5'6 women- at what weight did you think you looked best?



  • Anya_000
    Anya_000 Posts: 718 Member
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,273 Member
  • whitpauly
    whitpauly Posts: 1,483 Member
    kgeyser wrote: »
    Right around 5'6"-5'7", and probably about 137-140 is my happy place. Because of how my body fat distributes, if I go any lower than 137, pretty much every bone on the top half of my body is clearly visible and people start asking if I am sick. But of course, the fat on the hips and thighs still hangs on. :|

    This is me,,5'6 136 and I had a customer ask if I was sick,I still have chubs on the thighs and belly tho so I'm going for around 133,that was a good place for me,was 125 a few years ago and I looked gross!
  • Anna022119
    Anna022119 Posts: 537 Member
    5'6 here, age 47. Currently 115 lbs and disliking my arms and rear end. Working towards 126 lbs as I've been there before and that looks good on me. I'm 'blessed' with a larger than average chest but a small frame otherwise.
  • spiriteagle99
    spiriteagle99 Posts: 3,380 Member
    Probably around 130. I'm currently 123, which is a good weight for running, but I'm very bony on top (you can count all my ribs). When I was young, my best weight was 120 and I wasn't bony at all. Gravity does bad things as you get older. All my fat (and I still have some) slid down to my thighs.
  • gritsinct
    gritsinct Posts: 14 Member
    I have never been a low weight, but my mom is 5'6 and I think she looks phenomenal at 160. That's my goal. I don't think I would like my look if I get any thinner than that and would definitely want to gain.

    160 is overweight though

    I know, by less than 1 BMI point. I just like that look. Going lower just because BMI says so is not something I'm willing to do unless I have to. Not only will I be going for a look I don't like for myself, but I would also have to eat less to sustain it. To be perfectly honest, I could stop at a weight that's higher than that if I feel I'm where I want to be, as long as it's out of the obese range.

    BMI also doesn't take into account muscle mass. Many phenomenal looking (and very fit) lifters are obese by BMI standards. That should not be the only metric used. :smile:

  • Partylikelizkeeler
    Partylikelizkeeler Posts: 43 Member
    I've always felt best around 130-134, but I also feel like my body doesn't want to get lower in weight than there either. Currently 149 and working my way back down.
  • jillstreett
    jillstreett Posts: 69 Member
    My smallest was in college when I was crazy active and I have a doctor's appointment record that said I was 139. I think I remember a bathroom scale weight roughly in that same time frame reading 133. I was tiny and don't know that I need to be "tiny" again and I am currently 146. I'd like to lose down to the 130's to start a little recomp knowing that the muscle will add weight. I basically never want to be over 150 again.
  • SCoil123
    SCoil123 Posts: 2,108 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    It's interesting how all the higher weights got wood. Is it now a taboo to aim for a look that's different from the popular ideal? Don't get me wrong, I'm not really that bothered by woos, I just thought it was an interesting observation.

    Don't forget... Half the people don't know what woo means, and the other half are wrong.

    There are a lot of people who believe healthy BMI range should be a universal goal, in my experience on these forums. While I do agree it is a good guide for most it isn't universal and we should each work with our doctors to set personal health goals.

    For me (I'm 5'8" female almost 40 and in early perimenopause) my doctor gave me a weight range of 145-165. The BMI range for my height is 125-163 so they are a little different. I think my doctor knows my body better so I use that one and aim for 150-160. I also work out 5-6 days a week and that includes 2-3 heavy lifting sessions, plus have a broad frame structure. These things make a different in how people look at certain weights.

    If your doctor is happy with your goal and you feel good there it shouldn't matter what anyone else thinks.

  • yweight2020
    yweight2020 Posts: 591 Member
    mitch16 wrote: »
    sardelsa wrote: »
    I am just under 5'7, I think I look best now, I am around 133lbs. But I have been this weight many times without the muscle base and body composition I have now, so to me weight alone is irrelevant.

    I'm 5'7" and this is where I like to be, too--I feel strong enough to workout, light enough to run easily, my clothes fit well, maintaining here isn't too bad, and I don't mind how I look in photographs. I do hear from my mom that I'm "too skinny" though.

    165 lb I like to be thick in all the right places and I feel stronger, I looked good at 140 lbs but it's to small for my liking.
  • FarmerCarla
    FarmerCarla Posts: 601 Member
    edited October 2018
    When I was young, and 5'6", I looked best at around 125. Now that I'm old and an inch shorter, I look best at around 135-140. That's what I'm working to get back to. Older women seem to look healthier with a little more weight. To keep my weight "in context" ;), I do have a large bone structure (and man-size hands and feet to prove it).
  • lorrpb
    lorrpb Posts: 11,465 Member
    jjpptt2 wrote: »
    Just for context... even at the same height and weight, people can look very different. People carry their weight differently, have different body composition, etc.

    ^^ THIS. Age also matters. A question like this is just a set up for feeling horrible about yourself.
    Plus you don't even know if people are accurate about the numbers they are throwing out.
    Comparison is the thief of joy. That's what a random "curiosity" survey is, and there are lots of them on here!