Body Image and Issues after Weight Loss - "Body Frame"




View Full Version : "Body Frame"


ZebraBri
07-24-2011, 08:32 PM
Maybe I truly have been making excuses for myself. Maybe other people were adding on to my excuses.

Do you ever hear "You're meant to be built like that" and "that's just how my frame is?" and things such as that? Well, I've been told that I have a big body frame, and even if I loose a lot of weight, I'll still be bigger. I believed this for a while. Family told me, doctor's told me, etc.

But then I notice the before and after pictures of many people with successful, wonderful weight loss results. Their "before's" looked like they would even have a "big frame" if they lost all the weight...but they ended up looking really tiny after. No "big frame-skinny" at all (if that makes any sense).

So if the "different frame" thing a myth? This probably sounds like a stupid question, but I'm not sure how else to get it answered. :/


xxkaleidoscopic
07-24-2011, 08:58 PM
I dunno whether or not this is true. I know some people have smaller frames than others in the sense that smaller frames don't carry weight as well as bigger frames. And maybe a bigger frame will prevent you from being a size zero, like if your hip bones are wide-set. But there's no reason to believe it'll keep you from getting the kind of figure you'd love!

nelie
07-24-2011, 09:14 PM
I think it is somewhat, I thought I was always thick, big bony wrists, big fingers that didn't seem chubby, big shoes and a thick neck. Now I wear size 8 ring, my neck lost 2 inches down to 6 inches, my wrists are under 7 inches and I still have big feet although I lost over a shoe size.


swtbttrfly23
07-25-2011, 01:57 AM
I've been hearing that from my mom pretty much all my life! The old "you're big-boned" theory. Now there is some truth to that, I do have a large frame and I am taller than most girls, so I was always able to hold my weight better than someone with a smaller frame at my same height and weight. For example, my wrists and ankles (we're talking bone here) are definitely thicker. I also have a good amount of thicker muscle, especially on my legs. I'm a strong, thick woman, not a dainty little thing. I have wide shoulders and wide feet.
That said, I have plenty of room for losing weight! I think what it should ultimately come down to is body fat. Large or small frame, it comes down to the composition of your body. I have plenty of body fat to lose, even on my bigger frame. No matter how much I do lose, I would probably never be smaller than a size 8 or 10-it's just not how my body is composed!

Mishflynn
07-25-2011, 02:22 AM
Im quite Tick set too. Im "wide" my hip bones are wide apart,my rib cage is wide. atm i have very little extra fat on my rib cage (yey) so the bones arent going to get any closer together, so i will always be "wide". Its sad :((((((
My waist is going to be tiny though!.....no bones there!!!!! lol!
Make the best of what youve got! thats all anyone can do!

I will always look bigger than i am , face on in pics,-spometimes wider than fatter people, but side on is where you notice it on me.

sontaikle
07-25-2011, 07:06 AM
It's really hard to tell sometimes, but I truly think we DO have different frames, and I can see it in myself.

I really don't know what the smallest size I'll ever be able to be is, but I can bet it's NOT a size 0. At my current weight and a size 10/12, I can already feel my hip bones emerging. I can also feel my ribs and I wear a 36" band bra, however it's a little tight. I'd probably fit into the 36" perfectly once I finish my weight loss journey (there really isn't much fat at all left around my ribs). I know I have a wider back and hips hidden under all of this as it runs in the family.

It can really be hard to tell a person's size from before and after pictures, as everyone carries their weight differently. I'm sure that if you were to ask people on this forum what size they ended up as, they'd be glad to mention it after all that hard work! :)

pamatga
07-25-2011, 10:59 AM
Maybe I truly have been making excuses for myself. Maybe other people were adding on to my excuses.

Do you ever hear "You're meant to be built like that" and "that's just how my frame is?" and things such as that? Well, I've been told that I have a big body frame, and even if I loose a lot of weight, I'll still be bigger. I believed this for a while. Family told me, doctor's told me, etc.

But then I notice the before and after pictures of many people with successful, wonderful weight loss results. Their "before's" looked like they would even have a "big frame" if they lost all the weight...but they ended up looking really tiny after. No "big frame-skinny" at all (if that makes any sense).

So if the "different frame" thing a myth? This probably sounds like a stupid question, but I'm not sure how else to get it answered. :/

I am going to echo a little of what everyone here said. IMO, I think that when you see those people who appear to be teeny tiny, it could be for several reasons: they might be dehydrated (if you are watching a really low sodium food plan you won't have as much bloat), they might have used weights to replace fat (which takes up more space) with muscle which gives you a leaner look, and finally they just might have a smaller frame (just might--not necessarily).

Also, there are a lot of books written by experienced body builders and such that will give you specific exercises to work specific groups of muscles so that you can essentially do a "trompe l'oeil" (french for "fool the eye"). It was said that Bo Derek was told to do a lot of upper body exercises so that her waist would look a lot smaller and hence a "10" for the movie. People who make their bodies their "work" know all of this. If you really have your heart set on having a "perfect" tiny figure then do some research at the library and I think you will find lots of books out there to help you.

P.S. I am currently doing a lot of exercises for my wide hips and thunder thighs ---lots of reps with low weights (you will never see me go higher than 8 lbs but you might see me do 100 reps of 8 different exercises) so that I am sculpting them to look "thinner". It is working(within 7 weeks). I have already gone down 1 pant size although I have only lost 2 lbs on the actual scale. On the other hand, I have a large bust and therefore a tendency to have poor posture so I am doing a lot of shoulder and upper back exercises so I have a better posture. Stand in front of a mirror sideways and purposely slouch. You will definitely see a difference! Also, a straighter back makes your waist look smaller.

Exercise smarter not harder. ;) That is my spin on this topic. GL.

k8yk
07-25-2011, 01:05 PM
I think our skeletons are all a little bit different, but not so much as people think. The difference between a "small frame" and a "large frame" are nothing most people will notice.

If you weight more and look thinner, it's probably due to a lot of muscle. People frequently guess my weight around 130, but I've never weighed under 160 in my adult life. I even had one girl insist I was 110 (LOL, talk about misguided ideas of what weight looks like!)

So while I do think some of our "healthy weights" can be a bit higher, it's not because of big bones- it's because of muscle. You're not destined to be big, that's for sure. But you also might not be able to weigh as little as someone else without making yourself sick. Can you imagine what I would look like if I really did weight 110? I'd be dead.

joyfulloser
07-25-2011, 06:25 PM
A little truth...mostly MYTH! I too have heard this before from family. Truth of the matter is that, for the most part, all skeletons weight the same. I don't believe anyone's bones are heavier than the next.

That said, different people have different "genetic" purportions. Some tend to carry weight up top an less down below and visa versa. However, even though a person may be limited in certain aspects of purportion (i.e. boobs), most areas can be totally restructured. BUT it takes more than just "losing weight". HEAVY WEIGHT TRAINING, can give a flatbutted woman a nice round butt. Will it make her look like J-lo or Beyonce? I think not...but she can totally reshape her rump into somewhat of a rump-shaker!:carrot:

Have a large frame/torso, there are specific exercises that will build size, strength in your lower half, while tightening your waistline and creating a more symmetric balance.

Never let someone tell you what you CANNOT do, but find those who have DONE IT and ask them how. Congrats on your weight loss thus far...65lbs is nothing to sneeze at!:D

ZebraBri
07-25-2011, 06:33 PM
Thanks everyone for the replies! It's frustrating to think about haha, because so many people tell you one thing, and then people who've lost weight tells me another. But the responses I've gotten on here are good, and have made me think.

MsThickMiddle
07-28-2011, 12:16 AM
My younger sister JUST told me about how we're built to be big and our whole family is big boned etc. I think she fails to remember me 10 years ago at 112 pounds! I was very tiny almost too small. I started having babies and packed on the pounds along with it. By no means do I want to be that small EVER again. But I dont agree with her! My bone structure hasn't changed just whats hanging from it!

shr1nk1ngme
07-28-2011, 01:01 AM
As a yo-yo-er for many, many years, I have had the opportunity to find out exactly what it means to have a large frame. Though I am only 5'2", even when I WAS a size "0" - I went down to a GIRL'S size 14 - I was never a waif. I think that's the difference. I have a large frame (as defined by wrist measurement) and the main difference is that no matter how skinny I ever get, I will always look like a short, clunky person. My ankles get bony but the bones themselves never get smaller. When I am skinny, I just have big, bony wrists and ankles. Also, though it does get thinner when I lose weight, my neck is still short and thick at any weight.

So I just never look like Kate Moss or Mary Kate Olsen no matter how skinny I get.

fight2winthis
07-28-2011, 09:53 AM
You're sooo right! When I tell people what I weigh, they're alwasy shocked. I look much lighter than my weight. I used to be confused about that, but now I know I have nothing to worry about. People tell me that for my height I should weigh about 60-65kg ideally, but when I lost weight to 64kg I looked skeletal! My eyes popping out and all, I lacked energy. Of course I gained it back rapidly, but now I know I dont have to aim so low cos it's just not how I was meant to be. My feet are larger than most women I know (finding my shoe size is a challenge), I have a small waist and relatively flat stomach and almost no fat in my upper body (I see my ribs when I stretch my arms), but my waist measurements is higher that a friend of mine who wears a size 8 and has a pudgy belly. My back and shoulder width are higher than average (a friend of mine makes clothes so I always see the statistics), so yeah, I know that some people have larger/heavier 'bones' or 'frames' than other people, and it's nothing to worry about. Everyone cannot look the same, even people of the same height. FYI, my brother has his gigantic shoes made specifically for him!

MadameZombie
07-28-2011, 11:49 AM
I have a LARGE frame but I'm short so I look a little stocky. My hands are huge, and my feet are size 11s and WIDE. However, I think that this frame makes muscle look amazing. I have a really great décolletage area and a pretty exaggerated hourglass shape. I've been losing inches from my waist, not so much from my bust and hips. Sometimes I wish I was tall and waif-ish but even if I get down to my goal weight I think I'm still going to look larger than other women my height. Oh well... My husband digs the hobbit look I guess.

tkdtara84
07-30-2011, 01:14 AM
I agree with a PP-- mostly myth with a little truth. I'm pretty tall for a girl, so I carry my weight well. Just a few days ago in a doctor's office, the nurse thought I weighed under 150. It's all a matter of proportion, which gives people the perception of someone being fat or skinny.

At my lowest weight pre-baby, I was 160, a loose size 8, and I felt pretty good at that weight. At a 6, which is my goal, I think I'll appear comparable to a 5' person who's a size 2 or maybe even a 0. Now, if I ever were a size 0 myself, which I will never be, I'm sure I would look downright anorexic. A size 0 can look healthy, though, for a short girl-- it's all in the proportions.

Just because you're taller does not mean you're "large framed." You'll still look thin once you lose the weight. The difference is your "thin" look will be a bigger size number than a shorter girl, but you'll still both look great and both look thin.

Sometimes I think people say the large frame thing to make you feel better-- as if you can't help the way you are, but I don't think that's true. We can all do something to not be so overweight. And don't let it work against you and make you feel like even when you lose the weight you won't look like you want to-- you'll look great, and even if you end up with some trouble spots (everyone has them or at least feels as if they do), you will be much happier with the way you look in the end than you were at the beginning or even now.

milmin2043
08-02-2011, 12:30 AM
This thread reminds me of something that was said on "Mike and Molly" the other night. Molly was doing a workout on the elliptical and her mother was saying that she needed to stop killing herself because she is just big boned, just like her father was. Molly said "Mom, bones don't jiggle". I thought that was funny.

We do sometimes tell ourselves things (and others do it as well) that keep us from our ultimate goals. I enjoyed reading all of the responses in this thread. Much to think about.

ChubbyCheeks
08-02-2011, 12:36 AM
This thread reminds me of something that was said on "Mike and Molly" the other night. Molly was doing a workout on the elliptical and her mother was saying that she needed to stop killing herself because she is just big boned, just like her father was. Molly said "Mom, bones don't jiggle". I thought that was funny.

We do sometimes tell ourselves things (and others do it as well) that keep us from our ultimate goals. I enjoyed reading all of the responses in this thread. Much to think about.

LMAO. That is really funny.

And yeah, I think even if you are tall and such, you can still be small. When you see skinny people, don't they just look... skinny?
I don't think I've ever seen someone and thought... "Well, skinny does not fit her, her frames too big!"

keekles
08-09-2011, 03:42 PM
I think it's just a myth. I don't think the human skeleton varies that much between small and big frame, maybe a size or two.

Sunshine87
08-09-2011, 04:01 PM
I think what it should ultimately come down to is body fat. Large or small frame, it comes down to the composition of your body. I have plenty of body fat to lose, even on my bigger frame. No matter how much I do lose, I would probably never be smaller than a size 8 or 10-it's just not how my body is composed!

Agreed. Same here. In fact, I think a bigger frame is better because you can weigh a little more and look great. Did you ever see a woman who is medium sized yet she does not have rolls, cellulite, and she has muscle...I think this is what a bigger frame with a lower body fat % looks like.

runningfromfat
08-09-2011, 04:06 PM
Another vote for myth mixed with truth. Frame size can certainly dictate how one looks at a certain weight and set a limit on a goal weight BUT if you're in the obese range or far from a healthy BMI (and aren't a super bodybuilder) then you're most likely carrying around a good deal of fat. Genetics might make you more prone to gain weight but I don't believe that your bone size does that.

I will say, though, that muscle tone probably makes a bigger difference when it comes to how someone carries their weight. I've been at 185lbs but I was hardly exercising at all at that time. I have pictures of myself now and then and the difference is like night and day but they were both on someone with a "large" frame.

Now, I do think frame size does play a large role when it comes to ones goal weight. I've been "skinny" before and looked amazing at 140lbs, losing much more than that would look pretty bad on me (I also am an hourglass at that weight). I had a good friend who definitely had a small frame at the same height as me and she's always weighed quite a bit less than me. There's just no way I could get to her size because of my build. That doesn't mean I can't look fit and healthy with my size. ;)

SouthLake
08-16-2011, 11:48 AM
I think there are two different parts of our composition- muscle and farme/bone. Both can have a huge effect on our appearance.

With muscle, take my husband. He is the same height as his best friend, and weighs about 40 pounds more than him. (needs to lose about 15) He wants to get down to his friend's weight, because thats the look he would like. However, both of them are flat out built very differently. His friend has long, lean muscles, kind of a "runners build", if you will. My husband is broad shouldered, and thick muscles, with large, very sculpted biceps (despite having never lifted a weight in all his 34 years). No matter how much weight my husband loses, he will never have the same body type as his friend, his muscles are just composed differently. Likewise, his friend, who does quite a bit of heavy weight lifiting, will never look like my husband without the assistance of supplements (and not the healthy kind:) )

Then you have your bone/frame size. I am in between 5'8" and 5'9" with a medium build frame. My hip structure determines my pant size. In college, I lost a lot of weight unintentionally, all the way down to 112ish. At that weight, I could barely button size 6 pants over my hip bones. Being a size zero or a size two will never, ever happen for me. That doesnt mean that I'm not going to continue on my weight loss journey, but, I understand that, even though I'm considered tallish, I will never have a Kate Moss or runway model look. That's just not what my frame dictates.

Nobody is built to be obese- by their frame or their muscles. But, some people are built to be lithe, others are a little more solid. Some women look great at a size 8, some look skeletal, some look thick. Understanding where you are in the spectrum is healthy, but don't let it discourage you.

Magrat
08-17-2011, 05:30 AM
As a yo-yo-er for many, many years, I have had the opportunity to find out exactly what it means to have a large frame. Though I am only 5'2", even when I WAS a size "0" - I went down to a GIRL'S size 14 - I was never a waif. I think that's the difference. I have a large frame (as defined by wrist measurement) and the main difference is that no matter how skinny I ever get, I will always look like a short, clunky person. My ankles get bony but the bones themselves never get smaller. When I am skinny, I just have big, bony wrists and ankles. Also, though it does get thinner when I lose weight, my neck is still short and thick at any weight.

So I just never look like Kate Moss or Mary Kate Olsen no matter how skinny I get.

This is me, right now. I am a short, large-boned mesomorph. Over the past six years I have slowly lost to the vicinity of my eighth grade weight. I'm wearing zeros and double zeros and girls sizes 14 and 12. But I still look chunky.

It's not fair. I want to be a waif, I want to be small-boned and delicate. I'm beginning to think I'd have to get down to about 90 pounds before that I would happen. And I know my stupid body won't let me go there since it is fighting me tooth and nail for every lost ounce.

mimi86
08-17-2011, 01:14 PM
Not really a myth, there are different frame sizes--check yours on this chart:

http://www.am-i-fat.com/body_frame_size.html

I'm only 5'2" but my wrist is 6 inches, and it's BONY (you can see the bone on the outer side of the wrist sticking way out, and when i turn my hands palms-up you can see all the tendons and veins...no fat there!). My elbow breadth is also 2.5 inches, which puts me right on the cusp between Medium and Large frame for a 5'2" woman.

If there are any other pear-shaped shorties out there with a small frame and same weight we could compare pictures to see!

k8yk
08-17-2011, 02:45 PM
This is me, right now. I am a short, large-boned mesomorph. Over the past six years I have slowly lost to the vicinity of my eighth grade weight. I'm wearing zeros and double zeros and girls sizes 14 and 12. But I still look chunky.

It's not fair. I want to be a waif, I want to be small-boned and delicate. I'm beginning to think I'd have to get down to about 90 pounds before that I would happen. And I know my stupid body won't let me go there since it is fighting me tooth and nail for every lost ounce.


You need to embrace who you are instead of wanting to be somebody else! There are so many different ways to be beautiful. "Waif" isn't the only one, and please don't let popular media convince you otherwise.

We can all lose weight and get to a healthier shape, but some things you cannot change. Like I am 5'8" and very muscular. I will never weigh less than 150 pounds unless I'm dying. I could be angry and hate myself- but why? You only live once! Instead, I've decided to embrace myself and love being a strong, tall woman. Please don't judge yourself against anyone else. You can only be YOU :hug:

shr1nk1ngme
08-18-2011, 11:02 AM
You need to embrace who you are instead of wanting to be somebody else! There are so many different ways to be beautiful. "Waif" isn't the only one, and please don't let popular media convince you otherwise.

We can all lose weight and get to a healthier shape, but some things you cannot change. Like I am 5'8" and very muscular. I will never weigh less than 150 pounds unless I'm dying. I could be angry and hate myself- but why? You only live once! Instead, I've decided to embrace myself and love being a strong, tall woman. Please don't judge yourself against anyone else. You can only be YOU :hug:

^^ This.

For a long time I thought if I got down to <100 pounds, I wold look like a waif. But I finally got there, and guess what? I looked sick instead. I figured out, with my wrist measurement (5'2" tall and 6.5" wrist) that <100 was not at all flattering to me. So I have made a decision to maintain a more healthy weight (105 - 120 lbs) and to engage in a very serious bodybuilding workout, and monitor my nutrition to ensure healthy muscle growth. I use FitDay pc software (not the online version) to do this.

I have a large-boned, but short, body. Having been very skinny in the past, I have finally accepted that I will never be a waif. But I CAN look like I just stepped out of a Nike ad. So I have made the athletic look my goal. It's healthier anyway, and sets a better example for my kids to follow. :)

kaplods
08-18-2011, 11:33 AM
I think overweight people may tend to overestimate their frame size, but I also think there is a very wide range of frame sizes and shapes.

You may not have a large frame, but you also may never be able to force your body into the shape you want, whether it's the classic hourglass or the modern super model.

If you're apple shaped, you may or may not get a waist at your ideal weight. If you're pear shaped, you may always be pear shaped (just a much smaller pear).

I also don't think that frame size is as simple, as small, medium, and large. A person can have huge wrists and a tiny pelvis, or vice versa. I think that we come in all sorts of proportions - wide and narrow shoulders and pelvises, wide and narrow, large and small hands, feet, skulls...

If you're very overweight, frame size doesn't matter - so talking about it is sort of socially-moderated silliness. When I was almost 400 lbs, it didn't matter what size my bones were - I was way too fat. Almost 100 lbs later, and it still doesn't matter.

Getting the fat off, however will probably reveal my "true" frame size, but it still won't matter. I'm not obligated to lose or keep a certain amount of weight, based on my bone size. I'll keep trying to lose weight until I reach the shape and health I want, or until I determine that I can't or don't want to go any further.

I think we spend far more time worrying about what we "should" weigh or should look like than is mentally or physically healthy. We act as if there's some magic number, that come **** or high water we're obligated to reach, whether we personally want to or not.

Your weight and health status will never be an objective point. At best, it will be a range, and will be determined by all of your behaviors and attributes, not a single point on the scale.

We act as if we're going to be perfectly healthy and beautiful at some magic point on the scale, and suddenly become ugly and ill 5 lbs later.

I think it's what makes dieting such a national obsession, even with women who are at a healthy weight. You're almost not a woman in America, if you haven't obsessed about your looks and weight - if you haven't decided that your life would be perfect if you could only lose those 5, 10, 40, 60, 200 lbs.

We also act as if only the magic number matters. If we can't lose ALL the weight we want to, if we can't get the exact body that we want, then it's not even worth trying to make any improvements.

We don't truly, deep-down believe that "every pound matters," we think that if we can't reach the magic number, or the magic "look" then we might as well make no effort at all.

It took me 35 years of dieting to truly learn and realize that every ounce matters - every extra step, every morsel of food - every positive change is worth keeping and hanging on to and making more.

When you really believe that, regaining isn't as automatic. It's only because we think that only the goal matters, that regaining is so easy.

I know I've said it many times before, but we need to see health weight loss and management like mountain climbing. We need to see why it's a bad idea to respond to a stumble by throwing ourselves off the nearest cliff so we can "start fresh" tomorrow or Monday or New Years.

I think the emphasis on "goal weight" or goal body actually works against us, because everything else seems meaningless.

If the emphasis were on improvement, not just the final destination, I don't think giving up and throwing ourselves off metaphorical cliffs would be less of an issue.

celly123
08-18-2011, 11:56 AM
There is definitely some truth the idea of frame size. I am a little on the tall side, and the lowest weight I've ever been at this height is 145, and at that weight my hipbones jutted out and my elbows were sharp, you could see my collarbone and my ribs - all trademarks of a "skinny" girl, yet I didn't have that waif-ish figure.

I just have wider-set hip bones and ribs, and that's that! If I can get down to 160 I think I'll I have a good body, but it'll never be a "thin" body.

fight2winthis
08-18-2011, 05:10 PM
I feel you! @165 my cheekbones are protruding lol, my neck is long and my eye sockets are hollow, almost skeletal. I think I'll settle for 170 aka 77kg!

k8yk
08-18-2011, 06:52 PM
One more thing while everyone is discussing body size- did you know that the images of models in magazines are generally more than 10% BELOW a healthy body weight? So that body so many people are after- it's already unhealthy to begin with. No wonder we can't get anywhere near it without harming ourselves.

anthem
08-18-2011, 07:08 PM
I have been loving this discussion and have been pondering the same things for quite a while. I have these tiny wrists, which would lead me to believe that I have a small frame. However, my rib cage is huge and falls in the medium to large frame (leaving any excess fat on my ribs out of this- ribs are larger than my breasts) so even with weight loss I won't look "skinny".

celly123
08-18-2011, 07:51 PM
One more thing while everyone is discussing body size- did you know that the images of models in magazines are generally more than 10% BELOW a healthy body weight? So that body so many people are after- it's already unhealthy to begin with. No wonder we can't get anywhere near it without harming ourselves.

And to add to this - they photoshop OUT the gross looking parts of models bodies in their pictures. They actually blur the ribcages and weird looking bone lines (i.e. if their legs are spread, their groin bones poke out and these get shopped!).

So they show this stick thin waif, but without any of the gross things! It's not physically possible to have a body that frail without bones popping out!

Magrat
08-18-2011, 09:20 PM
^^ This.

For a long time I thought if I got down to <100 pounds, I wold look like a waif. But I finally got there, and guess what? I looked sick instead. I figured out, with my wrist measurement (5'2" tall and 6.5" wrist) that <100 was not at all flattering to me. So I have made a decision to maintain a more healthy weight (105 - 120 lbs) and to engage in a very serious bodybuilding workout, and monitor my nutrition to ensure healthy muscle growth. I use FitDay pc software (not the online version) to do this.

I have a large-boned, but short, body. Having been very skinny in the past, I have finally accepted that I will never be a waif. But I CAN look like I just stepped out of a Nike ad. So I have made the athletic look my goal. It's healthier anyway, and sets a better example for my kids to follow. :)

If you don't mind my asking, what did you do to get under 100 pounds?