Labels

Short-Waisted, Defined.

I stand 5'4" tall. That is on the "short" or "petite" side. However, I don't wear petite-sized clothing. It wouldn't fit me.

No. Despite being short, I am not "petite." I have long legs. Well, longer than the average 5'4" woman. They are 30.5 inches long in the inseam. So how is it that I am short? In my upper body.

I am short-waisted.

According to sources on the Internet, "short-waisted" is defined as when the length of your natural waist to the top of your head is shorter than the distance between your natural waist to the bottom of your feet. Your are "long-waisted" when the opposite is true. And you are "average" when the two are about the same length.

The distance between my natural waist and the top of my head is 27 inches. The distance between my feet and my natural waist is 37 inches.

This explains why the following poses are so much harder for me in Bikram:
  • Ardha Chandrasana with Pada-Hastasana (I can't fold in half "like a Japanese ham sandwich.")
  • Dandayamana-JanuShirasana (I can barely clasp my fingers under my foot. Then trying to drive the elbows down below my legs? Holy shit that's hard!)
  • Padangustasana (I can get down into "toe" but can not lift my body straight while balancing on my finger tips. My body won't straighten. This requires much more ab strength from me.)
  • Ardha-Kurmasana (Yeah... My forehead is difficult to get to the floor, seeing as my head barely goes past my knee while folded over.)
Oh the woes of the short-waisted! I would give anything to be long-waisted. It would make my Bikram practice less challenging.
Labels:

Comments

Bratty Duke said…
But it would make looking not-stumpy challenging, as someone who is 5'7" with the same inseam can attest to.
October 07, 2009 6:40 PM
Me said…
I hadn't thought of that!
October 07, 2009 6:46 PM
hannahjustbreathe said…
I'm totally short-waisted, too. Trouble is, I also have a 35" inseam. Yeahhh...

This is an interesting post, though. It's making me wondering if my short-waisted-ness is why my backbends are so much better than my forward bends... Hmmm...
October 08, 2009 5:22 AM
Me said…
YES! Hannah, my back bend have always been far superior than my forward bends. Going backwards? Piece of cheesecake. Forward bending, trying to flatten my upper body to my lower body, with forehead touching shins... Like "Japenese ham sandwich?" HARD!

Gosh though, a 35-inch inseam???? How do you find pants that fit?????
October 08, 2009 5:30 AM
hannahjustbreathe said…
Let's just say, thank goodness brands started making "Tall" sizes... :) (J.Crew and Gap actually make really long pants.)
October 08, 2009 1:06 PM
Duffy Pratt said…
My guess is that the long waisted folks have problems of their own. Most notably in the compression poses: Separate Leg Forehead to Knee, Rabbit, and the Final one after Rabbit. With a longer torso, it's almost certainly harder to curl up and get the forehead on the knee.

Also, I find it hard to believe that any woman in our culture would give up long legs and trade it in for a long torso.
October 08, 2009 2:39 PM
Me said…
LOL! Duffy, I think most women would prefer longer legs than a torso... But being the old married woman that I am, I seem to care more about what would make my yoga poses easier...

Long waist and short legs would make it so much easier to "halve" myself in poses. To dream...
October 08, 2009 6:33 PM
thedancingj said…
You should hear my friends with long waists and short legs gripe about all THEIR problems doing Bikram! LOL. The grass is always greener, dude.
October 10, 2009 5:37 PM
lmg said…
i just happened across your blog and this post and wanted to comment as a super long waisted female. i'm not sure what the specific poses are that "duffy pratt" above me mentioned but i can say, i'd MUCH rather have a long leg problem than a long waist problem!

but, it is a lot easier for me (and us long torso's) to fold myself over and reach past my feet, like you mention wishing was easier for you.

like your blog! cheers!
October 10, 2009 10:18 PM
un-heel-ed said…
Hi.. chanced upon your post... I'm also 5'4" and short-waisted... and I can totally understand everything you said, especially the poses... I can never do them as well. My friends don't understand why I cannot reach my toes (whether standing or sitting) even with all the warm-ups. The "Padangustasana"? I'm the only one in my class who cannot get up from that position.

But... I'd still prefer short-waisted-ness anytime of the day... it's still a lot easier to camouflage it and work around it than the other way around... isn't it?
November 16, 2009 6:05 PM
un-heel-ed said…
Hi.. chanced upon your post... I'm also 5'4" and short-waisted... and I can totally understand everything you said, especially the poses... I can never do them as well. My friends don't understand why I cannot reach my toes (whether standing or sitting) even with all the warm-ups. The "Padangustasana"? I'm the only one in my class who cannot get up from that position.

But... I'd still prefer short-waisted-ness anytime of the day... it's still a lot easier to camouflage it and work around it than the other way around... isn't it?
November 16, 2009 6:06 PM
NYChic said…
I'm almost 5'4 (63.75inches). From my waist to the floor, I measure 40 inches and from waist to top of head 23.75 inches.

My inseam is 31.5. People usually assume I'm 5'7 or 5'8 because they claim my legs are a mile long. I'm also thin @ 112lbs and long arms. Most petites won't fit me in length, but only sleeveless or 3/4 sleeve shirts or petite skirts fit me well. For reference, my measurements are 32C-24.5-34.5
May 21, 2013 10:56 AM
Me said…
I would DIE to have your measurements!
May 21, 2013 11:02 AM
Post a Comment

Popular Posts