlet where the sales associate was obsessed with the phrase. “We don’t carry many extended sizes. I don’t think we have the navy shorts in an extended size.” He looked at me sadly like it was my fault he couldn’t help me.

It’s so silly. Why aren’t there just sizes? No woman who wears a size 0 or 2 hears, “We don’t carry collapsed sizes here.”

The reason seems to be about branding. Until recently, REI didn’t carry sizes beyond XL because, to paraphrase, “overweight individuals don’t really do the activities REI designs their clothing for.”

Give me a break. Does everyone who wears Wranglers wrangle cattle? Do you have to be a rock climber to wear The North Face? A goddess to wear Nike?

You don’t have to be a certain size to enjoy nature. REI doesn’t want fat women wearing their gear. Full stop. It isn’t about whether those women do or don’t hike.

Some stores even charge more for “plus” sizes. They claim it’s because of the extra material, but it’s really just a fat tax. Sweaters for a size 2 don’t cost less than those for a size 12, even though they require less material. So why should a 1X cost more than an XL?

“Fat”, “overweight”, “heavy”, “queen-sized” or “curvy” women even have to shop in a different section of Nordstrom in Portland—tucked away on the second floor.

Shopping is capitalism, and the last time I checked, there wasn’t a weight limit on a credit card application.

The bottom line (pun intended) is that this size-monitoring makes my body an object of judgment and makes brands look small. This isn’t just a retail issue; it’s a social one. Given that online shopping allows every size to be stored and shipped without a separate section, these outdated practices must end. Please just stop.