The shape of things
Curvy.
Voluptuous.
Two words that are often used to describe the female form.
Recently, I’ve read something by someone (vague enough for you?) making derisive comments about fat women using these describers. They said fat women were deluding themselves.
Except … no. No, they’re not.
Curvy and voluptuous are body shapes. Fat women can be both curvy and voluptuous without using it as an “excuse” for being fat or wanting to “hide” behind a word. Just like slim women can be both slim and pear shaped with wider hips. It’s got nothing to do with weight and everything to do with the proportions of a women’s body.
And the body shapes that are the most widely accepted, even in the fatosphere world?
Curvy.
Voluptuous.
That hourglass va-va-voom shape. Larger breasts, slimmer waists (or at least, more definable waists) and slightly larger hips.
Look at any fashion magazine or fashion photograph. Most looks are trying to emulate this. It’s “feminine”. It’s what the female form “should” look like.
So, where does this leave the people who don’t fit into this accepted body shape?
Where are the pears, the apples, the noodles, the figure eights, the no-definable-shapes, and the mix of shapes?
Out in the cold? Sorry guys, you don’t exist?
I’ve often said I would love it if clothing could be designed for body shapes, for those people who want to get into fashion and have no idea where to start or what they like in clothing, or for those who actually want to shop to their body shapes.
Myself, I wear what I want to wear, regardless if it’s recommended for my body shape or not. My friends wear what they want to wear, regardless of their body shapes.
I want to, as a blogger I read regularly states (mostly in jest), “challenge the paradigm”. I want to mess with those pre-conceived notions of what a feminine woman is, and what a woman “should” look like and dress like. I want to wear clothes I’m not “supposed” to, I want to be loud.
I want to be heard.
Speaking as someone who has an hourglass shape, I find that fashion magazines absolutely loathe breasts. I’m frequently told by people I know that I need to lose weight, in spite of the fact that I wear a size ten (I fit a 10G bra). I think that even women with what men’s magazines present as desirable body shapes are subjected to body-hate.
I wear clothes irrespective of what shape they are meant for – I hate that fashion magazines teach women to ‘disguise their flaws’, after all souldn’t we be proud of our bodies, not trying to look like everyone else? – but I find that almost all clothes I try on seem to be designed for women who have the body shape of a mannequin.
I’ve been asking myself these same questions lately. The most popular plus sized fatshion bloggers, plus sized models, and most lauded fat women in our culture all have hourglass figures. With relatively flat bellies – or at least low profile ones, not ones that stick out.
Clothes are made to fit these shapes. Especially anything with a waistline.
It’s great to see women outside of the usual actress/model range of very thin, but it would be even better to see women of more varied shapes too.
Great post Sonya!
I agree with you, Steph! I hate the concept of “flattering” clothing. When people say that, they usually mean, disguising your “flaws”. What flaws? Who says? I definitely don’t envy the difficulty you must have, finding bras in your size (especially cute ones!).
Thanks, Kath! I agree — even plus sized models have to be ‘fit’ and have little (if no) rolls. I’d like to see someone — model, celeb, whatever out there with visible rolls, a big bum, hips, boobs, etc etc. Even plus sized modelling conforms to the usual modelling standard.