Star: It’s Not A Fat Suit!
May 18th, 2007 by Rian | Filed under Jessica Simpson, Tabloid Magazines.
Sorry that I’m a little late with the scans this week - this article is actually from last Friday’s edition of Star Magazine.
Anyway, they ran a quick two-page story about Jessica Simpson’s obvious weight gain. The article claims that Jessica has gone from roughly 105 pounds to 130. Personally, I’d peg her weight to be closer to 140 or so. She is 5 foot 3 1/2 inches according to IMDB.com.
Click here to read the story.
have you seen the pics of her from Cannes? She looks thin! How can she be 140?!
130 or 140? Um… I don’t think so unless she has a lot of muscle tone. I don’t know how toned her body is exactly, but if it is even a little bit I guess 130 seems *kinda* reasonable… Otherwise she’s more like 120-125 tops.
Yes, she’s gained weight, but so what. Her body type isn’t meant to be as skinny as she was playing Daisy Duke. She got that thin cuz she was nervous about appearing in a bikini. She looked great but it was against her body type and she couldn’t keep up with the diet and exercise regime. Now she’ll get thin and buff for another role. I wish stars could give their metabolisms a break!! Jess is going to keep yoyo’ing like her sis if they keep going to buff and back. Not easy being in the industry and having Papa Joe Pimp for a dad.
yea…def not 140…that makes me like 250. remember camera adds some weight
Man, she really is fat and too prove it they have a picture of her from a completely neutral angle, wow.
Dr. Jackowski sounds like he knows what he is talking about too. Hourglasses gaining on the top, middle, and bottom. Sounds like an hourglass to me.
I wouldnt say she is in the 120s. Definitely 130
I’m 5′3 1/2, I look much smaller than her, and I weigh 124 so I would say she is closer to 140 than 130. Those boobs alone probably weigh 5 pounds each!
of couse she is gonna look huge cause the camera shot her at such a weird angle and not frontal. In any event, if she’s comfy with her gain, which is not that bad, then great for her.
i’m 5′4 and 130. i work out five days a week and wear a size 4. this article is so insulting. i don’t look anything like that. she probably is at about 145. i weighed that at one point and i looked like her in the second pic. 130, my ass. when i’m around 125 i start to look really thin, so there is NO WAY she’s 130 now. sorry, just needed to vent!
to add to my last post i feel that when a mag shows a pic of a celeb that’s unflattering and goes, well, she’s bulked up to 130, i’m like, COME ON. that’s how much i weigh normally and i feel good about myself. so if that’s “fat” then i must need to lost 30 pounds. it messes with women’s heads (at least women like me who have issues with weight).
I don’t care if she is 130, 135, 140, 145 or even 170, she is hot and those curves only make her hotter.
Pinky we are the same size. I work out 5 days a week too, and I def don’t like as heavy as she does. Although my boobs do look like that (BFing does wonders to a girl’s figure!).
photoshoping done really badly
anyway a woman body isnt the only thing that defines her, jessica may make very boring music and cant act but essentially she is a musician and now it seems an actor, she isnt a model
if she yo-yo’s so what
the headline is completly harsh: not a fat suit?!?! COME ON. the angle is completely unflattering, they’ve caught her with her mouth open so her face looks bigger. i mean, i think she looked way better before but its not like she looks completely awful now.
I agree Ashleyy. How freakin’ rude!! Man, I don’t think I could handle being a celebrity. I don’t know how they deal with this crap all the time.
True- she’s not a stick. But she’s not “fat” either. Bad photo, bad angle, bad story..
that has to be the most unflattering camera angle ever! but yes she has put on quite a few lbs . . .
its the angle. the other pictures of her that same night but not from an angle like that show her looking slim.
That has got to be one of the meanest headlines I have ever seen.
I wished I weight 130-140 lbs.
Agree, no way she is 130, at least 135 or so, her boobs are heavy! Also, I doubt she was ever 105, I am 5′4 1/2 and I look way skinnier than that at 105, not to mention her boobs are so much bigger.
Another tabloid error when recording weight. I don’t think she ever weighed 105, what a crock of shit. She probably weighs 150 right now too.
yes jess has gained weight but that angle is just wrong no matter who you are you would look heavier than you really are. Anything to make a buck i guess
Yea she is definitely not 130.
I’d guess she is about 140. She is a full girl!
Don’t forget her fake tan makes her dark…and thinner looking than she is if she were pale.
Homegirl is looking harsh these days.
i saw a photo of her today..taken from cannes. she looks fine. this photo is BS. either a terrible angle, photoshopped, or both.
that orage color and massive boobs look hideous, though, despite whatever she weight…
I bet she’s 110 (105 would be BONY) for the Daisy Duke photo and 135-140 now but the only reason people make a big deal is because she yo-yos so much. I’m also 5′3″ so know what weight looks like what. She probably naturally falls around 125 and has to work REALLY hard to get skinny and then cant keep it up and balloons.
What is “BFing” that someone mentions above?
And I bet she is a turbo tanner now to try to look skinnier. How tragic.
that has to be one of the least flattering angles for a photograph. She’s not that big. Anyone would look huge from that angle.
I agree with y’all, she looks great and she’s NOT a model, so who cares?
I’m 5′1, and muscular, and I can maintain 115 with exercise. If I go a week w/o aerobics, I gain 5 lbs *snap* just like that!
I’m amazed at these gals who weigh 130 and are a size 4. When I weighed 130, I was a size 8!
Oh sorry BFing = breast feeding. Not any kind of miracle diet I assure you.
I really don’t think she’s 140. I look about the same size she does and I’m 5′6″(three inches taller!) and 125. If she were 140 at her height, she’d be MUCH bigger in photos. She still looks average sized to slim.
Also, if I, at 140 lbs. (and 5′6″) wore a size 8-10, what the hell size does that make her if she is 140?!
People, she does NOT wear a 12-14, I don’t care how big you think she looks.
wow people can be so harsh and they wonder why actresses are now becoming really skinny.
this is just so pathetic, when she was skinny for daisy dukes all the tabloids were talking about her “eating disorder”. Now that she doesn’t starve herself anymore and has found a healthy and stable weight, they’re calling her fat. Not to mention, that 5′3 130 pounds is FAR from fat, it’s just average. I am 5′3 120 pounds and I look about her size, so I doubt she weighs 130 pounds. Anyway, it’s just sickening how the media perpetuates eating disorders and poor body image.
there’s no way she’s 140 I’m 165 and I’m 6′ and a guy, there is no way she’s only 25 pounds lighter is she’s a woman and 9 inches shorter
I love the angle the photo is taken at. It definitely proves how big she is because that angle doesn’t make everyone look big.
I agree that she is closer to 140 than 130.
People remember that muscle weighs more than fat. I am 5′5 and weigh a soft 140. I just started a reg workout routine and look slimmer, more toned and clothes are fitting better but that scale doesn’t move!!!! It is something I have to get use to. As my body starts changing over I will start to lose some weight.
So with Jess she is not working out much so 135 is about right. Tanning makes her look a bit slimmer and high heels and black 2 piece outfits are good trick to break up a thicker middle.
Prob 110 in the dasiy dukes maybe 115 she was working out alot hence more muscle.
She looks thinner in Cannes probably because of fast diet. Celebs will do anyhing to lose weight before red carpet events.
I think she is struggling with her weight, big time.
Very rude. Besides, I’d like to point out that it’s NOT WEIGHT that defines skinniness!
I agree with Silvie D on the 105 lbs thing. If Jessica ever weighed that little in her Daisy Duke days, she would have to actually be underweight with a bmi of 18.3.
I actually would put her about 120-125 lbs. There was a sighting of her recently and she reportedly had “the thinnest legs I’ve ever seen” or something along those lines. I’d hate to think what she looked like in person at 105.
ya but what sucks is she’ll lose it all in like 2 months and look hot again. its not fair. i really wish she would go a way for ever!!!
There is no way she weighs that much. That is a very unflattering camera angle. She looks slimmer in her Cannes photos. My body looks a lot like hers but I am 2 inches shorter and weigh 103, so I doubt she is that heavy.
ok ok i dont LIKE jessica simpson..but that camera angle is just CRUEL
EVERYONE LOOKS FAT FROM ABOVE!!!!!!!!!!
Not only did she get majorly FAT, but fug too. i say she’s 140 now. She’s the side of a house!
to respond to someone elses post, i am 5′4 and weigh about 126 and i dont even wear a size four.
she looks hot. jessica has awesome curves and i love the thicker jessica better than the daisy duke jessica.
I’d also say she weighs around 140, not 130. I’m 5′4 and her body looks just like mine when I’m 140. At 130 I look somewhat thin… I know its the angle as well though.
It’s not a fat suit - but man, it sure looks like one.
“me” - if you are 5′4, weigh 126, and fit a “4″, surely you are talking about the faux-4s you find at the mall for $79, which are designed to make people feel better about themselves. a true designer 4 would be very unlikely to fit you.
I’m 5′3 and around 105-110, and I was about 135 after I had my baby, but I was and looked quite a bit thinner than she does now. I would guess her weight is pretty close to 140 from recent pictures. And that is accounting for the camera adding 10 lbs.
that is a really unflattering camera angle of her..no wonder she looks bottom heavy
yeah, so she’s gained weight. but you have to admit that photo is taken from a HORRIBLE angle! that would make anyone look fat. :\
she’s probably about 130 lbs and a size 6.
it’s tough being short, trust me i know. a 10 lb weight gain always looks like a 20 lb weight gain when you’re 5′3
Anonymous Realist- your comment was rude….
ANYWAYS, she is not heavier than 130! she is teeny in real life! and short! those are just unflattering pics! she looked great at cannes!
Her stomach is still flat, only her boobs look bigger to me. But seriously what happened to her face? Has she had work done or something?
Also, what stores sell this “faux fours”? I would gladly pay $79 to drop a size or two. Then I could talk about how “I’m not even that skinny and I’m a size four.”
I’d go out with Jessica Simpson even if she was 170
Anonymous Realist is not rude, just realistic (and anonymous).
;)
Anyhow, I think we all have different shapes and proportions (duh) so we won’t ever all look the same - even if we were all at the same height and weight.
I don’t really like Jessica Simpson. Not because of her weight gain, but because of her recent face expressions. She always looks so awkward and like she’s trying too hard. (Could this relate to the weight gain?)
No way she’s 130.. I’m thinking more.
I’m 119 and nowhere near that
A number is nothing. Muscle weighs a lot. She did at once have muscle tone. Regardless of the number she is fat now. End of story.
YOU COULD TELL ME SHE WAS 100 POUNDS AND I’D STILL SAY SHE LOOKS FAT!!
She varies from one event to the next, but she hasn’t looked thin in a while. Everyone keeps saying bad angle (and yes, it is a bad angle) but if she were in daisy dukes shape and a pic like that was taken she would not look at all big! She has gotten to a weight where she has a double chin when she makes certian faces, and can only be photographed a certain way (stomach sucked in and arched back with hands on her hips) to even look moderately slim.
she probably is in the 120’s..she is really not fat, she is a curvier women, she also has the curves in all the right places!!!She has a small frame, I guarantee that she looks better then 90% of the girls her age in hollywood.
I think the 2. photo is very adverse!!!
i think its her overall appearance at the moment that i hate. i don’t understand the super dark tan, was she trying to hide the fact that shes gained weight? its a bad picture admittedly but i’d say she is probably a US 6/8..
Check out her photo from the IMDB website that was taken on May 16, 2007. She looks fantastic. No way the photo from the tabloid is close to real, and at the very least, not recent.
Regardless of the amount, she is so hot and curvy. I do not care if she ways 190 pounds, giver her to me.
Sometimes I wish some asshole would follow these tabloid writer assholes take pictures of their overweight and lazy asses, and post pictures of them.
A “faux four” is the kind you find at Gap.
I actually kinda like her heavier, too — and usually I’m all for a leaner look.
I think she’s beautiful still. Lucky for her, she has a frame that can support a range of weights, she can look good at any weight.
i personally think she looks about 140
She has heavier arms, big boobs and skinny legs, so she looks heavier than she is in pics that only show her above the waist. I personally think she’s probably 120-ish because she looks 130 from the waist up, and 110 from the waist down.
I think about 140 too. I’m just a little taller than her and I got fat in the 140s and looked about like that.
I really don’t find anything attractive about her. I think her face looks kind of drag queenish.
this is why celebs have eating disorders in the first place- stupid tabloid articles like these! shes beautiful- leave her alone! p.s. 130 at 5′’3 and a half is completely and tottaly normal and healthy. Is this magazine saying because she’s healthy she’s not sexy? what kind of message is that to send to young girls?
Pinky, on May 18th, 2007 at 2:21 pm Said:
i’m 5′4 and 130. i work out five days a week and wear a size 4. this article is so insulting. i don’t look anything like that. she probably is at about 145. i weighed that at one point and i looked like her in the second pic. 130, my ass. when i’m around 125 i start to look really thin, so there is NO WAY she’s 130 now. sorry, just needed to vent!
bwahahahahahahaha.
“Pinky” are you for real? Do you really think you wear a size 4? Seriously. Do you?
ok, ok, ok. here’s the thing. and those of you who do wear TRUE designer 4’s will already know this.
1) a true designer size 4 has a 24 inch waist.
2) a shopping mall / department store will classify a 24 inch waist as a size 00.
3) so that means “Pinky” wears a designer size 10.
bwahahahahahahahahaha. sorry “Pinky”.
is this make everyone feel like crap day??? You do not know Pinky’s exact proportions, and waist measurements Helena, so get off your freaking high horse. Perhaps she has a tiny waist and is larger elsewhere, or maybe she only weighs 130 because of muscle. & futhermore, how many real women do you know that go out and reguarly buy these “designer” clothes–armani, gucci, etc whatever the heck you are referring to. Maybe she’s not a designer size 4 and maybe “regular” stores do it to make women feel better, but who freaking cares!?! 95% of women do not live some desinger drenched celebrity life so why does it matter?? if she fits into a four at the majority of stores….newsflash….most people would consider her a FOUR!!!
& I can attest that even a few pounds can make a huge difference. I am now 5′4, about 145-147ish, and I am a very loose 10, or a snug 8. (Yes I want to lose weight, okay!?!) when I was only about 7 pounds thinner and more toned at 138, everything fit like a dream and I had no 10’s…everything was a 6 or an 8. So if she is 8 pounds lighter than I was then, a four is in no way out the question.
so harsh…
Theres no way she was ever 105 lbs. I think she was more like 115. And now I think she is more like 140.Shes still not overweight, now shes just not working out excessively and eating minimally. And that camera angle is ridiculous.
I don’t think that’s a REAL pic of Jessica Simpson. I just saw her on TV 2 days ago and she in NO WAY looked fat. She wasn’t as skinny as she was, but she wasn’t fat at all. Someone has tweaked that pic of her.
just telling it like it is, megan. the sooner you come to terms with the fact that mass market retailers are shrinking their sizes while enlarging their waistbands, the better.
newsflash.
most people are LARD A*SES so i really couldn’t give two s*its if most people delude themselves into thinking they’re not WELL within the double digits. i’m not under any misconceptions that a 00 at the gap is really a 4. and a 4 at the gap is really a 10. and a 6 or 8 at the gap is really (panic attack) a 12 / 14.
it’s not about money. so don’t make it some kind of socioeconomic divide kind of issue. it’s about coming to grips with the reality of how freaking HUGE this country is (and is progressively getting).
in the 70’s, when my mother was in her 20’s, a size 4 meant a 24-inch waist. the woman, like most baby boomers, likes to keep clothes from when she was at her beauty “peak”.
ask the next baby boomer you see what a size 4 was back then vs. what it is now.
and then go hit the treadmill.
at 5′4 and 138 (your low weight), your BMI is nearly 24. That’s one point from being “overweight”. And five points from being “obese”. And that’s according to the Center for Disease Control.
Bad camera angle and bad photo. She has definitley put on weight but would look fine if she didn’t dress like a hooker and overdose on the cosmetic procedures (especially the lips). She is looking creepier every day
actually boobs that big would make anyone look fat.However i think it’s the photo.I am 5′5 and weigh 130,i think i need to gain ay least 5pounds to look perfect.
what the fuck? that does not even look like her!
hey you guys can you post the Nicole ritchie article in this issue? it talks about her weight.
okay helena. I don’t know where to begin. first of all I am well aware that marketers are doing this whole vanity sizing thing. The point you are missing is size is still a NUMBER. I don’t mean that in a whole “be empowered love your body, feminist” way, I mean it in a way to prove that sizing is not a FACT. All those “conversions” back to the real sizes you provide are essentially worthless because what is the ultimate standard all other sizes must be measured to? Is it the Gap? Is it Armani? I’m sure you’re thinking, no, it’s the standards that we had back in the seventies—THOSE were the true sizes. But why are they above any other sizes? Maybe we should go even farther back until each size is smaller—actually let’s go back to corsets. I’m pretty sure our waist was meant to be about 19 inches.
There is no way a size can be considered “correct” from because there are too many opinions and variations. It’s not equal anywhere across the board, and is NOT an indication of a healthy body. I am not trying to make this about class either. I just don’t think it is right to act as if designer sizes are the “real” sizes, and I would feel the same way if you considered less expensicve clothes the standard. It may be stupid they have just changed because we have gotten so much fatter, but are you going to expect everyone to revert back to the standards of the seventies (when apparently NO ONE had a weight problem & everyone was sooo perfect)?! How often do we expect others to suddenly revert back to a way of doing things we haven’t used in years…not often.
& you’re not going to bully me into feeling like a worthless fatass, I already said I wanted to lose weight & your litany about hitting the treadmill –spare me. I run 5 days a week as it is along with weights. And learn a little more about BMI please. Using the BMI chart alone is usually pretty inaccurate and is an admittedly out of date system. It doesn’t measure muscle tone–which weighs much more. You need to use the pinchers to get an accurate measurement of actual BMI. And it is SO important to know your body frame. I am a large body frame—everything about my proportions is larger, and my weight now is only a few pounds from where I felt comfortable at. I am NEVER going to be naturally 5′4 120 pounds.
I just love most of all how you scoff at my low weight of… 138. A POINT AWAY FROM BEING OVERWEIGHT! (again, you knew nothing about the amount of fat on me, or my body type) god, the horror. How did I live? How am I living now, ABOVE that weight? You’re missing the fact that at 138…I STILL WASN’T OVERWEIGHT, ESPECIALLY for my frame size. I have never been below 138 in my whole adult life–I pretty much just skipped straight through the 110’s and 120’s, which is telling me something—it’s fine for my body type! I have done cross country, soccer, and baseball reguarly in these past 5 years so you better believe I was a toned 138.
this is long I know, but you are so ignorant
oh, & it’s also worth adding that when I had surgery and couldn’t do any sports for a while and weight wasnt a focus, I got up to a big 165, and it is from that weight that I am now at 145. So I know what it takes to lose weight and I don’t need to be talked down to like I’m some lazy obese person who is just adoring this grand delusion that I wear a “REAL” size 8. (Oh no, ma’am, I know I am only a “real” 14, i’m sooo not worthy!)
So she put on weight, so what? She is probably just going through a phase in her life where she maybe eats a bit more or drinks more and if you don’t excercise you put on weight quite easily. It’s not the end of the world and I hate for the magazine to bully Jessica in some sort of crash diet just to look like she looked when she was three or four years younger!
thank you megan!
i loved your post.
5′5″ and 112lbs here. Not toned at all (hate exercise). But I cannot even fit into the 0 at The Gap. At BCBG (still not “real size”) a 4 is tight on me. Big stores like The Gap, Inc. (Banana Republic and especially Old Navy), make their sizes bigger so women feel better about themselves and spend more money. Try walking into Dior or Nicole Miller wearing your Gap size 0 and ask for a 0. The sales people will laugh in your face.
She prolly weighs 120 or 130. the reason why some readers are saying “I’m 5′4′’ and 120 lbs and I don’t look like THAT” is b/c Jess IS NOT 5′3.5′’. she’s not. not at all. not even close.
i’ve met her. she’s prolly 5′ even. i’m 5′2.5′’ and i was taller while wearing flats than she was in HUGE heels. homegirl is short.
don’t believe most actors stats listed by their agents. they lie to make their clients look larger than life. Tom Cruise anyone?
she looks like a cow at 120 b/c she’s only 5′ tall. done.
I totally agree with Megan and I am NATURALLY a size 00 (which I hate). People are different sizes so what. Some of you are rude and pathetic ana wannabees. Bunch of losers. No wonder so many women have REAL EDs. It absolutely SUCKS to have an ED. Not something to aspire to. Get a life.
Megan Rock on woman. You are completely right.
Tim Jones You are also fabulous and nonjudgemental. More people should be like you.
Take a lesson people. There is more to life than size. Unless you want to end up with an NG in the hospital or dying from heart failure. Not worth it. Yes I know this from experience and no I will not share details with asses like yourselves. I just want my kids to grow up confident, happy, sucessful and not ever to come in contact with the judgemental trash exhibited here. Ok I’m done.
haha, Megan you’re awesome! Helena, you’re a bitch.
Anyway, this is probably the rudest article I’ve seen in a really long time. How do these ‘journalists’ sleep at night. Way to make pretty much every woman feel like shit about themselves. Even if she is actually *gasp* 130 lbs, that’s still a perfectly healthy weight for her height. wtf??
Megan, you go, girl! I usually dont take the time to read really long posts but I had to with yours. You are right on the money. (since everyone else is telling, I am 5′5″, 135 lbs, not fat, not skinny, and wear a 6)
Wanna bet that “Helena” is actually some short, ugly (her personality came thru in these posts, therefore, I can confidently claim her to be ugly from that alone), and horridly obese person… Notice how she calls everyone else fat yet has not posted her own stats? Not that she’d be honest there either, but she seems to know alot about obesity and high BMI’s… makes me suspect she’s 5′0″ and 180 lbs…
Helena, go piss off and keep your rude, ignorant comments to yourself.
Ling 00, there IS more to life (obviously!) to weight and size. But this IS a celebrity weight and diet gossip site. So we really don’t need a lesson on health and life. No offense, but there have been a lot of comments like this lately. Yes, we know there is more to life then size and weight! Just because tens of thousands of people like to visit this website and comment doesn’t mean they don’t know that!
There are mothers and daughters and nurses and lawyers and writers and artists who visit this website, among others. Just because they like to visit, leave their comments and occasionally debate about celebrity and weight doesn’t mean they don’t have lives! A few minutes (or even a couple of hours) spent on this website does not reflect a person’s life.
I didn’t mean to get preachy, but I’m tired of the rude comments people make suggesting that anyone coming to this website and commenting are losers with no life who only think about weight. That is a very narrow-minded assumption!
Jess has quit working out and put on a few pounds - but that picture is all angle. We would all look twice our size if our picture was taken from below like that. Haven’t any of you taken pictures before?
Just my opinion but I would guess she is 5′3″ and a soft 120lbs now. Back in her daisy dukes - 105-109lbs but muscle.
As to Helena - I agree that a designer size 4 is not a Gap 4 - but there is a way to explain things without being insulting to other posters. Some of your remarks - while true - were unnecessary and only make you look bad.
I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to be as mean as I was but I did suffer from a REAL ED and I know how hard it is. It’s complete hell and you never really get over it. It just makes me mad when people make ANYONE feel bad about their weight especially average sized woman. What pissed me off is that people were making other posters feel bad about their weight. Isn’t this about “celebrities?” People should be more accepting. Its sad. There is nothing wrong with a size 6 ,8 , 10 or whatever. I am stuck at a 00 from years of screwing up my metabolism from anorexia and bulimia. Anyway I COMPLETELY agree with the most current posters here. I wonder what these journalists look like???
ughhh i wish she was skinnnny again ! she was PERFECT. jess please get skinny & blonde again! u were the perfectttt girl. I’m sorry, but I reallly don’t like her body now. She was so much more beautiful before.
helena you are too funny. i just measured a vintage dress by chanel from that era and you’re right. size 4 is a 24-inch-waist. you have inspired me to do more crunches, girl! and to the girl who insists she’s not fat. just big boned. i say, take your pinchers and hold them high! i would give anything to be built like a little stocky bulldog.
LOL what b*tchiness!
I gotta say, I think some designers are falling prey to the whole vanity sizing thing too…I have never been larger than a 2 in “designer” stuff (I am a 0 at the mall stores), and some places like BCBG makes their 0s the about same size as those same mall stores.
you’re not big boned, you’re big assed.
nessa….i can’t even tell if you are dissing me or not, but whatever. I never said big boned once, that doesn’t even really exist…I was discussing FRAME SIZE and BODY SHAPE. So whether you were being mean or not, I WILL take my “little bulldog shape” and pinchers, thank you very much. I say until anyone sees you in person they have no room to judge.
and love, i hope you’re not talking to me.
Wow! This is crazy! I’m 5′ 8″ and 130.5 pounds and wear a tight 6 or loose 8. At this weight I don’t look that rail thin just normal. I’m sorry, but if you are 5′ 3″ and weigh 130 you would not fit into a size 4. My mother is that height and weight and wears a 10 to 12.
helena– You’re a bitch, and just so you can get it right the next time you try to quote a source, it’s actually “Centers for Disease Control,” not “Center.”
By the way, even though I love looking/laughing at unflattering pictures of celebrities at bad angles, there is no way I’d ever think they were actually fat. Unless it was a picture of you, helena.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go squeeze myself into a big fat size four from The Gap.
geez people. if the center for disease control says you’re fat, then you’re probably fat. accept it and move on. or if you’re fat and some of these comments have made you feel bad, then lose some weight. helena isn’t bitchy, she’s just got too much money for her own good. i shop at payless and forever 21. and even if i had more money i still would never pay designer prices for clothes. ever.
I bet that magazine has photoshopped that picture..She dosent look like that. There is a picture of her in a magazine taken sometime in june where she is thin. Also an hourglass will never bulk in their stomach…that is the smallest part of the figure. Her bust would grow and her hips would grow but her stomach will stay flat
ok people calm down! tis just a website no need 2 get personal. first off yes shops use vanity sizing but the reason they need to is that our culture is so obesessed with skinniess and ridiculously low weights that we have lost all sight of what is ‘normal’ and ‘healthy’. second before you go arguing are you even on the same size ranges (i.e. uk8=us4 etc) and all shops have differrent measurements for each size.
now, the first photo was a publicity shot therefore most likely photoshopped, a flattering angle and after a long extreme diet and exercise regime on her part. yes she has gained weight but camera angle, body position and clothes all play a factor. personally i think she does look overweight in that photo, but that doesn’t mean anything about how she looks in real life (camera doesn’t add ten pounds it adds at least 15!). now can we please get over it and stop calling people you have never met fat and bitches?