Is a size 14 viewed as overweight?

[Ilovemycatalot]

Just reading online that uk size 16 is the average size of a uk woman right now. Im a size 14 and 5ft 3 so always felt overweight anyway but in reality would you view someone as a size 14 overweight? For me anyone who can fit into a size 10 would be considered slim although I know clothes sizes come up different depending on shop. Just curious what dress size people on here buy and if they consider themselves overweight.

@Kennykenkencat sorry I'm having a slow morning but I'm not understanding your reply to my post. Marilyn had a buzzard figure. Her dressmaker notes showed she fluctuated a little and was geverslly 35-37 bust
22-23 waist
35-36 hips
5'1"
36D
Whatever size she wore would not be reflective of many other women who wore that size. She has a very extreme hourglass shape!!!! If you get a chance to see any of her clothes in an exhibition, it's so interesting. Her waist was minuscule but she had a modern day size bust. Very unique! Everything would have had to have been tailored to fit her so she wasn't really any size

Marilyn Monroe’s government ID card showed that she was five feet five and a half inches tall.

Size means nothing. I am currently a 10 and overweight from a BMI perspective. I'd probably be bordering on obese at at a 14. I am very short though.

How are people measuring these sizes? I’m bang on the measurements for a 14, but despite being just 5’2” am not overweight, let alone ‘very’ overweight or obese. I’m right at the top of the healthy BMI band, but not over it.

But then I think I only have one piece of clothing that is actually a size 14 as in reality clothes are usually bigger than the measurements they supposedly fit!

I'm measuring the sizes by wearing them! I am a 12-14. Some clothes are a 12, some are a 14. I don't own any 16s and the only 8s and 10s I own are baggy so forgiving!

Can't remember the last time I measured myself. I'm 5ft1 and am just in the obese category.

I'm 5ft 7 and a size 14 at the moment and I would say its borderline. A few pounds more and I would be certainly overweight

I'm not happy with my waist measurement at all at this size. Some women might carry weight differently - a large bust or bottom can simply be shape, but a big tummy is never a good sign (mine is too big).

I don’t think we should focus so much on dress sizes. For a start they vary massively between shops, but they also vary massively between decades. As a population we have been getting fatter and fatter and the retailers have responded by increasing the dimensions of their dress sizes. If you shop in vintage clothes shop you’ll find a size small is about equivalent to a size XS or evens XXS small in modern sizing. I’ve been a fairly consistent size 10 all of my life but in the past 5 or so years I’ve been finding that size 10 clothing is far too big on me.

So to answer your question OP, yes, I would say for the vast majority of people size 14 is overweight. Back in the 80s it would probably be equivalent to about a size 16 or more which definitely would have been considered big at the time. Sadly, being large is becoming normalized.

I don't even know if it is true if you're taller you can carry more weight off. I'm quite tall and already feel massive and gangly. When I carry extra weight it doesn't feel like there's anywhere to hide if you know what I mean.

Yes. I am 5ft 9" & size 14. I weight 12 stone 12oz & I am overweight.

Of course it is. If you are 5ft and weigh 60kg you are overweight. If you are 6ft anf weight 60kg you are underweight. Similar for clothes sizes, if you body is proportionally smaller because you are small then you will need to carry more weight to need the same clothes size someone naturally and proportionately bigger does.

It doesn't mean that tall people necessarily carry excess weight better.

It doesn’t matter whether MM had a dressmaker or not. The measurements you quoted would have made her a size 14. She was just top heavy
Her Bust at 37” was a U.K. size 14
Her waist at 22” was a U.K. size 10
and hips at 36” was a UK size 12

I have seen the dresses. she wore and at the time I thought the clothing was quite big as I was 32” 18” 35”
Try getting clothes to fit those measurements without a dressmaker when the smallest waist size was a size 10 22” waist

5 foot 2, size 6 to 8. So, no. 14 on me would be enormous. My mum's a 14/16 and my height and she's having health troubles now. If we were 6 foot 5 we could probably be size 10 or 12 and be slim, but at a short height, no.

14 on most people I would think of as a little overweight yes (I'm 14-16, I am definitely overweight)

Dress sizing should be the same no matter how tall or short you are and all stores should conform to the same standard sizing

A 24” waist is the same for someone who happens to be 6ft 1” or 5ft 1”

Whether you are top heavy, an apple or have bigger hips. You choose the clothing on the design.

When you look in the mens clothing section their sizing is based on actual sizes. 34” waist 31” leg or jackets size 38” means that if you have a 38” chest it should fit you. If you are shorter or taller, have longer arms and body then the sizing letter should give you an indication of which jacket to pick

Imagine if you were shopping for a pair of trousers for a guy and he measured as 36” waist 34” leg but the size you needed to look for was 32” waist 38” leg but then in other stores it is 30” waist 36” leg.

There used to be a somewhat standard size in womens clothing which ever shop you were in. Now who knows what size I am supposed to be. I don’t have time to play the guess what size you are today game.

Also can someone explain why a longer length pair of trousers means that you have a longer bum and the same length legs.

Just because you are tall doesn’t mean you have the same length legs as everyone else but your waist to crotch measurement just gets longer.
Shopping with Dd she can only find the longer length leg without the enormous bum length in the childrens department.

Also can someone explain why a longer length pair of trousers means that you have a longer bum and the same length legs.

That's the more common shape.

That's the trouble with mass produced clothing. There's a lot of variation in shapes, even within the same size. You can't just pick up a size X anywhere and expect it to fit as if tailored for you.

Shops profile their customers and try to get the best fit for their average buyer. Teenage girls tend to be slimmer than middle aged women, so a size 10 in a teenage store will be smaller than Bon Marche or whatever. What people call vanity sizing is really just manufacturers adapting to larger people. Cars and seats and beds have got bigger too. Are we supposed to be using the same dress patterns that people used in 1850?

I'm 5ft, generally a size 10, an 8 in some shops, narrow shoulders, little hands and feet - towards the top of the ideal BMI range for my height. I'd definitely be very overweight as a size 14, but also know plenty of people who are a 14 and I'd guess aren't overweight. I think height and build have a lot to do with it. Also muscle. I'm 5kg heavier since I started strength training, but still the same clothes size.

Dress size is based on waist not hips or bust. A 22-23 inch waist would have been, from the 90s up until a decade or so ago, a UK4-6 or a US 0-2. With current flatter sizing, I wear a UK 4-6 and have a 24-25 inch waist. Obviously, with a 39 inch bust and hips, I can't wear every single dress or top in a UK6, some won't go over my hips or totally squash my breasts but I still find plenty of clothing with the right material and cut to fit my shape properly. Women's clothing tends to default to an hourglass shape, so it's perfectly possible to find dresses that fit my waist properly but also go easily around my hips and bust without looking over stretched. There are plenty of disappointments and there are some brands that I love but know from experience will never fit my shape, but that's true for everyone, as not everything can fit every body.

Tbh, the main area that I find it hardest to get clothing to fit is skinny jeans on my calves or capped sleeved tops on my shoulders as I'm naturally broad with a lot of muscle and women's clothing isn't designed for muscularity. The second is in height as I'm very short. But even with my bust and hips, I can get away with wearing bigger children's clothes quite a bit, so I'll sometimes go for kids' clothes for height. As a short, muscular, hourglass anything I wear that doesn't fit my waist makes me look utterly ridiculous. By your logic I'd be wearing a UK 16 and even when I was literally tipped into obesity, I never wore anything bigger than a UK12.

When you look in the mens clothing section their sizing is based on actual sizes

Men’s clothes sizes aren’t infallible. My husband often moans that clothes makers assume that all tall men all have massive stomachs.

Dress sizing should be the same no matter how tall or short you are and all stores should conform to the same standard sizing

This would be perfect, if ... people came in a standard shape and size.

I bought a hoodie the other day (Elle Sport) and although it fits me fine around the middle etc, the sleeves are too tight to roll up. I washed some dishes and had to change because my cuffs got wet. I am well used to ridiculous women's clothing with sewn-up pockets etc, but that was a new one on me.

It’s so personal

I’m 5”7 and really really unhappy with how I look above a size 10. Ideally I’d like to be an 8 again.

But that’s how I feel about my body. I am not judging or commenting on other women.

2 years ago I weighed 12 stone and was a size 14. According to the weight charts I was overweight.

I'm now 10 stone and also a size 14 (that's another thread and I'm quite frustrated!!) But now the weight charts put me right in the middle of the healthy weight range.

So basically, a.size 14 can mean you are overweight, yes. But it can also mean you are a healthy weight!

Best way to know is to weigh yourself and look your weight up on the weight charts for your height and age

If dress sizes really were uniform across all manufacturers, it would be even harder to find a good fit. It might even be impossible.

As it is, shops profile their customers, so if you're the target market for Shop X, there's a good chance they can fit you. If you have some difficult sizing feature like a large bust, small waist, long legs or whatever, you've got a better chance of finding your fit if you know which shops cater for you. If everywhere were completely uniform, nowhere would cater for your specifics.

I share everyone's frustration as I have a hard shape to dress as well, but it just isn't realistic to expect to be able to walk into any old high street shop, pluck any mass produced item off the peg and expect it to fit you specifically. You may complain that, say, not everyone with wide hips has a large waist and you'd be right, but overall, if one body part is larger, the rest are likely to be larger too. It's just statistics.

My advice is to learn which shops suit you, prioritise quality over quantity and befriend a local dressmaker for alterations and commissions. Even made to measure stuff doesn't have to be madly expensive and if it fits you perfectly and will last ten years, it's worth it.

It hugely depends on your height and probably where you carry weight. I am 5ft5 and when I have been a size 14 and I was overweight at that size.

The sizing discrepancy you observe is better described as size inflation. Sizing normalizes to the mean. If this were not true, we’d still be making clothes to fit people in the mid-1800’s. But then if we did, we would have gone broke because nobody could wear them. I don’t see anyone complaining that doorways and seats are larger but these are also sized to the mean. We have to change our sizes based on average sizes (and) due to the way fabric allocation costs are calculated. If you don’t want sizes to change (to match increasing consumer girth) then everyone needs to go on a diet.