I haven't seen the episode yet... was this a clearly ridiculous description of a person who couldn't fit those stats? Or is this just a general objection to encouraging often-unrealistic weight norms?
(Not always unrealistic, though -- that was my height and weight between the ages of 16-23 or so, and I had a very hearty appetite.)
Maybe it could have fit her - I didn't get a great look at her overall form - and sure, there are women who fit that description, but it's highly unusual and I'm just generally objecting to the ongoing reinforcement of unrealistic norms.
So this would be what in standard units? *a question to the google unit conversion later* 1.75m and 54kg? So that's underweight by common BMI measures, isn't it?
I was, at one point, ~5'10" and 129 pounds (bout of depression in 2001-02). Having been there and remembering what I looked like, anything less than that would be getting into dangerous territory.
Ha ha, when I had an EDNOS in college, I was six feet tall and 145 lbs, and had amenorrhea and vitamin deficiencies and all sorts of exciting side effects. I was sad I wasn't 120 or even 110 lbs, like the models.
Yes, my first reaction upon hearing that description of someone was - is the character supposed to be suffering from an eating disorder? Because, yeah.
no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 12:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 01:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 01:20 pm (UTC)(Not always unrealistic, though -- that was my height and weight between the ages of 16-23 or so, and I had a very hearty appetite.)
no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 01:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 02:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 02:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 02:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 02:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 02:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 05:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-08-14 06:46 pm (UTC)