THIS is why we have whacked body images

girl you look good at 204 and 5'8.......what is the lowest you became post-op......I am 5'5 and now 199.....my lowest was 140 for a hot second after my TT and then inactivity and bad eating caused me weight gain.


do you workout regularly?  will protein shakes again  help me to lose 50 pounds at 3.5 years out because of my shoulder tears I cannot do much upper body work?

wow this is an awesome site. i looked my height and size up. i don't think i look like them at all!

My 2 cents:

1.  They ALL look better than I do -- my sag gets in the way. 

2.  I hate vanity sizing.  It messes with my head big time.  I don't know if I'm too big or too small.  I currently wear a size 2 at most places (00 if you're at chicos.... have a couple size 6s in formal wear).  I wish sizing were consistant, whether I end up a 2 or a 10.  It would be easier to mentally judge size. 

I hate vanity sizing too.  I would rather know what I legitimately wear so when I buy something I'm not thrown for a loop.

Very interesting.... I too don't agree most woman look like the one one the right...Isn't the average American woman supposed to be size 14?    I always say the biggest revolution yet to be born is when the American woman says ENOUGH and uses her pocket book and closes it up to speak...with merchandisers, media, etc...  What...we have to gauge ourselves with celebrities who do not know what it is like to be a single mother, often supporting our children with little to no help....cars that don't start...and bills that often go unpaid.  And then we are supposed to have the energy and time to do all that it takes to conform to the standard "they" establish for us...whoever "they" are...

If the average woman is a 14, then most women DO look like the woman on the right (or larger). Only 1/3 would look more like the other two.

I only wished I looked like that woman on the right when I wore a size 14.  What size did they say she was versus what you think she is?

On February 9, 2012 at 7:13 AM Pacific Time, Cleopatra_Nik wrote:

Yeah so…this picture made the rounds on Facebook the other day and comes from a page that promotes a more realistic view of body imagery. Most folks celebrated it. “Yes! Curves! We love them!"

 

I, however, called BS on this photo.  

 

Ok so the woman on the left. Her size looks pretty accurate on the low end (and I'd even argue she's probably about a 2). But then you get to the woman in the middle. She’s a 12? Really? Because I’m a 12 and not nearly that small framed. And even people I know how are “natural 12’s" (meaning they came to be a size 12 on their own, not through any weight gain or loss) don’t look like that. To me, she looks more like a size 8.

 

Meanwhile the woman on the right looks more, to me, like a 12. She’s what I and every other 12 I know looks like. For what it’s worth, her body shape is the one I find most appealing.

 

THIS is a good example of why society, in general, is so whacked out about body image. I know this picture seeks to do a good thing but even it can have some toxic connotations. For us 12’s, how do we feel when we see a “fellow" 12 who looks SO much smaller than us? And for the woman I believe to be a real 12, how do other women who look like her (and are 12’s) feel when they are told they are a 16?

 

Yes, it’s just a number but like it or not, in many ways we let that number define us.

 

Personally, I’d love to see “real" real women. Women who look like they’ve given birth a few times. Women with a few lumps. Women with a little muffin top action going on. Let’s see THOSE women rockin’ it. I have seen those pictures out there and I appreciate them because I CAN FIND MYSELF IN THEM.

 

But I just thought I’d put this up for discussion. What do you think when you see this picture and pictures like these? Do they help or hurt your work toward a better self image?

Hey Nik, Coming from an obese kid to an anorexic teen the woman on the left looks like a 0-2 to me......the middle chick.....maybe a 4-6 at the most...........................chick on the right................ personally I would say 8-12 depending on body shape, height and births given..

with all that said I personally birthed 10 kids in every fashion,  natural, with drugs, c-sections, VBACS and last year after abdomnioplasty in March 2011 I was a size 4 in a $125.00 pair of linen pants I tried on and in regular stores a size 8......pics on my profile page with the balloons when I turned 40.

so I believe that those pics or numbers are off and just to say that is what America goes by makes me even more sadder today because I no  longer even look like the female on the right

but who cares at least I am still healthy according to all my labs and I am still co-morbidity FREE....oh Yeah!

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh I see the sizes now.  I could not figure out how everyone knew what size these women were? Okay...

 I have to agree with Kim, 

If you were to walk into a high end designer store these sizes would be accurate.  If you were to walk into walmart these sizes would be way off, the national average model would probably fit into an 8-10.  I have looked and looked for a graph I had seen with sizing differences and how an actual size 10 today from say Old Navy is probably more like a size 16/18 was 20 years ago. 

The fact is, when I was 20, 20 years ago, and hovering around 200 to 220 pounds I could hardly find a size 24 to fit me.  Currently i'm at 283 and I can put on a 24 but they are tight.  That's a huge amount of size differential from 20 years ago. 

http://www.justsaywhen.com/Vintage-101-Sizing.htm A quote from this great article

"  What neither Jane nor the underpaid sales person realizes is that Vintage Clothing sizes are much much smaller than today's clothing sizes. Without getting into a really long explanation of the changes made in American clothing size charts during the last 50 years, let me say this...generally speaking, vintage clothing sizes run 4-6 sizes smaller than clothing sizes today. For example, I normally wear a size 4-6 in most everything ( dress, pants, skirts) but if I'm trying on a 50's dress, I need a size 12. Likewise, if it's a dress from the 70's, I can usually fit into a size 10. That's just the way the cookie crumbles. Get over the NUMBER Chica ! Sizes back then were much smaller, period. "

So I believe those body sizes are in proportion and they do actually fit with my image in my head of those sizes, but it may be easier for me, since I've never been those sizes since I've been a grown woman...I have no external point of reference.

Gypsy