I’m too sexy for your body
Yesterday I went to my tailor to be measured for my wedding sari/dress.
Let’s just say that I’m far from the Western ideal of 36-24-36, a shape that has been referenced in pop culture by the Commodores, Sir Mix-A-Lot and the Violent Femmes.
Come to think of it, I don’t recall a time, even during my fittest teenage years, where that “ideal” string of numbers described my physique — and I was cute at 19!
Andrea Lynn, who was an editor for the News Bureau at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, says 36-24-36 is a disproportionate figure, akin to Barbie. The measurement casts aside the fact that the average woman is shaped more like a pear, not an hourglass. Plus, 36-24-36 would mean that a woman has a size 10 bust, a size 2 waist and size 4 hips.
Which begs the question: Is that “ideal” attainable without surgical enhancements?
So, despite the big-bigger-biggest measurements for my sari, I’m gonna strut it on my wedding day.
Tags: 36-24-36, barbie, body image, commodores, sari, sir mix-a-lot, violent femmes, wedding planning, women's body size, women's measurements
August 20th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
I absolutely agree with you about 36-24-36 being unattainable, unrealistic and not the only hallmark of attractiveness. But be assured about the sari. If draped right, it is immensely sexy, feminine and kind to most body types.
But no matter what you wear, you’ll look great.
August 26th, 2008 at 4:07 am
I used to be 36-25-35 (not quite the ideal, but close) before the kids, and let me tell you, and you’ll agree, I in no way ever looked as curvy as Barbie. Those numbers don’t mean anything. Barbie just had a good tailor keeping her clothes snug tight. Women look as sexy as they want to look, and I know you’ll look good in anything you put on.