Do women understand the meaning of Curvy? (clips, older, product)
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.
1. you're "GUESSING" but I'm "WRONG".
2. you know womens sizes are different in Australia, the UK and the US right?
3. you obviously have never shagged a very thin lady. Muscles are muscles but the vagina is full of FLESH and fat OVER the muscles. Think of a bicep...a thin persons toned bicep is gonna be hard, but a fat persons toned bicep is gonna be soft OVER the hard, even if they have muscles underneath. THE FAT MAKES IT SOFT. If you prefer to rub your bits on a scrubbing board rather than a fluffy towel, well, you're going to prefer the skinny girl.
Guessing a 10 because the most reliable measurements available are from the height of her career, not post pregnancy. Your assessment seems to be based on nothing but folklore. But we know, based on custom made outfits, that she was generally a modern day 4. And if you're talking about non-U.S. sizes for a U.S. lady, you ought to specify. But by the way you went on about how she was a size 14 and would be considered 'fat' today, it's clear you were trying to present her as being bigger than she actually was. A common misconception but one that ought to be squashed.
No, I've never shagged any lady seeing as I am a straight female. How many women have you shagged?
But I can tell you that I've taken anatomy, have examined dissected female genitals, and probably have had more run ins with vaginas than the average straight gal (in a medical setting) and can tell you no, you're just plain wrong. The vagina is lined with muscle and spongey tissue, not fat. Your genitals do not have the same anatomical build as an arm. The labia majora has fatty tissue, but weight gain and loss only cause very minor changes in its size.
Now, what significant weight gain can change about sexual activity is the size of the thighs, buttocks, and abdomen, all of which can impede access to the vagina and make intercourse seem like a tighter squeeze, but the vaginal canal itself, no, its properties are not determined by weight but by genetics, age, childbirth, and hormones.
I don't think you can answer that question without first defining curvy. I define it by a WHR of 0.7 or less. Others add to that a necessary softness, that low-muscle fertile look so popular in classic paintings. Others still (men) would throw all of that out the window for a big pair of boobs.
I say boobs and butts and measurements be damned. If a woman's silhouette doesn't look curvy from behind, she's not curvy.
I don't think pictures of women intentionally sticking their hips out count. I know you like Candice Swanpoel, but the extreme jutting of her hips in all her pictures make me suspect the girl has scoliosis.
Curvy to me is Salma Hayek. She doesn't need to intentionally stick her butt out or her boobs in the air.
I disagree with you in a way. In mainstream society--yep I'd say that you're spot on about what was attractive and the type of body that was coveted by the "average" american. However in the black and Hispanic communities curvy thicker women with big butts had been the "in" thing in the nineties and late 80's even. Matter of fact J-Lo grew up in such a community where her curves and "butt" were the norm not the exception. So when she "came out" and glamorized "curves", they had already been glamourized in the black/latino communities. I think white people were the ones that made the hooplah about J-Lo's body.
For the most part "thicker", curvy women have always been coveted and seen as the ideal body-type, in latino/black communities(Sir Mix A lot-"baby got back"). Thin women weren't and still aren't the "trend" in the black and latino communities. But I know that in the white community thin women were coveted for quite a while(and they still are in a way).
So while Kim K may have been considered fat to mainstream society and hollywood back in the early ninities, to black and latinos she would have been considered what she is today--which is sexy and attractive and ideal.
That being said, it looks like the rest of society has caught up and now you have women of all ethnicities and sizes claiming they have "curves", "big butts", etc. It's the "in" thing. For how much longer? Who knows?
I agree. And exactly what you have said, I failed to mention. You're right. Black people and hispanics traditionally liked girls with a little more meat to them. Good points. But if I had brought up all that, my post would have likely been too long for anyone to read. So thanks for doing it for me.
I don't think pictures of women intentionally sticking their hips out count. I know you like Candice Swanpoel, but the extreme jutting of her hips in all her pictures make me suspect the girl has scoliosis.
Curvy to me is Salma Hayek. She doesn't need to intentionally stick her butt out or her boobs in the air.
huh? That's a straight on shot of her on the runway. True, she sticks her hip out a lot in the magazines, but they all do to exaggerate that curve. But it's clear from that straight on shot that she she has a small waist in relation to her hips.
When I hear "curvy" I think of a woman with some flesh on her bones and is attractive--in a "curvy" way. Fat? No, I don't think of curvy as fat. Plump means overweight to me, curvy doesn't.
As a woman, I think it's interesting that at times, Marilyn Monroe (whose weight fluctuated a lot) was a size 14. That's curvy for sure. In fact, many of the movie stars of the 40's, 50's and 60's were curvy.
This new anorexic look like Kate Middleton and the new crop of Hollywood starlets is worrisome...it's not, IMHO, healthy to be that thin--and try to keep the weight there through starvation, medications, and in many cases, purging. Why do that to ourselves? Are we brainwashed by the media?
huh? That's a straight on shot of her on the runway. True, she sticks her hip out a lot in the magazines, but they all do to exaggerate that curve. But it's clear from that straight on shot that she she has a small waist in relation to her hips.
Sorry, I didn't look at all the photos you linked and didn't realize you had included a picture of her as well. I remembered from your other posts. She does have a small waist; she is very slim and has a small everything. I get VS catalogs at the house at least twice a week, and I see her in her famous pose most of the time.
When I hear "curvy" I think of a woman with some flesh on her bones and is attractive--in a "curvy" way. Fat? No, I don't think of curvy as fat. Plump means overweight to me, curvy doesn't.
As a woman, I think it's interesting that at times, Marilyn Monroe (whose weight fluctuated a lot) was a size 14. That's curvy for sure. In fact, many of the movie stars of the 40's, 50's and 60's were curvy.
This new anorexic look like Kate Middleton and the new crop of Hollywood starlets is worrisome...it's not, IMHO, healthy to be that thin--and try to keep the weight there through starvation, medications, and inmany cases, purging. Why do that to ourselves? Are we brainwashed by the media?
Bring back curvy!
Just because somebody is slender, DOES NOT mean they do any of the above. Some people are naturally very thin.
I'm thin-a combination of exercise, a balanced diet (I eat healthy food and junk alike, I drink regular soda and never ever diet), and good genes. The "OMG you're so skinny!" and "why don't you eat a sandwhich" comments get really tiresome. I'm actually quite average, but it's only here in the States people react that way. I guess it's because the norm here is...big?
I think both Marilyn Monroe and Kate Middleton look great. When I think of "curvy" I think of someone wih MM proportions. I realize that by todays standards, in the U.S., curvy is PC for overweight/fat.
I never thought the Duchess of Cornwall (Kate Middleton) looked anoerexic. She looks like a normal, healthy woman to me.
Since her wedding, she has probably dropped 15 pounds. She is way thinner than she was. At the beginning of her engagement, she looked much healthier.
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.
. But we know, based on custom made outfits, that she was generally a modern day 4. And if you're talking about non-U.S. sizes for a U.S. lady, you ought to specify. But by the way you went on about how she was a size 14 and would be considered 'fat' today, it's clear you were trying to present her as being bigger than she actually was. A common misconception but one that ought to be squashed.
huh? That's a straight on shot of her on the runway. True, she sticks her hip out a lot in the magazines, but they all do to exaggerate that curve. But it's clear from that straight on shot that she she has a small waist in relation to her hips.
