You must log in or register to comment.
The trace does not match the photo and is the wrong pose. its squishing her arms and shoulders down and ignoring the twist in her stance, making her chest look blobby.
How is arguing what relative terms mean a thing? Skinny means less fat than someone else, usually the “average” which obviously varies wildly from many factors. Fat means fatter than that same idea. The definition will vary person to person. This thread is full of people who confuse their opinion with objective truth.
Isn’t that dress covered in fringe? I mean, she’s in great shape either way, but fringe all over a dress is bulking.
What an awful image format. Why is this still a thing?
Because I think they like it when we complain about it. In that spirit, I LOVE 10,000 pixel tall image posts! They are so easy to view and definitely not annoying.
Oh absolutly! In fact… I meant the exact opposite of what I said!
I think a contributing factor is the art style.
A simple trace has no shading or depth, which then the widest section of each part is brought to the front, the same level of the slimmer parts of that section.
For example, a cyclindar has a gradual taper to the full width. This art style would just faltten it to a rectangle.
I don’t think “skinny” is being used correctly here, which seems to be the whole source of conflict.
Taylor Swift isn’t skinny. She certainly isn’t overweight, but skinny doesn’t mean “not overweight”, it means thinner than average. It’s the opposite extreme of fat, with the norm being somewhere between. Taylor Swift is in the normal range. Emma Stone is skinny.
If you’re using “skinny” to mean “not fat”, obviously there’s going to be some disagreement with those who use “skinny” to mean “thinner than normal”.
In the context of the post they clearly were using “skinny” to mean “not plus sized”.
Right, that’s the problem. They were using the word in a way that’s inconsistent with the dictionary definition, causing confusion.
Taylor Swift is (supposedly) 5’10" and around 130lbs.
That is skinny. Even according to BMI, she’s bordering on underweight.
I think it depends on where you live too, skinny (as in thinner than average) being a relative measure.
I live somewhere extremely skinny by global standards and she wouldn’t be called skinny, people might say, “yeah I guess she’s skinny” if asked, but she wouldn’t be seen as “a skinny person” because she wouldn’t be far off the average. Same way a 5’8 woman wouldn’t be a “tall woman” in the Netherlands.
Still seems like a definitional problem, with an imprecise meaning behind the word “skinny.”
Even according to BMI, she’s bordering on underweight.
Bordering on, but still on the “normal” side of the chart.
Does “skinny” look to broad population averages, or celebrity averages, or even celebrity averages for that particular age, or some kind of ideal? Is “skinny” a pejorative, negatively loaded term?
I wouldn’t call Taylor Swift “skinny” if that’s intended to mean thinner than ideal. But she is thinner than the American average. Is the American average considered “fat”? How much of a gap is there between skinny and fat, occupied by people who are neither?
Is “skinny” a pejorative, negatively loaded term?
Not in our society. Skinny is seen as the ideal.
BMI is a terrible metric, and even then her BMI is on the lower end of the normal range.
Oh I’m aware. That’s why I threw in that even according to the faulty BMI scale for women, Taylor Swift is considered bordering on underweight to being underweight.
That you think Taylor Swift isn’t skinny says way more about you than anything else.
Her weight has fluctuated, like most normal people. When she was closer to 115, she was closer to skinny, not at 130. Certainly not in the reference photo, which is probably the fullest I’ve seen her. There are plenty of photos where you could make the argument, but they look much more like the “exaggerated” sketch anyway. She is not skinny in the reference photo provided.
When she was closer to 115, she was closer to skinny, not at 130.
She was unhealthily underweight at 115.
Correct.
That’s also not a uniformly right fitting outfit. It’s tight on the shoulders and hips, but looser at the middle Drawn clothes don’t have to have any thickness or areas to stretch.
I always love this type of thread-squabbling.
Obesity has become such a pervasive problem that people do not even understand what it means to be skinny.
I grew up in the '70s when we ate the appropriate amount of food. 50 years later let me tell you my friends, what you think is skinny is NOT skinny.
Taylor Swift’s legs would jiggle if you shook them…
Most people’s legs will jiggle if you shook them, even thin people.
No. That only happens when there’s surplus fat or stretched skin.
Skinny people don’t jiggle.
It’s really true.
How much fat is “surplus”?
I really did not intuit how fat people truly are until I lost about 65kg and got fairly toned and muscular.
I hit 73kg at 188cm at that was with so much added muscle vs prior. If you had taken away all the muscle mass that I had added through my journey I’m confident to say I would have been around 65kg. This was with around 11% body fat.
Rediscovering at my own body in the mirror and seeing what actually skinny was… Completely blew my mind and changed my perspective forever
You can also look back at photos of people in the 70s from various cultures. We’ve become fatter overall because of processed food and reduced exercise.
We’ve also gotten significantly taller and older in only about a century.
Year Median age
1820 - 16.7
1860 - 19.4
1900 - 22.9
1940 - 29.0
1970 - 28.1
1980 - 30.0
1990 - 32.9
2000 - 35.3
2020 - 38.8
I’ve done painting of live models who are objectively attractive to have people (men I’m sure) say nasty things about the model.
Like attractive in real life an attractive in TV/Internet are different and a 10 on person is a 4 on the Internet or whatever.
This is a great illustration of that problem.
I think anyone who’s seen a decent amount of celebrities in person can attest to this. People who look attractive in 2D do look attractive irl, but in an uncanny way? Less of a sexy - I want to date this person - attraction and more of a confused - how is it possible to look like this - admiration.
Clavicular is a perfect example of this, he looks like a statue not a person
TBH lots of supposedly attractive celebrities look kind of weird to me, probably mostly due to fashion (makeup etc.). That would probably be even worse IRL, depending on whether they’re “done up” and how much of their look is plastic surgery.
That is really illustrative.
I won’t deny that this is true, but it’s also the case that cartoons tend to have larger heads. The skinny version of swift here is also shorter and has more narrow shoulders / hips. She’s not just drawn thinner, but literally smaller to accommodate the proportionally larger head. I think this is kind of exaggerating the effect. If the artist had instead drawn a larger head, it wouldn’t be as dramatic.
Oh I love this!
She’s not skinny though?
Taylor Swift is (supposedly) 5’10" and around 130lbs.
That is skinny. Even according to BMI, she’s bordering on underweight.
Yes, I googled and found similar numbers that would put her at a BMI of 19, which is indeed almost underweight. I don’t buy the numbers though. I mean look at the thighs in that picture. She’s definitely bigger than the majority of the women at my work, and they’re about normal weight. I’d put her at around a BMI of 25 or 174.5 lbs. Not overweight, but definitely not skinny.
Consider the camera angles here as well. The camera is shooting from slightly below which puts emphasis on her thighs and hips with the slight lens distortion.
She’s definitely bigger than the majority of the women at my work, and they’re about normal weight. I’d put her at around a BMI of 25 or 174.5 lbs
This is insane of you.
Consider the camera angles here as well. The camera is shooting from slightly below which puts emphasis on her thighs and hips
Fair enough, but that doesn’t explain why her face looks so puffy
Her face isn’t even part of this conversation. You’re just rudely commenting on a woman’s body at this point.
I agree with you that that’s skinny. Definitely thin by any metric.
I know it depends on the body, but at 5’2" when I was 125, I was definitely thin and underfed. Add 8 more inches of height? Wild
I’ve been 125 at 5’9", that was my weight after I recovered from disordered eating and until my husband asked me to bulk, so from 20 years old to about 48. Nobody really commented that I was too thin (except husband), I looked slender not skinny skinny, was in shape, worked out. More cardio less weights.
90 lb when having trouble from 16 to 20 - that looked skinny and surely wasn’t healthy but I still got my period.
150 now since gaining - aimed for 145, overshot. Still aiming for 145 finally making progress, slowly. People STILL think I am thin. I am not. This is more than I weighed 9 months pregnant and honestly it freaks me out a little. Doctor says it’s a healthy weight still though.
ETA - 125 at 5’9" is barely even underweight by BMI. 128 lands in Normal territory.
Yeah I’ve been 5’3" and 115lbs. I was really unhealthy, underfed, and thin.
It’s bonkers that there is so much support in here for people saying shit like Taylor Swift isn’t skinny.
Without knowing too much about Taylor Swift, I assume she’s much more fit than the average person, and muscle weighs more than fat, so her weight might even be a bit misleading here, compared most people.
I would say she’s more fit than skinny. She’s definitely been skinny and too skinny, but I think she gained a lot of muscle before and during her Eras Tour, making her look less skinny in that picture there.
But, it’s problematic to even discuss her weight like this, and it just puts unnecessary pressure on other people, who might see her as skinny.
But, it’s problematic to even discuss her weight like this, and it just puts unnecessary pressure on other people, who might see her as skinny.
Thanks for bringing the whole point of the post back around!
I think it’s a cultural thing, some places people just have lower BMI’s genetically or dietarily (is that a word?).
I’m considered skinny at 6’4 130lbs, but all of my friends who are all a little underweight or “barely healthy” according to BMI wouldn’t, they’d just be considered thin, since the median weight is much lower than in, say, the US.
I think these people calling Taylor Swift not skinny are just imagining Victoria Secret models.
It’s a range, just like all bodies are on a range, and they don’t seem to get that
It’s like they’ve never seen women’s bodies in real life before. If Taylor fucking Swift isn’t considered skinny, then I guess the rest of womanhood can go yeet ourselves off of cliffs. She’s practically underweight and it still isn’t skinny enough.
Many people use skinny as the opposite of fat, so to be charitable to the poster maybe that’s what they meant. They could be thinking: Taylor is thin sure, but not too thin, so not skinny. Skinny would be firmly in the underweight category using this definition; a sleight on their weight and not something to aspire to.
She’s not skinny though?
Many people use skinny as the opposite of fat, so to be charitable to the poster maybe that’s what they meant.
Do people really think that Taylor Swift is fat?
“not skinny” includes both “fat” and “normal”, though
Many people use skinny as the opposite of fat, so to be charitable to the poster maybe that’s what they meant.
I was responding to this in particular.
In the pursuit of continuing to be charitable, I’ll assume you’re genuinely confused.
“Not skinny” does not mean “fat” necessarily, in the same way “not tall” does not necessarily mean “short”, or “not cold” isn’t the same as “hot”. It’s a continuum with a middle ground that’s the assumed “default” so there are terms describing deviation from that middle. In common language, “not” preceding the term that describes that deviation tends to mean it falls within the default range, as if they meant it fell outside the range in the other direction they’d just use the term for that part of the range instead.
In this case, the assumed middle is the range of weights deemed “normal” so fat and skinny describe those body types that fall outside that range. Saying someone isn’t skinny does not equate to saying they’re fat since thay can be neither (and that’s typically what’s meant).
Again, I was specifically replying to this line:
Many people use skinny as the opposite of fat, so to be charitable to the poster maybe that’s what they meant.
Plenty of VS models have oomph tho.
touch grass
Taylor Swift is not “skinny” though.
Look at her thighs.
Ariana Grande is skinny.
Ariana Grande is skinny.
She’s practically dying. She’s skeletal.
Ever heard the phrase “skin and bones”?
That’s where skinny comes from.
And as evidenced here, the definition of skinny varies wildly.
what
Skinny means you can see the bones.
I’m not saying I find it attractive, I’m not arguing that it’s healthy.
Taylor Swift is not skinny.
Skinny means you can see the bones.
No, it does not. Your opinion of what a relative term means is not fact.
golly that’s not what i understand skinny to mean. i think it’d be odd if “every skinny person is unhealthy” was true by definition
Ariana Grande looks like she has a very serious eating disorder. She’s not skinny, she looks malnourished.
It’s like saying that a Honda Civic is a muscle car because someone rolled up in a poorly setup Kei car.
Skinny used to be a pejorative and it basically meant that you were too poor to feed yourself, i.e. malnourished.
