Why is there an entire article criticizing this woman's body? It's funny that the comments section shows more maturity than the news article.
Are 29 year old women suuposed to have that much cellulite? She's not obese, but she is overweight.
Where did OP call her obese? Even at a size 16, she would not be obsese at 5'10". Overweight, yes, but not obese.
She's probably a size 12, but her bikini is more like a size 8.
I'm envious of her waist.
That's breedin material.
I'm 36D and wear a US size 10/12. She's far, far bigger than me, especially her flat behind. Her pants size must be at least US 14 if not US 16. By the way many clothes now come small, medium, and large or are made to stretch, so that you can gain or lose 20 lbs and can still wear the same items.
How tall are you R13?
R13, how tall are you?
Her suit looks like an 8. She's about a 12. Not fat, but wrong-sized. She'd be fine in a better suit.
I'm 5'4" with very long, athletic legs and toned behind.
She is a fat sow.
She is closer to 16 than to size 8. Says she is 5'10" so I am guessing she weighs about 180 190.
I;'d guess she's a solid 180 too.
NO WAY that's a size 8.
She's at least a US 12/14.
She's a 14, and there's an entire article on her appearance because she's parading her fat ass around in a swimsuit that's at least two sizes too small and not even age appropriate for a grown woman.
Sorry, but she's a cow. R3 you need glasses.
This woman gets away with calling herself a fashion designer? And she admires Anna Nicole? What a fucking joke. Are there no standards anymore? At all? So all we need to do is flash our pussy on the internet and launch a fashion career off of this.
Jesus H. Christ.
[r22] just adores the "gamine" body of self starvation victims like Audrey Hepburn.
She's not a cow, R22. She could lose a few pounds, but her midsection is tight.
R22, you're a fucking idiot. She's not skinny, but she's certainly not a fat cow either. Wow.
she's a jew and we know how THAT goes!
I'm 5'4" size 6. She looks fat, no two ways about it I have never come close to looking her size. If she is 5'4" or taller, she is minimim a size 12 in the United States.
I'd say 14. Of course, pics add pounds so it's hard to say.
Remember this? When people actually gave a shit? This woman... THIS woman, and man, are feeling the need to lose a few.
I liked this standard much better. Everyone is such a slob now and we're so worried about hurting feelings or getting sued that no one identifies a person as being ft until that person has furniture collapsing under their ass.
She does NOT look "great" by any stretch of the imagination!
She looks, at best, normal (meaning "overweight").
That too-small swimsuit isn't doing her any favors, either. She could look a hell of a lot better if she stopped trying to jam herself into a small size.
She's overweight. Deal with it.
The camera doesn't add cellulite R28, and the camera might add 10lbs, not 50.
For reference, here's Katie Green, a size 8/10 (USA), 12 (UK) model
R32, that woman at your link is no size US 8/10. No way. She's about a 14 too.
Katie's slimmer than Josie. She's not a 14.
R35, looking at the pics Josie look taller and smaller. Except for Josie's big tits.
Josie's bigger in the rear too.
R32, I agree with R34 - that's not a size 8 or 10 US. A 12 US at the very least. Her "campaign" shots are obviously 'shopped, as the ones at the beach, she is much fleshier. Looks the same size as the chick at OP's link.
Those aren't size 8 thighs (esp if she's 5'10"), but great tits! She's lovely.
Your question has no meaning. Clothing sizes in the US have not been standardized for decades. We've been over this many, many times.
Her suit (which may be an 8, 10, 16, whatever depending on the manufacturer) is too small. Beyond that, those who answer are talking out of their...hats.
Robin Lawley used to be a much sought after plus model, but even she (Like Crystal Renn), has caved and lost weight to get more work. While I think Crystal looks better with more weight, Robin (at link), looks much better thinner IMO.
It genuinely depends on her height. As someone with similiar proportions at 5"7 I'd say she is easily a 12 pant given the hips and butt. Definitely not a 16 though. Dress size obviously would be bigger to accommodate her boobs.
She's a US 14.
For dance, 10.
For looks, 3!
Whatever "size" she wears, she's entirely too large for actual fashion. Which makes discussions of size irrelevant.
Some sort of smock or prison garb would be more appropriate.
I think her bikini top is on upside down.
[quote]I'm 5'4" with very long, athletic legs and toned behind.
No one who is 5'4" has "very long" legs.
She's a US 16 in lines like Banana Republic and J Crew
She's a US 14 in Old Navy and Ann Taylor
I'd also guess a 36DD.
R49, I'm totally out of proportion, there's very little space between by breasts and hips, so yes that description would be totally accurate. I wear tunics as dresses, for example.
I think she's US size 14.
R49, I have seen any number of short statured women with short torsos ("short-waisted" seems to fit R52s description of her body) and comparatively long legs. There are professional dancers on Broadway and in ballet companies who are built this way. It's about proportion, not stature.
[quote] there's very little space between by breasts and hips,
Click on the link to see what a plus size US size 12-14 model look like. Check out the photo in the white swimsuit and you can tell the models legs and butt are several times larger than your model OP.
Based on this comparison your model is closer to an 8 but is probably about a size 10-12.
Now here she is again with the same weight shaming storyline in 2011.
This must be the Daily Mail annual holiday special to make all the over indulgers feel better about themselves. Look, ho ho ho, there's someone fatter wearing the wrong bikini.
Ugly obese people like her shouldn't be allowed to o to the beach. They should be locked in gyms with juice bars until they all eat each other and die off. So fucking sick of fat people.
I dated a woman who was 5'9 and 140 lbs, 36D with no gut, hourglass but not huge hips, and she was a size 10/12. This woman has about 40-50 lbs on her, a much bigger waist, wider hips, and fatter ass. So I would have to say she is bigger than 8, and probably closer to 16.
I have also known a size 22 woman who was not much bigger than this lady.
I dated a woman who is 5'9", 135, 34D/DD, and she was a size 6.
Since this is what a size 22 woman looks like, I think R68 is full of it. Some women like to exaggerate the size of other women because of their own insecurities so I'm not surprised by the ridiculous guess.
I'd agree with those who said about a US ladies 12.
[quote] there's very little space between by breasts and hips,
R52/64, I shall call you "TITTYHIPS"
from this day forward!
She's a size 12. There's a little spare tire, but not much, if she didn't have that I would put her at a ten.
If you think about it her arms and legs are small. Her breasts are a decent size, but there is nothing to put her pass a size 12.
[quote]5'9, 140 is not a size 10/12.
True, it's actually smaller. More like a 6 or as 8. See link
Only Americans and Brits would consider this woman 'normal' sized. She is fat.
I went to Columbia Sportswear to buy hiking pants today. The smallest women's size they carry is size 2 and they were too big for me (I ended up a boy's 14/16 and they are a bit big in the waist).
I did not used to have this problem of not being able to buy clothes off the rack (back in the 70s). I used to be able to buy men's Levi 26 inch waist pants just about everywhere that jeans were sold. Now, the smallest size seems to be a 30.
It's really hard to tell what size a woman is by looking at her in a bikini, or by weight. You need measurements. She may not be entirely proportionate from top to bottom either, though that's usually more of an issue with shorter women.