Describing Body Types

[tantraman]

Lads,

In describing body types, I find using women's dress sizes a tad tedious, as those numbers don't always reflect what one sees ... and I end up having to still write out descriptions.

Although we seems to have standard scales for facial beauty ...

External Link/Members Only)

Hidden Image/Members Only

... and PP does a tremendous job keeping us to the FS Scale for bubble butts ...

Hidden Image/Members Only

... I can't find a guide for female body types on UKP. But I found this online, and wonder whether this would be of help in standardising our spiel, unless there's something I've missed? ...

Hidden Image/Members Only

[unclepokey]

This is an amazing piece of work.
The trouble is that beauty is - it really is - in the eye of the beholder. This applies very much to facial features.
With other metrics -tits and bums  - sizes can describe with more precision what is the state of the woman concerned.

I am not turned on greatly by huge tits. Indeed one of my long time and hugely loved regulars has almost no tits whatsoever.

As to bottoms  - well I do like a good bottom on a woman. But that doesn't mean I like some of the arses one sees for instance in Bay St Nassau. Enough is as good as a feast I think the saying is.

The real metric for me is the personality of the woman in question. There are three points on that compass. Did we enjoy each others company and did I feel I'd had value for money? 10 points.
Did I leave feeling I wouldn't return despite not feeling I'd completely wasted my money. 5/10.
Or was the booking a total disaster darling! 0/10.

[winkywanky]

My personal observation: looking at the faces, there's a few of the Plain/Neutrals that look just as good as some of the Beautifuls. Even one or two of the Gorgeous. Some of that is the quality of the photo/lighting, mostly the make-up.

[houseboot]

It's all subjective.

No 5 fat?

Others might describe her as normal, curvy or chubby.

[mh]

I'd query use of the word "normal" for any body type. I mean for some punters, naming no names, <cough> HP <cough> 6 and 7 would be deemed normal! 

2 to me would be "slim".

I think the scale is one out between 3 and 5 - 3 to me would be "shapely", 4 "curvy" and 5 "chubby". 6 would then be fat I suppose, but there's a big jump in size from images 5 to 6...

[PatMacGroin]

It's all subjective.

No 5 fat?

Others might describe her as normal, curvy or chubby.

Yeah, I'd probably describe that as just a bit overweight. It's beyond the chubby level where you could easily pinch a bit of flesh between thumb and fore finger, but fat sounds a touch harsh. I'd say that scale would need another image between 5 and 6 (obese) to cover fat.

Also, even though the butt scale actually seems spot on it does seem hard to quantify other aesthetic judgements in a scale like this. Particularly facial beauty. I've used a 1/10 scales in my reviews, but that's my personal rating of comparison against my other reviews, and sometimes I look back on them and think I'd change them in hindsight.

[akauya]

2 to me would be "slim".

For me too!

It's all subjective.

No 5 fat?

Others might describe her as normal, curvy or chubby.

Agree.

It's totally silly trying to find a "definitive" rule. Same for the facial beauty "scale". It's ridiculous. I remember the guy who set that one up was obsessed with reviews giving numerical ratings. Is he still around?  For example describing Megan Fox as 'rare beauty' to me is bonkers. Yes, she is pretty but not a rare beauty.

As the saying goes beauty is in the eyes of the beerholder 

[LLPunting]

Lads,

In describing body types, I find using women's dress sizes a tad tedious, as those numbers don't always reflect what one sees ... and I end up having to still write out descriptions.

Although we seems to have standard scales for facial beauty ...

External Link/Members Only)

Hidden Image/Members Only

... and PP does a tremendous job keeping us to the FS Scale for bubble butts ...

Hidden Image/Members Only

... I can't find a guide for female body types on UKP. But I found this online, and wonder whether this would be of help in standardising our spiel, unless there's something I've missed? ...

Hidden Image/Members Only

RL good looking faces aren't always photogenic and photogenic faces aren't always "beautiful" in RL.  So it's too subjective to waste time on, better to say if nose was big, long, snub, sharp, etc; lips thin or full; etc.

In the body type pics boyish is redundant; skinny just about shows it, if joints bulge more than flesh on lengths between that'd be skinny; 2 and 3 are slim/slender by today's standard of ladies in UK (average reported dress size is 12+, those in pics are 8 or below;  pics 4 and 5 are getting towards RL norms and sizing up at 10-14, neither are particularly chubby let alone fat; there really should be another couple of pics between 5 and 6 to properly reflect chubby and fat before obese (6 is pushing into morbid); 8 doesn't look particularly different to 0-2.

It would be better to describe the size of a lady's belly, the heft of her thighs, sagginess of butt, slack or tautness of tone, degree of cellulite, texture of complexion.

[akauya]

RL good looking faces aren't always photogenic and photogenic faces aren't always "beautiful" in RL.  So it's too subjective to waste time on...

This is exactly what I was going to say but didn't know how to say it 

[Ali Katt]

For me too!


Agree.

It's totally silly trying to find a "definitive" rule. Same for the facial beauty "scale". It's ridiculous. I remember the guy who set that one up was obsessed with reviews giving numerical ratings. Is he still around?  For example describing Megan Fox as 'rare beauty' to me is bonkers. Yes, she is pretty but not a rare beauty.

As the saying goes beauty is in the eyes of the beerholder 

Megan Fox I don't find attractive. Roma I rarely find attractive which most of those AW verificiation photos seem to be.

Because of my taste I like pale skin, often lighter coloured hair and blue\green\hazel eyes. I think it's well documented I prefer upwards of a size 14, with 16-22 being the sweet spot. That means a size 8 girl with olive skin is never going to be an 8 out of 10 for me, they are my 5s.

I appreciate the effort, but I don't think reviews should be standardized. I'm even more against leaderboards, scores out of 10s and escort of the month etc which are other forms related to standardisation and statisitcs.

[LLPunting]

Megan Fox I don't find attractive. Roma I rarely find attractive which most of those AW verificiation photos seem to be.

Because of my taste I like pale skin, often lighter coloured hair and blue\green\hazel eyes. I think it's well documented I prefer upwards of a size 14, with 16-22 being the sweet spot. That means a size 8 girl with olive skin is never going to be an 8 out of 10 for me, they are my 5s.

I appreciate the effort, but I don't think reviews should be standardized. I'm even more against leaderboards, scores out of 10s and escort of the month etc which are other forms related to standardisation and statisitcs.

Yup, agree totally.  That's why I believe an objective description of the SP and the encounter is most useful.  Similarly saying things like OWO was "wonderful" or "best ever" without describing technique is just diarising one's conquests. 

[EastCoast Rambler]

Whenever a girl says she's a size 10 for instance, you know she's at least a 12. Curvy means fat. Big booty? - that's just a fat arse with loads of dimples.

[Malvolio]

Descriptions work best for me - once you've read a few reviews you can get an idea of what she's like.

Height is also useful in the description.

[peter purves]

A valiant attempt my friend 

You can do it with certain criteria like bums ie shapes of bums

Hidden Image/Members Only

Or with breasts

Hidden Image/Members Only

However, even with body types it is hard, I guess you could use the standard:

Work Out for Your Body Type

External Link/Members Only

 

[jeanphillipe]

check this out


External Link/Members Only

personally i dislike the lollypop which is big breast tiny ass.

my preferences are ofcourse hourglass/violin or pear

[tantraman]

check this out

External Link/Members Only

That's interesting, jeanpjillipe ... I upload here for ease of access ...

Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only

[tantraman]

All in all, thanks everyone for the discussion ... it's clear that we'll duly continue to describe bodes as we see them, and there's nought wrong with that.

[Horizontal pleasures]

I'd query use of the word "normal" for any body type. I mean for some punters, naming no names, <cough> HP <cough> 6 and 7 would be deemed normal! 

2 to me would be "slim".

I think the scale is one out between 3 and 5 - 3 to me would be "shapely", 4 "curvy" and 5 "chubby". 6 would then be fat I suppose, but there's a big jump in size from images 5 to 6...

I am happy to be quoted but do not understand: surely sizes less than about 6 are close to anorexic. I like sizes 14 to 22 best. But I can meet anyone who is bigger or smaller and has enthusiasm and will like a randy grandpa.

[Horizontal pleasures]

Megan Fox I don't find attractive. Roma I rarely find attractive which most of those AW verificiation photos seem to be.

Because of my taste I like pale skin, often lighter coloured hair and blue\green\hazel eyes. I think it's well documented I prefer upwards of a size 14, with 16-22 being the sweet spot. That means a size 8 girl with olive skin is never going to be an 8 out of 10 for me, they are my 5s.

I appreciate the effort, but I don't think reviews should be standardized. I'm even more against leaderboards, scores out of 10s and escort of the month etc which are other forms related to standardisation and statisitcs.

yippee, someone else who shares my size preferences! Hello AK, from
HP

[scutty brown]

best way to describe women's body shapes is by analogy to animals.......so you get

humpbacked whale
walrus
giraffe
orang-utan
gorilla (for the butch hairy ones)
whippet (for the gymnastic types)
stick insect  (for the anorexics)

[snaitram99]

I am happy to be quoted but do not understand: surely sizes less than about 6 are close to anorexic. I like sizes 14 to 22 best. But I can meet anyone who is bigger or smaller and has enthusiasm and will like a randy grandpa.

Sounds to me like mh is using American sizes, which I believe are about 4 below UK sizes, so a slim UK size 8 would be a US size 4, but a UK size 4 would prob be anorexic. Of course the Americans don't always realise ours are different so they would think a girl quoting size 10 could be a bit chubby. Confusing isn't it. No idea of EU sizes.

[Rochelle]

Sounds to me like mh is using American sizes, which I believe are about 4 below UK sizes, so a slim UK size 8 would be a US size 4, but a UK size 4 would prob be anorexic. Of course the Americans don't always realise ours are different so they would think a girl quoting size 10 could be a bit chubby. Confusing isn't it. No idea of EU sizes.

Look at the post again. The numbers are not dress sizes. He's talking about the numbers on the body chart in the original post.

[LLPunting]

best way to describe women's body shapes is by analogy to animals.......so you get

humpbacked whale
walrus
giraffe
orang-utan
gorilla (for the butch hairy ones)
whippet (for the gymnastic types)
stick insect  (for the anorexics)

Sadly I think you're serious.   

[snaitram99]

Look at the post again. The numbers are not dress sizes. He's talking about the numbers on the body chart in the original post.

OK I stand corrected re mh - but HP misled me by referring to dress sizes.

[Horizontal pleasures]

OK I stand corrected re mh - but HP misled me by referring to dress sizes.

i was misled as the sizes were not dress sizes. But since we are in the UK why were US sizes quoted? I had no idea that they were different. Now I am not only misled but totally puzzled.

[Rochelle]

i was misled as the sizes were not dress sizes. But since we are in the UK why were US sizes quoted? I had no idea that they were different. Now I am not only misled but totally puzzled.

Oh jeez, it's not hard to follow. Just look at the last image in the original post. No US dress sizes were quoted in any post.

[LLPunting]

i was misled as the sizes were not dress sizes. But since we are in the UK why were US sizes quoted? I had no idea that they were different. Now I am not only misled but totally puzzled.

BTW dress sizes acroos Brit retailers (and online ones) are inconsistent.  You'll need to look up sizing standards for Brit industry to find the actual measurement ranges for "official" sizings.

[mr small]

Facial attractiveness is made up of many different features and each of us will have our own criteria as to not only which features are most / least important but also what constitutes poor / ok / good for each of these features.

e.g.

eyes ....nose....mouth......teeth......hair.....skin.....foreheads......chins......cheeks.......makeup etc

 

[mh]

Sounds to me like mh is using American sizes

 |
 |
 V

Look at the post again. The numbers are not dress sizes. He's talking about the numbers on the body chart in the original post.

Correct. 

[mh]

i was misled as the sizes were not dress sizes. But since we are in the UK why were US sizes quoted? I had no idea that they were different. Now I am not only misled but totally puzzled.

|
|
V

Oh jeez, it's not hard to follow. Just look at the last image in the original post. No US dress sizes were quoted in any post.

 

[django0700]

best way to describe women's body shapes is by analogy to animals.......so you get

humpbacked whale
walrus
giraffe
orang-utan
gorilla (for the butch hairy ones)
whippet (for the gymnastic types)
stick insect  (for the anorexics)

I am easy going so for me they are only a few categories:

• Love to fuck her
  Fuckable in a pinch
  I'd rather pleasure myself
  I'd rather turn gay.
  
  

[Colston36]

Whenever a girl says she's a size 10 for instance, you know she's at least a 12. Curvy means fat. Big booty? - that's just a fat arse with loads of dimples.

I am guilty of using voluptuous when she was frighteningly vast.

[ZeroCount]

That first body shape chart is really interesting, I'd love to see that quoted in reviews.

I wonder, am I unusual in having a preference for either end of the chart, but not so much the middle? 0 and 1 both look amazing, but I'm also partial to anywhere from a 5 up to a 7. The middle of the scale however does little for me, nor does the "athletic" 8 and 9.

[Daffodil]

Given what seems to be the new standard of moderation, all women are beautiful and sizes are irrelevant. Body types shouldn’t be described.

[Redpunter]

Given what seems to be the new standard of moderation, all women are beautiful and sizes are irrelevant. Body types shouldn’t be described.

A Pulse and wet pussy comes to mind

[Mallow841]

I don’t think it is possible to describe someone else’s body accurately as we all have our own perceptions of “chubby” “curvy” “slim” for example.

When it comes to dress sizes it can be confusing also, it was a regular who told me how dress sizes differ on people in threads to their height, I didn’t take it into consideration before.

For example a 5’9 size 14 woman is likely to look a lot slimmer and smaller than a 5’2 size 14 woman.

I doubt there will ever be a foolproof way to describe a body type, or facial attractiveness to be honest.

[Horizontal pleasures]

I don’t think it is possible to describe someone else’s body accurately as we all have our own perceptions of “chubby” “curvy” “slim” for example.

When it comes to dress sizes it can be confusing also, it was a regular who told me how dress sizes differ on people in threads to their height, I didn’t take it into consideration before.

For example a 5’9 size 14 woman is likely to look a lot slimmer and smaller than a 5’2 size 14 woman.

I doubt there will ever be a foolproof way to describe a body type, or facial attractiveness to be honest.

It looks like you have not yet tried yourself to describe one, we look forward to your first review!

[Mallow841]

It looks like you have not yet tried yourself to describe one, we look forward to your first review!

I have actually.
If you look through my posts I posted about admin giving me access to my old profile again, I am still awaiting.

[Colston36]

best way to describe women's body shapes is by analogy to animals.......so you get

humpbacked whale
walrus
giraffe
orang-utan
gorilla (for the butch hairy ones)
whippet (for the gymnastic types)
stick insect  (for the anorexics)

I love gorillas.

[LLPunting]

I have actually.
If you look through my posts I posted about admin giving me access to my old profile again, I am still awaiting.

What was your old profile name?