Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think I was 5'8" and 120-125 when I got married. 15 years and two kids later, I'm 130-135. Shrug.
You're at a much healthier weight now. You were clinically underweight then.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:118 at age 25 when I married. The same 16 years and 3 kids later. Its pretty much genetic, I don't really have to work at my weight. I just have to work to make sure it's more tone/muscle than blah. I am much more fit and toned now in my 40s than I was in my 20s.
Get back to us in 10 years.
Anonymous wrote:Must you ask this question during a pandemic? Really?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I simply don't believe most of these numbers. The one posted above is a BMI of 18.0, which is clinically underweight.
I'm 5'4'' 122. At my lowest weight, I was 5'3'' 105, which is an 18.6 BMI. That required me to essentially be anorexic.
I've since developed a healthier relationship with food.
I am 5’4 and 108. At 122, I’d have a lot of flab on my stomach. I love my underweight BMI
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I simply don't believe most of these numbers. The one posted above is a BMI of 18.0, which is clinically underweight.
I'm 5'4'' 122. At my lowest weight, I was 5'3'' 105, which is an 18.6 BMI. That required me to essentially be anorexic.
I've since developed a healthier relationship with food.
I am 5’4 and 108. At 122, I’d have a lot of flab on my stomach. I love my underweight BMI
Anonymous wrote:I simply don't believe most of these numbers. The one posted above is a BMI of 18.0, which is clinically underweight.
I'm 5'4'' 122. At my lowest weight, I was 5'3'' 105, which is an 18.6 BMI. That required me to essentially be anorexic.
I've since developed a healthier relationship with food.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I simply don't believe most of these numbers. The one posted above is a BMI of 18.0, which is clinically underweight.
I'm 5'4'' 122. At my lowest weight, I was 5'3'' 105, which is an 18.6 BMI. That required me to essentially be anorexic.
I've since developed a healthier relationship with food.
What is the circumference of your wrist?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This is fascinating.
Im assuming the majority of responses are from white women. Weight is a defining standard of beauty the way complexion? Hair texture? Is for people of color.
I know where our issues stem from. Where does your weight obsession originate?
I have been married 20 years and have no idea how much I weighed on my wedding day. Maybe 140? I'm 170 now.
Maintaining a weight from your youth is an accomplishment, I think. At some point, most people give up on themselves and may be beaten down by life. It's easier to eat the chips and chug the wine than it is to exercise and go to bed early. My $0.02.
or you have little value if you gain weight and men will toss you aside or never look at you. if you had other value this would be less important.
It's not that deep, or should I say "shallow"? It's not about turning heads, it's about staying vital, fit and healthy. Looking great is a bonus.
This.
I am sorry but most older white women do not look "great" when they are a size 0-2. They wrinkle a lot faster. A white woman will keep a more youthful, fit and fresh face around a size 4-10. Generally speaking ofcourse - there are always exceptions.
I'm the $.02 poster. 5'7, 135, size 6/8, late 40's. My face and body both look good. Thankyouverymuch. I'm not competing with 20 year olds or anyone else. I am aging naturally and that's the way I want it. I want to stay fit and vital.