Also  do men really take those stats into account? Now I have seen some providers sites who posts stats and they actually look bigger than what their stats dictates. What is wrong with admitting that they may be a siz 11/12 or higher?

Reoes a woman's stats really give an accurate impression?

Nothing is wrong with it, but a lot of hobbiests don't have a clear idea what womens sizes really mean. As I recall Marilynn Monroe was a size 10. I could be wrong about this, but the average woman is between like a size 6 and a size 9? Any help from the ladies would really be appreciated at this juncture because I am know way out of my depth.

a size 14, the last I read about it online some time ago. But I think that photographs should be a clear clue as to what a lady looks like, than relying on her stats.



Article I just found:

PRINT THIS STORY | E-MAIL THIS STORY

Sizes may vary, but shape of many Americans is pear

By Lisa Ryckman, Rocky Mountain News
April 13, 2004

The hourglass of the past has been replaced by the pear shape of the present.

We're getting heavier faster than we're getting taller, according to a new national survey that used the latest technology to determine the average sizes for American men and women.

Advertisement

The bottom line, so to speak: The average woman is a size 14. But she might fit into sizes 8, 10 and 12, too.

The last time anybody checked - about 60 years ago - the average woman was considered a size 8: 35-inch bust, 27-inch waist and 37.5 inch hips. But clothing manufacturers typically ignore those numbers, which means difficulty in finding the right size. Some use "vanity sizing," which means they label bigger clothes with smaller sizes to make their customers feel better.

That explains why only 10 percent of the women in the survey who wore a size 8 actually fit those measurements. Nearly 70 percent of the women surveyed had hips bigger than 40 inches, which puts them closer to 14.

-- Modified on 4/26/2004 11:10:01 AM

The lady doesn't change.  However if she spends more, they will sew a smaller size into the tag.

-- Modified on 4/26/2004 4:09:33 PM

You are correct sir

in Iowa and Nebraska last year and those corn-fed babes were huge!  They really skew the national stats.  The average size in L.A. is probably a 6.  Hmm, I'm going to have to make another trip to the heartland.

I haven't a clue about dress size but other stats are important.
Stats add to the info on her physical description.  More info
is never bad and can frequently be good.

The most important stats for me are height and weight.  These
go along way to describing her build.

After that I pay attention to her actual measurements but they
are less important.

fr

the concept of inner beauty? (just kiddin') Actually though, I do prefer a lil meat on them bones, but tone, attitude, performance, personality, etc are far more important than dress size. I've seen BBW's, petites, slims, and luved them all.

...A size 14 and 5'4" tall...
 The problem with stats and sizes is that most men don't take height into consideration when seeing the other numbers. I am almost 6' tall and a size 10/12, that is much different from a woman who is 5'4 and a size 10 or 12. (I am not saying there is anything bad about being that size, by the way). I am not a heifer, as someone so eloquently put it, but am strong and solid, not fat or flabby.
 I see so many stats and weights on websites that are not even close to being accurate. Sometimes I wonder if these women are actually fooling anyone. I believe you can get a good idea idea of the woman's relative fitness level/ body style from pictures, even if they are touched up a bit.
 I have enclosed a link to an article that lists the average measurements for women in the U.S. It also has stats for men. (No discussion about penis size, though. Sorry guys.)

Reoes a woman's stats really give an accurate impression?

I understand that many of us want a Pam Anderson-type provider, and quite frankly, picture that whenever we hear stats to our liking. But I NEVER assume that what's in the pic is what I'll get. Seeing your 2-dimensional dream provider in 3-D can be very sobering in many cases, especially if the expectation is unreasonable. Remember the saying, "If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is." Do what I do and pray for the best, prepare for the worst.

Seemed to have been asking only that provider's advertising be done honestly.  A person can go into the philosophy of dreams versus reality, but significant mis-representation should concern everyone who makes an appointment with a new provider based upon her advertising.

I can hold a lot of weight and still look average in size, and I can be very, very tiny and not look sickly, so I'm 'lucky' in that regards that whether on the 'upper' end of the scale or the lower end of the scale, I can hold it well.
Weight (the number) also is irrelevant since many years ago, I used to bodybuild so naturally, muscle weighs more than fat. When I would tell people what my weight was, they would be surprised. Happily, just being able to go OFF the Pill recently, I dropped 10 pounds almost immediately! Woohoo!
Also, the body shape makes a difference as, when I was a size 14, most people were shocked and thought I was full of BS because I look smaller (thin legs); and I've seen ladies who were considerably larger than myself wearing the same size but because they had tiny waists, even though they might've had a big butt or hips. So, it depends on how it's distributed, too.
They said Marilyn Monroe was a size 12 or something, but if you look at the ladies from the 30-'40's, they had tiny waists and shoulders (and backs) but bigger in the thighs, I think, than we are today.
Most of my clients tell me right from the start that they are pleasantly surprised when they see me, and I sure would rather have it in that direction than the opposite! They say, why don't you put up better pictures, change it, etc, since it's not you, at all??? Well, I may change it for other reasons, and then add new pictures, but it's worked to my benefit to leave it as 'lousy' as it is (for those who think so). By that I mean that it's served as a filtering, screening process in itself.
By the time someone has gone through their preferences and prejudices, and looked and still selected me, he's usually someone I would want to see also.
And age, well, read my last few reviews..age-schmage..sometimes I look younger than my daughter! Age is meaningless in many ways..

As Sedona and SomeRandomProvider have pointed out, it's how the numbers are distributed.  You need a picture, at least, to tell you that.  But if you have the picture, who needs the stats?

Women will always misrepresent themselves if you let them. All the women I know lie about their weight, especially on their ID.

I have the photos that I like on my website. They are creative and look very unprovider like. I can't have classic model shots up on my site because I model, and although I am sure my manager will find out eventually, I would prefer it to be later than sooner, as I am stilling paying off my student loans....grrr....

I am a big girl, not a BBW, and not fake boobs and enhanced ass either. I am just curvy, tall, and wild looking with the dreadlocks now. My reviews pretty much paint my picture, especially my latest! I agree with Sedona, my photos filter out those I wouldn't enjoy spending time with.

Some women who are size 10 look like they are size 7. It depends on the frame of the woman in question. How about for men?  Let's see . . . size 3 or 5 would be considered too small by some. Hmm . . . interesting, eh?

Hugs,
Ciara

Michelle,,,,, What you got "Is All Good"  All I can say is "More please"

-- Modified on 4/27/2004 2:34:38 PM