Beauty at any weight ...
The great majority of women are spoon or straight shaped. They take on weight in their stomach and, more in the spoon category, also their hips. They gain weight and I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in them.
Far less women are apple and hourglass shaped. Apple women put it into their chest and bust first, and then their stomach. Hourglass women put it into their bust and hips, equally -- sometimes width and proportion -- before their stomach. As a result, apple shaped women have the lowest life expectancy (pressure on their heart, other vitals) and hourglass women have the longest life expectancy.
In fact, hourglass women have the least increase in their stomach overhang as a result of the distribution, especially on wider structures that are 2-4" beyond ideal forms. As it has been shown regularly, the "inch(es) you pinch" on your stomach are still a better indicator of health than even BMI. BMI does not work because it does not take into account different proportions.
Yes, there are models out there that cannot be healthy under a size 10. Kate Dillon is a perfect example.
Which brings me to Carmella Bing. She was already a beautiful body, hourglass with a somewhat enhanced bust to what was already natural. She had a little bit of a pudge to her belly even earlier, showing that she was 20lbs. and 2+ dress sizes beyond her ideal. But she was never petite, and would be luck to hit a size 8 or 6 dress size at her most ideal.
Now she's gone from being a borderline, hourglass full figured woman (FFW) to a big beautiful woman (BBW). She already had the curves, and now they are in absolute, proportional excess. Is she as "hot" of a "model" as she once was? Doubtful, even in my view. But is she one hell of a fuck now? Oh God yes! I wouldn't think differently either way.
Maybe it's because I have a wife that has been as small as a size 6 (although that was when she was a late teenager and starving herself and she'll never return there) and as big as a size 20. She's perfect at a size 14 in my view, and can never be healthy below a size 10. She varies between D cups and F cups, has a pair of hips that went wide, but she's an apple, so her ass has never been jutting like a hourglass body's would. And I find her as hot at any weight.
It's not because I'm in love with her. It's because she's beauty at any weight, proportional and curvy as she loses and gains in different ways.
That's Carmella Bing as well.
Probably my favorite example of all-time will be Autumn Jade. In fact, she was sexiest as her most full, because not much went to her stomach at all. Sierra has managed much of the same as well, and African Americans are statistically more hourglass than Anglo-American women. Autumn Jade, like many women of the south, likely have some African mixture in there that adds that little perfect hint of extra curvature and hourglass form as well.
The great majority of women are spoon or straight shaped. They take on weight in their stomach and, more in the spoon category, also their hips. They gain weight and I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in them.
Far less women are apple and hourglass shaped. Apple women put it into their chest and bust first, and then their stomach. Hourglass women put it into their bust and hips, equally -- sometimes width and proportion -- before their stomach. As a result, apple shaped women have the lowest life expectancy (pressure on their heart, other vitals) and hourglass women have the longest life expectancy.
In fact, hourglass women have the least increase in their stomach overhang as a result of the distribution, especially on wider structures that are 2-4" beyond ideal forms. As it has been shown regularly, the "inch(es) you pinch" on your stomach are still a better indicator of health than even BMI. BMI does not work because it does not take into account different proportions.
Yes, there are models out there that cannot be healthy under a size 10. Kate Dillon is a perfect example.
Which brings me to Carmella Bing. She was already a beautiful body, hourglass with a somewhat enhanced bust to what was already natural. She had a little bit of a pudge to her belly even earlier, showing that she was 20lbs. and 2+ dress sizes beyond her ideal. But she was never petite, and would be luck to hit a size 8 or 6 dress size at her most ideal.
Now she's gone from being a borderline, hourglass full figured woman (FFW) to a big beautiful woman (BBW). She already had the curves, and now they are in absolute, proportional excess. Is she as "hot" of a "model" as she once was? Doubtful, even in my view. But is she one hell of a fuck now? Oh God yes! I wouldn't think differently either way.
Maybe it's because I have a wife that has been as small as a size 6 (although that was when she was a late teenager and starving herself and she'll never return there) and as big as a size 20. She's perfect at a size 14 in my view, and can never be healthy below a size 10. She varies between D cups and F cups, has a pair of hips that went wide, but she's an apple, so her ass has never been jutting like a hourglass body's would. And I find her as hot at any weight.
It's not because I'm in love with her. It's because she's beauty at any weight, proportional and curvy as she loses and gains in different ways.
That's Carmella Bing as well.
Probably my favorite example of all-time will be Autumn Jade. In fact, she was sexiest as her most full, because not much went to her stomach at all. Sierra has managed much of the same as well, and African Americans are statistically more hourglass than Anglo-American women. Autumn Jade, like many women of the south, likely have some African mixture in there that adds that little perfect hint of extra curvature and hourglass form as well.
