Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The feminine ideal has long been curvy and soft, so yes, this is very normal and not a surprise at all.
Umm ... no it hasn’t been.
Yes, it has. Are you the same poster who's been going on nonstop about how 115 and 5'5 is not underweight? Because... maybe it's time to push back from the computer and take a walk. That will burn calories and keep you from gaining weight, which I'm sure you're thrilled about.
No, I’m the PP who said 5’5’’ 115 is nearly underweight (it’s 3 lbs away from being clinically underweight).
But take one look at any TV show or movie. How many chubby girls do you see?
Right, but I said "long".. as in for a very long time. Aka I'm not talking about a TV show filmed within the past 5 years.
And I actually see a fair amount of "normal weight" girls on TV more and more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The feminine ideal has long been curvy and soft, so yes, this is very normal and not a surprise at all.
Umm ... no it hasn’t been.
Yes, it has. Are you the same poster who's been going on nonstop about how 115 and 5'5 is not underweight? Because... maybe it's time to push back from the computer and take a walk. That will burn calories and keep you from gaining weight, which I'm sure you're thrilled about.
No, I’m the PP who said 5’5’’ 115 is nearly underweight (it’s 3 lbs away from being clinically underweight).
But take one look at any TV show or movie. How many chubby girls do you see?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The feminine ideal has long been curvy and soft, so yes, this is very normal and not a surprise at all.
Umm ... no it hasn’t been.
Yes, it has. Are you the same poster who's been going on nonstop about how 115 and 5'5 is not underweight? Because... maybe it's time to push back from the computer and take a walk. That will burn calories and keep you from gaining weight, which I'm sure you're thrilled about.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Im not sure what you mean by “normal weight”. I’m 5’5 and 115 pounds. I’m 55 years old. Other than when I was pregnant, I’ve been the same weight since high school. 115 is normal for me. I eat a ton. I’m just very active. I’ll never be heavier than this. My husband seems ok with it given the obesity too often seen in women my age.
Presumably "normal weight" as in the normal weight range as designated by the government. You would probably be underweight, aka not that range
Considering OP mentions stomach fat I assume she means America "Normal" or overweight. The pp you are replying to is not underweight.
5’5’’ 115 is a BMI of 19.13. It’s barely within the healthy range.
It's well within the healthy range.
NP. Apparently a random commentator knows better than the CDC I guess. Are you an anti-masker too?
That's not what the CDC or the medical community says, and interestingly I was wearing a mask before the CDC said we should![]()
Here's another fun fact, a BMI can''t be used as the be all or end all, so pp who is 5'5" and 115 could be perfectly healthy an not at all underweight.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The feminine ideal has long been curvy and soft, so yes, this is very normal and not a surprise at all.
Umm ... no it hasn’t been.
Yes, it has. Are you the same poster who's been going on nonstop about how 115 and 5'5 is not underweight? Because... maybe it's time to push back from the computer and take a walk. That will burn calories and keep you from gaining weight, which I'm sure you're thrilled about.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, a lot of men like chubbier women, but I find it concerning that your man is a health nut so he should no the major health conditions belly fat could mean, and yet he wants that for you, that seems selfish that he can focus on his health, but wants you to disregard your own for his pleasure.
That's not the kind of body fat that those government studies are talking about. For most people, excess stomach fat might be a concern, but for apple body types it's just where it goes. It would be like telling Jennifer Lopez she was concerningly overweight because she has a large behind.
Jennifers large behind doesn't put her at increase risk for cancer, diabetes, and heart disease.. You are really taking this personally PP.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Im not sure what you mean by “normal weight”. I’m 5’5 and 115 pounds. I’m 55 years old. Other than when I was pregnant, I’ve been the same weight since high school. 115 is normal for me. I eat a ton. I’m just very active. I’ll never be heavier than this. My husband seems ok with it given the obesity too often seen in women my age.
Presumably "normal weight" as in the normal weight range as designated by the government. You would probably be underweight, aka not that range
Considering OP mentions stomach fat I assume she means America "Normal" or overweight. The pp you are replying to is not underweight.
5’5’’ 115 is a BMI of 19.13. It’s barely within the healthy range.
It's well within the healthy range.
NP. Apparently a random commentator knows better than the CDC I guess. Are you an anti-masker too?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The feminine ideal has long been curvy and soft, so yes, this is very normal and not a surprise at all.
Umm ... no it hasn’t been.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes, a lot of men like chubbier women, but I find it concerning that your man is a health nut so he should no the major health conditions belly fat could mean, and yet he wants that for you, that seems selfish that he can focus on his health, but wants you to disregard your own for his pleasure.
That's not the kind of body fat that those government studies are talking about. For most people, excess stomach fat might be a concern, but for apple body types it's just where it goes. It would be like telling Jennifer Lopez she was concerningly overweight because she has a large behind.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Im not sure what you mean by “normal weight”. I’m 5’5 and 115 pounds. I’m 55 years old. Other than when I was pregnant, I’ve been the same weight since high school. 115 is normal for me. I eat a ton. I’m just very active. I’ll never be heavier than this. My husband seems ok with it given the obesity too often seen in women my age.
Presumably "normal weight" as in the normal weight range as designated by the government. You would probably be underweight, aka not that range
Considering OP mentions stomach fat I assume she means America "Normal" or overweight. The pp you are replying to is not underweight.
5’5’’ 115 is a BMI of 19.13. It’s barely within the healthy range.
It's well within the healthy range.
Anonymous wrote:The feminine ideal has long been curvy and soft, so yes, this is very normal and not a surprise at all.