http://www.vmagazine.com/page.php?pn=size I personally love that they're doing this, but I fear that other people might make or take this as a mockery. I'm built similarly to the one in the bra, so I'm happy to see my body type being represented. Go girls and V-Mag!
Top photo - Fat, Fat, (relatively) Formless, Thick; Central - Fat, Fat; Bottom - Thick (but looks shopped) 'Thick' is simply a girl with large amounts of lean muscle tissue in feminine areas, 'Thicker' is the same girl with fortunate distribution of blubber padding those areas, ie ass/chest/thighs/calves. Fat is a girl whose fat stores outcrowd her lean muscle stocks by 2-1 or more.
This is an area where everyone seems to have a different definition. To me, thick is still firm with a lot of muscular definiton, especially in the arse and hips and thighs. In my opinion the girl that Kenny is infatuated with, the blonde model, is the definition of 'thick.' For me the only one of those women I would say was 'thick' is the one on the right in the top photo. And if the bottom one isn't photoshopped, then her too as she has fantastic, firm muscular legs. That's very beautiful in my opinion.
Yeah, I agree. It's all about differing opinions. I think if they were more toned, they wouldn't be considered fat, cause they're shapely. These ladies are like 5'9 and up and are plus-sized models.
The blog said their names are: Candice Huffine, Marquita Pring, Michelle Olson, Tara Lynn and Kasia P. Not sure who is who. She looks like Aaliyah in that pic (R.I.P.)
I find all of these womens shapes very pleasing to the eye, the one below has a great pair of legs. I would call none of them fat.
None of them are fat unless a man loves famished looking models. For me a woman who is size 13 and above is considered fat. Curves are good but not a tidal wave.
I dunno dear, size, just like weight, doesn't always tell all like we tend to think. A size 16 on a woman 5'2 is going to look a lot different than on a woman 5'10. Some of these women, given their hips and height, could very well be a 15 or 16 (US) and you just said you don't think they're fat.
Some women give the size and measurements of Marlyn Monroe but,her size had fluxuated from the time she made it big until her death in 1962.
If you're a gay or straight white dude, there's a 98% chance you think they're fat or as many of them say, "gross". If you're a man of color, you probably consider them average to thick. "Thick" is more about shape rather than weight. If you're 165lbs with a small waist, ralatively flat stomack, thick thighs, hips & ass - you're thick. In 'white-guy-world', that's considered fat. It's all about perspective...but since this is WWBM.com...they're just thick.
I wouldn't say 98% of the white dudes would think that. I'm not saying that many of the white men don't tend to perpetuate the "thin is better" mentality, but there are many, many white men who don't look at body types as the be all end all of a woman's "worth" as a potential mate.
I can't speak for the percentages, but the rest of what you said I find true. I'm never called fat. I'm not toned, so that could be "fat", but I have curves and that helps it look better...lol If not, I'd look more round and someone might want to roll me down a hill or something.
