Swedish Mannequins Now In Normal Sizes!

Options
24567

Replies

  • mariposa224
    mariposa224 Posts: 1,269 Member
    Options
    I think it proves that "sizes" are rather arbitrary. someone posted about being a "size 4" and not being considered "normal" except that number is completely determined by a vanity marketing team.

    today's "size 4" is more like a classic size 8 or 10, even. so "normal" doesn't really apply to anyone because everything is shifting, always.

    But the "normal" size the OP was referring to of the mannequin is NOT a classic 8 or 10, it is a modern day 8 or 10. So in comparison to these "normal" size mannequins, I AM smaller. I just think the word normal isn't the best word choice.
    She also apologized. It would seem she made an error in the choice of her wording & we can't edit the subject line once posted. Cut her some slack...
  • firstsip
    firstsip Posts: 8,399 Member
    Options
    This is my favorite comment from that article, "Now all we see are stick figures like the Norman Rockwell paintings as being attractive not in Europe only in America."

    Note: Most of the comments on that article are already pretty disgusting--be forewarned.
  • mariposa224
    mariposa224 Posts: 1,269 Member
    Options
    I suppose from a marketing perspective it makes sense. But it's sad that overweight is now considered "normal", though I suppose they just mean average.

    The person in the article that was quoted as saying the heavier mannequin represented a healthy BMI was certainly wrong though.
    Wow... So you honestly believe that anyone wearing a size 8 or 10 is overweight???? And certainly in an unhealthy BMI????? Judgmental much? Suppose the woman is 5'10" and wears an 8 or a 10? Still think that? Over-generalization.... Wow...
  • sarah_jones3
    sarah_jones3 Posts: 59
    Options
    Guys I honestly didn't want to offend anyone I should have thought more about my wording, I simply wanted to share something I read and ask peoples thoughts,

    I really do apologies for upsetting anyone :( I feel like I have caused a lot of pain and trouble, which was never my intention.
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Options
    I think they look nice. I think it proves that the exact clothes size you wear does not determine how good you look. they look like they have between 25-30% body fat (based on comparisons with body fat percentage photos of real people, obviously the mannikins don't actually have any real fat) which is not obese. So any arguments against them on the basis of promoting unhealthy body composition are invalid. They do not look obese. Dress size does not determine whether you are obese or not. There are plenty of women with healthy body compositions at those dress sizes.

    I wouldn't agree with them promoting unhealthy body fat percentages, but people have different frame sizes and different amounts of muscle, and two people at the same body fat percentage will not necessarily be the same dress size.


    Also I totally disagree with all the body shaming (in the article, most of which I didn't even read) - people come in all shapes and sizes, and they all look great at a healthy body fat percentage.
  • DrMAvDPhD
    DrMAvDPhD Posts: 2,097 Member
    Options
    Mavd hope I didn't offend you, :cry: I didn't mean to, I am not sure what a size 4 is in the UK? smallest size I have seen here is 8 :ohwell:

    I am in two minds, not sure I like the new but I definitely don't like the current ones.

    Using terms like "normal" can be offensive, although I'm guessing you just meant "average". Just keep in mind that people are NORMALLY different sizes. My honest opinion is that it looks like the store has a variety of sized mannequins, which is more normal than a bunch of cloned 4s or cloned 14s would be!

    EDIT: Although what isn't normal to me is how perfect the bodies are of both the 4 and 14 mannequins. Wouldn't it be kind of cool if they did molds of real models for the mannequins?
  • Danger2OneSelf
    Danger2OneSelf Posts: 883 Member
    Options
    Does this mean the male mannequins will no longer have washboard abs? I've spent my whole life trying to figure out how they maintain such a solid physique, while living such a sedentary lifestyle? I guess I'll lose my envious attitude and quit sucker punching them while I shop for clothes
  • n2thenight24
    n2thenight24 Posts: 1,651 Member
    Options
    I just told my boyfriend about this, his response? "Why don't you guys just try the *kitten* on" Lol, a mans perspective.
  • IpuffyheartHeelsinthegym
    IpuffyheartHeelsinthegym Posts: 5,573 Member
    Options
    Guys I honestly didn't want to offend anyone I should have thought more about my wording, I simply wanted to share something I read and ask peoples thoughts,

    I really do apologies for upsetting anyone :( I feel like I have caused a lot of pain and trouble, which was never my intention.

    while I did originally find the title offensive, as it looks to be the making of body shaming, I do get that we are all human and make mistakes. Clearly it was not your intention to do that, so apology accepted. :bigsmile:
  • Danger2OneSelf
    Danger2OneSelf Posts: 883 Member
    Options
    I just told my boyfriend about this, his response? "Why don't you guys just try the *kitten* on" Lol, a mans perspective.

    Tell him only a genius can be so dumb
  • tcmay72
    tcmay72 Posts: 82 Member
    Options
    I will never forget my joy when seeing my first "my size" mannequin at forever 21 loved it
  • SCtolulu
    SCtolulu Posts: 154 Member
    Options
    Thanks for sharing. I think it's great. And I totally agree with neandermagnon. My smallest size occurred about 12 pounds higher than my lowest weight.
  • mariposa224
    mariposa224 Posts: 1,269 Member
    Options
    Does this mean the male mannequins will no longer have washboard abs? I've spent my whole life trying to figure out how they maintain such a solid physique, while living such a sedentary lifestyle? I guess I'll lose my envious attitude and quit sucker punching them while I shop for clothes
    This made me laugh. :laugh: Thanks! :wink:
  • SavvyCake
    SavvyCake Posts: 150 Member
    Options
    I'd be happy to just see a mannequin in any of my local stores that actually fit the clothes for sale. I've worked in clothing retail stores before, and it's just a fact that most of them are intended to wear XS (extra small) clothes, which was not the most-frequently purchased size at those stores. While I think it would be awesome to see mannequins that are a size Medium (halfway between the smallest and largest averages), what would really thrill me would be to see mannequins that just actually represent the sizes the store sells. It drives me crazy when I go into plus-sized stores and see their storefront mannequins all have on the store's smallest-sized garments FOLDED AND PINNED to fit tightly onto the mannequin. And I don't just mean pinned in order to look smooth and sleek, I mean pinned in order to take off a couple sizes. You sell plus-sized clothes, store! We expect to see plus-size when we go in there!
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    I suppose from a marketing perspective it makes sense. But it's sad that overweight is now considered "normal", though I suppose they just mean average.

    The person in the article that was quoted as saying the heavier mannequin represented a healthy BMI was certainly wrong though.
    Wow... So you honestly believe that anyone wearing a size 8 or 10 is overweight???? And certainly in an unhealthy BMI????? Judgmental much? Suppose the woman is 5'10" and wears an 8 or a 10? Still think that? Over-generalization.... Wow...

    Um, first of all. Calm down! It is not a woman, it's a mannequin. And one without clothing.

    Even if she had little muscle, a woman that size would have a BMI > 25. If she had any muscle under the fat, she would weigh even more giving her a higher BMI.
  • jcmartin0313
    jcmartin0313 Posts: 574 Member
    Options
    The problem with this entire discussion is that size is not a reliable indicator of health. Our society has co-opted size and health into a package which is used to market almost anything. The real danger is that we come to accept "bigger" without the qualification of healthier. It is most certainly possible for someone who is a size 8 or 10 to be just as healthy as someone who is a size 2. It is also just as possible for someone who is a size 2 to be in poor health and someone who is a size 12 to be in good health. Retailers, however, need something to display clothes on and using an average size of 6-8 is probably not a terrible idea.
  • wikitbikit
    wikitbikit Posts: 518 Member
    Options
    It drives me crazy when I go into plus-sized stores and see their storefront mannequins all have on the store's smallest-sized garments FOLDED AND PINNED to fit tightly onto the mannequin. And I don't just mean pinned in order to look smooth and sleek, I mean pinned in order to take off a couple sizes. You sell plus-sized clothes, store! We expect to see plus-size when we go in there!
    On one hand I totally agree with you, but then on the other, more cynical hand... You know how they (usually) already charge us more to buy plus size? Imagine if they had to get special mannequins!
  • toaster6
    toaster6 Posts: 703 Member
    Options
    They still aren't built like average people though are they? No lumps, no bumps, everything is proportional. So you still aren't seeing what those clothes would look like on "normal" bodies.
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Options
    I suppose from a marketing perspective it makes sense. But it's sad that overweight is now considered "normal", though I suppose they just mean average.

    The person in the article that was quoted as saying the heavier mannequin represented a healthy BMI was certainly wrong though.
    Wow... So you honestly believe that anyone wearing a size 8 or 10 is overweight???? And certainly in an unhealthy BMI????? Judgmental much? Suppose the woman is 5'10" and wears an 8 or a 10? Still think that? Over-generalization.... Wow...

    Um, first of all. Calm down! It is not a woman, it's a mannequin. And one without clothing.

    Even if she had little muscle, a woman that size would have a BMI > 25. If she had any muscle under the fat, she would weigh even more giving her a higher BMI.

    someone can have a BMI above 25 while their body fat percentage is in the healthy range. Being heavier because you have more muscle does not make you less healthy than someone with the same body fat percentage and less muscle.

    BMI is a pile of poo, to put it bluntly. It's just the relationship between weight and height... body fat percentage tells you how much fat you are carrying. It doesn't matter what your BMI is, if your body fat percentage is in the healthy range, then you're not overfat and don't need to lose fat unless you want to for aesthetic reasons.
  • sakuragreenlily
    sakuragreenlily Posts: 334 Member
    Options
    They still aren't built like average people though are they? No lumps, no bumps, everything is proportional. So you still aren't seeing what those clothes would look like on "normal" bodies.

    So true... but what struck me is that these mannequins are a lot more "realistic" than the ones I usually see in stores... I mean... They have heads with faces and they're not stark white O.O... Didn't know they made for-realsies mannequines like this

Categories