Irony of size 0

Don't you find it quite ironic that the beauty standard of size 0 or even size 2 puts women at such a low weight that they may lose periods and become infertile?  Not only is fertility affected, but libido drops at such a low weight.  How is what is considered "sexy" sexy when you aren't even interested in sex??  When you don't have the strength or energy or physical desire?  Maybe it is that whole puritan "women should be pure" "women can't want it" thing... It seems really messed up.  Insights?

Yes but that's not everyones ideal.  Just the (forgive me for saying it folks but it's TRUE! )  Just the ideal of gay men who design clothes.  They aren't interested in sleeping with the girls anyway now are they?  lol

i don't think there's anything sexy about an unnatural size zero, and that is not my beauty standard. (i say unnatural because i know there are some, not many, but some, girls out there who have trouble keeping weight on and are naturally that thin). 

i don't know many men, (actually i don't know any but maybe some will crop up here) who would choose a size zero over a girl at a healthy weight.

i agree that the fashion industry are the ones pushing the size zero ideal. i rarely see photos of runway models and think they look good. usually i think, oh that poor thing.

i suppose size zero works on the runway, because nobody is looking at the girl's body then, just the clothes hanging on it. but in real life, i think size zero is very unsexy.  

sadly, in the fashion industry THIS is plus sized.

and this is normal.

i think option #1 is by far sexier, but i suppose her hotness does distract from the clothes, while the second girl is just like a hanger for them.

Some girls are meant to be a size 0. I am 4'11" and I have never in my life been skinny. Healthy? yes, but never skinny. My lowest weight has been 113 or so which is at the higher end of my healthy BMI range, right now I don't have a scale but I'm probably more like 117. I have been a size 0. I look chubby at anything BUT a size 0.

If I were 5'7", it would be a different story. Models are unnatural size 0's, but the size should not be abolished - it's right for some girls.

laf, that is definitely what i was trying to say! there are definitely girls who naturally fit in a 0, most of them petite ladies like you :)

but me, at 5'8, would be skeletal and starving at a size zero.

My mom was below a size 0 for many years of her life and she had two kids. :P

As far as the male attraction part goes, I believe there is someone out there for everyone, so some men will find it attractive. I have no comment on the libido of size 0 women. I've never been a size 0 so I have no idea. I personally don't think being very skinny is attractive.

Jackattack: just because someone has 2 children doesn't mean they are enjoying sex. Women don't need to orgasm to get pregnant.

i completely agree about the whole beauty standard thing...the whole size 0 debate has done nothing but create self esteem and body issues for women and impact eating disorders. the whole media and industry is constantly promoting unnaturally skinny and its not what its made out to be at all. 5 ft6.5 is what height i am and im a size o ( ed issues) and felt waaay sexier at a higher weight....i now avoid the media/anything to do with models as it makes me feel awful about tryin to reach a healthy weight in my recovery. theres nothing attractive or good about being an unnatural or healthy size and the sooner the industry promotes that the better it is for everyone.

Original Post by r4eboxer:

Jackattack: just because someone has 2 children doesn't mean they are enjoying sex. Women don't need to orgasm to get pregnant.

My mum is a size 0, has had 2 children, and still enjoys sex. 

Trust me... I've heard... 

You mean a size 8 is no longer considered ideal? When did that happen?

haha Tom, don't you read Vogue?!

Original Post by baboo4:

Original Post by r4eboxer:

Jackattack: just because someone has 2 children doesn't mean they are enjoying sex. Women don't need to orgasm to get pregnant.

My mum is a size 0, has had 2 children, and still enjoys sex. 

Trust me... I've heard... 

hee hee hee

I don't think a size 0 is unnatural. A size 0 of today is basically a size 6 from decades ago (when the ideal was a six!). All that happened was the same size clothes got a different label on them. My mother in law is 5'0" and 100 lbs and most 0s are too big for her so she gets a lot of things altered or shops in the girls' department. She doesn't look that small at all, btw. I'm a size 0 now at say, Abercrombie or Free People, but I also have a perfectly normal BMI and there is no way I look unhealthy. My BMI is higher than some of the girls here who are trying to lose.

OMGoodness lets please leave our moms & sex out of it!  I mean I'm a mom but still!  :P

& no size 8 is the new XXXL as far as the fashion industry is concerned.  That's what I currently wear postpartum.

I weighed 98-105ish in high school / college & I'm 5foot1.  Never in my life would my hip bones, & you could sort of see them back then, go into a size 3 let alone zero.  It's just not physically possible for me.  However I had a friend at Church who was 5foot5 & from 3 generations of size Zeros.  Healthy happy ( hateful ) & naturally blonde size Zero's.  Ironically after years of veiled jealousy it dawned on my that my hubby is WAY cuter than hers.  lol

i think sizes really shouldn't matter anymore since they've changed so much throughout the years and vary from store to store. i agree with the poster above ^ that a size 0 today isn't that big of a deal anymore because it's pretty much what used to be a size 6 with a different number. anyways, i wear a 0 sometimes a 2 depending on the clothes, but it doesn't really matter because maybe in a few years it'll be consider a size 00 or 000 haha.. vanity sizes exists. and a size 0 is about a 24" waist.. which isn't really as small as everyone thinks it is. but i def agree, it all depends on the person and their body type.

I thought OP was talking about UNNATURAL size 0's, not naturally thin people who happen to be a size 0.

The only 0 I won't to see is about 6 of them behind a 1 and a comma and another comma on my check

spelling error

Original Post by allnaturalgirl02:

I don't think a size 0 is unnatural. A size 0 of today is basically a size 6 from decades ago (when the ideal was a six!). All that happened was the same size clothes got a different label on them. My mother in law is 5'0" and 100 lbs and most 0s are too big for her so she gets a lot of things altered or shops in the girls' department. She doesn't look that small at all, btw. I'm a size 0 now at say, Abercrombie or Free People, but I also have a perfectly normal BMI and there is no way I look unhealthy. My BMI is higher than some of the girls here who are trying to lose.

allnaturalgirl: I've been thinking about that too! I'm 5'6'', weigh ~119lbs, by no means am i stick-thin. I have a booty and thighs but I fit into a BR size 0.  I'm thinking BR makes their sizes bigger since its targetted towards slightly older people.

huggitbear: btw- I'm a size 0, healthy BMI and just got pregnant, so all size 0 people are not unhealthy. i used to be a size 8 four years ago but I love my size 0/2 size a lot more!!

Ugh, I'm sorry, this post pisses me off.

I'm usually a size 1 or 2 and occasionally a size 0 (depending on the brand.) I am in no way extremely skinny, I'm actually quite curvy. Don't forget you have to take height into consideration, I'm only 5'4".

I know a size 0 isn't right for everyone, but it definitely isn't an unhealthy size. The sizes have changed since the Marilyn Monroe days. I believe Marilyn Monroe would have been a size 4 now, but back then she was what...a size 16? (I'm not 100% on this)

 This pretty much has already been stated by other people. So it's pretty much useless. I'm pretty much going to post it anyways.

Original Post by jules817:

sadly, in the fashion industry THIS is plus sized.

and this is normal.

 you guys are definitely right. i think it would have been better had the OP left out the number size, because there are obviously a large quantity of healthy women who wear a size zero because they are more petite.

i think the problem is in the above links. when the second is praised over the first. healthy vs. not. the fact that the first woman is on a "plus size" site.

Well coming from a girl that is 5'5 and a size 2, not everyone has a larger frame. I was given an "extra small" frame, so my ideal weight fits a size 2.. I can still be happy, have energy, and enjoy sex. Narrow shoulders and small hips just make me this way.

But I do agree, and UNNATURAL size 0 or even size 2 girl, those girls that fight their lives to be unnaturally thin, aren't so attractive to me.  But those are girls that just want to be clothes hangers.

Original Post by jules817:

Original Post by jules817:

sadly, in the fashion industry THIS is plus sized.

and this is normal.

 you guys are definitely right. i think it would have been better had the OP left out the number size, because there are obviously a large quantity of healthy women who wear a size zero because they are more petite.

i think the problem is in the above links. when the second is praised over the first. healthy vs. not. the fact that the first woman is on a "plus size" site.

 ...mehh....

I think there's a happy medium between both of those pictures, definitely leaning towards the choice 2.

Don't get me wrong, if I had to pick between option 1 or 2, it would definitely be 2.