Weight and Clothing Size
zylkm4
Posts: 18 Member
I hope it is ok to ask this as it really bothers me. I am a female weighing between 110-113 lbs at 5' 5.5". I have been this weight range for about five years, and before that was very underweight for six years.
I wear a size 4 in pants and jeans. My body is very tiny towards the top, in chest and arm area, but I carry more weight in thighs, butt, low abdomen. I could wear a child's top and have almost no breasts. I have friends who weigh as much as 30 to 40 lbs more than I do who wear a size 2 or less in pants. Almost everyone who is my weight wears smaller size pants than I do.
I am moderately active with dance, ballet, cycling, lifting weights and calisthenics, hiking, canoeing etc. I workout about an hour and 20 minutes per day five days per week on average. I do however have an 8 hour a day desk job.
Why do I need a larger size pant than others who weigh a lot more than me? Is it due to body fat or is it bone structure? Though I am 47, I am also in surgical menopause since age 33, but even before that, when my normal weight was around 120 as an adult, I wore size 6-8. I was under 100 lbs before I could fit into a size 0. When I would lose more body fat, I would lose it everywhere and would look skeletal on top, so I am not sure that I could reduce fat in just lower area.
I am just curious if anyone else experiences this? Is it normal to vary so much in size of pants for people of the same weight?
I wear a size 4 in pants and jeans. My body is very tiny towards the top, in chest and arm area, but I carry more weight in thighs, butt, low abdomen. I could wear a child's top and have almost no breasts. I have friends who weigh as much as 30 to 40 lbs more than I do who wear a size 2 or less in pants. Almost everyone who is my weight wears smaller size pants than I do.
I am moderately active with dance, ballet, cycling, lifting weights and calisthenics, hiking, canoeing etc. I workout about an hour and 20 minutes per day five days per week on average. I do however have an 8 hour a day desk job.
Why do I need a larger size pant than others who weigh a lot more than me? Is it due to body fat or is it bone structure? Though I am 47, I am also in surgical menopause since age 33, but even before that, when my normal weight was around 120 as an adult, I wore size 6-8. I was under 100 lbs before I could fit into a size 0. When I would lose more body fat, I would lose it everywhere and would look skeletal on top, so I am not sure that I could reduce fat in just lower area.
I am just curious if anyone else experiences this? Is it normal to vary so much in size of pants for people of the same weight?
7
Replies
-
Comparison is the death of joy. What is pant size in the grand scheme of things? Your body shape is your body shape and you can’t change bone structure. You could tweak it with different types of workouts but it will always be uniquely your body and shaped like your body alone.20
-
I think it depends on your body shape. I am smaller on top than the bottom. But the sizes vary by designer/brand widely. I have clothes size 4 to 8 that I currently wear.4
-
Yes, it is normal.
Just because two people weigh the same on a scale doesn’t mean they carry the weight the same way. Your friend may be more (or less) muscular than you. Or you may just be genetically blessed to have larger legs and a smaller torso.3 -
Bodies come in different shapes.
My top size is no where near my pant size.
I'm an apple!5 -
Different bodies hold on to weight and size in different places. My hips and butt have always made shopping difficult, no matter what size I am! Even several sizes down from where I was a year ago I have to wear the same type of shape as I did then as I'm the same shape, just a smaller version of it.3
-
I've lost a lot of weight this year. My bust is now down to a size 6 / 8 AUD/UK, my hips are around a size 8/10 but my waist is still around a size 12. It's frustrating because it means I still don't quite fit into conventional sized clothing but our bodies are weird and inexplicable :P3
-
I'm not sure why you care if you are a teeny tiny size 4....
Everyone has differing body compositions, genetics mostly. Don't look to others, just be the best version of you9 -
moderately active with dance, ballet, cycling, lifting weights and calisthenics, hiking, canoeing etc.
This may well explain why your thighs are larger than some other people. It sounds like yours will be very strong and muscular. Much better than a smaller size but without the strength.
10 -
sytchequeen wrote: »moderately active with dance, ballet, cycling, lifting weights and calisthenics, hiking, canoeing etc.
This may well explain why your thighs are larger than some other people. It sounds like yours will be very strong and muscular. Much better than a smaller size but without the strength.
This was my immediate thought too. Add in genetics and one or both explain the answer.5 -
I'm straight up and down so my sizes are usually consistent.
I have a friend who's tiny on top - small shoulders, small chest, but wide hips and carries any extra weight there. Definitely different sizes top and bottom.
Another friend has a very large chest and tiny thin legs. Much smaller on the bottom than on top.
Different people. Different shapes. Don't focus on the number. It's just a number. It's got nothing to do with who you are or what you look like or your strength or you passion.5 -
Don't go by sizes of clothes - I'm 5'2" and weigh about 116 lbs - I have sizes in my closet - all that fit me well - from a 2 to a 10. Due to vanity sizing, the size on your clothes is meaningless right now. Clothes manufacturers realize you're more willing to buy a garment that is a lower size, so sizing is now really skewed. It could be body shape - I am very small on top, a bit bigger through my hips and belly (this is especially true since I've gone through menopause). Relax, look in the mirror, focus on the good.8
-
Don't go by sizes of clothes - I'm 5'2" and weigh about 116 lbs - I have sizes in my closet - all that fit me well - from a 2 to a 10. Due to vanity sizing, the size on your clothes is meaningless right now. Clothes manufacturers realize you're more willing to buy a garment that is a lower size, so sizing is now really skewed. It could be body shape - I am very small on top, a bit bigger through my hips and belly (this is especially true since I've gone through menopause). Relax, look in the mirror, focus on the good.
I read somewhere once (maybe here on MFP) that vanity sizing is not actually a thing. The explanation has always stuck with me. Apparently clothing manufacturers make a size 12 to fit the average sized woman. So, as the average size woman got larger, so did a size 12. Other sizes are cut larger or smaller than the size 12, accordingly. I guess that’s why they use an arbitrary number instead of measurements. But, it’s not a huge conspiracy to make us feel better or worse about ourselves.12 -
men have it sooo easy when it comes to clothes shopping - waist and length - yes, i know women have hips as well - but you would think it could be done...
did with shirts - collar size and sleeve length; add boob circumfrence and voila4 -
Don't go by sizes of clothes - I'm 5'2" and weigh about 116 lbs - I have sizes in my closet - all that fit me well - from a 2 to a 10. Due to vanity sizing, the size on your clothes is meaningless right now. Clothes manufacturers realize you're more willing to buy a garment that is a lower size, so sizing is now really skewed. It could be body shape - I am very small on top, a bit bigger through my hips and belly (this is especially true since I've gone through menopause). Relax, look in the mirror, focus on the good.
I read somewhere once (maybe here on MFP) that vanity sizing is not actually a thing. The explanation has always stuck with me. Apparently clothing manufacturers make a size 12 to fit the average sized woman. So, as the average size woman got larger, so did a size 12. Other sizes are cut larger or smaller than the size 12, accordingly. I guess that’s why they use an arbitrary number instead of measurements. But, it’s not a huge conspiracy to make us feel better or worse about ourselves.
Vanity sizing refers to the change in size of clothing over time, and the thought that people are more likely to buy clothing and feel good about themselves when the size is a smaller number, regardless of their body size. Vanity sizing has changed pants sizes, for example what used to be a size 6 is now a size 0 at some stores.
While people who wear larger sizes typically see no issue with this, the people at the small end of the spectrum lose out because they can't find clothes that fit them, because what once was a 0 is now actually sized to a 6.
Anyways, back to the original question, it is impossible to compare your pants size with another woman's unless you are trying on the same pair of jeans or the same brand/style at the same time (not years apart, because the sizing changes). I can't even compare what I wore as a teenager to what I wear now because the sizes are not the same.
It sounds like you work out regularly, eat healthy, and you are technically underweight - so you don't have room to lose any more weight. I would work on learning to love your body how it is, because you have worked hard to maintain a healthy body and your body allows you to do all of these activities you enjoy. Maybe try to change your thought process when you start to think about what sizes other people wear.4 -
I find that cut and sizing varies hugely, especially depending on where the clothing is made. I am 5'10" and weigh 180lb. I usually fit comfortably into a UK size 16 (bottom half) and a 14 or less (top half). I carry the weight on hips and backside. Clothing from German or Scandi labels is fine. French or Italian - forget it.1
-
Bodies are different.
I'm 5.5" shorter than you, weight the same, and also wear size 4 pants. My limiting factor is my chest/shoulders, I wear XS in a lot of bottoms, but often need a M in shirts for my tops.
4 is an excellent size for a slender woman. I wouldn't want to go down to a 2 or a 0, it makes it much harder to find clothes. Often 4 or 6 is as small as clothes go.
I would focus on not comparing yourself to others, it brings nothing good.5 -
You need a larger size because you carry your weight in an area where pants fit. Period. People with other body distributions may be able to wear smaller sizes at heavier weights because their fat and muscle is distributed more evenly.
Case in point: I'm an inch shorter than you, and about 15 pounds heavier, and I'm also in a size 4. It's because I *don't* carry it in my hips, but instead my chest (34DD). Arms are twigs. Legs have muscle.
Perhaps it's time to start thinking goals that aren't a clothing size? You're underweight, so losing more weight is not an option.7 -
Add me to the chorus: it's just your body type/bone structure, NOT fat. You don't have any fat to lose with your stats. I am inverted triangle shape, wear a size 6 top and size 4 bottoms. 130 lbs, 5'5".2
-
Body type and shape will vary widely as does one clothing manufacturer to another, one country to another.
I'm relatively proportioned, but have no waist (curvy is a term no one will EVER accuse me of LOL), and broader shoulders. I do weight lift, but am not heavily muscled (no body building or anything like that). 5' 7" currently 147 pounds.
I am comfortable in a size 6-10 on bottom, and tops are generally Medium. Some tops will fit me great most places but cut off circulation in my arms (if I can even squeeze my arms into them). Bottoms my thighs can be tight once they fit my waist/hips, especially closer to my goal weight (not because I have thick thighs, but just because I'm active and actually work out and have some muscle).
I still have another ~15-20 pounds to lose, even at my thinnest I was a typically in sizes 4-6 depending on the brand. If I was wearing smaller than that I KNEW it was "vanity" sizing.
If I ever want to feel bad about my size, I just need to try on some European/Italian-brand/made clothes LOL.1 -
Body shape matters but so does clothing cut. Mid rise, low rise, high rise, ultra rise, modern cut, classic, skinny, boyfriend, and whatever other random words being used as labels. Honestly-what does boyfriend cut even mean?
I go look for pants in some magic combo of rise/cut/shape/material/size that actually fit my body shape. I might wear 3 or 4 different sizes (of the same brand) because of varying cuts/styles.
I pick which one looks best to me.
I have clothes in a size 2 to size 20 that all fit.4 -
Size has little to do with weight within specific ranges. I am currently wearing a 2/4 but am 145lbs and 5'5. Some of it may have to do with brand and cut. I have muscular things and not all pants fit me well. I wear anywhere from a 2-8 depending on brand. I have exceedingly narrow hips compared to the rest of my body. It makes finding certain types of clothes very challenging, but it also means I can wear smaller pants. I think I would personally trade my small pants size for some semblance of a waist. The difference between my waist and hip bone where my pants sit is like 2".
I diatribe to say, that what you find frustrating, on your end others who you seem to think are in the "better" camp may find it equally frustrating. Mentally I have had to get over weight 20-30lbs more than friends that are the same size as me, its just the way my body is shaped and there is no use fighting it.2 -
Duck_Puddle wrote: »Body shape matters but so does clothing cut. Mid rise, low rise, high rise, ultra rise, modern cut, classic, skinny, boyfriend, and whatever other random words being used as labels. Honestly-what does boyfriend cut even mean?
I go look for pants in some magic combo of rise/cut/shape/material/size that actually fit my body shape. I might wear 3 or 4 different sizes (of the same brand) because of varying cuts/styles.
I pick which one looks best to me.
I have clothes in a size 2 to size 20 that all fit.
Not to threadjack... I have no idea what it *means*, but boyfriend/girlfriend cuts are the best fitting ones I've found for my body shape -- they fit not-super-tight-not-super-loose through the waist and hips, but are more relaxed in the thighs, so they work well with my running/lifting quads and hamstrings.1 -
I agree that clothing brand sizing varies., and that it is subject to vanity sizing. I just bought a size 2 in Macy’s store brand skinny leg pants but a size 8 in Levi’s jeans. And I fit anywhere from size 4-8 in dresses depending on brand and style. I am 122 pounds and 5’ 4.5”.3
-
Worrying about what size you wear is an exercise in futility. It depends on where you carry your weight, your bone structure, what brand, what type of cut, how fitted or loose you like to wear your clothes, what time of day it is. Heck, I have had to buy different sizes of the same pants in different colors as they fit differently for some reason. I currently fit well in clothes that are small or medium, sizes 6-12.
Being bothered by a numbering system that is not in any way standardized is a waste of time and energy, and it's concerning that you are wondering if losing more weight would get you into a lower size. You are already underweight, and there is no standardized clothing size that means you are the right weight.2 -
I agree that clothing brand sizing varies., and that it is subject to vanity sizing. I just bought a size 2 in Macy’s store brand skinny leg pants but a size 8 in Levi’s jeans. And I fit anywhere from size 4-8 in dresses depending on brand and style. I am 122 pounds and 5’ 4.5”.
I am 5.4" and weigh 155, and wear sizes 6-12. It's great to be on here and see how everyone is so different.1 -
deannalfisher wrote: »men have it sooo easy when it comes to clothes shopping - waist and length - yes, i know women have hips as well - but you would think it could be done...
did with shirts - collar size and sleeve length; add boob circumfrence and voila
You'd think...
Finding pants that fit me right is a PITA for my waist size...particularly the fashionable "slim cut" pants. Most guys don't have much of an *kitten* it seems...I have a round, protruding bubble *kitten*...partly genetic and partly from cycling, lifting, etc. I also have stocky legs (thighs in particular). It seems like men's pants are cut only for the waist size and don't take into account much else.
I usually have to opt for the less fashionable relaxed fit, baggier jeans and/or stretchy materials to get my *kitten* in my pants.5 -
deannalfisher wrote: »men have it sooo easy when it comes to clothes shopping - waist and length - yes, i know women have hips as well - but you would think it could be done...
did with shirts - collar size and sleeve length; add boob circumfrence and voila
Yes, my OH can just walk into LL Bean, pick up clothes his measurements, pay for them, walk out, AND THEY FIT PERFECTLY.
Meanwhile, I have two pairs of capris by the same brand, labeled the same size, and they are actually two different sizes.
I don't see how any woman can successfully buy clothes that fit online.5 -
I hope it is ok to ask this as it really bothers me. I am a female weighing between 110-113 lbs at 5' 5.5". I have been this weight range for about five years, and before that was very underweight for six years.
I wear a size 4 in pants and jeans. My body is very tiny towards the top, in chest and arm area, but I carry more weight in thighs, butt, low abdomen. I could wear a child's top and have almost no breasts. I have friends who weigh as much as 30 to 40 lbs more than I do who wear a size 2 or less in pants. Almost everyone who is my weight wears smaller size pants than I do.
I am moderately active with dance, ballet, cycling, lifting weights and calisthenics, hiking, canoeing etc. I workout about an hour and 20 minutes per day five days per week on average. I do however have an 8 hour a day desk job.
Why do I need a larger size pant than others who weigh a lot more than me? Is it due to body fat or is it bone structure? Though I am 47, I am also in surgical menopause since age 33, but even before that, when my normal weight was around 120 as an adult, I wore size 6-8. I was under 100 lbs before I could fit into a size 0. When I would lose more body fat, I would lose it everywhere and would look skeletal on top, so I am not sure that I could reduce fat in just lower area.
I am just curious if anyone else experiences this? Is it normal to vary so much in size of pants for people of the same weight?
I have a similar build. My excess weight goes to my thighs, but it is also muscle and my build. I'm at least 4 sizes up from my waist, and I've never found pants that actually fit correctly (always tight around the thighs, but clown pants around the waist) - I always wear skirts or dresses. I'm a dancer, cyclist, hiker, runner. I've come to very much appreciate (and be proud of) my strong thighs.2 -
HoneyBadger155 wrote: »If I ever want to feel bad about my size, I just need to try on some European/Italian-brand/made clothes LOL.
haha. or clothing that is dual marked for Eur/US. I have cycling shorts with the following tag..
Eur L
USA M2 -
Oh the joys of the many various body types. My lower half is always larger than my top half. Sometimes by a lot, sometimes by a little, depending on the make of the clothes. Doesn't matter how much I gain or lose, it's just my shape. I prefer to think of it as "mermaid" shaped. I just buy whatever fits and I feel good in, and don't think or worry about the size, as life's too short to get hung up on things that don't matter and that I can't change.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions