clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Question: Answer: Interpretation: I guess that's a yes... Yup. It's OK and I don't hate fat people, I have fat friends and some family. I just don't DATE fat chicks. Link to post Share on other sites
stace79 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I aspire to reach a level of physical fitness when seeing all of those athletes on ESPN. You look at some lame fashion models, and kiss the ground they tread. You moan and groan over her waistline. I think she has a serious problem if she can't climb a few flights of stairs. This is a much more healthy attitude -- if you're truly concerned about overall HEALTH, rather than size, then that's admirable. I wouldn't want to date someone who couldn't climb a flight of stairs either. Link to post Share on other sites
lovestruck818 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I don't think anyone here is advocating that a woman should be weighing 200 lb. Unless she's 6 ft 4" maybe. But size zero? From what I know, an American size zero would be the equivalent to UK size 4, and I don't know of any shops that stock anything below a size 6 here (and yes, we also have delicately built Asian women here who need to buy clothes, and who are catered for). A very small boned, slim woman (say the Asian type figure) might wear a size 6. A very slim woman with a more Northern European build might take a size 8 - but size 6 would be unusual unless she was skeletal. Even size UK 10 would be considered slim for most women. Size 4? I don't know anyone who takes that. I've a friend of Malaysian heritage. She's got a fairly European build, but her little sister is tiny (petite and very slim - like a little doll). She's a size 6. I think sizes have become slightly more generous In fact I know they have. My mother had anorexia when she was in her twenties. Her wedding dress was a 10, she had a 22 inch waist - and that dress would probably be more like what we consider a size 6 to be now. Still....Size 8 tends to be the size that is referred to when people are talking about a woman verging on being a bit too thin. Personally I think a woman of 5 ft 4" can be a size 8 without having an eating disorder.....possibly (at a push, and if she's very small boned) size 6. Size 4? I can't see it. So if If you're with a healthy adult woman who's a size zero, unless she's a midget I'm assuming that this whole size zero craze has led to a bit of vanity sizing going on. Edit: So I looked and found... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Size_zero So size zero is like a UK size 6/8 then. First of all, Wikipedia sucks...it's just average joes posting whatever they want...NOT people who are actually qualified enough on the subject to be writinf in detail like that. Secondly, not all size 0 women are "dangerously thin". I am 5'1" and a size 0. I am not anorexic looking or anything. It's just b/c I am so short. Had I been taller, then yes I would probably be "dangerously thin." I don't think the article was really taking into considering the woman's height. Link to post Share on other sites
lovestruck818 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Let's face it, the person who started this thread is just concerned about looks. So are most of the people who replied in agreement. The fact that he only mentioned women and thinks that the main drawback of such a 'social problem' is his narrowed dating pool.. LMFAO! Anyone who bashes fat people for being unhealthy had damn well better make sure that they: 1. NEVER overindulge in alcohol. 2. NEVER smoke, or stay in places where people smoke regularly. 3. Only eat natural food without any additives/preservatives/insecticides/hormone injections/etc. 4. Stay far away from air-polluted areas (streets, factory areas...) 5. Work out everyday. Then, you have the right to throw a stone. I am thin. But I do not work out, I don't give a damn about what my food contains, and my area has very high air pollution. Lots of overweight women would be healthier than me. actually...smoking keeps ya thin. Nicotine is an appetite suppressant. Link to post Share on other sites
stace79 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I'm not sure what a UK 10 is, I suspect it's a lot smaller (OK, I looked, a US 10 is a UK 14, US 6 is a UK 10) than a US 10. A US 10 is pretty huge. Here a 6 is, IMO, a nice size for most people but women here treat it like it's some unattainable ideal. As for 'petite', here that just tends to mean 'short and fat' more than 'small'. This is where you show your ignorance. Do you realize that sizes over the past 15 years have shrunk? Someone who wore a size 6/8 10 years ago would likely have been within your ideal. Now, you have to look like a middle school boy's body to fit into those same clothes. It's almost like fashion designers want women to look like men -- no hips, no breasts, no curves. And I'm talking literal curves, not fat rolls. You can't judge people purely based on their clothing size or their weight only. You have to look at a variety of factors to determine HEALTH, such as BMI, body fat percentage and fitness based on physical tests. The way YOU are trying to judge people just makes you look shallow and superficial. And if you are superficial, whatever. Just call a spade a spade. Don't pretend like "health" is of supreme importance to you, when you really just want a girlfriend to look good on your arm. Lastly, I did not reply to your question "are you fat" because it's really of no relevance. Well, I guess it would be to you, because apparently if you're fat your opinion doesn't count. Link to post Share on other sites
stace79 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 First of all, Wikipedia sucks...it's just average joes posting whatever they want...NOT people who are actually qualified enough on the subject to be writinf in detail like that. Secondly, not all size 0 women are "dangerously thin". I am 5'1" and a size 0. I am not anorexic looking or anything. It's just b/c I am so short. Had I been taller, then yes I would probably be "dangerously thin." I don't think the article was really taking into considering the woman's height. It's also based on your body shape dictated by genetics. Some people are literally just smaller. My niece was a competitive cheerleader, extremely healthy, 5'6'' about 108 lbs her high school career. However, she had broad shoulders and was more muscular, and slightly more endowed in her chest than most girls her size. She was wearing size 8, which some people posting her would say is heavier than average size. (he likes size 6 or less) I'm rolling my eyes here. Anyway she would most definitely not be considered fat, just as you might not be dangerously thin in a size 0. Also, it depends on the clothier. If you shop at Express, you might wear a size 4 jeans; New York & Company you may fit a size 2; Ann Taylor you might wear something different. It also depends on the style of clothes -- there's just no real standard for measurements in clothing sizes. This has long been a complaint from women. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 This is where you show your ignorance. Do you realize that sizes over the past 15 years have shrunk? Please cite a reliable source for this, every source I've found says the opposite. Maybe the clothes just feel smaller to you as time goes by? Link to post Share on other sites
Trialbyfire Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Yes Taramere, it appears there's a lot of vanity sizing going on and there's no doubt that the sizes of our parents, were much smaller than now. It's not as rampant in Canada, as in the States, although I think it's getting progressively worse. What used to be the size differences between UK/Canada and the US, is one size. In other words, a 0 in the US, was equivalent to a 2/4 in the UK/Canada. It appears that this has changed to 0 to 6/8, but not for every retailer. Canada is a mix of old UK culture and newer US influence. If it's a US retailer, they no longer bother to reduce the sizes in Canada. Also, some of our own manufacturers, have jumped on the vanity sizing bandwagon, albeit not as badly. When someone with a 27" waist, can fit into a size 0, there's a problem! Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 - there's just no real standard for measurements in clothing sizes. This has long been a complaint from women. Also not true. The US government developed a standard for sizing in the 1940s but it has been disregarded lately as garment makers adopt smaller and smaller size numbers for larger and larger garments. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 First of all, Wikipedia sucks...it's just average joes posting whatever they want. Not really that simple. There are reviews and editorial standards. For most non-controversial subjects Wikipedia is a good resource, and can serve as a springboard to more serious research. Shucks, that sounds like an encyclopedia, doesn't it? Link to post Share on other sites
Star Gazer Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 A US 10 is pretty huge. It is? News to me. http://theweightinggame.ivillage.com/dietfitness/fabulous.JPG Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It is? News to me. http://theweightinggame.ivillage.com/dietfitness/fabulous.JPG Tillie is hot and I bet they are all above average height. Link to post Share on other sites
lovestruck818 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Not really that simple. There are reviews and editorial standards. For most non-controversial subjects Wikipedia is a good resource, and can serve as a springboard to more serious research. Shucks, that sounds like an encyclopedia, doesn't it? Are you kidding me? My friend submitted an article about himself and it got published. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Are you kidding me? My friend submitted an article about himself and it got published. So what? The attention given is roughly equal the interest generated. You think other sources of information are unbiased and completely reliable? Link to post Share on other sites
GorillaTheater Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I find Wikipedia to be very reliable, particularly the articles on the French Foriegn Legion, Mongolian history and demography, and cashew production. Though I need to back and make sure some yahoo didn't change any of my edits. Link to post Share on other sites
lovestruck818 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I find Wikipedia to be very reliable, particularly the articles on the French Foriegn Legion, Mongolian history and demography, and cashew production. Though I need to back and make sure some yahoo didn't change any of my edits. but my point is...I can go and access that same article and change it up however I want. It's just people like you and I submitting things. I would say half of it is legit and the other half is completely bogus. Link to post Share on other sites
Girlygal Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 A US 10 is fat???? Seriously? Thats BS. Hell Marilyn Monroe was a 12 or 14 and she damn hot. If it wasnt for Hollywood women being size 00 a good portion of are young girls wouldnt view themselves as fat. This hollywood vision has caused more anorexia, bulemia and self mutilation then any other media outlet. We have all been brain washed into thinking "skinny" is best. I prefer Healthy, i work out i cut carbs and watch what i eat. But you know what? i still eat ice cream and chips. We need a healthy balance. I like the gym but i will never drop down to a size 0 thats just stupid. And god bless you if your naturally skinny! Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Maybe we need a Wikipedia thread. Or just a link to one of the 100,000 threads about it on /. On topic, the women in the above linked picture look everywhere from fine to mildly obese. I'd also bet they are substantially over 5' 4, I wouldn't be shocked if they are closer to 5' 9 or even taller. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 A US 10 is fat???? Seriously? Thats BS. Hell Marilyn Monroe was a 12 or 14 and she damn hot. That was a US standard 12, not the current US TUBBY 12, and Ms Monroe wasn't any too fit. Link to post Share on other sites
lovestruck818 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 A US 10 is fat???? Seriously? Thats BS. Hell Marilyn Monroe was a 12 or 14 and she damn hot. If it wasnt for Hollywood women being size 00 a good portion of are young girls wouldnt view themselves as fat. This hollywood vision has caused more anorexia, bulemia and self mutilation then any other media outlet. We have all been brain washed into thinking "skinny" is best. I prefer Healthy, i work out i cut carbs and watch what i eat. But you know what? i still eat ice cream and chips. We need a healthy balance. I like the gym but i will never drop down to a size 0 thats just stupid. And god bless you if your naturally skinny! ummm...skinny IS best. I've been fat and I've been skinny and being skinny is a lot better. My quality of life has improved dramatically after I lost the weight. You would be surprised how much better service you get and how nicer people are to you when you're thin. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 but my point is...I can go and access that same article and change it up however I want. It's just people like you and I submitting things. I would say half of it is legit and the other half is completely bogus. Start a thread OK? We're here to talk about fat chicks. Link to post Share on other sites
GorillaTheater Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 We're here to talk about fat chicks. Sorry. Put me in the "opposed" column. Link to post Share on other sites
stace79 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 ummm...skinny IS best. I've been fat and I've been skinny and being skinny is a lot better. My quality of life has improved dramatically after I lost the weight. You would be surprised how much better service you get and how nicer people are to you when you're thin. Skinny is not flat-out always better. Again, you people are all putting this into a black-white thing. It's not just black or white. If you are only judging by appearances, then sure, say skinny people are better people. If you are going for health, then you need to take in many more factors besides just weight on the scale and clothing size. If you lost weight in a healthy way, ate right, exercised, etc. rather than just starving yourself or doing a bunch of coke to drop pounds, then sure, more power to you for being "slim" or "thin" or whatever. It's the attitude of "skinny at all costs" that makes me sick. Guys plainly exhibit they won't date girls over a certain size or weight, and so girls drop pounds any way they can -- drugs, laxatives, starvation, binging/purging. Then guys like on this board still want those girls, even though their bones could break in a stiff wind from lack of nutrients, or they're skinny but flabby & jiggly because they have zero muscle because they never work out. Girls' hair falls out because they starve themselves or their teeth rot from puking up anything they eat. That is certainly far less attractive to me than a woman who is a healthy size 10 or 12. But to each his or her own. Again all I would ask is that you be honest and admit if you're just being superficial. Link to post Share on other sites
clv0116 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 That is certainly far less attractive to me than a woman who is a healthy size 10 or 12. How tall would a healthy normal woman have to be make a 28"-30" waist "healthy"? Because that's what we're talking about BEFORE we consider vanity sizing. Link to post Share on other sites
Chocolat Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It is? News to me. http://theweightinggame.ivillage.com/dietfitness/fabulous.JPG Hmmm. First off, these women are all in good shape and appear to be much taller than average. Also -- and more important -- it appears that the measurements shown are UK sizes. A UK size 12 is the equivalent of a US size 8. http://theweightinggame.ivillage.com/dietfitness/2008/07/what_a_girl_wantswhat_a_guy_ne.html Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts