Marilyn Monroe-my body ideal

2456

Replies

  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Marilyn Monroe's Measurements (per her dress-maker):

    Height: 5 feet, 5½ inches
    Weight: 118-140 pounds
    Bust: 35-37 inches
    Waist: 22-23 inches
    Hips: 35-36 inches
    Bra size: 36D

    At her skinniest she was 118.0 lbs, heaviest, 140.0 lbs...she did, in fact, have a tiny waist, but she also had hips and thighs...something today's runway models definitely lack.

    And anybody that looks at her and says she had a super low body fat % must be nuts...or needs glasses.
    Yes, she had hips and thighs. As do I. I have her exact proportions (extreme hourglass). At her smallest, she was most definitely smaller than a modern size 6-8. At her highest she was probably at most a 6.

    Like I said, my 40-28-40 5'3" frame is a size 8 at 150 pounds and definitely not low body fat. Who said she had low body fat? She was still super tiny.

    You CAN have curves and be very small.

    I don't deny that...I'm just saying her figure to me is more attractive than today's runway models.

    I also think that people are vehemently against the idea that she may have been a larger size (size 6 is not large by any means)...I also find it interesting that the very idea of her being a size 12-16 (though this size was FOR SURE smaller than today's size 12-16) actually seems to cause an uproar because people have an emotional reaction to a size 12...even a size 8-it seems to almost offend some people...I find that fascinating.

    All that being said, her figure may be unattainable due to her extreme hourglass figure, but a modified version of it is my goal figure.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I also think that people are vehemently against the idea that she may have been a larger size (size 6 is not large by any means)...I also find it interesting that the very idea of her being a size 12-16 (though this size was FOR SURE smaller than today's size 12-16) actually seems to cause an uproar because people have an emotional reaction to a size 12...even a size 8-it seems to almost offend some people...I find that fascinating.

    All that being said, her figure may be unattainable due to her extreme hourglass figure, but a modified version of it is my goal figure.

    People have an emotional reaction because others who are TODAY'S sizes 12-16 (and I was a 12 at my highest weight. On a shorter woman, this does not look good.) point to Marilyn and say, "See? She was a size 12-16 and look how great and healthy she looked, so I must look like that, too!" They use this extremely tiny woman to justify their obesity. They ignore that 12-16 in the 1950s and 1960s is not what it is now.

    I'm not against her being a size 6 or 8. I'm just saying she was smaller than that and her measurements back me up. I like her shape, too. I better, since it's the shape I have. :-) Not everyone can achieve it, though. Eight percent of women in the world are an hourglass and even fewer are an extreme hourglass. Finding enough women with that shape to walk the runways would be impossible. Not to mention that runway modeling requires women to basically be a very unhealthy low weight to act as hangars rather than human beings.

    I don't know anyone who doen't have an eating disorder who strives to look like that in the real world.
  • marieautumn
    marieautumn Posts: 928 Member
    I also think that people are vehemently against the idea that she may have been a larger size (size 6 is not large by any means)...I also find it interesting that the very idea of her being a size 12-16 (though this size was FOR SURE smaller than today's size 12-16) actually seems to cause an uproar because people have an emotional reaction to a size 12...even a size 8-it seems to almost offend some people...I find that fascinating.

    All that being said, her figure may be unattainable due to her extreme hourglass figure, but a modified version of it is my goal figure.

    People have an emotional reaction because others who are TODAY'S sizes 12-16 (and I was a 12 at my highest weight. On a shorter woman, this does not look good.) point to Marilyn and say, "See? She was a size 12-16 and look how great and healthy she looked, so I must look like that, too!" They use this extremely tiny woman to justify their obesity. They ignore that 12-16 in the 1950s and 1960s is not what it is now.

    I'm not against her being a size 6 or 8. I'm just saying she was smaller than that and her measurements back me up. I like her shape, too. I better, since it's the shape I have. :-) Not everyone can achieve it, though. Eight percent of women in the world are an hourglass and even fewer are an extreme hourglass. Finding enough women with that shape to walk the runways would be impossible. Not to mention that runway modeling requires women to basically be a very unhealthy low weight to act as hangars rather than human beings.

    I don't know anyone who doen't have an eating disorder who strives to look like that in the real world.

    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
  • YaGigi
    YaGigi Posts: 817 Member
    I love Monroe!


    But my ideal beauty type is Monica Bellucci in "Irreverseble" and "Malena":

    monica-bellucci.jpg




    Kelly Brook is gorgeous too. And oh so sensual.


    calendario2012kellybrook.jpg
  • TyTy76
    TyTy76 Posts: 1,761 Member
    She was hot.

    But she is not my body ideal.
  • Joreanasaurous
    Joreanasaurous Posts: 1,384 Member
    Marilyn Monroe's Measurements (per her dress-maker):

    Height: 5 feet, 5½ inches
    Weight: 118-140 pounds
    Bust: 35-37 inches
    Waist: 22-23 inches
    Hips: 35-36 inches
    Bra size: 36D

    At her skinniest she was 118.0 lbs, heaviest, 140.0 lbs...she did, in fact, have a tiny waist, but she also had hips and thighs...something today's runway models definitely lack.

    And anybody that looks at her and says she had a super low body fat % must be nuts...or needs glasses.
    Yes, she had hips and thighs. As do I. I have her exact proportions (extreme hourglass). At her smallest, she was most definitely smaller than a modern size 6-8. At her highest she was probably at most a 6.

    Like I said, my 40-28-40 5'3" frame is a size 8 at 150 pounds and definitely not low body fat. Who said she had low body fat? She was still super tiny.

    You CAN have curves and be very small.

    I don't deny that...I'm just saying her figure to me is more attractive than today's runway models.

    I also think that people are vehemently against the idea that she may have been a larger size (size 6 is not large by any means)...I also find it interesting that the very idea of her being a size 12-16 (though this size was FOR SURE smaller than today's size 12-16) actually seems to cause an uproar because people have an emotional reaction to a size 12...even a size 8-it seems to almost offend some people...I find that fascinating.

    All that being said, her figure may be unattainable due to her extreme hourglass figure, but a modified version of it is my goal figure.

    It has nothing to do with the emotional reaction of a size 12 and more with the fact it is just plain WRONG. She ranged anywhere between a modern days 2 to an 8. With the way sizing varies she probably could have fit into some 0s. I think RML_16 sums it up well. The amount of misinformation about her and misquotes is staggering in the body positivity camp. If you have to make stuff up to make her fit your ideal... why not just choose someone else? Christina Hendricks?
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.
  • YaGigi
    YaGigi Posts: 817 Member
    I have 17 inches difference between my bust/hips and waist.

    Move aside!

    :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :tongue: :happy:



    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I have 17 inches difference between my bust/hips and waist.

    You should post a photo. Curves are beautiful and I'd love to see that.
  • marieautumn
    marieautumn Posts: 928 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.

    mmmmK.
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,247 Member
    In these photos, I'm 5'5 and ~143 pounds, and anywhere from a snug size 2 to a loose size 10.

    size_zps24f90592.jpg

    At my "fighting weight" of 132-135, I'm close to MM's measurements, but my waist is a little bigger and cup size smaller, and those snug size 2's fit perfect.

    IMG_5581.jpg

    I also love Audrey Hepburn... I think I remember hearing that childhood illness and malnutrition contributed to her tiny size as an adult.
  • BeachGingerOnTheRocks
    BeachGingerOnTheRocks Posts: 3,927 Member
    Yep. MM was at her largest in Some Like It Hot, when she was battling a severe prescription drug addiction following a miscarriage. Prescription pill abuse will make a person bloat severely. It's sad, but a lot of women would gain weight under those circumstances.

    I'm not an extreme hourglass, just a plain one at 36-26-36, and I'm a size 2-4. If her measurements are similar for hips and bust, then she was also no bigger than a 4. I also have hips that make me look bigger in photographs. I look much bigger in photos, actually. MM's tiny waist makes her look bigger than she is because most people can't fathom a waist that small.

    She may have been the most beautiful woman to ever live. Her face is beyond beautiful, and her figure is epic.
  • YaGigi
    YaGigi Posts: 817 Member
    I have 17 inches difference between my bust/hips and waist.

    You should post a photo. Curves are beautiful and I'd love to see that.

    I'm not into posting my pics online, sorry.

    And obviously, I have extra weight thats why I'm here. To lose it and get fit.

    But I keep my proportions at any weight, thank God, I was blessed with that!
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I have 17 inches difference between my bust/hips and waist.

    You should post a photo. Curves are beautiful and I'd love to see that.

    I'm not into posting my pics online, sorry.

    And obviously, I have extra weight thats why I'm here. To lose it and get fit.

    But I keep my proportions at any weight, thank God, I was blessed with that!
    :flowerforyou:
  • YaGigi
    YaGigi Posts: 817 Member
    You look great!

    I don't see big difference between size 2 and 10 though! Lol


    You have a very pin up look about you.
    In these photos, I'm 5'5 and ~143 pounds, and anywhere from a snug size 2 to a loose size 10.

    size_zps24f90592.jpg

    At my "fighting weight" of 132-135, I'm close to MM's measurements, but my waist is a little bigger and cup size smaller, and those snug size 2's fit perfect.

    IMG_5581.jpg

    I also love Audrey Hepburn... I think I remember hearing that childhood illness and malnutrition contributed to her tiny size as an adult.
  • GlutesthatSalute
    GlutesthatSalute Posts: 460 Member
    I think MOST MEN prefer women like this. Yes one can make an argument that not all women can get this way. My point is some tone, some fat, curves, and WOW!

    ^^^ This exactly... and :drinker: to looking so sexy while saying it
  • nytius
    nytius Posts: 173 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.

    QFT... A lot of people can't even envision an extreme hourglass unless her measurements are under (or above) an imaginary line. I think it says something about the way some people "see" proportion.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.

    QFT... A lot of people can't even envision an extreme hourglass unless her measurements are under (or above) an imaginary line. I think it says something about the way some people "see" proportion.
    I also think some people are insecure and look for reasons to insult others, even if they have to ignore certain facts to do it. I'm assuming that was the actual intent behind the post to which I was responding.
  • mazdauk
    mazdauk Posts: 1,380 Member
    I'm not clear how a 40" bust is a size 8 even in US sizes - they must vary enourmously! when I was a 42-37-44" I was a UK 18, now I'm 38-33-38 and a 14/16 (because I'm a 34F) in some dresses and tops (14 in others), a 14 in UK skirts but a 10 in a US skirt (OK, I only have one, Ralph Lauren from an outlet, but its no-where near tight on my 33" waist so does that make me a US 8?)

    I don't want to resemble MM in any way, but to me her body - especially arms and legs - are "naturally feminine" - curvy but firm, and not flabby. That's what I'm aiming for. Aiming.:ohwell:

    ETA the size someone "should" be for maximum aesthetics does depend on their bone structure, but for individuals its where you feel comfortable. My sister asks me if I'm going to "keep going" when i reach my goal weight. I will switch to maintenance, and if I lose more all well and good, but I'm realistic. At my age I'm not looking for perfection, just not being a big middle-aged blob.:bigsmile:
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I'm not clear how a 40" bust is a size 8 even in US sizes - they must vary enourmously! when I was a 42-37-44" I was a UK 18, now I'm 38-33-38 and a 14/16 (because I'm a 34F) in some dresses and tops (14 in others), a 14 in UK skirts but a 10 in a US skirt (OK, I only have one, Ralph Lauren from an outlet, but its no-where near tight on my 33" waist so does that make me a US 8?)

    I don't want to resemble MM in any way, but to me her body - especially arms and legs - are "naturally feminine" - curvy but firm, and not flabby. That's what I'm aiming for. Aiming.:ohwell:
    I'm a US 8. My waist is 28 inches. I have a small frame, so while my breasts are quite large, my back is small.
  • babyj0
    babyj0 Posts: 531 Member
    I think she's most women's inspiration.
  • mazdauk
    mazdauk Posts: 1,380 Member
    I wish they made clothes in a variety of "cuts" - like curvy (aka hourglass) and for more boyish figures. I find everything seems to be somewhere in between - which is aggravating! (Don't get me onto trying to get jeans to fit round the waist AND hips!) I did see a sports top once available in a "curvy" and "athletic" cut, but it was not in my size:huh:
  • Grimmerick
    Grimmerick Posts: 3,342 Member
    Betty Brosmer has an awesome hourglass figure, I would say it's extreme
  • marieautumn
    marieautumn Posts: 928 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.

    QFT... A lot of people can't even envision an extreme hourglass unless her measurements are under (or above) an imaginary line. I think it says something about the way some people "see" proportion.
    I also think some people are insecure and look for reasons to insult others, even if they have to ignore certain facts to do it. I'm assuming that was the actual intent behind the post to which I was responding.
    :laugh: yes I am very insecure and jealous of you.
    Perhaps people comment the things they do because it is what they actually think. You do not look like an "Extreme hourglass" to me. Sorry. It's my opinion and I don't see why it's seen as an insult? When I think of an hourglass, I think of some one with a slim waist, nice chest and hips and I didn't see that really by looking at your pictures. So if I'm wrong in your opinion so be it. You are entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to mine. No need to get fussy.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I wish they made clothes in a variety of "cuts" - like curvy (aka hourglass) and for more boyish figures. I find everything seems to be somewhere in between - which is aggravating! (Don't get me onto trying to get jeans to fit round the waist AND hips!) I did see a sports top once available in a "curvy" and "athletic" cut, but it was not in my size:huh:
    I buy midrise. They're high up enough so the crack doesn't show, but they sit at the waist, so you don't have to worry about fitting waist and hips.

    Don't some brands offer a "curvy" jean, though, that's for the pear/hourglass shape? I haven't tried any.
  • ldrosophila
    ldrosophila Posts: 7,512 Member
    I'm my ideal not some long dead tragic movie star or some model on the victoria secret runway. I'm ideal because the only body I'll ever have is my own. Love it or hate it thats all I got. Weight loss may redefine, but even surgical intervention wont change it that much. Others are attracted to my body because I'm attracted to my body.
  • BeachGingerOnTheRocks
    BeachGingerOnTheRocks Posts: 3,927 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.

    QFT... A lot of people can't even envision an extreme hourglass unless her measurements are under (or above) an imaginary line. I think it says something about the way some people "see" proportion.
    I also think some people are insecure and look for reasons to insult others, even if they have to ignore certain facts to do it. I'm assuming that was the actual intent behind the post to which I was responding.
    :laugh: yes I am very insecure and jealous of you.
    Perhaps people comment the things they do because it is what they actually think. You do not look like an "Extreme hourglass" to me. Sorry. It's my opinion and I don't see why it's seen as an insult? When I think of an hourglass, I think of some one with a slim waist, nice chest and hips and I didn't see that really by looking at your pictures. So if I'm wrong in your opinion so be it. You are entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to mine. No need to get fussy.

    If you have to start something with "not to offend, but...." then you know it's meant to be an insult and are probably better off keeping your "opinion" to yourself.

    It would be like me saying "sorry to offend, but your hair's a little over-processed and ages you." Saying that wouldn't be nice, and I'm sure you would feel insulted. Even if it is my opinion, I'd keep it to myself.
  • marieautumn
    marieautumn Posts: 928 Member
    Not to offend, but when I think "extreme hourglass" your shape is not what I think of. Not saying your are overweight or anything along those lines, but it's just not what image my mind conjures.
    My waist is 12 inches smaller than my bust and hips, which are the same size. That is the definition of an extreme hourglass (more than a 10-inch difference). It has nothing whatsoever to do with weight or size.

    A 200-pound woman could be an extreme hourglass by body type, as can a 90-pound woman.

    QFT... A lot of people can't even envision an extreme hourglass unless her measurements are under (or above) an imaginary line. I think it says something about the way some people "see" proportion.
    I also think some people are insecure and look for reasons to insult others, even if they have to ignore certain facts to do it. I'm assuming that was the actual intent behind the post to which I was responding.
    :laugh: yes I am very insecure and jealous of you.
    Perhaps people comment the things they do because it is what they actually think. You do not look like an "Extreme hourglass" to me. Sorry. It's my opinion and I don't see why it's seen as an insult? When I think of an hourglass, I think of some one with a slim waist, nice chest and hips and I didn't see that really by looking at your pictures. So if I'm wrong in your opinion so be it. You are entitled to your opinion just as I am entitled to mine. No need to get fussy.

    If you have to start something with "not to offend, but...." then you know it's meant to be an insult and are probably better off keeping your "opinion" to yourself.

    It would be like me saying "sorry to offend, but your hair's a little over-processed and ages you." Saying that wouldn't be nice, and I'm sure you would feel insulted. Even if it is my opinion, I'd keep it to myself.

    I stand by my opinion. Have a nice day. :flowerforyou:
  • Show_Stopper
    Show_Stopper Posts: 656 Member
    I think her body was beautiful and if ny body was adored like hers well I would consider that winning
  • grrrlface
    grrrlface Posts: 1,204 Member
    22 inch waist is tiny! Don't know how it would've stayed 22-23 inches when she weighed 140lbs... I'm 126lb with 35-27-35 measurements! Not saying she would be exactly the same!

    Her figure is admirable but unattainable for most. I'm lucky to have an hourglass but would love a smaller waist!

Categories