Quote:
Originally Posted by Harleykitty
Okay, I don't understand. There is a big difference between each of our sizes, in comparison with our height/weight. Here is mine
Height: 5'5.5
Weight: 165lbs
Pants Size: 12/14. (14s are little roomy)
Frame Size: Medium to small. But mostly medium
|
Here is the deal - I am tiny. 5' 3" if I stand up really straight. For me to get to 130-135 - with my muscle mass, I'll be a size 4, maybe less, we'll see. I am SOO short that my bones are smaller in every dimension - they don't hold up 5'6". If you're taller than me, your bones are going to be bigger - you're not going to get to those smaller sizes and look okay or feel okay. But at size 8, as a taller woman, you're going to look very similar to the eye, as I do in a 4. Does that make sense? I mean, if your bones take up a certian amount of space, say in your pelvis, that determines what size pants you can wear. If your bones are larger, you're limited in how small you can go, but not in how good you will look at any particular size.
Also, body composition has A LOT to do with it. Although I have a LONG way to go, here is a photo of me in my new size 8 pants. You can see I already have some ab defenition - there is plenty of fat there, though...working on it. But, if my abs were not in as good of shape, I'd have a tummy that stuck out and I'd be in 12s or 14s. Even easier to see is my arm. If the same amount of weight were on my arm, but it was fat, it would be hanging down. My arms are extremely muscular so they are going to be smaller than if they were not as developed. They are leaner. Does that make sense?
So in the end, If I didn't go to the gym at all, maybe I'd end up an 8, maybe 6 if I was lucky. But add the gym to the tiny frame, and I'll be in those little sizes when I get to goal weight.
Helpful?