Does your frame affect how well you carry your weight?

healthypelican

I'm 5'8. Above 105kg, I look like a wreck. I won't speak for my body (pretty much a sad sack of potatoes), but my face looks horrendous. Once I'm below 105kg, I lose my double chin and there is a lot less fat around my face.

My friend is 5'11 and weighed up to 135kg, and looked much more attractive than me. She didn't seem to have as much fat around her face as me, even though she was a larger woman and she had a lovely hour glass figure. It seems like her face was more defined, while mine got lost amongst the fat.

So even if I'm at 115kg, and she's at 135kg, she still looks much better. I'm sure I was attractive at one point.

Does frame size come into this? I've been told I have small hips, but I have large wrists, so I'm confused about what my frame size is. I am friends with another girl who is 5'9 and her wrists are literally half the size of mine. So weird.

-or maybe it's just body fat percentage (doh)

4legsRbetterthan2

People carry their weight differently for all sorts of reasons. I also think we tend to judge ourselves more harshly than we do others, so consider the possibility that a 3rd person may not view you and your friend as differently as you do. Either way, loving yourself regardless of your weight is very important, what are the things you love about yourself? Focus on those.

tinkerbellang83

Frame definitely affects how you carry your weight, but attractiveness is subjective. Your hourglass friend might envy your narrow hips, the same way you envy her curves.

I'm 5'8" and currently around 108kg, I feel a lot more attractive than I did at 116kg. I have wide shoulders and wide hips and if I'm below 100kg I generally have a pretty flat stomach and well defined waist.

ritzvin

Yes. I never look as overweight as I am (most people are shocked that I weigh as much as I do)..My weight mainly goes on my thighs, and a bit on my tummy and arms - the right cut of skirt and non-sleeveless top can almost completely obscure any excess weight. Even at my heaviest (160 lb, which is 15lb over 'obese' threshold at my height), I still had an hourglass figure and didn't really look overweight from the front (if dressed strategically).

missmince

ritzvin wrote: »

Yes. I never look as overweight as I am (most people are shocked that I weigh as much as I do)..My weight mainly goes on my thighs, and a bit on my tummy and arms - the right cut of skirt and non-sleeveless top can almost completely obscure any excess weight. Even at my heaviest (160 lb, which is 15lb over 'obese' threshold at my height), I still had an hourglass figure and didn't really look overweight from the front (if dressed strategically).

Dressing strategically... great phrase. I have that body type, too. Great for skirts and dresses, but not so much for jeans.

To the OP, I think frame size doesn't count whether you have narrow or wide hips, just what your bones are like. My wrist measurements also don't match my hip size either. And facial bone structure is something else entirely, so some people's faces look better heavier, especially as they get older.

healthypelican

tinkerbellang83 wrote: »

Frame definitely affects how you carry your weight, but attractiveness is subjective. Your hourglass friend might envy your narrow hips, the same way you envy her curves.

When I say she's more attractive, her features are more prominent, less hidden by fat.

tinkerbellang83 wrote: »

I'm 5'8" and currently around 108kg, I feel a lot more attractive than I did at 116kg. I have wide shoulders and wide hips and if I'm below 100kg I generally have a pretty flat stomach and well defined waist.

I find that hard to believe, you must be very toned! I am jealous (not a criticism)- Even at 85kg I carry my weight in my stomach, while being slim everywhere else.

healthypelican

ritzvin wrote: »

Yes. I never look as overweight as I am (most people are shocked that I weigh as much as I do)..My weight mainly goes on my thighs, and a bit on my tummy and arms - the right cut of skirt and non-sleeveless top can almost completely obscure any excess weight. Even at my heaviest (160 lb, which is 15lb over 'obese' threshold at my height), I still had an hourglass figure and didn't really look overweight from the front (if dressed strategically).

I am trying to wear more flattering clothing as well. It has meant buying mostly more expensive clothing though. And it helps that I realised I am an apple and not a pear.

Christine_72

tinkerbellang83 wrote: »

I'm 5'8" and currently around 108kg, I feel a lot more attractive than I did at 116kg. I have wide shoulders and wide hips and if I'm below 100kg I generally have a pretty flat stomach and well defined waist.

Really? I'm 5'8" and weigh 69kgs and have a pot belly (definitely not flat) and a bit of inner thigh flabberoony going on too!
Not sure how old you are, but I'm 45 which may make a difference??

AnnPT77

missmince wrote: »

ritzvin wrote: »

Yes. I never look as overweight as I am (most people are shocked that I weigh as much as I do)..My weight mainly goes on my thighs, and a bit on my tummy and arms - the right cut of skirt and non-sleeveless top can almost completely obscure any excess weight. Even at my heaviest (160 lb, which is 15lb over 'obese' threshold at my height), I still had an hourglass figure and didn't really look overweight from the front (if dressed strategically).

Dressing strategically... great phrase. I have that body type, too. Great for skirts and dresses, but not so much for jeans.

To the OP, I think frame size doesn't count whether you have narrow or wide hips, just what your bones are like. My wrist measurements also don't match my hip size either. And facial bone structure is something else entirely, so some people's faces look better heavier, especially as they get older.

Some of the frame size estimators/calculators are based on wrist size, but I think in real life frame size does count hip (well, pelvis) width. It's still bones!

However, generalizing from one body part to one's entire frame, as an estimating method, seems crazy to me. We aren't all proportioned the same. I have wide shoulders, huuuge head & very large hands (plus big wrists) and the hips of a 14-year-old boy (even though I'm a 61-year-old woman).

I think one reason people tended to under-estimate my weight, when I was obese, is exactly that: They assumed I had normal woman-hips underneath the fat. My hip measurement when just into the obese zone (mid-180s at 5'5") was as high as 48"ish. At goal weight, they're more like 34-35" (no booty, either).

Besides frame size, everyone has a different distribution of fat, which can be kinder (or less so) appearance-wise. For example, some women gain in breast size, but I didn't, much. Some add most of the weight around waist/hip/thigh region, some more purely around the middle, and some distribute it more evenly over the body. Face can be one of the areas that accumulates fat more for some, less for others. For me, getting more fit, even while obese, tended to tighten everything up (hips went down from 48"ish to 46"ish at same basic weight).

Lots of variables make an appearance difference.

LiveLoveFitFab

My weight tends to go straight to my butt and thighs. When I first started here, I was 167lbs.

Definitely overweight for someone only 5'4, but no one else thought so. Guys still paid attention to me. Some places that size of booty is considered a win. All depends where the weight goes I guess. Apple body types tend to show it faster because it goes to the belly first, whereas us pears or hourglass girls have more leeway.

subcounter

The things you've mentioned are usually depends on your genetics and where you store the fat. As other mentioned, some people store less fat on their faces and belly, compared to their breasts, thighs, or well butts, so they seem "fitter" compared to someone that would store the fat on their bellies and face area more.

It also depends on your posture, your muscle strength as well, some can carry the excess weight better than the others without having back pains etc.

Obvious choice is, go down or up to a weight you feel confident at, and your body agrees with you. If you're unhappy about your double chin, simply drop your body fat percentage with proper lower calorie diet. Do not compare yourself to other people, its all about you at the end of the day.

bbell1985

Yeah...I'm 5'4" and even up near 170 lbs I've never gone over a 29inch waist or 34-36in bust. I hold lots of weight in my thighs and butt. I think I look alright for how heavy I am.

LaMujerMasBonitaDelMundo

I'm a 1.57m (5'3") pear-shaped having a plump butt & at 60kgs. I still look chubby. However when I was at my all time low at 52 kgs., my face shrinked & eyes & cheekbones were swollen that I get comments that I looked like a sick person. When you are petite, even an inch size waist already makes a difference.

EDIT: I'm a mesomorph or medium-framed based on my wrist size.

ritzvin

missmince wrote: »

ritzvin wrote: »

Yes. I never look as overweight as I am (most people are shocked that I weigh as much as I do)..My weight mainly goes on my thighs, and a bit on my tummy and arms - the right cut of skirt and non-sleeveless top can almost completely obscure any excess weight. Even at my heaviest (160 lb, which is 15lb over 'obese' threshold at my height), I still had an hourglass figure and didn't really look overweight from the front (if dressed strategically).

Dressing strategically... great phrase. I have that body type, too. Great for skirts and dresses, but not so much for jeans.

Yep.. pants are definitely not my friend.

ninerbuff

Genetics determines most how you carry your weight. There are lots of people who are the same height, weight, frame type and lean mass, but carry fat on their bodies different.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

tinkerbellang83

healthypelican wrote: »

tinkerbellang83 wrote: »

Frame definitely affects how you carry your weight, but attractiveness is subjective. Your hourglass friend might envy your narrow hips, the same way you envy her curves.

When I say she's more attractive, her features are more prominent, less hidden by fat.

tinkerbellang83 wrote: »

I'm 5'8" and currently around 108kg, I feel a lot more attractive than I did at 116kg. I have wide shoulders and wide hips and if I'm below 100kg I generally have a pretty flat stomach and well defined waist.

I find that hard to believe, you must be very toned! I am jealous (not a criticism)- Even at 85kg I carry my weight in my stomach, while being slim everywhere else.

The point being she seems more attractive to you, but that may not be more attractive to other people.

You can find it as hard to believe as most lol, it's a fact. I do strength training so I am quite muscly, but not overly defined. It's just the way the weight comes off me, the majority of my fat goes on my hips and thighs, it comes off my face and stomach first. Like @subcounter said that's mostly down to genetics.

ZephieC

I have a little extra weight all over but the main bulk is belly. Clothes hide a multitude of sins...lol. I am down 20 with another 20 to go. When people hear that I get the "really?" with the quirked eye brow...but I am the one facing the naked truth in the mirror...and the paunch. My mother in law and I are close in height but she weighs less than me and wears a larger size. We all carry weight differently. I take pictures every month so I am comparing myself only to the past me rather than other people.

JessicaLeshay86

I believe it has alot to do with it..Im a 5 foot 1 rectangle..lol
Thought i was hourglass my entire life but Im not. Im just short and medium framed. I gain weight and lose weight evenly.

jbirdgreen

Yes. I'm 5'7" and my sister is only an inch taller than me 5'8". She has narrow hips, longer legs and big boobs. I, on the other hand, carry weight in my thighs/midsection, I have wider hips, and much smaller boobs. I carry more weight in my arms/stomach, although she can gain there too. An example of how different our body types are: If we were buying suit separates -- her bottoms would be a whole size smaller than her jacket; my bottoms would have to be a whole size larger than my jacket. We used to joke that together, we'd have the ideal body type.

She looks better at a heavier weight than I do. She could be 200 lbs and look like I do when I am 180. She also has a more athletic look at her best weight, even though she never works out. When she was smaller, she had killer calf muscles and never set foot in a gym. Meanwhile, I am in the gym all the time now and I still have that "soft" look like I don't workout.

What's funny is that our genetics comes from the same pool -- we're 100% blood sisters -- but our bodies could not be more different.