to think that women who are a size 6/8/10 are permanently on a diet?

[SabineUndine]

I don't mean diet as in counting every calorie, but diet as in they hardly eat any carbs and don't eat cakes, biscuits etc more than a couple of times a year? I am not a thin person (you guessed?) and I look at what my really slim female colleagues eat and it's salads with no carbs and just a tiny bit of protein, or soup or smoothies. Is that what it takes to be a thin person?

The small wrist people tend to be lighter to be around the same clothes size.

Could be true.

My wrist is 14cms. I weigh about 6 stone and I'm a size 6-8

My wrists are tiny so I've measured them to find 14.5 cm, but I am 5'7. My shoulders are narrow too and a lot of dresses are too big on my shoulders but they also need to accommodate 30ff norks. The bravissimo ladies often remark that I have a narrow back.

Even at my lightest of about 10 stone 10 I have 40 inch hips and a traffic stopping arse though.

Traffic stopping arse
Me too

I have no arse
15st 8 or 10 in this pic, can't remember exactly

You look great - wouldn't have put you at over 15 stone.

I would have guessed at 12 probably.

You've lovely legs btw!

Re. natural body shapes - we've evolved to cope with seasonal fluctuations in food supply. In times of plenty we can gain fat. Those fat supplies then help us through leaner times. In modern societies with plentiful food many of us don't encounter lean times so we remain fat.

DeadAsADildo

Doesn't this make you quite underweight?
According to BMI, yes.
But I am little. Narrow back, 14cm wrists. I don't feel particularly hungry and I am happy with the way I look.

How tall are you, hollin? You look amazing and m I'd never have dreamed you weigh the same as me! I'm 5"6 with a 17cm wrist. I look my best at the top of a healthy BMI, even really a bit above it about 26 or 27. I look much fatter at this weight than hollin so I'm trying to lose a couple of stone, but I know I'll never be light - I don't look good below 10 stone (not that I'd ever get there again anyway!).

A curvy size 8 (5ft 5, 8 stone 12).

This is not my natural weight. If I were left to my own devices to eat whatever I like I'd be a v curvy 10.

Despite having a man sized appetite and loving sweet things, I like being an 8, so I exercise a lot of willpower, I eat v healthily and go the gym 4 times a week.

Since turning 40 (now 41) I have found that I can't eat what I like without putting on weight and have to work at it. I do eat large portions as I cannot abide being hungry it makes me feel wretched, but generally when I eat its things like prawn salads, etc.

Having said that previous partners have loved it when I'm more curvy.

I'm 5ft 10

"Oh - and the commonly held belief that clothes sizes have changed is wrong. I tried on a coat this weekend that had belonged to my grandmother when she was 59 in 1965. It fits me with room to spare aged 49 in 2016. And it's a size 12!"

No it's not wrong Bobo! One example of yours doesn't cancel out every other example!

Size 6-8. Eat like a horse. Today alone a green smoothie, orange, left over roast lamb with roast potatoes, cavolo nero and cauliflower cheese, a wrap thing from Pret, half a Camembert with bread and now some Thai fish curry with Thai crackers. I weigh 8 stone 5 at 5"5 and exercise moderately.

"34-24-34 measurements are not "natural" even in very young women"

I disagree with that. An unnatural size would be one only reached through being underweight of wearing a corset - I think Scarlet O'Hara in Gone with the Wind wanted to a 17 inch waist.

Marilyn Monroe had a 22 inch waist and she wasn't known for being skinny.

We're advised not to go over a 32 inch waist these days, which would be a size 10- 12 somewhere with terrible size inflation like Next.

*"Oh - and the commonly held belief that clothes sizes have changed is wrong."

I don't believe it's wrong. And one point I had three skirts from Next in my wardrobe. One was a size 12 from before I had my daughter, then there was a 10 from between the two children and now I but a size 8. The size 12 when held against the size 8 was the same size and the size 10 against the size 8 was actually smaller!

Next is the worst Still. When I had a 31.5 inch waist I should have been a 16 according to size charts, but could fit into size 10 trousers in Next. I really think the sizes should be standardised, but I know there'd be lots of complaints here.

Clothes sizes are all over the place in different shops. I've a size 8 pair of skinnies on at the moment but I've also got 10s in the wardrobe and a few 12s.

Short article on size inflation backed up by research :
www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/04/daily-chart-1

To be honest, size has never been a big deal to me - there's so much variation it's pretty meaningless.

I buy & wear what fits and flatters, regardless of the label - I tend to track my size through measurements (although have no clue what I am at the mo as I don't want to know, I just now I'm v v large compared to my 'normal').

Yes, Mango, I don't care what the label says really - I'd just like to have some confidence ordering online that something is likely to fit. It's annoying ordering three dresses in the same size to find that one flaps around like a tent, one fits and the other won't come close to zipping up. I'd like some consistency.

There are lots of women who do watch what they eat all of the time to remain slim. We have plenty at my office.

That short article manages to come across as very splenetic with it's choice of phrasing. Just for this I'd feel it's focusing only on one side of the bell curve; some places certainly have increased thier sizes, not disagreeing with that. Other places have changed the ratios of the individual sizes.

My 43-year old body really wants to be a 10, this is where I am when I eat 'normally' which is OK but not thin enough to look great in clothes.

I've vacillated between a 10 and an 8 where clothes look ever so much better, but it's a battle e.g. less than 1000 calories a day.

I filled in La Redoute's size guide recently. It told me that at 5' 7" and 9 stone I'd be a size 14. I ignored it and ordered 10s

"That short article manages to come across as very splenetic with it's choice of phrasing."

I'm afraid I had to look up the meaning of splenetic and I found 'bad tempered, and spiteful'. I don't see that at all.

My 43-year old body really wants to be a 10, this is where I am when I eat 'normally' which is OK but not thin enough to look great in clothes.

I've vacillated between a 10 and an 8 where clothes look ever so much better, but it's a battle e.g. less than 1000 calories a day.

And that is a perfect example of what I meant when I said that denying yourself the chance to eat what you fancy, within reason, all the time, must be a miserable existence.

If you are a size 16 and you want to slim to a 12, fine. You won't get there without some serious correction to the way you eat, and some deprivation.

But to be a size 10 and put yourself through a 'battle' to stick to 1000 a day in order to be an 8? Madness.