Taller girls look less muscular

NikkiSixGuns

Grass is always greener, right?

I used to envy tall women. I used to envy very thin women. I used to envy people that I compared myself to and thought they were stronger/looked better than me.

No more...

I am 100% comfortable being "short". Being short has its advantages (no different than being tall).

I do not want to be very thin. Lifting has given me "bulk" and I'm proud of it. (I do think it's more apparent because I'm short.)

I don't compare myself to others. Comparison robs you of the joy that is rightfully yours. I work to be the best ME. If someone else has a smaller waist size than me or is 5" taller - so what? Why get upset over something that I have no control over? If someone has bigger biceps, can squat more than me - so what? They worked for their results, and envy is pointless. I can work for results, too.

They're not me, and I'll never be them. We can do exactly the same thing and get different results. What do I gain from comparing us? A shi--y mood. Thanks anyway.

Just be your dang self.

neandermagnon

I think that applies for large framed women of any height. If you're short, you're supposed to be built like a pixie with a tiny little frame and weigh about 100lb. If you're tall, you're supposed to be built like a supermodel, with long, slim legs and a tiny little frame and you're allowed to weigh a bit more for being taller, but not that much more.... in other words, society expects women to have a tiny frame and be slender and not take up much space, and also to be delicate, weak, etc. ... whether you're tall or short, if you have a large frame, you're not built like how many people in our culture think women should be... my reaction to it is more like: what the heck's wrong with women having a large frame and being muscular?... and for that matter, what the heck kind of culture doesn't want women to be strong (whatever their body type)? But some women deal with it by trying to diet down to be an entirely different body type, which is doomed to failure because you can't shrink your ribs, shoulders or pelvis.

I've also noticed magazines airbrush the torsos of medium-large framed celebrities in such a way that they're effectively making their shoulders, rib cage and pelvis narrower, so they look smaller framed... that's not the same as airbrushing out rolls of fat or airbrushing someone to look like they would at a smaller body fat percentage.... they're airbrushing them from one body type that's seen as undesirable to another that's seen as desirable, and totally reinforced the idea that women are not supposed to be large framed. And when women say things like "if I gain muscle I look stocky " or "if I gain muscle I look like an amazon " then that's because society made them hate their body type. Which is really sad.

I look like an amazon and I love it--always have Well, almost always. I wasn't too happy about it when I was 14, but then I wasn't too happy about anything at that age.

Accepting your body type--not just height, but also build--seems to be a pretty important prerequisite for a woman's happiness. There are things you cannot change, and why would you want to? I have Northern ancestors who needed to be big in order to deal with the harsh conditions. I don't *need* to be big now, but it helped me succeed in many sports and I don't have to ask anyone to get things from shelves.

Also, can we have a cheer for Dot Jones?

totally agree.... and I think amazon or valkyrie build is great. And I like being short and stocky. I've never found my height (or lack thereof) to be a disadvantage in any of the sports that I really like. For weight lifting it has a mechanical advantage. And in ice hockey (which I used to play for years, in a league etc) having a low centre of gravity is an advantage if you know what you're doing and are otherwise strong and have good balance. I fully believe there's a sport for every body type... I suck at running and mega suck at basketball lol... I can do a slam dunk if you give me a stepladder :laugh:

Had to google Dot Jones... actually I saw her in one episode of glee, which I don't normally watch, just it was on when I was at a friend's house, didn't know the name of the actress though. I'm not clued up about famous people.

and totally agree @ Nikki Six Guns.... be the best you that you can be :drinker:

Mouse_Potato

There are health issues associated with having a shorter frame as well. Yes, I gain muscle quickly, but what happens if I let myself go a bit? I'm short (5'4") and I'm a banana shape, so when I put on a few pounds my waistline zoomed right in to the heart disease danger zone. And I wasn't even technically overweight!

if you're short, large framed and have a relatively thick waist (which you would have as a banana shape), and you're using the "waist should be less than half your height" thing, then it's possible that this is more a problem with that particular test than you actually carrying enough fat to put you at greater risk of heart disease. The NHS (UK health service) has switched from that to having the same maximum waist size for everyone, regardless of height, because frame size does not correlate with height, very often shorter people have the same size torsos as taller people, they just have shorter legs. The absolute values used by the NHS are more reliable than the less than half your height rule.

The values used by the NHS are as follows:

somewhat increased risk of disease: men - over 37 inches; women - over 31.5 inches

greater risk of disease: men - over 40 inches; women - over 34.5 inches

- measure your waist midway between the bottom of your rib cage and the top of your pelvis, and breathe out first.

I still think that this will give false positives in large framed people and false negatives in small framed people, however it eliminates some error by not assuming that all short people are small framed and all tall people are large framed, which is not the case.

My body is built so strange. I am 5'6", with a short upper body and tall lower body. 34" inseam, yet there is barely one inch between my hip bone and lower rib. My waist and hips are the same size (39"), my legs are long and lean, but very muscular (20" thighs, 15" calves, all muscle)
I have very strong core muscles, but you certainly cannot see them under the bubble wrap that is called my waist!
My arms are longer and I have wide shoulders. Never had a problem with muscles responding to lifting tho, even my long muscles.
The only problem I have is getting the short parts of my body to lean out.

We are quite similar! I am 5'4" with a small frame and a 32" inseam. At 140 pounds I had a 32" waist (hence my comment about the heart disease risk). There is barely an inch between my ribs and hips as well. 21" thighs, 14" calves, solid core and broad shoulders. Arms responding very well to heavy weights! Not an inch of jiggle anywhere! .....Except my midsection. :sad:

BinaryPulsar

I love Dot Jones. I'm not a fan of Glee, but I was familiar with her comedy from before that.

bumblebums

Dot Jones stands at 6'3" (or 6'4", depending on who you believe) and is an armwrestling champion and was at one point a shotput athlete. Oh, and let's not forget the Olympic weightlifter Holley Mangold, who is 5'8".

No shortage of muscular tall women out there, once you start looking for them.

neandermagnon

There are health issues associated with having a shorter frame as well. Yes, I gain muscle quickly, but what happens if I let myself go a bit? I'm short (5'4") and I'm a banana shape, so when I put on a few pounds my waistline zoomed right in to the heart disease danger zone. And I wasn't even technically overweight!

if you're short, large framed and have a relatively thick waist (which you would have as a banana shape), and you're using the "waist should be less than half your height" thing, then it's possible that this is more a problem with that particular test than you actually carrying enough fat to put you at greater risk of heart disease. The NHS (UK health service) has switched from that to having the same maximum waist size for everyone, regardless of height, because frame size does not correlate with height, very often shorter people have the same size torsos as taller people, they just have shorter legs. The absolute values used by the NHS are more reliable than the less than half your height rule.

The values used by the NHS are as follows:

somewhat increased risk of disease: men - over 37 inches; women - over 31.5 inches

greater risk of disease: men - over 40 inches; women - over 34.5 inches

- measure your waist midway between the bottom of your rib cage and the top of your pelvis, and breathe out first.

I still think that this will give false positives in large framed people and false negatives in small framed people, however it eliminates some error by not assuming that all short people are small framed and all tall people are large framed, which is not the case.

My body is built so strange. I am 5'6", with a short upper body and tall lower body. 34" inseam, yet there is barely one inch between my hip bone and lower rib. My waist and hips are the same size (39"), my legs are long and lean, but very muscular (20" thighs, 15" calves, all muscle)
I have very strong core muscles, but you certainly cannot see them under the bubble wrap that is called my waist!
My arms are longer and I have wide shoulders. Never had a problem with muscles responding to lifting tho, even my long muscles.
The only problem I have is getting the short parts of my body to lean out.

We are quite similar! I am 5'4" with a small frame and a 32" inseam. At 140 pounds I had a 32" waist (hence my comment about the heart disease risk). There is barely an inch between my ribs and hips as well. 21" thighs, 14" calves, solid core and broad shoulders. Arms responding very well to heavy weights! Not an inch of jiggle anywhere! .....Except my midsection. :sad:

my torso's similar in that I have barely an inch between my rib cage and pelvis and I have a thick waist.... but I have a huge rib cage that takes up most of my torso, then very little waist. And I have little short legs... I fit 28" trouser legs but probably in reality more like 27" but I don't think anyone makes trousers that short. And most of the time I have to get regular leg size and wear turn-ups... I'm the queen of turn-ups lol. I also hear you re solid arms and legs, shoulders, etc but shame about the midsection!!!

neandermagnon

Dot Jones stands at 6'3" (or 6'4", depending on who you believe) and is an armwrestling champion and was at one point a shotput athlete. Oh, and let's not forget the Olympic weightlifter Holley Mangold, who is 5'8".

No shortage of muscular tall women out there, once you start looking for them.

6'3" that's tall! She didn't look that tall on Glee I would have guessed around 5'10" maybe... but TV can be deceptive and I wasn't paying that much attention to Glee anyway.

I saw this record breaker type challenge thing on you tube, with this woman who's a champion powerlifter (I think in the open weight category) and the challenge was basically how many fridges she could throw across the room in the time. It might have been some other kitchen appliance. But it was very impressive to watch, especially as the lifting and handling instructions for things like that are that are that you must have 2 people carry them. So she was not just carrying them alone, she was picking them up and throwing them across a room.... that's amazingly strong!

neandermagnon

I love Dot Jones. I'm not a fan of Glee, but I was familiar with her comedy from before that.

is there anything of her other stuff on you tube? I'm not a fan of Glee either....

bumblebums

Dot Jones stands at 6'3" (or 6'4", depending on who you believe) and is an armwrestling champion and was at one point a shotput athlete. Oh, and let's not forget the Olympic weightlifter Holley Mangold, who is 5'8".

No shortage of muscular tall women out there, once you start looking for them.

6'3" that's tall! She didn't look that tall on Glee I would have guessed around 5'10" maybe... but TV can be deceptive and I wasn't paying that much attention to Glee anyway.

I think it's because she is (a) muscular and (b) surrounded by guys cast to play football players (American football, of course), who tend to be refrigerator-sized.

jaxbeck

Actually I'm 6'1 and when I was at my most fittest, 5 years ago, I was not lacking in the muscles

Matiara

I am 5'9" and I am built like Xena. Lucy Lawless is 5'9" too, by the way. Gina Carano is 5'8".

Go here and pay attention to the heights of most hurdlers and jumpers:

http://www.usatf.org/Athlete-Bios.aspx/

They are not short. And they are muscular looking.

I think something that happens to tall girls is that they fall for the supermodel dream, regardless of what their body type actually is. If you are tall already, the only way to deal with your insecurities if you want to occupy less space is by dieting down to a hopefully slender look. But tall girls can be naturally muscular, and they can have a relatively easy time putting muscle on (and a hard time keeping it off, making the aspiring models especially miserable).

I think that applies for large framed women of any height. If you're short, you're supposed to be built like a pixie with a tiny little frame and weigh about 100lb. If you're tall, you're supposed to be built like a supermodel, with long, slim legs and a tiny little frame and you're allowed to weigh a bit more for being taller, but not that much more.... in other words, society expects women to have a tiny frame and be slender and not take up much space, and also to be delicate, weak, etc. ... whether you're tall or short, if you have a large frame, you're not built like how many people in our culture think women should be... my reaction to it is more like: what the heck's wrong with women having a large frame and being muscular?... and for that matter, what the heck kind of culture doesn't want women to be strong (whatever their body type)? But some women deal with it by trying to diet down to be an entirely different body type, which is doomed to failure because you can't shrink your ribs, shoulders or pelvis.

I've also noticed magazines airbrush the torsos of medium-large framed celebrities in such a way that they're effectively making their shoulders, rib cage and pelvis narrower, so they look smaller framed... that's not the same as airbrushing out rolls of fat or airbrushing someone to look like they would at a smaller body fat percentage.... they're airbrushing them from one body type that's seen as undesirable to another that's seen as desirable, and totally reinforced the idea that women are not supposed to be large framed. And when women say things like "if I gain muscle I look stocky " or "if I gain muscle I look like an amazon " then that's because society made them hate their body type. Which is really sad.

I agree with your sentiment, but having experienced it from the other side (tall and small framed), we get crap about our body type too. It may be presented as the ideal by the media or what not, but in real life, I been getting dirty looks from other women and comments like "do you eat?" since I hit my full adult height at 16. Bring up, say, bikini models on the general board here, even models who are not unhealthily thin, and you get comments like "stick figure", "anorexic", "weak", etc. As someone who is tall, long limbed, and will be quite slender when I lose my excess body fat, comments like that are hurtful. I don't understand the need to body shame any body type.

On a lighter note, I'm a lot stronger than I look due to my fitness regimen and it leads to some funny moments. Whenever I'm out and about and I lift something heavier than a bag of sugar, there will be a man rushing over to help me only to look at me like an alien when I say I don't need help or the object isn't heavy to me. The other day, I picked up the 42 pound bag of cat litter (one handed) from my cart to put in my vehicle and the attendant looked at me, looked at the bag, and looked back at me like, "How in the world...?" My little 10 inch biceps may not look like they can lift anything heavier than an empty paper bag, but looks can be deceiving.

Fithealthyforlife

I am 5'9" and I am built like Xena. Lucy Lawless is 5'9" too, by the way. Gina Carano is 5'8".

Go here and pay attention to the heights of most hurdlers and jumpers:

http://www.usatf.org/Athlete-Bios.aspx/

They are not short. And they are muscular looking.

I think something that happens to tall girls is that they fall for the supermodel dream, regardless of what their body type actually is. If you are tall already, the only way to deal with your insecurities if you want to occupy less space is by dieting down to a hopefully slender look. But tall girls can be naturally muscular, and they can have a relatively easy time putting muscle on (and a hard time keeping it off, making the aspiring models especially miserable).

I think that applies for large framed women of any height. If you're short, you're supposed to be built like a pixie with a tiny little frame and weigh about 100lb. If you're tall, you're supposed to be built like a supermodel, with long, slim legs and a tiny little frame and you're allowed to weigh a bit more for being taller, but not that much more.... in other words, society expects women to have a tiny frame and be slender and not take up much space, and also to be delicate, weak, etc. ... whether you're tall or short, if you have a large frame, you're not built like how many people in our culture think women should be... my reaction to it is more like: what the heck's wrong with women having a large frame and being muscular?... and for that matter, what the heck kind of culture doesn't want women to be strong (whatever their body type)? But some women deal with it by trying to diet down to be an entirely different body type, which is doomed to failure because you can't shrink your ribs, shoulders or pelvis.

I've also noticed magazines airbrush the torsos of medium-large framed celebrities in such a way that they're effectively making their shoulders, rib cage and pelvis narrower, so they look smaller framed... that's not the same as airbrushing out rolls of fat or airbrushing someone to look like they would at a smaller body fat percentage.... they're airbrushing them from one body type that's seen as undesirable to another that's seen as desirable, and totally reinforced the idea that women are not supposed to be large framed. And when women say things like "if I gain muscle I look stocky " or "if I gain muscle I look like an amazon " then that's because society made them hate their body type. Which is really sad.

I agree with your sentiment, but having experienced it from the other side (tall and small framed), we get crap about our body type too. It may be presented as the ideal by the media or what not, but in real life, I been getting dirty looks from other women and comments like "do you eat?" since I hit my full adult height at 16. Bring up, say, bikini models on the general board here, even models who are not unhealthily thin, and you get comments like "stick figure", "anorexic", "weak", etc. As someone who is tall, long limbed, and will be quite slender when I lose my excess body fat, comments like that are hurtful. I don't understand the need to body shame any body type.

On a lighter note, I'm a lot stronger than I look due to my fitness regimen and it leads to some funny moments. Whenever I'm out and about and I lift something heavier than a bag of sugar, there will be a man rushing over to help me only to look at me like an alien when I say I don't need help or the object isn't heavy to me. The other day, I picked up the 42 pound bag of cat litter (one handed) from my cart to put in my vehicle and the attendant looked at me, looked at the bag, and looked back at me like, "How in the world...?" My little 10 inch biceps may not look like they can lift anything heavier than an empty paper bag, but looks can be deceiving.

That's so great! I love it when women either a.) embrace their bodies as they are, b.) work the change them...or better yet...c.) both embrace their current body AND work to change it. Also, another thing I've found is, it takes a LOT of weight and progressive resistance to build muscle. You'll be lifting 80-lb bags of stuff easily in no time if you keep up your attitude and workout plan (and have the diet to support strength/mass gains if that's what you want).

bumblebums

I am 5'9" and I am built like Xena. Lucy Lawless is 5'9" too, by the way. Gina Carano is 5'8".

Go here and pay attention to the heights of most hurdlers and jumpers:

http://www.usatf.org/Athlete-Bios.aspx/

They are not short. And they are muscular looking.

I think something that happens to tall girls is that they fall for the supermodel dream, regardless of what their body type actually is. If you are tall already, the only way to deal with your insecurities if you want to occupy less space is by dieting down to a hopefully slender look. But tall girls can be naturally muscular, and they can have a relatively easy time putting muscle on (and a hard time keeping it off, making the aspiring models especially miserable).

I think that applies for large framed women of any height. If you're short, you're supposed to be built like a pixie with a tiny little frame and weigh about 100lb. If you're tall, you're supposed to be built like a supermodel, with long, slim legs and a tiny little frame and you're allowed to weigh a bit more for being taller, but not that much more.... in other words, society expects women to have a tiny frame and be slender and not take up much space, and also to be delicate, weak, etc. ... whether you're tall or short, if you have a large frame, you're not built like how many people in our culture think women should be... my reaction to it is more like: what the heck's wrong with women having a large frame and being muscular?... and for that matter, what the heck kind of culture doesn't want women to be strong (whatever their body type)? But some women deal with it by trying to diet down to be an entirely different body type, which is doomed to failure because you can't shrink your ribs, shoulders or pelvis.

I've also noticed magazines airbrush the torsos of medium-large framed celebrities in such a way that they're effectively making their shoulders, rib cage and pelvis narrower, so they look smaller framed... that's not the same as airbrushing out rolls of fat or airbrushing someone to look like they would at a smaller body fat percentage.... they're airbrushing them from one body type that's seen as undesirable to another that's seen as desirable, and totally reinforced the idea that women are not supposed to be large framed. And when women say things like "if I gain muscle I look stocky " or "if I gain muscle I look like an amazon " then that's because society made them hate their body type. Which is really sad.

I agree with your sentiment, but having experienced it from the other side (tall and small framed), we get crap about our body type too. It may be presented as the ideal by the media or what not, but in real life, I been getting dirty looks from other women and comments like "do you eat?" since I hit my full adult height at 16. Bring up, say, bikini models on the general board here, even models who are not unhealthily thin, and you get comments like "stick figure", "anorexic", "weak", etc. As someone who is tall, long limbed, and will be quite slender when I lose my excess body fat, comments like that are hurtful. I don't understand the need to body shame any body type.

On a lighter note, I'm a lot stronger than I look due to my fitness regimen and it leads to some funny moments. Whenever I'm out and about and I lift something heavier than a bag of sugar, there will be a man rushing over to help me only to look at me like an alien when I say I don't need help or the object isn't heavy to me. The other day, I picked up the 42 pound bag of cat litter (one handed) from my cart to put in my vehicle and the attendant looked at me, looked at the bag, and looked back at me like, "How in the world...?" My little 10 inch biceps may not look like they can lift anything heavier than an empty paper bag, but looks can be deceiving.

^^^ it is possible to be strong and not be hyooge, and it is possible to be hyooge and weak. Your average high-rep, low-weight pumping bodybuilder would fall in the latter category. And if you look at female powerlifters, you'll see quite a few examples of the former.

To underscore your larger point, yes, most women will get crap for how they look at some point or another. We walk a rather fine edge as far as behavior and appearance goes. If you try to fit your looks into that range and they naturally fall somewhat outside of it, you are setting yourself up for unhappiness. Even if you fit squarely into the social "ideal", your looks are unlikely to last forever, so it is better not to define your self-worth entirely by your looks.