-
[QUOTE]magnolia was using that picture of an example of someone she thinks look healthy and attractive. That discussion doesn't have to be relevant to her public image or whether it's just or fair to judge her for it. Totally different topic.
[/QUOTE]
Actually- I don't think she looked attractive in that pic, I was just pointing out that the media saw that photo and reacted as though she was a 300lb heifer. Face was not pretty (and a horrible angle) and no, not thin - but not exactly a fat slob either. Now given that in the bad pic, I'd she is a size 8, maybe a size 10.... and the average american woman is a size 14, it's a rough message. Normal to the media is like a size 2 or 4.
-
[QUOTE=magnolia1973;701057]Actually- I don't think she looked attractive in that pic, I was just pointing out that the media saw that photo and reacted as though she was a 300lb heifer.[/quote]My bad, but you did say you would kill to look like her and I thought you were referring to the picture of her you posted.
[QUOTE=magnolia1973;701057]Face was not pretty (and a horrible angle) and no, not thin - but not exactly a fat slob either. Now given that in the bad pic, I'd she is a size 8, maybe a size 10.... and the average american woman is a size 14, it's a rough message. Normal to the media is like a size 2 or 4.[/QUOTE]Well.. they're right. "Normal" women in the US [I]are[/I] fat. Size 14 is fat. After some Googling around to get an idea what different sizes look like ([URL="http://www.mybodygallery.com/index.html"]this page[/URL] was helpful), I'd say I prefer women in the sizes 2-8 range. 8 is on the chunky end of the "healthy, attractive" range for me, but some women pull it off well. But size 10 seems to be the threshold where ALL the pictures start looking "pudgy" instead of "curvy" to me and really start falling fast in the sexy department. All of this is obviously just IMO. But I don't think I'm unusual in my preferences at all. The media does tend to unfairly glorify VERY thin women over women who are healthy and sexy but not quite as thin. But I don't think that's what's going on here, and I don't think that makes it unfair to say that if a "normal" American woman is size 14, then the average American woman is unhealthily and unattractively fat, KWIM?
Also, I think "fat Christina" above is more like a 12 than an 8. She's clearly wearing shape-control clothing and would look much bulgier in the middle without it.
EDIT: None of this is to say that we should poke fun at, judge harshly, or denigrate fat people. But I don't think we should pretend they're not fat either. Size 14 [I]shouldn't[/I] be average.
-
When looking at stats the median is more useful than the average
-
[QUOTE=kenn;701132]When looking at stats the median is more useful than the average[/QUOTE]
My understanding is that size 14 is also the mode (the most commonly occurring in the sample set) for US women. This is one of those cases where the average fairly accurately reflects the reality.
-
[QUOTE]My bad, but you did say you would kill to look like her and I thought you were referring to the picture of her you posted.
[/QUOTE]
Body, not face!!! No way is she a 12- she has on REALLY unflattering clothes- no one with an ounce of thigh fat should wear a girdle over fishnets. :-) If I had on that outfit, you'd be thinking I was a 22 (I'm a 14). She's only 5'1....that outfit enhances thigh fat
I do agree that we should not kid ourselves, but also realize that the size 0's and 2's that populate Hollywood are not common and not a healthy goal for most of us. I also agree that 14/16 is not a healthy average. I remember back when it was hard to find size 16's and that they are commonplace now is not promising.
Here is another one- she's a size 4- professional dancer, 5'3:
[IMG]http://skinnyvscurvy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/size-4-dancer.jpg[/IMG]
-
my GOD you're all a bunch of girls
-
Is your avatar pic a picture of you, roughly as you look currently? Because just judging from your face, you are healthier and better-looking than "fat Christina". Just really don't think she carries her weight well at all and doesn't look healthy. I could certainly be wrong in my judgment of her size. I also don't know how tall she is which obviously makes a difference.
EDIT: Oh, I see you said she is 5'1". That makes a HUGE difference. I was assuming she was of basically normal height, but she's short. That's obviously going to make her look fatter at the same waist size, hence the confusion.
-
[QUOTE=Owly;701161]My understanding is that size 14 is also the mode (the most commonly occurring in the sample set) for US women. This is one of those cases where the average fairly accurately reflects the reality.[/QUOTE]
That is disturbing
-
[QUOTE]Is your avatar pic a picture of you, roughly as you look currently?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but I carry my weight in my thighs and arms, not my midsection or face. There are certain angles that can make heavy thighed girls look ginormous in photos. Also, realize that BOTH of those women are being absolute fashion don'ts for their shapes. This is a pic of her in a more flattering dress. She may not look ideal, and there may be 3 layers of spanx under there....but
[url=http://www.millionlooks.com/news/christina-aguilera-looks-fat/]Christina Aguilera Looks Fat | MillionLooks.com[/url]
At any rate, I prefer the hourglass look to the more willowy look. Haha, the nice thing about the paleo/primal diet is it is the one way of eating that appears to preserve boob size.....
The one y'all would stop at is probably airbrushed to a degree, and if I looked like that I'd wander around nude and sell my antiaging cures....
-
it's funny how these threads go way off track to even include references to funny old cowboy movies :) it's great!
