Fat People's View on Skinny

all countries have dark pasts,

In the spirit of Godwin's Law...

175px-Adolf_Hitler-1933.jpg
 
I have a 34 inch waist, but I cannot fit into most 34 inch pants for two reasons: the size of my legs and the size of my ass. It's not fat... it's muscle from all the hiking I do.
Same here, except I have a 32 inch waist, and all mine are from mountain biking.
I'm almost embarrassed to say that I bet a girls' style* pant or jeans that were big enough for a guy would fit me better than most guys pants.

I have to buy 36 inch pants and wear a belt.
Same here except 33 and 34 inch waist pants.

*meaning how they are straight all the way up to above the behind, then taper in for the womans waistline.
 
What do you think about these women for example?

http://www.curvystyle.com/Crystal.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3202/3116016265_5b0ed405c3.jpg

http://www.curvystyle.com/fluvia1.jpg

You see even though I think they are pretty or beautiful looking women as far as features go, I would hate to be in their bodies. Men on the other hand might think pretty, so what if she's not petite. At the end of the day I don't really think it matters, sexy is sexy no matter what, but we all have to feel comfortable in our bodies no matter the size.

Cutsiemarie: It doesn't matter if the designer only used up to size 7 models which is quite large in high fashion for catwalk, fact remains that to be CLASSIFIED as a plus size model you have to be at least size 12. Like those girls in the pics. Both are high fashion models for people like Jean Paul Gautier etc. and they are 12 or 14 which is a plus size. Its an industry and there is a set criteria.

So are all those women size 12-14? Doesn't that make those in the first pic at the start of this thread like 20+?? Cause I'm thinking 14 must be where I draw the line.
 
Interesting...

http://www.wgntv.com/landing/?United-Airlines-bumping-bigger-passenger=1&blockID=267721&feedID=209

A valid argument...
"How do you eyeball someone and decide they're not going to fit?" said aviation consultant Robert Mann, president of R.W. Mann & Co. "From a knees-to-seatback perspective, I don't fit. I'm 6 feet 4 inches".

but Robert, you are the only one who is going to suffer like that. Unless you jam your knees into the seat in front of you and push it forward, you are not encroaching on anyone else's space. Obese people often tend to take up part of the seat next to them, if not all of it.
I personally don't enjoy it when I can't use my freakin armrest when someone's spare tire is 'dunlop'-ed over it.
 
Interesting...

http://www.wgntv.com/landing/?United-Airlines-bumping-bigger-passenger=1&blockID=267721&feedID=209

A valid argument...


but Robert, you are the only one who is going to suffer like that. Unless you jam your knees into the seat in front of you and push it forward, you are not encroaching on anyone else's space. Obese people often tend to take up part of the seat next to them, if not all of it.
I personally don't enjoy it when I can't use my freakin armrest when someone's spare tire is 'dunlop'-ed over it.

If you didn't put your knees behind someone's seat that means they are invading the space of the people next to you or in the aisle. Of courses Airlines really have some nerve with all the terrible things they do to people.
 
If you didn't put your knees behind someone's seat that means they are invading the space of the people next to you or in the aisle.
Of courses Airlines really have some nerve with all the terrible things they do to people.
Well...
their multi-million dollar airplanes, their rules

Most people are within a certain height and weight range, i.e. people who can fit in airline seats.

For the airlines to accomodate atypical sizes, they would have to retrofit all their aircraft, either by removing seats and putting seats for the obese. Guess what that does? It costs money. It will cost the regular consmer like me more. Both because of the cost of retrofitting the aircraft, and because the airliners won't be able to carry as many people...raising the ticket rates.


Maybe, obese people that are obese due to medical issues could get their insurance to help them out on stuff like this (i.e. cover the extra cost of a Southwest ticket for obese people). However fat people who are fat due to laziness would be on their own.
 
I guess the way I feel about it, I pay for my ticket as well. I'm not sharing my seat with someone who spills over. The person doesn't have to fly. They can drive, take the bus, or take the train.

I have rights too.
 
Yes Anti-flag both of those women are size 14, plus size begins at 12 and there is a cut off but I am not sure where. The first pictures of obese women are probably 20, but remember plus size models are at least 5'8" and have classic hourglass shapes (breasts corresponding to hip size and waist being at least 5" smaller than the two).
 
Yes Anti-flag both of those women are size 14, plus size begins at 12 and there is a cut off but I am not sure where. The first pictures of obese women are probably 20, but remember plus size models are at least 5'8" and have classic hourglass shapes (breasts corresponding to hip size and waist being at least 5" smaller than the two).
I had no idea plus sizes started so low. Why not use models of average height though to actually show what the clothes look like? Isn't that the entire point of it? Also I'm guessing a 5'4 size 12 would look more fat and out of proportion?
At least now I know I go for sizes 10-14 depending on height.
 
No not at all its not the point. The models represent some ideal beauty. When you are marketing dreams, sex and beauty you don't use average anything, the image must represent a certain perfection of a dream. Plus size measurements are low but if you compare it with the standard size in high-fashion where 0-4 is the average then plus size seems huge. When Naomi Campbell, Linda Evangelista, Cindy Crawford, Elle Macpherson were coined the supermodels of their day they averaged size 6 and were all amazon tall (tall will always be a criteria). Basically the models we are presented with now like Giselle are much smaller because the standard has changed to size 0-4.

And you are right the height changes everything! Tyra Banks has said that since she left modelling she has fluctuated between 148 lbs. and 162 lbs but she's a bloody amazon so she can carry that weight which becomes evenly distributed. I'm short myself, 5' 3" and if I even gain 5 ior 10 pounds it makes a huge difference in how I look.
 
Last edited:
No not at all its not the point. The models represent some ideal beauty. When you are marketing dreams, sex and beauty you don't use average anything, the image must represent a certain perfection of a dream.
From a fashion show style perspective yes, but I notice the same when it comes to selling clothes to the average person. I was under the impression you would use clothes models to sell clothes(blast my logical mind), whilst I get that you'd use beautiful people and show everyone the "ideal", shouldn't most people be smart enough to look at it and realise they don't have the same proportions as the model and wouldn't look the same? Therefore making it not actually work very well and not buying anything at all? Or am I giving the human race too much credit for not being easily influenced? :shrug:

Plus size measurements are low but if you compare it with the standard size in high-fashion where 0-4 is the average then plus size seems huge. When Naomi Campbell, Linda Evangelista, Cindy Crawford, Elle Macpherson were coined the supermodels of their day they averaged size 6 and were all amazon tall (tall will always be a criteria). Basically the models we are presented with now like Giselle are much smaller because the standard has changed to size 0-4.
I guess I don't understand it because I wouldn't have thought using ugly (IMO) and unrealistic women helps advertise clothes.
And you are right the height changes everything! Tyra Banks has said that since she left modelling she has fluctuated between 148 lbs. and 162 lbs but she's a bloody amazon so she can carry that weight which becomes evenly distributed. I'm short myself, 5' 3" and if I even gain 5 ior 10 pounds it makes a huge difference in how I look.
Most people fluctuate, and everyone has a different body type so not everyone who fluctuates a large amount has that weight evenly distributed, even if they are tall. We're all individuals.
 
From a fashion show style perspective yes, but I notice the same when it comes to selling clothes to the average person. I was under the impression you would use clothes models to sell clothes(blast my logical mind), whilst I get that you'd use beautiful people and show everyone the "ideal", shouldn't most people be smart enough to look at it and realise they don't have the same proportions as the model and wouldn't look the same? Therefore making it not actually work very well and not buying anything at all? Or am I giving the human race too much credit for not being easily influenced? :shrug:


I guess I don't understand it because I wouldn't have thought using ugly (IMO) and unrealistic women helps advertise clothes.

Most people fluctuate, and everyone has a different body type so not everyone who fluctuates a large amount has that weight evenly distributed, even if they are tall. We're all individuals.

They advertise their clothes with tiny models, yet they don't actually sell those sizes in the store. (for example: only making long pants in a size 8 or higher) it's false advertising to me.
 
They advertise their clothes with tiny models, yet they don't actually sell those sizes in the store. (for example: only making long pants in a size 8 or higher) it's false advertising to me.

All advertising is false, they'd never sell a product if they were honest and said "it's poorly made, it'll fall apart after the first wash and catches on everything".
It's based on psychology, you see someone who looks good in it and think "if I buy that, I'll look good too!" of course once you get your fat ass into the pants you realise it's not quite the same.
It goes for all products, I just don't get why people still fall for it.
 
No not at all its not the point. The models represent some ideal beauty. When you are marketing dreams, sex and beauty you don't use average anything, the image must represent a certain perfection of a dream. Plus size measurements are low but if you compare it with the standard size in high-fashion where 0-4 is the average then plus size seems huge. When Naomi Campbell, Linda Evangelista, Cindy Crawford, Elle Macpherson were coined the supermodels of their day they averaged size 6 and were all amazon tall (tall will always be a criteria). Basically the models we are presented with now like Giselle are much smaller because the standard has changed to size 0-4.

And you are right the height changes everything! Tyra Banks has said that since she left modelling she has fluctuated between 148 lbs. and 162 lbs but she's a bloody amazon so she can carry that weight which becomes evenly distributed. I'm short myself, 5' 3" and if I even gain 5 ior 10 pounds it makes a huge difference in how I look.

Screw tall women. I'm so jealous of em!

I'd fucking sell my kidneys for some extra height. Seriously, it would be cool to be 6ft tall ifonly for a few hours then die.
 
Screw tall women. I'm so jealous of em!

I'd fucking sell my kidneys for some extra height. Seriously, it would be cool to be 6ft tall ifonly for a few hours then die.

From the perspective of one that's above 6 feet in height, it's not all that special.

But in all fairness, I'd never trade my height for anything :D
 
All advertising is false, they'd never sell a product if they were honest and said "it's poorly made, it'll fall apart after the first wash and catches on everything".
It's based on psychology, you see someone who looks good in it and think "if I buy that, I'll look good too!" of course once you get your fat ass into the pants you realise it's not quite the same.
It goes for all products, I just don't get why people still fall for it.

That is why I love my DVR and watch everything recorded so I don't have to watch those stupid commercials. They are an insult to my intelligence.
 
Back
Top