I'm just a fraction over 5'5" and my weight is running around 122-5. But I'm small-boned. I do keep track of my weight but if it is an issue, often it may be better to take measurements rather than weigh.
Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Click the "Create Account" button now to join.
Results 1 to 15 of 24
Hybrid View
-
07-20-2007, 05:53 PM #1
Queen of All I Survey
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 2,506
-
07-21-2007, 04:44 AM #2
Registered User
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Posts
- 317
I'm 5'6" and 165 lbs. I'm definitely fatter than I should be (waist in wrong place for my body shape, "apple" belly developing, 33 inch waist). If I get back to having a 26-28 inch waist, I'll be a lot healthier. Even if I do get back to a healthier waist measurement, I'll never have a "normal" body shape. A 26" waist puts me at 38" hips or so, and 28" waist puts me at 40" hips. I have curvy calves, solid thighs, and a round butt. And since I'm not a lot over my healthy weight, it's entirely possible for me to lose fat and not lose weight. And really, if I'm 165 and mostly muscle, that's a win
I've also been as low as 110, in lifeguard training and the same height. Bad scene. I looked like a concentration camp victim, with a 24" (or less, I was scared to check) waist. Bones jutting out all over is *not* a good look for anyone. Especially not in a racing suit.
It's normal and healthy for your thighs to get bigger when you exercise them. Most pants aren't cut well for any woman's body, and the curvier you are the worse it is. Not that skirts are better... few of them are designed for women who have a real waist *and* real hips at the same time. I've got all these measurements because most off the rack clothes don't fit me, no matter how healthy or unhealthy my weight is :P.
Reply With Quote