U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:32 PM
 
Location: las vegas nevada
517 posts, read 714,461 times
Reputation: 146

Advertisements

yea I showed a link specifically saying the range was .67 to .8

it seems to be on the higher side than lower to be more ideal imo. I know over .8 is considered unhealthy. But as someone who is in the mid 70's and small I'd say .7 may be attractive but it has nothing curvy about it.

there are health risks for those under .67 as well... To me .7 is only medium for a small girl. No one in the world would ever call me hippy. Yet it's in the mid 70's. So like I said point is dead for you.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:33 PM
 
Location: las vegas nevada
517 posts, read 714,461 times
Reputation: 146
.63 is not in ideal range. It's unhealthy and not a sign of fertility. But small hips are a sign of fertility.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:39 PM
 
Location: Up in the air
19,126 posts, read 25,789,079 times
Reputation: 16226
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitgirl11 View Post
mistake you've made actually there is a different because when I ovulate I look large and regularly I'm actually medium. In small chested people it may look less of a difference. But for larger chested women like myself it's a significant difference.
Um. I'm a 36GG and I don't notice a bit of difference. If anything, it would be MORE pronounced in smaller chested women because of the smaller amount of tissue.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 05:42 PM
 
Location: las vegas nevada
517 posts, read 714,461 times
Reputation: 146
yea again it's probably most noticeable in people between medium range...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 06:09 PM
 
3,517 posts, read 5,441,583 times
Reputation: 5566
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitgirl11 View Post
yea I showed a link specifically saying the range was .67 to .8

it seems to be on the higher side than lower to be more ideal imo. I know over .8 is considered unhealthy. But as someone who is in the mid 70's and small I'd say .7 may be attractive but it has nothing curvy about it.

there are health risks for those under .67 as well... To me .7 is only medium for a small girl. No one in the world would ever call me hippy. Yet it's in the mid 70's. So like I said point is dead for you.
I'm sorry, you posted several links so I guess you'll have to repost it. Ideal for what? Health? Attraction? A curve is basically defined by the difference between two points. The greater the difference, the more extreme the curve so I don't know how you could possibly suggest that a WHR below .67 is less curvy than one around .8. Larger hips allow for a curvier figure, as a waist can only be SO small so someone with a 24 inch waist and 36 inch hips is curvier than someone who has a 24 inch waist and 32 inch hips.

I'm not sure what you mean by .7 being medium. And what are your measurements? You did say that at one point you had a WHR of 0.8 and minor weight changes tend not to significantly affect proportions.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 09:20 PM
 
Location: las vegas nevada
517 posts, read 714,461 times
Reputation: 146
I never said my whr was .8 I said below .8.

Anyhow I'm in the mid 70's as said before. And 32/30 is still below .8 when you have a 24 inch waist. I'm just saying big hips don't constitute fertility necessarily. It seems actually more on the slim side do
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 09:39 PM
 
3,517 posts, read 5,441,583 times
Reputation: 5566
Quote:
Originally Posted by kitgirl11 View Post
I never said my whr was .8 I said below .8.

Anyhow I'm in the mid 70's as said before. And 32/30 is still below .8 when you have a 24 inch waist. I'm just saying big hips don't constitute fertility necessarily. It seems actually more on the slim side do
Deep breaths. Okay, why don't you tell us how on earth you concluded that narrow hips indicate superior fertility despite studies that say just the opposite.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2012, 09:56 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
26,875 posts, read 28,145,186 times
Reputation: 25988
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnexpectedError View Post
Deep breaths. Okay, why don't you tell us how on earth you concluded that narrow hips indicate superior fertility despite studies that say just the opposite.
Weren't you listening. Because she has boobs! And she is delicate.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2012, 01:26 AM
 
Location: las vegas nevada
517 posts, read 714,461 times
Reputation: 146
no I already said I'm in the 70's I've got small hips. Therefore the ideal at .7 isn't too far off and is probably about medium sized.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2012, 01:28 AM
 
Location: las vegas nevada
517 posts, read 714,461 times
Reputation: 146
not large.

I proved my own point. Big hips =/= fertility
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Fashion and Beauty
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top