Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm curvy and slightly overweight. You can be both ya know.
True. To me, all curvy means is having lines that aren't straight up and down. If a woman's bust measurement and hip measurement are significantly larger than her waist measurement, that's curvy, regardless of weight. An hourglass at 115 lbs is an hourglass. So is an hourglass at 160.
Someone who is NOT an hourglass, but is top-heavy, or pear-shaped, has curves as well. The only women who I wouldn't call curvy are ones who have no waist to hip and/or bust to hip ratio to speak of, and flat butts, too. A straight, non-curvy figure can also be found on women who are overweight and those who are not.
Nope, not true. I'm hourglass shaped and I'm a size 1. The shape depends on the ratio between bust, waist and hips. It has more to do with bone structure, than fat.
Yep...a wide pelvis (the pelvic bones themselves having a certain spread) has as much to do with waist/hip ratio as the amount of fat on one's hips does.
But it IS. If you don't believe me, walk up to an overweight person and ask them how they would rather be described. Overweight? Or fat? Or maybe you have someone who is close to you who is overweight. A friend or relative, perhaps. Next time you are around them, discuss their weight with a third party, but within earshot of your overweight contact. Say something like, "Jenny is a nice person but I wish she would lose a few pounds because she is fat." See if Jenny is okay with the description you've given her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20
It's just like 'black' it's a descriptive term. The fact is our society is so AFRAID of fat that it's become a dirty word. Watch a black and white movie from the 1930s. There were fat girls who were laughing about being fat, because it was just a word they used. 'I'm fat, I need to lose weight.'
"Overweight" is a descriptive term as well. Why is it so difficult to ask people to use words in their daily speech that are not hurtful to others. This is not about being politically correct, a concept for which I have little to no use whatsoever. It is simply about being kind and decent to others. The way you would want someone to be toward you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trimac20
So what? Now you have friggin' twig annorexic girls saying 'I'm fat' as if it's the worse thing in the world. Being fat is not ideal but people act like someone who is fat has leprosy. Jeepers.
Being overweight is not the worse thing in the world. I am not even asking anyone to accept or condone their choices, since for many overweight people it is a result of years of bad eating choices and habits. I just hate the direction the courts of public opinion seem to be heading regarding overweight people. I just want to see them treated with the respect and dignity that they deserve. Calling them "fat" falls short of this standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801
I had a writing workshop teacher who used the word 'fat' deliberately. She had to be around 300 pounds. (She also had two male spouses and they all lived together in what they call a 'committed triad'.)
She wrote about being fat and eschewed the euphemisms.
This is fine with me too. But just because the term did not bother her does not negate the fact that it is hurtful to countless others.
It's all just a judgement call, furthermore changes with each generation.
Marilyn Monroe would be considered "fat" by almost all standards these days...the girl was a good, hefty size 14 with a damn good appetite.
Nicole Richie famously refused attendance to one of her parties, for girls over a size 2. In her eyes, they were "fat", even though by most standards they would be considered medically underweight.
The range of women who are now considered "fat" is far far wider than it was 30 or even 20 years ago. Soon you will be considered "fat" if your clavicles aren't sharp enough to cut paper.
Even BMIs can be misleading. A person with good muscle tone will be heavier than a person of a similar size who has no muscle tone, just flab. I will permanently have an "obese" waist measurement, thanks to genetics - the rest of me might be underweight, but my short-waistedness permanently puts me at "high risk" for all sorts of hideous diseases, and always will, according to statistics. I may only have 20% body fat, but my waist measurement spells "obese" no matter how "skinny" I am.
The problem I have with judgement words is, they are truly in the eye of the beholder...therefore have little or no real meaning to most of us.
It's all just a judgement call, furthermore changes with each generation.
Marilyn Monroe would be considered "fat" by almost all standards these days...the girl was a good, hefty size 14 with a damn good appetite.
Nicole Richie famously refused attendance to one of her parties, for girls over a size 2. In her eyes, they were "fat", even though by most standards they would be considered medically underweight.
The range of women who are now considered "fat" is far far wider than it was 30 or even 20 years ago. Soon you will be considered "fat" if your clavicles aren't sharp enough to cut paper.
Even BMIs can be misleading. A person with good muscle tone will be heavier than a person of a similar size who has no muscle tone, just flab. I will permanently have an "obese" waist measurement, thanks to genetics - the rest of me might be underweight, but my short-waistedness permanently puts me at "high risk" for all sorts of hideous diseases, and always will, according to statistics. I may only have 20% body fat, but my waist measurement spells "obese" no matter how "skinny" I am.
The problem I have with judgement words is, they are truly in the eye of the beholder...therefore have little or no real meaning to most of us.
I hate to do it, but I have to disagree with you about the history of sizing in beauty. Marilyn Monroe didn't look fat, so she wouldn't have been called fat. She truly was curvy. The way the word was meant to be. Nicole ritchie is or has not in any way shape or form become the pitch women for this decades body size. I think personally that thin girls with perky/ cute/ slightly small buts were what we (society) considered pretty for about an eighty year gap...This has been the "traditional standard" of beauty since atleast the fifties, some could argue the twenties. It was only til Jay-Lo came onto the scene with a but that was oversized yet tight, that society started to shift towards bigger back sides. Kim Kardashian would not have been considered pretty (body wise) in the nineties. Much of the change has alot to do with eating habits and how much bigger people are today. Society is shifting simply put because people are much bigger today. I take my nephew for example. The kid is only ten years old and he weighs 140 pounds. I didn't weight that til I was a junior in highschool. When I was his age, I would have been glad to weigh eighty pounds. People are eating out too much and they just aren't eating healthy home cooked meals anymore. Plus, I remember the days, when drinks, french fries, etc were all one size. That size today would be considered kid size..So all of these "popular" girls today with big backsides works with the shifting demographics of the size of the people. Can Kim K be a model today. Only because of her notoriety. However, if no one knew her in the nineties when it was the sheek/ waife look, she wouldn't have been considered..Times a changing..That's my theory.
I had a writing workshop teacher who used the word 'fat' deliberately. She had to be around 300 pounds. (She also had two male spouses and they all lived together in what they call a 'committed triad'.)
She wrote about being fat and eschewed the euphemisms.
Lots of women call each other B**** as a term of endearment, and other people black, latino and asian (yes, I know filipinos, indians, and chinese people that call each other this) call each other n**** as a term of endearment, this doesn't mean I should condone it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(Again, like the examples given above.)
