"I don't know if it's just me, but I have felt for quite some time that the current system of describing ones body type / size is open to massive misinterpretation.
Allow me to expand on this.
As someone who remembers 'The Clothes Show' from the 80's I recall that the term 'Fabulous' was used by the 'larger' ladies - I imagine this is what we refer to these days as BBW
It is apparent that younger members who are not familiar with this interpret the term 'Fabulous' to mean something more akin to 'perfect body', 'Hot', 'Supermodel' etc.
Because there is no explanation of what these terms mean when creating a profile, we have a situation where some members may be missing out due to misinterpretation by others.
For example, without stating a particular preference, but simply describing a scenario to illustrate a point, one could visit a profile where the user has selected the 'Fabulous' option. The reader interprets this as BBW and, as that is not the type they are looking for, they pass the profile by, when in fact, the 'Fabulous' user may be exactly the type they are looking for.
Of course, there is another method that would clear up a lot of confusion.
In the clothing industry, there is a standard system i.e. sizes. (e.g. Size 10, 12, 14 etc)
Obviously, I appreciate that size standards are different between Men & Women, but for example, a woman may consider herself as @Ample' where others may regard her as curvy - and vice versa.
And, if I'm being particularly pedantic, Curvy is a shape, not a size.
Perhaps as a compromise we could modify the existing system, for example, give examples of sizes for each of the 'types'
Just off the top of my head, for example 'Curvy - Sizes 14-18)'
How do others feel about this?"
Personally, I've been a size 18 plus and worked really hard to get to a 14 ... so I'd rather not be grouped in that way. (Nowt wrong with being an 18)
Plus, as others have said - check out the photos, or if none pass by  xx |
