Is it even possible for ANYONE to be a size 0/1?
Replies
-
Some people can definitely be a size 0. I have never, nor will I ever be a size 0. I have a huge bone structure and even at my skinniest, I was a size 5. I would have to be considered under-weight to fit into a size 0 (for my body type)0
-
Sorry but can we stop referencing a size 0 as a teenager's size/body? I'm a size 0 and a 31 year old woman. I'm not starving, I'm not sick, and I'm not killing myself to maintain it. It's the frame I was born with and the body I've built through hard work. When I was a teenager I was a size 13 to 16. Not everyone has to be a size 0, but the not-so-subtle shade being thrown at the size is a bit much. I'm not targeting any poster in particular but I've noticed overall there seems to be an aura of vitriol regarding the size. It's a tad offputting.
I just re-read the thread to see if I missed something, but as far as I can see, nobody disparaged size 0 or implied it was for teens only.
I think you might be reading into people's comments too much, because I honestly don't see anything I'd call hostile.
Edited to add: If my posts seemed to you or anyone as if I were implying only a skeleton would fit into a size 0, that isn't at all what I was talking about. I was referencing my own bone structure, which is tall and broad. I apologize if I wasn't clear and you felt like I was taking a swipe at you or anyone else.0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Sorry but can we stop referencing a size 0 as a teenager's size/body? I'm a size 0 and a 31 year old woman. I'm not starving, I'm not sick, and I'm not killing myself to maintain it. It's the frame I was born with and the body I've built through hard work. When I was a teenager I was a size 13 to 16. Not everyone has to be a size 0, but the not-so-subtle shade being thrown at the size is a bit much. I'm not targeting any poster in particular but I've noticed overall there seems to be an aura of vitriol regarding the size. It's a tad offputting.
I just re-read the thread to see if I missed something, but as far as I can see, nobody disparaged size 0 or implied it was for teens only.
I think you might be reading into people's comments too much, because I honestly don't see anything I'd call hostile.
Edited to add: If my posts seemed to you or anyone as if I were implying only a skeleton would fit into a size 0, that isn't at all what I was talking about. I was referencing my own bone structure, which is tall and broad. I apologize if I wasn't clear and you felt like I was taking a swipe at you or anyone else.
Not you at all. Many posters in this thread have been fine. Just a few references to being a teen's body, people aspiring to weird things due to size 0, and someone saying they don't like the size 0 "look" are a few that come to mind. If I said I didn't like the size 14 "look", more than half of the women in America would want my head on a stick. There were a few other threads where the size was mentioned in such a way.
I absolutely understand part of the disdain due to societal standards but I just wanted to throw it out there because sometimes on this board, and in real life, I get subtly and not-so-subtly reminded that my size makes people think I starve or I'm less of a woman because I have no "shape" when I do or that it's not a "woman's shape" because no woman that has had kids can be a size 0 which is not only untrue but falsely ties being a mother to being a woman. Size 0 is a stupid as hell size (thanks America!) but is still a size.
One size doesn't fit all thankfully and that's definitely what the takeaway of this thread is about overall.2 -
I think the takeaway from this thread is that yes real people do wear size 0 and clothing size is just a stupid number that doesn't even help you find clothes that fit since nothing is standardized. It does not mean anything about you as a person.
Size 0 is smaller than size 16. A person who wears either size may be a teenager, a mom or a senior citizen.
My teenager wears a size 0. A lot of teenagers her age do not wear that size. I'm happy the size is available. She has been very slim all her life. We have constantly had to find adjustable waist pants or sew waistbands. Size 0 fits her well now with no adjustments. It is wonderful to just buy her regular pants. If a slim 30 year old is the same clothing size as a slim 16 year old I don't see the insult to her womanhood.2 -
I think it really depends on height. It's a lot easier for 5ft woman to fit a size 0 than a 6ft woman. I'm 5'9 and I would have to weigh about 110lbs to be that size. Plus it wouldn't look good. I have a tiny Kelly Ripa'esque friend who is 00 and looks great but I would look skeletal of I tried to wear the same size.1
-
When I was 18 I weighed 105 lbs at 5'10". This was normal for me. I did not diet. I ate like a horse.
My clothing size? 5 to 8. Even as underweight as I was I still had the bone structure around my hips that made this my size.
I'm 41 now. I weigh 141. I've lost 30 lbs and I'm at the end of it. My size is 8 to 10. I carry more weight in my arms, legs, breasts and torso. I look much healthier. I would never want to return to my high school weight.
As a seamstress, I've sewn for thin size 14s and chubby size 4s. The clothing size means nothing when it comes to how one carries their flesh.1 -
I think it would be painful and dangerous for me to try. I think I'm a UK size 8-10 at the moment. If you're in the US that's a 6-8. A US 0 is UK size 2, and I didn't even know they made clothes in that size. Size 6 was always the smallest you could get, I used to shop in the children's department when I was smaller though in my early 20s, but was probably a size 6-8 (4-6 in US)0
-
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Given that I was a size 6 when I was 3 lbs from the bottom of my healthy BMI range (5'9" 128lb), I think I can confidently say that even centuries after I'm dead, when there is nothing left but a pile of old dry bones, said bones will still not fit into a size 0.
On the other hand, by then with vanity sizing, a 0 may well fit a family of 4 and their cat, so I guess I should never say never.
Ha!!0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Given that I was a size 6 when I was 3 lbs from the bottom of my healthy BMI range (5'9" 128lb), I think I can confidently say that even centuries after I'm dead, when there is nothing left but a pile of old dry bones, said bones will still not fit into a size 0.
On the other hand, by then with vanity sizing, a 0 may well fit a family of 4 and their cat, so I guess I should never say never.
Exactly. I'm a good ten pounds from the bottom of my "healthy" weight per BMI, not especially petite at 5'4", and I'm a 0 or even 00 in a lot of mall brands because the vanity sizing is so out of control. Some brands, like Old Navy, often swim on me even in the smallest size.
Meanwhile, some other (usually designer or euro) brands I'm a 4 or 6 and I can comfortably wear my mom's size 8s from the 1980s and my own 6s from high school, so I try not to take clothing size as an indicator of anything.
On the plus side, my height and weight makes me fit perfectly into kids' sizes 12-16 depending on brand, so I'm saving a ton of money that way! If US brands keep up the ever-expanding clothing I guess I'll just have to get used to wearing pants with puppies on them to work
1 -
Sorry but can we stop referencing a size 0 as a teenager's size/body? I'm a size 0 and a 31 year old woman. I'm not starving, I'm not sick, and I'm not killing myself to maintain it. It's the frame I was born with and the body I've built through hard work. When I was a teenager I was a size 13 to 16. Not everyone has to be a size 0, but the not-so-subtle shade being thrown at the size is a bit much. I'm not targeting any poster in particular but I've noticed overall there seems to be an aura of vitriol regarding the size. It's a tad offputting.
Re talking about teens as size 0. The OP asked if everybody could be a size 0. My answer about my 11 year old likely never being a size 0 in adulthood was in response to this question. No. Everybody cannot be a size 0. Frame and height etc needs to be taken into account. No shaming size 0's here. I was very comfortable and healthy at 115 pounds and 5' 7 throughout my 20s and early 30s. If I had lived in the US I could have very well been a size 0. But that wasn't what the OP asked about.0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Given that I was a size 6 when I was 3 lbs from the bottom of my healthy BMI range (5'9" 128lb), I think I can confidently say that even centuries after I'm dead, when there is nothing left but a pile of old dry bones, said bones will still not fit into a size 0.
On the other hand, by then with vanity sizing, a 0 may well fit a family of 4 and their cat, so I guess I should never say never.
Exactly. I'm a good ten pounds from the bottom of my "healthy" weight per BMI, not especially petite at 5'4", and I'm a 0 or even 00 in a lot of mall brands because the vanity sizing is so out of control. Some brands, like Old Navy, often swim on me even in the smallest size.
Meanwhile, some other (usually designer or euro) brands I'm a 4 or 6 and I can comfortably wear my mom's size 8s from the 1980s and my own 6s from high school, so I try not to take clothing size as an indicator of anything.
On the plus side, my height and weight makes me fit perfectly into kids' sizes 12-16 depending on brand, so I'm saving a ton of money that way! If US brands keep up the ever-expanding clothing I guess I'll just have to get used to wearing pants with puppies on them to workMakePeasNotWar wrote: »Given that I was a size 6 when I was 3 lbs from the bottom of my healthy BMI range (5'9" 128lb), I think I can confidently say that even centuries after I'm dead, when there is nothing left but a pile of old dry bones, said bones will still not fit into a size 0.
On the other hand, by then with vanity sizing, a 0 may well fit a family of 4 and their cat, so I guess I should never say never.
Exactly. I'm a good ten pounds from the bottom of my "healthy" weight per BMI, not especially petite at 5'4", and I'm a 0 or even 00 in a lot of mall brands because the vanity sizing is so out of control. Some brands, like Old Navy, often swim on me even in the smallest size.
Meanwhile, some other (usually designer or euro) brands I'm a 4 or 6 and I can comfortably wear my mom's size 8s from the 1980s and my own 6s from high school, so I try not to take clothing size as an indicator of anything.
On the plus side, my height and weight makes me fit perfectly into kids' sizes 12-16 depending on brand, so I'm saving a ton of money that way! If US brands keep up the ever-expanding clothing I guess I'll just have to get used to wearing pants with puppies on them to work
Ahahaha! Pants with puppies! That made me chuckle.
Sounds like we're alike! I also found old navy notorious for crazy vanity sizing! I'm usually a 0 but cannot shop at old navy due to their crazy vanity sizing!
On the other hand, I'd totally wear puppy jeans. If they were kittens, even better!0 -
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »Sorry but can we stop referencing a size 0 as a teenager's size/body? I'm a size 0 and a 31 year old woman. I'm not starving, I'm not sick, and I'm not killing myself to maintain it. It's the frame I was born with and the body I've built through hard work. When I was a teenager I was a size 13 to 16. Not everyone has to be a size 0, but the not-so-subtle shade being thrown at the size is a bit much. I'm not targeting any poster in particular but I've noticed overall there seems to be an aura of vitriol regarding the size. It's a tad offputting.
I just re-read the thread to see if I missed something, but as far as I can see, nobody disparaged size 0 or implied it was for teens only.
I think you might be reading into people's comments too much, because I honestly don't see anything I'd call hostile.
Edited to add: If my posts seemed to you or anyone as if I were implying only a skeleton would fit into a size 0, that isn't at all what I was talking about. I was referencing my own bone structure, which is tall and broad. I apologize if I wasn't clear and you felt like I was taking a swipe at you or anyone else.
Not you at all. Many posters in this thread have been fine. Just a few references to being a teen's body, people aspiring to weird things due to size 0, and someone saying they don't like the size 0 "look" are a few that come to mind. If I said I didn't like the size 14 "look", more than half of the women in America would want my head on a stick. There were a few other threads where the size was mentioned in such a way.
I absolutely understand part of the disdain due to societal standards but I just wanted to throw it out there because sometimes on this board, and in real life, I get subtly and not-so-subtly reminded that my size makes people think I starve or I'm less of a woman because I have no "shape" when I do or that it's not a "woman's shape" because no woman that has had kids can be a size 0 which is not only untrue but falsely ties being a mother to being a woman. Size 0 is a stupid as hell size (thanks America!) but is still a size.
One size doesn't fit all thankfully and that's definitely what the takeaway of this thread is about overall.
I missed the "size 0 look" comment before I posted, and yeah, that's a bit much. I also get what you mean about the whole "real women have curves" mentality - I've actually laid into a couple of people who have posted that kind of body shaming crap on MFP and FB.
I think people are mostly trying to explain to the OP why they personally couldn't fit a size 0, and if some of the posts put a bit too fine a point on the fact that not everyone wants to be that small, it could be a reaction to the posters who implied "big boned" was an excuse, and that most people could fit into a 0 if they really tried, which I admit ticked me off a bit. I'm sure I'm reading too much into them, but I think oversensitivity is a natural product of a society where women's bodies are constantly and publicly judged as if anybody has a right to tell us how we should look.5 -
yes but the taller you are the lower a bmi you'd have to have to fit into it. there is such a thing as a small build.0
-
refuseresist wrote: »I think it would be painful and dangerous for me to try. I think I'm a UK size 8-10 at the moment. If you're in the US that's a 6-8. A US 0 is UK size 2, and I didn't even know they made clothes in that size. Size 6 was always the smallest you could get, I used to shop in the children's department when I was smaller though in my early 20s, but was probably a size 6-8 (4-6 in US)
They're not equivalent though . I'm a size 4 in the US but there is no way I can squeeze into a UK size 8. I tried last time I was over. They cut the clothes much smaller. (FYI a uk size 8-10 is a US 4-6, not 6-8 and in your 20's you were size 2-4 US size)0 -
My wife has been a 00 to a 1 forever. The only time that she was bigger than that was when she was pregnant with our kids. 3 months after each kid was born, she was right back to her pre-pregnant weight. I'd be happy to get back to my pre-marriage weight, which is 60 lbs away.0
-
It's much safer to judge yourself by body composition than by your clothing size, your weight, or your measurements. If your body fat percentage is healthy, you don't need to lose weight. Not everyone was meant to be a size 0. Not everyone who is a size 12 is overweight.
3 -
shadow2soul wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »The only clothes that come in a size 0 here in Aus are babies clothes.
How anyone can be a size nothing totally confounds me! I would love to know why and who came up with ridiculous concept..
@Christine_72 - I might be mistaken, but I think our size 0 is the equivalent of Aus size 4. Measurement wise I think it's like a 24" waist. Our sizes are pretty messed up here, but they added it because of vanity sizing. We even have a 00.
CHICOS in the USA also carry odd sizing. I wear Chicos' pants 00 that are really a size 4 petite for other stores. They are still wide for my waist but they fit OK around my hips, maybe a little bit to lose, and the capris sit just above my ankles. I tried Chico's 00 petite and they are too small around the hips. So we just need to forget about sizing because every store and designer has its own crewed up idea of how a woman body is or should be.
And by the way, I was a size 0 or 1 depending on the style when I was a young person. Not anymore.0 -
Vanity sizing is out of control, according to where I purchase clothes, I fit US 10 to US 16. I go by what fits, and not let labels drive me bonkers. I know plenty others who state they wear a 8 and will purchase an 8 no matter. Some fit, some are loose and others are tight, but being in a 8 regardless is a badge of honor. No, thank you.
IMHO too tight clothes look just as bad as too large clothes.2 -
FeedMeFish wrote: »For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34.
Man, I had to get out a tape measure to visualize that. My thigh is bigger around than your waist. I could almost put my hands around your waist and have my fingers and thumbs touch!
1 -
FeedMeFish wrote: »For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.
I am a 00/0 in most things - I am 5'1 and my measurements are 34-23-34 so sounds about right!0 -
kaylasaurus wrote: »FeedMeFish wrote: »For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.
I am a 00/0 in most things - I am 5'1 and my measurements are 34-23-34 so sounds about right!
That's about where I sit as well (5'4", 118 lbs), about 33-23-34. My ribcage is narrow, though, so I wear like a 28F bra and am visually pretty top-heavy although my hips are actually bigger than my bust when I measure.
It makes work clothing a challenge, as I can't normally get stuff from places like Old Navy/BR/Gap, Loft, and J Crew (and in department store type brands like Tahari and Calvin Klein) to fit right, but I usually do just fine at places like Zara or H&M or at shops for teenage girls.
And I've seen vintage clothing charts that make me anywhere from an 8 to a 12 in pre-1980s clothing. Also, I don't look especially slim - I don't have a thigh gap unless I tilt my hips the right way, I'm busty, my arms are pretty big for my size, etc etc. I am DEFINITELY not what people think of when they think "size 0", I can guarantee it, but clothing is really just that big now.1 -
I think it depends on a few things.
I was smaller than a zero (well there weren't size 0 back then, but smaller than a "1") when I was in late teens/early 20's because I always either didn't have enough to eat (poor) or wasn't inclined to eat (disordered). That was 98lb on my (then) 5'8" frame (I grew one inch when I achieved a healthy body mass). Still probably 26-27 inch waist, slim hips, probably 33" because I had not much butt, skinny legs, I don't have big boobs, and had thin arms.
I was also a 0 in my early 40s when I dropped a little too much weight but this was a much bigger size by then.
Also anyone who is shorter and slim would be smaller around, in inches, than someone tall and slim.
Clothing wise, I have historically had much more trouble with needing tall clothes than anything else. Tall Small is hard to find.
So yes, of course, people are different sizes, and some people when slim are smaller because they are built narrow, frame-wise, and others are built wider.
1 -
FeedMeFish wrote: »For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.
See, I'm your size and weight but wwould never get into anything size 0. Pants is probably M if it's a loose fit, top probably M as well. I do have a terrible tigh gap though, but because I have a wide frame. We're all different.
0 -
i'm 5' 3", and when i was 14 through 17 and the same height, i ranged from a size 0 to a size 4, depending on the outfit and i had a 19" waist. omg - i just realized my waist is a little over double what it was then!0
-
MakePeasNotWar wrote: »
I'm 5'9" too, and I was a size 6 at 128. Currently I'm 145 (21.4 BMI) and I can't get my size 8 shorts over my hips.
I was only half joking earlier about my skeleton not fitting into a 0.
A lot of it has to do with body type, don't you think? I'm super proportionate, so I think that's why I fit into smaller sizes. I think.
0 -
FeedMeFish wrote: »For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.
OK I'm in.
Size 0 most of the time with an occasional size 4. Is there a size 2?
As a 14 yo in the UK I was 5', 7 1/2 stone (105lbs), and measurements were 34b, 27w, 34h. I took a 34b bra, wore 27w,27leg Levi's and a size 10 in Marks and Spencer clothes.
Roll on 49 years (62yo) and I am 5'1 (grew an inch somewhere between 20 and 38) maintain between 100-105lbs, and my measurements now are 33b, 26w, 34h. I take a 32d bra, size 0 in a regular Jean, 4 in a skinny jean, and most UK Marks and Spencer size 8 clothing is loose on me, including the 4 pr of jeans I bought 3year ago at at the same weight.
Most of my dresses are xsmall or 0 as are tops and dress pants. Having a thicker waist means if high waisted pants or stiff fitted dresses ever come back in fashion I will have to go up a size.
Except for the 30lbs weight gain blip, I have weighted between 98-112 (7-8st) all of my adult life but this is the first time I have worn a 0 or had size 8 UK too big.
Cheers, h.
(Profile pic is 98lbs)0 -
I am a size 00. I've found as vanity sizing increases, 0 has gotten bigger. I've been a 00 for years.0
-
RosieRose7673 wrote: »macgurlnet wrote: »robs_ready wrote: »This is a genuine question, is size 0 even healthy?
I'm 5' tall and ~113 pounds and a size 0 is just about right for me - I've got pretty narrow hips.
Also, a size 0 now isn't the same as a size 0 from a while back. I have a pair of shorts my aunt gave me (these shorts are probably 20+ years old now) and they're labeled as a size 8, but are about as snug as the 0's I've picked up at Target recently.
A size 0 isn't possible for everyone, but there's plenty of folks that can fit into that size and be a healthy weight also.
~Lyssa
Exactly. I'm 5'3" and 109 pounds. I'm not a size 0 at Target anymore, I'm a 00. The vanity sizing in the US, especially at Target, is out of control. In equivalent sizing I'd be between a UK 4 and 6.
Vanity sizing is INSANE! I'm a size 0 in some brands but others are way to big for me in general. I'm 5'4.5 and 130. I do have very narrow hips and broad shoulders but still!
If it gets worse, they'll have to make 000 and 0000. I wouldn't be surprised if a 000 existed!
I KNOW! I hate the vanity sizing, it's ridiculous. I had a bunch of 00 jeans from like 5 years ago, when I went to buy new jeans from the SAME store, 00 was too big. There was a HUGE difference in the size. 00 now is like size 2 back then. Now many stores make 000's.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »The only clothes that come in a size 0 here in Aus are babies clothes.
How anyone can be a size nothing totally confounds me! I would love to know why and who came up with ridiculous concept..
US (and Canadian) sizes changed from UK and Aussie sizes -- so a 2 is about the same as an AU 8 and a 0 is a 6.0 -
Christine_72 wrote: »The only clothes that come in a size 0 here in Aus are babies clothes.
How anyone can be a size nothing totally confounds me! I would love to know why and who came up with ridiculous concept..
US (and Canadian) sizes changed from UK and Aussie sizes -- so a 2 is about the same as an AU 8 and a 0 is a 6.
Yeah I know the conversion. I just think it's stupid to have a clothing size say zero, it honestly make not one iota of sense to me, and is one of the few things that make me see red
Does it make women happy to say "look I'm sooooo skinny that I can fit into a size nothing" ?? This is the only reason I can come up with to invent a size 00
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions