Historic Ideals of Beauty and Weight

[Medieval Mom]

It is that time of year to plan my diet and exercise habits for 2011 while dipping gingerbread cookies in my coffee. :D

 

I've weaned ds#2, we're settling into a good routine with hsing, life is more stable than it's been for years. It's time.

 

But what's my weight goal? What's my bust/waist/hip measurement goal? As I pondered these questions, I collected various "suggestions" of "ideal measurements" from various books I have on hand. (I like to collect etiquette and beauty books :) )

 

Here are the results for anyone interested, in chronological order. I'm 5'2.5. For some books, I used 5'2" as a reference. ;)

 

Year Weight Bust/Waist/Hip Book/Source

 

1907 --123-- 35/26.5/36 Healthology (Eales)

1915 --123-- 36/26/37 Mae Josephine Bennet*

1942 --121.5-- 32.4/25.4/34 Lady Be Fit! (Nye)

1954 --112-117.5-- 32-33/22-23/32-33 Secrets of Charm (Miller)

1961 --113-126-- 34-35/21-23/34-35 Debbie Drake's Easy Way...

1967 --110-117-- 32.5/22.5/33 Charm and Poise (Tolman)

2003 --105-- No B/W/H Eat to Live (Fuhrman) +

now --103 to 138-- No B/W/H BMI index

 

*Beauty Contest Winner, source: Ladies Beauty Book (Keppel)

+ I don't own Eat to Live, but it was one of the few at the library that gave recommendations.

 

According to the BMI index, I'm not overweight at all. According to Fuhrman, I have major work to do. According to everyone else, I'm almost there, esp. Beauty Queen Mae Bennet's proportions and weight. :)

 

Notes? Comments? Anyone else enjoy looking at how beauty ideals have changed in such a short time?

 

I think I need more coffee and cookies to figure it all out and decide on my own personal goals :lol:

[Parrothead]

The only thing that comes to mind about the changes over the years of "ideal" is something I came across a few months ago. I tried to find shows for dd to watch that were from when I was a kid. I started watching Bewitched from the first episode. I was so surprised at how "heavy" Elizabeth Montgomery was when doing that show.

 

She looked to be a size 10 or 12 today and it was nice to see.

 

I don't know when TV moms started being size 0-3. I might have been a TV mom back in the 60s, but I'll never fit the weight criteria for today's TV moms.

[Medieval Mom]

That's interesting, Parrothead! It does seem that the ideal continues to become leaner and leaner.

 

Dh and I watched a silent movie together a few months ago. The lead lady was "short" (perhaps my height of 5'2 ish) and plump, and adorable. The lead man was tall, slender, and quite dapper. We both enjoyed the movie's plot, but also the fact the these stars portrayed a couple just like we are IRL :)

 

It seems today's standard is: "You can never be too thin nor too rich." :tongue_smilie:

[MamaSheep]

I'm sort of partial to Peter Paul Rubens's ideal beauties, myself. :D

[elegantlion]

I'm sort of partial to Peter Paul Rubens's ideal beauties, myself. :D

 

:iagree: But yes those statistics are interesting.

[Jamee]

I'm sort of partial to Peter Paul Rubens's ideal beauties, myself. :D

 

That was my thought too on seeing the thread title. :lol:

[Medieval Mom]

Here's Ruben's "Women". I somehow doubt that Ruben's ideals are reflected in any of the various "ideals" of the 20th century I found. ;)

[GWOB]

Here's Ruben's "Women". I somehow doubt that Ruben's ideals are reflected in any of the various "ideals" of the 20th century I found. ;)

 

So I guess I will just consider myself Rubenesque and a work of art.

[fairfarmhand]

check out this page.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Standards_of_Beauty_An_Illustrated_Timeline

 

the picture of Marylin Monroe looks flat out bizarre in comparison to the current drug-addict type bodies you see at the bottom of the page.

 

how big was Marylin? a size 14?

[Medieval Mom]

check out this page.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Standards_of_Beauty_An_Illustrated_Timeline

 

the picture of Marylin Monroe looks flat out bizarre in comparison to the current drug-addict type bodies you see at the bottom of the page.

 

how big was Marylin? a size 14?

 

Very interesting! Thanks!

 

According to http://www.marilynmonroe.com/about/facts.html

 

Marylin's Measurements were:

Height: 5 feet 5 1/2 inches

Weight: Varied, 115 - 120 lbs.

Measurements: 37-23-36 (Studio's Claim); 35-22-35 (Dressmaker's Claim).

 

Hmm... A few cookies later and I'm thinking maybe I don't need to worry about "slimming down" after all... :lol:

[C_l_e_0..Q_c]

I discovered the other day one good thing about turning 45. I'm no longer overweight according to Weight Watchers!

Since they adjust weight expectations according to age, within 24 hours I was within my healthy weight measurements! Go me! ;-)

 

I'm wondering what age are all those measurements aimed at..

Edited December 18, 2010 by CleoQc

[MamaSheep]

Here's Ruben's "Women". I somehow doubt that Ruben's ideals are reflected in any of the various "ideals" of the 20th century I found. ;)

 

Maybe not, but they're a lot closer to what's reflected in my mirror. :D

[Rosie_0801]

I vote you put on a few pounds and dress like this:

 

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2003/Asa.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2006/Jennifer.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2006/Temair.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2009/Thea.htm

 

 

Skinny chicks don't look so good in Italian Ren :D

 

Rosie

[Peela]

I vote you put on a few pounds and dress like this:

 

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2003/Asa.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2006/Jennifer.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2006/Temair.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2009/Thea.htm

 

 

Skinny chicks don't look so good in Italian Ren :D

 

Rosie

 

 

Oh Rosie, I have never seen so many huge women as I have seen in the SCA. Probably half of them are obese here. I guess it's a place they can feel comfortable at the weight they are, and really, that garb does look amazing on them.

 

As for Marilyn Monroe- that picture makes me feel much better because that is pretty much my body. I might be a bit shorter than she was and right now a bit slimmer (OK, maybe, maybe not), but that is my general shape. And it looks good on her!

It makes those skinny chicks look so...under nourished. Go and eat! Why would a man be attracted to someone who looks under nourished? Surely it would be a primal imperative to want a woman who is more...maternal looking?

[Rhonda in TX]

the picture of Marylin Monroe looks flat out bizarre in comparison to the current drug-addict type bodies you see at the bottom of the page.

 

how big was Marylin? a size 14?

 

A 14 then is not the same as a 14 now. However, it's definitely true that Marilyn was no size 0!! She looked fantastic.

[Medieval Mom]

As for Marilyn Monroe- that picture makes me feel much better because that is pretty much my body. I might be a bit shorter than she was and right now a bit slimmer (OK, maybe, maybe not), but that is my general shape. And it looks good on her!

It makes those skinny chicks look so...under nourished. Go and eat! Why would a man be attracted to someone who looks under nourished? Surely it would be a primal imperative to want a woman who is more...maternal looking?

 

Well, I'm certainly no Marilyn Monroe! I'm taken from another mold, more along the lines of Venus de Milo. Here it is, a picture of me naked. And another, from the back.

 

Don't worry! I have no intention of trying to be skinny or undernourished :) I have a pretty good idea of where I need to go to feel at my best ('cause I've been there before ;) ) I just find it amusing to look at these different "standards". It helps to break the myth that there exists any one consensus on what we "ought" to be, what is "perfect". :)

[Medieval Mom]

I vote you put on a few pounds and dress like this:

 

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2003/Asa.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2006/Jennifer.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2006/Temair.htm

http://realmofvenus.renaissanceitaly.net/yourgarb/2009/Thea.htm

 

 

Skinny chicks don't look so good in Italian Ren :D

 

Rosie

 

:lol:

 

I don't know-- I think Robin Wright sure looked good in The Princess Bride!

[Onceuponatime]

Some of those waist measurements look painful.

 

What year was the 36-29-40 beauty? ;-)

[Medieval Mom]

Some of those waist measurements look painful.

 

What year was the 36-29-40 beauty? ;-)

 

No kidding! Esp. 1961, Debbie Drake's chart. A 21-23" waist??? My ds7 has a 20.5" waist, and he's at the 0.07% mark on his weight chart at the doc's (58% in height). Ummm... I don't think I need a waist the size of a thin seven year old! :blink:

[Janie Grace]

We were watching Karate Kid (the old one) with the kids today and I noticed that the "cool" teenaged girls were rounder than you'd see on a current movie. They look like normal cute girls instead of waifs. The standard today (even just a short 20 years later) is scary.

[DarlaS]

Very interesting! Thanks!

 

According to http://www.marilynmonroe.com/about/facts.html

 

Marylin's Measurements were:

Height: 5 feet 5 1/2 inches

Weight: Varied, 115 - 120 lbs.

Measurements: 37-23-36 (Studio's Claim); 35-22-35 (Dressmaker's Claim).

 

Hmm... A few cookies later and I'm thinking maybe I don't need to worry about "slimming down" after all... :lol:

 

Marylin would be wearing a size 0 - 2 in today's sizes, depending on whether you believed the dressmaker or the studio, and the waist would be too large. I used the size chart at Lands' End. (Incidentally, LE pants gap at the waist for me--and I am a size 14 in today's sizes.)

[Soror]

Marylin would be wearing a size 0 - 2 in today's sizes, depending on whether you believed the dressmaker or the studio, and the waist would be too large. I used the size chart at Lands' End. (Incidentally, LE pants gap at the waist for me--and I am a size 14 in today's sizes.)

I was going to say the same thing. I wear a size 3 or so and her waist was smaller than mine- I have a couple of pounds on her. I am 116-120 at 5'4. Today's sizes are so much bigger than they were before.

 

I have wondered before what is really the ideal size. I am sure some think I am too big, I certainly wouldn't be modeling size. I also get plenty of comments that I am too thin as well. I like the size I am at though and more importantly I feel good. I eat well and figure I will end up the size I am supposed to be.

[Crimson Wife]

The "rule of thumb" I was told by my doctor at one point for figuring out a woman's ideal weight to add 5 lbs. to 100 for every inch of height over 5'. So 5' 2.5" would be 112.5. I'm 5' 2.5" and look my best around that weight. Any skinnier than about 110 and I start to look bony. Any heavier than about 115, and I start getting saddlebags and/or love handles :glare:

 

A weight of 112.5 at 5' 2.5" is a BMI of 20.2, which is healthy. :)

[joannqn]

The "rule of thumb" I was told by my doctor at one point for figuring out a woman's ideal weight to add 5 lbs. to 100 for every inch of height over 5'. So 5' 2.5" would be 112.5. I'm 5' 2.5" and look my best around that weight. Any skinnier than about 110 and I start to look bony. Any heavier than about 115, and I start getting saddlebags and/or love handles :glare:

 

A weight of 112.5 at 5' 2.5" is a BMI of 20.2, which is healthy. :)

 

 

This rule of thumb works for me. When I was at my most healthy, my weight was exactly what your doctor would recommend. Unfortunately, that was 15 years and 4 kids ago.

[Impish]

I go for being as healthy as I can be.

 

Funny how worrying about weight and size goes the way of the Dodo when you have a chronic illness. There are days where you're grateful to just be on your feet, no matter that a bikini won't ever grace my closet again. :lol:

[MamaSheep]

I go for being as healthy as I can be.

 

Funny how worrying about weight and size goes the way of the Dodo when you have a chronic illness. There are days where you're grateful to just be on your feet, no matter that a bikini won't ever grace my closet again. :lol:

 

:grouphug:

 

Yeah, I quit worrying about my weight and size about the time ds's autism "issues" were at their most violent and chaotic. He was up and um...in need of supervision, let's say... by 6 (if I was lucky) every morning. That was during the time that dd was nursing every 2 hours during the night, and dh thought I needed to be up until 12 or 1 watching a movie with him so we could spend some quality time together. And since we were coming out of a kind of troubled period in our marriage I tried to accommodate him as much as possible. My body image somehow didn't seem all that important while I was severely sleep deprived and trying to manage a new infant while dealing with ds's bizarre "stuff". I was just proud of myself for managing to get out of bed every morning and keep everyone alive and uninjured. Things have calmed down a LOT since that year, but somehow Mom's body image has not yet made it to the top of the priority list. It is getting to the point where I actually NOTICE what my body looks like again, which is something. But since it doesn't seem to bother dh, it's hard to make it matter much to me. Maybe when (if) the kids are grown and gone I will have time to focus more on things like that and I'll figure out a way past the weird hormonal imbalance that is evidently not only contributing to my infertility, but also has the reputation of making dropping pounds extra difficult, and I'll get all svelt. And all the neighbors will be impressed, because none of the people we live near now even know I was ever anything but a pudge. Until then, bigger fish to fry. And somehow, fish tastes better fried...

 

In the mean time, P. P. Rubens makes me feel better on those mornings when I notice the image in the mirror is no longer the 36-24-37 from college days.

[Rosie_0801]

:lol:

 

I don't know-- I think Robin Wright sure looked good in The Princess Bride!

 

She did, even without brushing her hair properly, but she wasn't wearing Italian Ren :)

 

Rosie

[smrtmama]

She did, even without brushing her hair properly, but she wasn't wearing Italian Ren :)

 

Rosie

 

:iagree:

 

Italian Ren loves a voluptuous woman. So does Elizabethan, btw. I did 14th century Bohemian when I had the complete lack of boobs for it. ;)

[Rosie_0801]

. I did 14th century Bohemian when I had the complete lack of boobs for it. ;)

 

Pics, Sweetie ;)

 

Rosie

[Paige]

No kidding! Esp. 1961, Debbie Drake's chart. A 21-23" waist??? My ds7 has a 20.5" waist, and he's at the 0.07% mark on his weight chart at the doc's (58% in height). Ummm... I don't think I need a waist the size of a thin seven year old! :blink:

 

I suspect they were either lying about it just as people do today or they were using some sort of corset to get that waist measurement.

[Veritaserum]

I suspect they were either lying about it just as people do today or they were using some sort of corset to get that waist measurement.

 

That has got to be with a corset! Even without one, I'd fit in pretty well with the 1900 - 1915 ideal. I even have the very pale skin and long hair. :)

[Guest]

I thought it was really intriguing that the biggest drop came during the postwar years, when women were supposed to be backing politely out of the work force to make room for returning GIs and become proper little housewives.

 

If anyone is interested in really digging into this topic, there's a wonderful book by Joan Jacobs Blumberg called The Body Project: An Intimate History of American Girls. Given the high rates of eating disorders in our culture (my sister was bulemic for years and wore off the enamel off the backs of her teeth, among other things), I would even consider it nearly required reading for moms and adolescent daughters at some point during high school.

[LG Gone Wild]

Those measurements must mean without muscle. I am 4'11" and bounce from 110-115 and while not perfect, I really *can't* get much smaller. 95lbs? Only if I want to be skin and bone.

[Truscifi]

Those measurements must mean without muscle. I am 4'11" and bounce from 110-115 and while not perfect, I really *can't* get much smaller. 95lbs? Only if I want to be skin and bone.

 

 

:iagree: Also it depends on your frame. Most short women have a small frame. According to my doctor I have a medium frame with decent muscle mass even though I'm a hair shy of 5'2". She said 125-130 is ideal for me. And I agree - I've been as low as 115 and I was scrawny. My doctor at that time fussed at me too for not eating enough and said I was malnourished. (I was ill too, so that was part of it.)

[Jami]

Those measurements must mean without muscle. I am 4'11" and bounce from 110-115 and while not perfect, I really *can't* get much smaller. 95lbs? Only if I want to be skin and bone.

 

:iagree: I'm 5'6.5" and my lean mass is 130 lbs, so I'd have to lose a lot of muscle for that formula to work. No thanks.

[Paige]

Those measurements must mean without muscle. I am 4'11" and bounce from 110-115 and while not perfect, I really *can't* get much smaller. 95lbs? Only if I want to be skin and bone.

 

It just depends on your frame. I'm 5'2 and have never been 95lbs or more unless I was pregnant. I'm petite, but not scrawny and I've never had a Dr say I was too thin. If I weighed 115 I'd be downright chubby. I weighed 119 right before I had twins and I was huge!

[Soror]

I agree a lot is frame size, I am fairly small framed myself. My friend is 2 inches shorter than me but would be a total anorexic if she was even as small as me, not to mention being smaller. I have another friend who is taller but is a complete pair-shape. Her hips are still somewhat big, even though her chest is now on the verge of concave. She actually needs to gain weight(she is sick), to look human on her top half she has to be about a size 10-12 on bottom. She does have however an extremely small waist.

[Crimson Wife]

I suspect they were either lying about it just as people do today or they were using some sort of corset to get that waist measurement.

 

Back in college I had a 22" waist. I was too skinny overall, however. Being in a sorority at the time skewed my perception of what my weight "should" be. :glare:

[sarawatsonim]

It just depends on your frame. I'm 5'2 and have never been 95lbs or more unless I was pregnant. I'm petite, but not scrawny and I've never had a Dr say I was too thin. If I weighed 115 I'd be downright chubby. I weighed 119 right before I had twins and I was huge!

 

I agree. Where I am not as small as you I am considered petite (although I can't shop petites because my limbs are too long). I am 5'3" and usually weigh between 100-107. I just had a baby on Tuesday and weigh 130 right now and still look pregnant. Although 130 lbs is by no means big, it doesn't carry well on my frame. Even when I was in college and too much partying raised my weight to 118, I looked like I was had put on extra weight just because of the way I carried it on my body. I have never been put into the non healthy category by a doctor, I am just naturally small. There are many times that I would love to be able to put on weight to have a more womanly figure, but it just doesn't work out that way for me.

[LG Gone Wild]

It just depends on your frame. I'm 5'2 and have never been 95lbs or more unless I was pregnant. I'm petite, but not scrawny and I've never had a Dr say I was too thin. If I weighed 115 I'd be downright chubby. I weighed 119 right before I had twins and I was huge!

 

My bones must be heavy or something. My mom is only two inches shorter and would you believe I am 20-25lbs heavier than her? Odd how I am considered petite when I feel like a gorilla next to women who really are petite in frame. Ya'll making me feel fat! I ought to let go of the idea that I need to be 100lbs to be regulation Asian weight. Maybe it's the T and A I've got on me. :tongue_smilie:

[Lawana]

No kidding! Esp. 1961, Debbie Drake's chart. A 21-23" waist??? My ds7 has a 20.5" waist, and he's at the 0.07% mark on his weight chart at the doc's (58% in height). Ummm... I don't think I need a waist the size of a thin seven year old! :blink:

In addition to overall size, I think waist size has a lot to do with the individual size and shape of the ribs and pelvis. Do you have any vertical distance between your ribs and pervis bones? I don't. There's no where for a waist to be. MIL had a 19" waist at age 18. In addition to being overall slim, she has at least 3" between the top of her pelvis and the bottom of her ribs.

[Soror]

In addition to overall size, I think waist size has a lot to do with the individual size and shape of the ribs and pelvis. Do you have any vertical distance between your ribs and pervis bones? I don't. There's no where for a waist to be. MIL had a 19" waist at age 18. In addition to being overall slim, she has at least 3" between the top of her pelvis and the bottom of her ribs.

That is true of friend. She is extremely long waisted and thin waisted. I have some waist and fairly thin- I think I am about 27in waist. Before kids I was about at a 24in. I dont' care to go that small again though.

[Aubrey]

The only thing that comes to mind about the changes over the years of "ideal" is something I came across a few months ago. I tried to find shows for dd to watch that were from when I was a kid. I started watching Bewitched from the first episode. I was so surprised at how "heavy" Elizabeth Montgomery was when doing that show.

 

She looked to be a size 10 or 12 today and it was nice to see.

 

I don't know when TV moms started being size 0-3. I might have been a TV mom back in the 60s, but I'll never fit the weight criteria for today's TV moms.

 

I was watching Bewitched (from the 60s) & Scarecrow & Mrs King (from the 80s) during the same stretch of mos. It was *amazing* to see the difference in size! I mean, Montgomery was almost 1/2 a person bigger than Mrs King, but she was *very* pretty.

 

I've decided that part of it is the styles that are in fashion now. If we'd go back to wearing fuller skirts, we could manage fuller hips. :D

[Medieval Mom]

In addition to overall size, I think waist size has a lot to do with the individual size and shape of the ribs and pelvis. Do you have any vertical distance between your ribs and pervis bones? I don't. There's no where for a waist to be. MIL had a 19" waist at age 18. In addition to being overall slim, she has at least 3" between the top of her pelvis and the bottom of her ribs.

 

Nope, none! When I sit, my ribs practically rest on my pelvic bones. ;)

Edited December 20, 2010 by Medieval Mom

[mama2cntrykids]

It just depends on your frame. I'm 5'2 and have never been 95lbs or more unless I was pregnant. I'm petite, but not scrawny and I've never had a Dr say I was too thin. If I weighed 115 I'd be downright chubby. I weighed 119 right before I had twins and I was huge!

 

See, I'm 5'0" and I look good at about 120 lb (with plenty of muscle). When I was in high school, I was about 98 lb (without near the muscle) and my mother would threaten me because I was too thin. Now, being 17 weeks pregnant, I'm well, considerably more than 120 lb and I'm fully aware that I don't look my best, but I don't look the worst that I have either.

[Ibbygirl]

I saw these recently and was gobsmacked by the difference between the two shows. And I thought the models in the 90's were skinny. :svengo:

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKiT52hAnis

[DawnM]

This is interesting because I actually have read that around 1900-1940s the weight charts were LOWER than they are now. I realize you aren't talking about weight charts, but still.

 

I am 4'11" and I remember reading that 100 years ago my weight should be around 94. Now, maybe if I had to work the farm and grow all my own food I could maintain that, but I found it hard to even maintain 110. That is the lowest I could get and I still worked out an hour a day and ate around 1200 calories per day. It was brutal.

 

Dawn

[Medieval Mom]

I saw these recently and was gobsmacked by the difference between the two shows. And I thought the models in the 90's were skinny. :svengo:

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKiT52hAnis

 

Yikes! And this is coming from a woman whose in-laws are naturally very, very thin. (Think BMIs of around 15-16.) There is a huge difference between people who are naturally thin, and those that look starved. Those girls (in video 2) looked starved. :(

[LG Gone Wild]

I saw these recently and was gobsmacked by the difference between the two shows. And I thought the models in the 90's were skinny. :svengo:

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKiT52hAnis

 

First, I LOVE that lingerie in the first video! That's totally my fantasy. Where can I get that?!

 

Two, LMAO about the 2nd video. DH said they had giraffe legs and came from the tall and frail store. The 90s show looked like way more fun.

[Ibbygirl]

Yikes! And this is coming from a woman whose in-laws are naturally very, very thin. (Think BMIs of around 15-16.) There is a huge difference between people who are naturally thin, and those that look starved. Those girls (in video 2) looked starved. :(

 

:iagree::iagree: Some of them look like they are about to faint.

 

First, I LOVE that lingerie in the first video! That's totally my fantasy. Where can I get that?! Dolce and Gabbana! Prolly off ebay by now since this was 20 years ago. :lol:

 

Two, LMAO about the 2nd video. DH said they had giraffe legs and came from the tall and frail store. The 90s show looked like way more fun.

 

Yeah, they actually jiggled a little bit. I really came across it quite by accident because I just happened to be watching videos on youtube from fashion week to see what was new and I clicked on the 90's one just for fun and I couldn't believe the difference after having seen the Valentino one. Really shocking to see them in contrast like that.