Facebook Email Pinterest Twitter Instagram YouTube Icon Headphones Icon Favorite Navigation Search Icon Forum Search Icon Main Search Icon Close Icon Video Play Icon Indicator Arrow Icon Close Icon Hamburger/Search Icon Plus Icon Arrow Down Icon Video Guide Icon Article Guide Icon Modal Close Icon Guide Search Icon

Conversational Threads

Too thin???

miatamomma | Posted in General Discussion on

Before I click on the “Gathering” site I have a screen from Threads with a back view of a model wearing a beautiful white dress with blue flowers.  If anyone else has noticed it, do you think her shoulder blades are sticking out?  It seems as if she is extremely thin and if that is the case; I thought we were getting away from the super-thin models.  Maybe I am seeing something that isn’t there.

Sue

Replies

  1. Teaf5 | | #1

    That's not her shoulder blade; that is light coming from the right side--check the back of her left arm, where the light also makes a long white streak.  She's slim, but that's an angled streak of light which is bigger and more central than her shoulder blade would be.

    When I first looked at that photo, I didn't notice the upper back at all because I was wondering how many women would want to call attention to their lower backside with all those large flowers!  It looks like something from "27 Dresses"--a bridesmaid's nightmare.

    1. miatamomma | | #2

      Thanks for the explanation.

      Sue

  2. Ckbklady | | #3

    I think you're both right - I think it's partly the lighting and partly that the model is slim. I looked the same as she does at that age and I've never been an anorexic model or anything like that. Some folks are just born "bony". :) She's not extremely thin - she's no Kate Moss, but yes, she is slim.

    I bet, though, as her metabolism slows in her late 30s and 40s, she'll be likely to gain a bit of weight (unless she's physically active and wants to maintain her shape). Right on the button of 35 I gained 10 pounds and now fill out the clothes that used to hang on me. That dress is lovely, and she wears it well.

    Fashion is so personal and subjective. I think she looks so elegant!

    :) Mary

     

    1. Ceeayche | | #4

      I can't wait until the fashion industry realizes that all shapes are elegant.  Some one told me recently that Marilyn Monroe was as large as 16 during her life as a fashion icon-- her clothes were just tailored very well.  I'm not against our slimmer sisters, I just wish we could celebrate us all.

      1. User avater
        ThreadKoe | | #5

        Yes, Marilyn was a full bodied woman! So were many of her fuller figured sisters of the silver screen. It wasn't until Twiggy and her like that the stick thin model became the rage. We have been stuck with the androgynous, boyish thin figure since. Before that, women were expected to have some curves. If you look at the patterns from the 40s and 50s, you will see more darts for fitting than what are available on our current patterns. More darts meant more opportunity to fit to more shapes, and many of the darts were hidden in design lines. Cathy

      2. woodruff | | #6

        The size 16 reference seems to have come from a jab by Elizabeth Hurley on a talk show. According to the Snopes site, Monroe's weight probably ranged from about 118 to 140 and her hips were around 35"-36":http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/mmdress.aspAccording to the website below:http://jigglybits.wordpress.com/2008/04/12/marilyn-monroe-size-16/"The Hollywood Movie Museum has fifteen of Marilyn Monroe’s dresses, which range, according to the caretaker, from sizes 4 to 8 by today’s sizes. The white dress she wore in “The Seven Year Itch” would be a size 8 today."

        1. Ceeayche | | #7

          Um, while I appreciate that a size 16 during Marilyn's time may be a smaller size now.  This only underscores my point:  We are not looking at size 8's in magazines and on the red carpet. They are 0-2-4's.  And they are getting airbrushed down to nothing.  And, if you look at the editorial page from most of the magazines they are being run by people who are not a Size 8. 

          Size 8 is considered huge today.  Recently the dancer from the reality show "Dancing with the Stars" and the star of "Ugly Betty" were touted as 'chunky.' Both were either a 6 or 8. 

          1. woodruff | | #8

            This is quite true, and it was probably the reason for Hurley's snarky comment, frantic as she herself no doubt was to be as thin as possible at that time. Prominent actresses these days, like the stars of "Desperate Housewives" are, for the most part, impossibly gaunted out, as you say around size 0--and photoshopped into the bargain (I've seen candid shots of Terry Hatcher out jogging, and talk about stick-thin little legs--eeek!).But people who have handled Monroe's clothing at auction say that in spite of her lush appearance on film, she also was a tiny woman with a miniscule waist. She was aware of and susceptible to the pressure to stay in shape and hold the line. She jogged before it was fashionable, and did some work with weights:http://www.watsonswildlife.com/Mayilyn_Monroe/Marilyn_Monroe_Hollywood_1952_H353_IMA_Framed.jpgHad she been active these days, with her vulnerable temperament, she might very well have fallen under the influence of the size 0 crowd.

This post is archived.

Threads Insider

Get instant access to hundreds of videos, tutorials, projects, and more.

Start Your Free Trial

Already an Insider? Log in

Conversational Threads

Recent Posts and Replies

  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |
  • |

Threads Insider Exclusives

View All
View All

Highlights

Shop the Store

View All
View More