Marilyn Monroe-my body ideal

Options
245678

Replies

  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Options
    She's several months pregnant in that photo.

    But, yes, she was beautiful. And would have been a size 2-4 in today's sizes. Not a 12 or 14 or 16 that people claim.

    Well she was actually a size 6-8 in today's sizes...She was 140 lbs and 5'5.5"
  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Options
    She's pretty but I still don't get the hype. While she had a lovely hourglass figure, she's not my ideal. If we're going with her era, I prefer Audrey Hepburn who I think was infinitely more classy.

    And looks aside, Marilyn is definitely not someone I look up to at all. I've watched a few of the movies she starred in and I can't stand her fake voice or fake persona. Mostly all I feel when I hear about her is pity at how tragic her life was.

    I don't look up to her as a person-her life was indeed very tragic...I do, however, think she is lovely and beautiful.

    I also think Audrey was gorgeous...she was pretty thin/borderline too thin. She was 5'7" and a size 2...lovely yes...healthy...Hmm..dunno about that.
  • CapnGordo
    CapnGordo Posts: 327
    Options
    I also think Audrey was gorgeous...she was pretty thin/borderline too thin. She was 5'7" and a size 2...lovely yes...healthy...Hmm..dunno about that.
    Why would you think otherwise? She lived to 63, and only passed then due to cancer.
  • mushroomcup
    mushroomcup Posts: 145 Member
    Options
    She's pretty but I still don't get the hype. While she had a lovely hourglass figure, she's not my ideal. If we're going with her era, I prefer Audrey Hepburn who I think was infinitely more classy.

    And looks aside, Marilyn is definitely not someone I look up to at all. I've watched a few of the movies she starred in and I can't stand her fake voice or fake persona. Mostly all I feel when I hear about her is pity at how tragic her life was.

    I don't look up to her as a person-her life was indeed very tragic...I do, however, think she is lovely and beautiful.

    I also think Audrey was gorgeous...she was pretty thin/borderline too thin. She was 5'7" and a size 2...lovely yes...healthy...Hmm..dunno about that.

    I wasn't thinking that you do look up to her as a person since your post was only about your body ideal (and though she's not my ideal, I do think that Marilyn was lovely). I just frequently hear other women/girls wanting to be like her and it makes me cringe, so I had to comment!
  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Options
    She's pretty but I still don't get the hype. While she had a lovely hourglass figure, she's not my ideal. If we're going with her era, I prefer Audrey Hepburn who I think was infinitely more classy.

    And looks aside, Marilyn is definitely not someone I look up to at all. I've watched a few of the movies she starred in and I can't stand her fake voice or fake persona. Mostly all I feel when I hear about her is pity at how tragic her life was.

    I don't look up to her as a person-her life was indeed very tragic...I do, however, think she is lovely and beautiful.

    I also think Audrey was gorgeous...she was pretty thin/borderline too thin. She was 5'7" and a size 2...lovely yes...healthy...Hmm..dunno about that.

    I wasn't thinking that you do look up to her as a person since your post was only about your body ideal (and though she's not my ideal, I do think that Marilyn was lovely). I just frequently hear other women/girls wanting to be like her and it makes me cringe, so I had to comment!

    Yes...it's true. It's like many celebrities today that young girls look up to...hardly any celebrity is a good role model-their lives are pretty screwed up. Marilyn was no exception...very tragic-a life with such potential cut far too short.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    She's several months pregnant in that photo.

    But, yes, she was beautiful. And would have been a size 2-4 in today's sizes. Not a 12 or 14 or 16 that people claim.

    Well she was actually a size 6-8 in today's sizes...She was 140 lbs and 5'5.5"
    Depending on when she weighed as little as 118 pounds.

    In fact, in most of her movies, at her "fighting weight," she was 118 pounds. Her waist was 22-24 inches. My waist is 29 inches and I wear a size 8 and I have Marilyn's proportions (though a bit shorter and I need to lose some weight/inches to get to the size she was).
  • toaster6
    toaster6 Posts: 703 Member
    Options
    She's several months pregnant in that photo.

    But, yes, she was beautiful. And would have been a size 2-4 in today's sizes. Not a 12 or 14 or 16 that people claim.

    Well she was actually a size 6-8 in today's sizes...She was 140 lbs and 5'5.5"
    Depending on when she weighed as little as 118 pounds.

    In fact, in most of her movies, at her "fighting weight," she was 118 pounds. Her waist was 22-24 inches. My waist is 29 inches and I wear a size 8 and I have Marilyn's proportions (though a bit shorter and I need to lose some weight/inches to get to the size she was).

    Yes, she had a 22 inch waist and that translates to a modern day dress size 0. When they auctioned off her famous white halter dress, it was put on a size zero or size two mannequin and the dress couldn't zip up. She was very curvy but she was also very thin.
  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Options
    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.
  • britttttx3
    britttttx3 Posts: 458
    Options
    She's beautiful.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    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.
  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Options
    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
    Options
    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: 932 Member
    Options
    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
    Options
    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
    Options
    She was hot.

    But she is not my body ideal.
  • Joreanasaurous
    Joreanasaurous Posts: 1,384 Member
    Options
    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
    Options
    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
    Options
    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
    Options
    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: 932 Member
    Options
    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.

Categories