I was watching those celebrity critics the other day where basicully they bash the dresses that the movie stars wear on the red carpet. And the one lady was commenting on one actress asking, "what is she, like a size 2?" and the other women replied, "OH NO, Darling try a negative 2." I mean a few years back, size 6 was considered thin, and they even had songs like brick house with the measurements 36, 24, 36 thats a winning mix. Now, to be considered thin, we have to be size 0 to negative numbers? I mean Marilyn Monroe was like a size 10 or 12 and was gorgegous. As years pass are we soon going to have to kill ourselves to become thin? Cause I'm sorry size -2, thats nonexistent if you ask me! I just think the media has become ridiculous filling our heads with this crap we shouldn't have any curve or meat on our bones. We are women!!! We should be a little voluptuous, don't you think?
2006-09-06 01:53:27 · 13 answers · asked by Needstoknow 2 in Beauty & Style ➔ Skin & Body
Yes, I found some measurements of Monroe, geez she was short! http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/mmdress.htm and her waist was very tiny, but her chest and hips were larger. It's a good read, hope you enjoy. Thanks for all your answers!
2006-09-07 10:37:34 · update #1
I have a figure similar to that of Marilyn Monroe's I am a size 12 and 1" shorter than she was. I am more thrilled with my shape and curve than I ever imagine I would be as a size 2. I think it's ridiculous that women do that to their bodies unless it's their natural look. It is important for us to remember that healthy is whats really hott ! ! ! WOMEN OF THE WORLD MEN LOVE CURVES (it's been proven over, and over again)
2006-09-06 02:02:13 · answer #1 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just to let you know size 2 measurements are about 32-24-34 and a size 0 is 31-23-33. Marilyn Monroe had a 23 inch waist by the way and at one point, 34 inch hips, so she would have been a size 0-2 in today's world. A size 2 is what a size 4 used to be, a size 0 is what a size 2 used to be. People aren't getting that much smaller, it's mainly clothes sizes are just getting bigger and they are relabelling them with smaller sizes! I still think 0 and 2 are a bit on the small side and anything less is absolutely ridiculous, I'm a size 6-8 myself and happy with that. I definitely agree curves are way better than bones! Take care : )
2006-09-06 02:53:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I like the way you think.
I couldn't agree more.
Women should have some curves to them, and every man I know likes them that way. I don't know a single man, man being the key word here, that likes a really skinny girl.
It also drives me nuts that words that used to be complementary are now being used as euphemisms for overweight. Curvy, voluptuous, full figure, all used to refer to a woman with a good body. She had fuller breasts and/or hips with a good waistline. Now it's a polite way for plus size women to describe themselves. Am I alone here, or did they change the definitions when I wasn't looking?
I have to add though, in Marilyn's time, they were on the old size chart. She would be around a 6-8 in today's clothing. So not only has the "ideal body" gotten smaller, the dress sizes have changed too. If you look at many bridal and formal dress makers, their size charts are still the old ones. I wasn't real happy when I found out I needed a 14 in them, I thought I was smaller than that. I never knew before that they had changed the size charts in the 60's and 70's. My mom had to explain it all to me, she of course was alive and loved that her dress size shrunk. Now I think it's crazy.
2006-09-06 02:14:59 · answer #3 · answered by welches_grape_jelly 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends on how tall u are. I’m 4’11 so a size 6 might be a little big for me but I’m not sure. I’ve never been a size 6. Our world is so distorted. Most people have eating disorders such are anorexia and obesity. In my opinion if u eat healthy and exercise then you’re the correct healthy weight.
2016-03-27 00:08:49 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
DEFINITELY. I've been irritated by this same thing for a while now. I'm a size 8, and I'm only 5'3. I'm not fat or anything, but I've got curves and a chest, and I'm proud of my body. As far as I can tell, it doesn't make me less attractive to the opposite sex - but this whole Hollywood obsession with size 2 is sick. The sample size jeans in Hollywood (the ones the stars get for free for test new brands) are ZERO. That's like, eighty pounds. Disgusting.
2006-09-06 02:03:51 · answer #5 · answered by Discotheque 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Marilyn Monroe also went up to a size 14. Guys don't like real skinny girls. Skinny as being cool, is a design of fashion designers. Most of whom wouldn't know what a woman felt like to begin with. We'd rather have a full figured woman who is healthy and taking care of herself. A size 2 is good for one thing--a bookmark.
2006-09-06 02:01:25 · answer #6 · answered by clear_skyzz 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
When I was growing up it was "a perfect size 8". Now you see NutriSystem commercials where she's bragging she's in a size 2. It's funny to me that the more obese America gets, the skinnier the idea of perfection is. I don't see this happening to the men's image though.
2006-09-06 01:57:40 · answer #7 · answered by They call me ... Trixie. 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree too. I look at a lot of TV and movie stars and can remember when they first started with meat on their bones and to see them now is disgusting. Everyone saying how great they look, yuck, their heads usually look like bobble-heads, shoulder bones sticking out, and skeleton looking fingers. I'm sorry but to me they look horrid.
2006-09-06 02:04:57 · answer #8 · answered by whitebeanner 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
when you go to the clothing stores the size 2's and 4's are already gone...and not much of a selection of 6's and 8's....now that is sad!
2006-09-06 02:23:15 · answer #9 · answered by mommymel 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honey you have my vote - I love meat to feel and hold onto. I get hot just thinking about a voluptuous woman.
2006-09-06 02:10:54 · answer #10 · answered by worriedaboutyou 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋