More Barbie Math

As Barbie says, "Math is HARD!" Except it really isn't. Just too hard for feminists.

I reworked the figures because I noticed that a VINTAGE Barbie doll does seem to have a bigger bust than the new Barbies do. So what if Ms. College Wonkeye was right???

She isn't. Nothing to worry about.

As a matter of fact, in order to get the bust measurement of 39" that Wonkeye got, real Barbie would have to be SIX FEET EIGHT INCHES TALL! And at that height, her waist would NOT be 18 inches, but rather 25.5 inches!!! Let that sink in a second. No matter WHAT you do with the numbers, her proportions are WRONG. They're based on the old, discredited numbers some woman's group came out with many years ago and that were discredited even then, but the eating disorders associations STILL use the figures. She built the model without ever checking the freaking DIMENSIONS or the MATH! College student my...eye. And all her fellow students are listening to this bullshit. (I'll post the math in a second.)

The arms would NOT be little sticks like our friend has them to look like; the arms would, at 6'8", have diameter of 3.5". Which is thin, but NOT freakish and NOT what Wonkeye built. In fact, the circumference of the arms at 6'8" is not much more than the circumference of my own arms NOW, and remember I'm chubby. A thin woman naturally has thinner arms than that. (Admittedly I've lost a lot of weight of late, but whatever.)

SO HERE WE GO - Barbie MATH! (The numbers have all been rounded off, but don't start imagining that makes any significant difference; that's the fucking PURPOSE of rounding off - to get very close but not fully precise. You wanna get precise, I'll DO that, but it's an exercise in futility - our model-building anorexic is STILL gonna get pwned.)

at 5'10" the conversion factor is 6.36

making bust 34"
waist 22"
hips almost 32"

No wispy waif THERE; nor a bizarrely buxom blimp-chest

at 6'2" conversion factor is 6.7

making bust 36.8" (hint - I'm 5'2" and my bust is MUCH bigger than that)
waist 23.5"
hips 33.5"

at 6'7" the conversion factor is 7.18

making bust 38.5 inches
waist 24.5
hips 35

at 6'8" conversion factor is 7.27

making bust almost 40
waist 25.5
hips 36.3
Upper arm circumference = 11 inches


Arms - those stick arms really bug me, so I took my own arm measurements. My upper arms' DIAMETER (i.e. measurement straight through the middle) is 4 and a half inches. Does 6'8" Barbie have giant arms? Hell no; in fact, she's got arms similar to MINE - 3.5 inches diameter!!

Now I'm 5'2" and we're talking about a 6'8" woman here, so sure the arms will appear thin, but NOT FREAKISHLY THIN as the model demonstrates. In fact, I dug out my old picture album the other night, the one I've kept since I was 12, and I have a picture of me with my arm raised - you know what? It looks VERY MUCH like the way Barbie's arms look on the actual doll, and if I had measurements, I bet my life they'd be SMALLER than Barbie's. Yes, I was very skinny - hell, I didn't measure up to Barbie's bust, waist OR hips.

All in all, her math sucks, she's wrong, and somebody's LYING.

In fact, I demand to see her fucking upper arm measurements so I can calculate the circumference. (Right off the bat you know they are wrong, because Barbie's arms are curvily SHAPED and not just sticks.)

Oh, Ms. Wonkeye, you have a LOT to explain. START, bitch!