Why Aren't There Different Shirt Length Options For Each Size???

Come on! I wanna show off Hodor, not my belly.

By now, you've probably read enough of my humble little blog to know that I'm not afraid to ask the important questions, really dig down deep to explore the world and our humanity, and if necessary, overturn big heavy rocks of convention, tradition, or assumption. Today, I make another big, bold, boisterous step and ask one of the most important questions I've ever asked: why the hell aren't there different shirt length options for each shirt size?

Just because someone is buying a small t-shirt doesn't mean they're a minuscule midget, or a gargantuan giant if buying extra large, yet these are the asinine assumptions most shirt manufacturers make (except for you, my beloved Express Men, you make glorious form-fitting smalls at a reasonable, no-belly-exposing length!). Do they not know that it's not only possible, but common to be tall and skinny, short and large, or any combination in between? People come not just in all widths, but all heights too, so why do shirts assume a height based on width?

An inch increase for each size. Seriously? 

Width is not the only measurement of an object's size. Mathematically, you have to have the height/length and depth too, or you're not measuring three-dimensional size, you're just measuring a single one-dimensional property. And last time I checked, people are three dimensional. Therefore, shirt sizes should accommodate the varying three-dimensional occurrences of human size.

And heck, manufacturers only need to worry about two measurements anyway since, for almost every single human on the planet, depth and width correlate pretty well. When you get wider, you usually get proportionally deeper too and vice-versa, though the beer-belly can be a bastard and throw the formula out of whack. But since shirts are basically measured by the circumference of an oval, and made out of material that flexibly adapts to differing oval shapes of width and depth, shirt size accounts reasonably well for that measurement. It's just the height measurement that's missing. Turn that oval into a tube, which is rudimentarily what we are.

Oh my god, I've really gotten in the weeds with math. What the hell? Okay, let's get back to the human issue here. Not that math isn't important or relevant. You kinda have to talk about the math to illustrate the problem and anyway, where would we be without math? We would never have gone to the moon, we wouldn't have computers or smartphones, we wouldn't be able to auto-tune shitty singers, we wouldn't have dopamine-inducing videogames, we wouldn't have a perfectly fine-tuned Reese's Peanut Butter Cup recipe that guarantees the same tasty delight each and every time...there's an almost endless list of things we wouldn't have or have achieved without math. We owe math big time, I mean—oh crap, I'm back in the weeds again. Sorry.

The greatest mathematical equation of all time.

Anyway, I get that manufacturers can't have a bazillion options for each shirt on the racks, and that bodies come in such variety it's nearly impossible to have perfect options for everyone, but there's no reason there shouldn't AT LEAST be two different length options for each size. A regular small and a tall small, a regular large and a tall large. That would go a long way to accommodating people's differences in width and height. Tall skinny people can raise their arms without exposing their bellies, and short large people can wear t-shirts that aren't dresses on them. Why the hell isn't this a thing already? Why isn't this standard operating procedure? WHY???