If that's a 6 then what is a, say, 2?
Edit: All 3 of those women are exceedingly gorgeous, btw.
let's all take a step back, catch our breath, and stop giving the wii u free press it doesn't deserve.
So... what is considered "normal" size for women? A 6?
According to Google the average size for women in America is 14.
There's "normal" as in the statistical average, and then "normal" as in the intended target.
what does the 3ds have to do with thisi think you mean wii
I don't understand clothing sizes for women. They seem to change every so often to prey on women's insecurities trying to fit into the culturally forced misogynistic stereotypes of beauty.
I mean look at men's clothing. If your waist is 30 inches in circumference and your legs are 36 inches in length you wear a size 30x36 pair of pants. Pretty straightforward and simple.
I mean look at men's clothing. If your waist is 30 inches in circumference and your legs are 36 inches in length you wear a size 30x36 pair of pants. Pretty straightforward and simple.
Your fake outrage is palatable.takes issue with this imaginary "plus sized" brouhaha
uses the word "retarded"
Your fake outrage is palatable.
Size 14 doesn't look bad because she is airbrushed. Most people (men and women) who are of that size also have muffin tops and flab.
Completely agree.10 is the best one there.
Calvin Klein never labeled Ms. Dalbesio a plus-size model or presented her that way in its ads.
But looking at the 27-year-old model, who just debuted as the face of Calvin Kleins Perfectly Fit campaign
??!Hmm. But still, what if they had presented her as a "plus size" model? The very fact that they could have, even though they didn't, is still worthy of outrage.
Hmm. But still, what if they had presented her as a "plus size" model? The very fact that they could have, even though they didn't, is still worthy of outrage.
That was dumb of Calvin Klein to represent her as a "plus size" model. Of course people are going to be mad when they put her pictures in a separate "plus size" section. That's not "plus size"!
Hmm. But still, what if they had presented her as a "plus size" model? The very fact that they could have, even though they didn't, is still worthy of outrage.
OK, so they called her "perfectly fit" instead of "plus size." But again, imagine if instead of calling her fit they called her "plus size." They totally could have done that, and deserve to be called on almost maybe having done it.
That was dumb of Calvin Klein to represent her as a "plus size" model. Of course people are going to be mad when they put her pictures in a separate "plus size" section. That's not "plus size"!
Hmm. But still, what if they had presented her as a "plus size" model? The very fact that they could have, even though they didn't, is still worthy of outrage.
OK, so they called her "perfectly fit" instead of "plus size." But again, imagine if instead of calling her fit they called her "plus size." They totally could have done that, and deserve to be called on almost maybe having done it.
Woah!
Don't google image search if you're at work.
Woah!
Don't google image search if you're at work. Didn't know she worked nude lol.
But she's definitely not what I would consider plus sized.
When you say being underweight is a "huge problem" (word choice is funny)... is "huge problem" referring to severity in the number of persons who are underweight, or referring to the severity of the problem for an individual person if they are underweight?
If it's the former -- the numbers -- I don't think that's true at all.
I've got the impression that those women are tall. That will skew it too.My wife is a 6/8. She does not look like that.
That 6 is more like a 4. That 10 is more like 6/8.
I've got the impression that those women are tall. That will skew it too.
The fact that she even thinks she's plus-size. To me, plus size is about being slightly bigger in a weight sense. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what it should be.
To me, she's a tall, normal, and very good-looking woman. There's nothing wrong with being plus size, either (lots of overweight women are still very attractive to me), but the classifications need to change.
That's plus sized?!
All of these women are attractive. 10 is the best by far.
Would bang all three without question though.
Hey not everyone benches like you do BSBHer chest is bigger, but I'm having a hard time seeing the considerably thicker limbs
.
I dont get why they have these plus size labels anyways. Why not just say size 10.
Is there an equivalent for men or do they just call it 'size 32'
(you size 32 fatasses)
I dont get why they have these plus size labels anyways. Why not just say size 10.
Is there an equivalent for men or do they just call it 'size 32'
(you size 32 fatasses)
She's a 6 because she's tall and is legitimately big boned. A shorter woman with the same proportions would probably be a 0 or a 2.If that's a 6 then what is a, say, 2?
Edit: All 3 of those women are exceedingly gorgeous, btw.
What does smaller than the average women but larger than a sample size mean?
So theres a 'size 10', and theres a 'size 10 plus size?'You can't infinitely scale clothing to fit larger people--it's not going to look right. The "plus" label is usually used for clothing made specifically for those proportions.
So theres a 'size 10', and theres a 'size 10 plus size?'
Hmph. I'm just saying... when I hear "noticeably thicker," I expect... well... really obviously thicker.
Or maybe I'm just really bad at telling thickness/weight, which could also be true given that normally don't pay attention to that.
yurop often does 44 (xs) to 54 (xl) in even numbers, sometimes more/less.I dont get why they have these plus size labels anyways. Why not just say size 10.
Is there an equivalent for men or do they just call it 'size 32'
(you size 32 fatasses)
What's wrong with women to still care how ONE company label their sizes.
The problem is "plus size" is a marketing term thought up by the fashion industry. It's meant for anyone that is over an 9. Fat chicks just took it as meaning something that fits them.