# BBW or SSBBW, size classification



## wtchmel (Mar 11, 2006)

I'm curious to know what everyone feels is the defenition of Bbw and SSbbw. From a size/number perspective or other.
What got me thinking is that I see people that are not even big, they/society considers them a bbw. When I was a size 14, i looked downright skinny on top. So I'm just curious on peoples thoughts on this issue.


----------



## ripley (Mar 11, 2006)

I always thought that the classification was 350 lbs. and above for a SSBBW. 

Also, I see "UltrasizeBBW" lately, and I am curious at to what point people think that ultrasizeness begins?


----------



## AnnMarie (Mar 11, 2006)

There's a fairly extensive thread on this here: 

http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1916&highlight=ssbbw


Ultrasize, as I always understood it (and it's RARELY used in my experience) was something over supersized... maybe over 500ish or something. 

There was an FA (ZincDink?) who had made a definition list going from chubby to something along the lines of hyperultrasize or something. Someone have a link to that handy... if it even still exists. I know he just posted some lost pages this week, but I don't know if that list was among them.


----------



## herin (Mar 11, 2006)

I agree. Most people seem to agree about SSBBWs starting at around 350. However, it's how you feel personally. Myself, I don't want a label. I weigh a little under 400 lbs right now, I guess I'd be a SSBBW


----------



## MisticalMisty (Mar 12, 2006)

I'm just a fat girl..I prefer to be called fat.


----------



## BBWBelle (Mar 12, 2006)

I can't even begin to try to draw a line of differentiation. I never liked the SS in front of BBW, I dunno; it's like SS is supposed to be some kind of disclaimer. I mean, wouldn't HBBW mean the same thing (huge bbw) but not sound quite so gentle? For women who are already often struggling with self esteem issues about their size, even 'BIG' beautiful woman is enough to elicit an apologetic kind of attitude. 

Ta hell wit dat...yanno? As humans we are made up of so much more than our body description. Me, I'm a Scheming Snorting Bossy Brazen Wench.


----------



## wtchmel (Mar 12, 2006)

Thanks for replying, and AnnMarie, Thanks for the link.   Ok, you can all ignore this post, I read annmaries link and it helped with my curiousity. Sorry for not searching well enough first.


----------



## AnnMarie (Mar 12, 2006)

wtchmel said:



> Thanks for replying, and AnnMarie, Thanks for the link.   Ok, you can all ignore this post, I read annmaries link and it helped with my curiousity. Sorry for not searching well enough first.



Oh no reason to apologize... lol, I just wanted you to see more answers than you might get second time around.  

As for Belle's comment about the BBW label possibly being an apologetic one, I just don't feel that way. I actually like the SS because it lets potential mates who are into LARGE BBWs know that I am indeed on the large end of the scale, and I have no issue with my size. Since there are size 12/14 girls who will use the term BBW as a descriptor, I think the SS is a big help in sorting out the wide range (small/midsized/SS) of sizes we can come in.

I don't necessarily revel in the fact that we all end up with labels in life, and I think most are sorting guidelines as opposed to definitions. It's like a genre of music, it's just something that eases recognition in a cursory evaluation - you've got to dig much deeper to find out what a person is all about in size, personality, temperment, etc.

I guess I just feel I KNOW a label could never contain me, so there is no way it could bother me to have one as a general point reference.


----------



## NotAnExpert (Mar 14, 2006)

In the dim, dark time when fat women had to get their clothing by mail-order, "Super-Size" originally referred to clothing that was beyond the standard size range of Lane Bryant and Roaman's. If you were over a size 46 (26 now), your choices dropped dramatically. That's around 300-350 pounds for most woman.

In time, as the "BBW" concept developed and stores started stocking realistic sizes, "super-size" was applied to the women themselves who still didn't feel the effets of this march of progress. Rather than a specific weight, it was more about point of view. SSBBW have experiences with finding clothing, mobility, health, accommodation and tolerance that smaller BBWs do not appreciate. 

Conceivably, women who are fatter still have issues and lifestyle experiences that their SSBBW sisters are only dimly aware of, hence such occasional designations as "Super-duper-size" or "Ultra-BBW", but the general idea's the same.

So if your road seems a little steeper than the average BBW's, you probably qualify as SSBBW.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Mar 14, 2006)

wtchmel said:


> I'm curious to know what everyone feels is the defenition of Bbw and SSbbw. From a size/number perspective or other.
> What got me thinking is that I see people that are not even big, they/society considers them a bbw. When I was a size 14, i looked downright skinny on top. So I'm just curious on peoples thoughts on this issue.



Hey Mel!!! (my hair sista') 

From a size point of view BBW has always been what sizes were available at Lane Bryant, which was size 16 to 28. SSBBW was above that. That was the standard that I stuck with, when writing for BBW and Dimensions.

Hope that helps.


----------



## CurvaceousBBWLover (Mar 14, 2006)

*I know folks find this fascinating. To me, these were always just labels. Fat is fat. *


----------



## ellyn (Mar 15, 2006)

I agree fat is fat and these titles don't mean too much; but I am blown away and almost offended by my 150 pound cousin calling herself a BBW. That's average to me. Can't we legit fat girls have _anything_ to ourselves?


----------



## Fuzzy (Mar 15, 2006)

Its because there is an absence of terms for the middle ground between "thin" and "bbw".. For the truly younger set, there is bbt(een).. and I guess there could be ssbbt(een)... but who would want to acknowledge that they're a chunkybw, or a not-so-bigbw.. althought I think Conrad coined the term "wannabe"bw...


----------



## fatcat00f (Jun 8, 2008)

I think, that bbw to 300-350 pounds, and above it already ssbbw!


----------



## Tooz (Jun 8, 2008)

I really hate when this comes up. It's different for everyone. It's a case by case basis. And, again, I say: Supersize = value meal. Feels object-y.


I'm just a fat chick.


----------



## TCUBOB (Jun 8, 2008)

The mistake I think some people make is by deliniating it solely on weight. Height also plays a role. if you have a woman who is 5'2" and 350 lbs and a woman who is 6'2" and 350 lbs are they both SSBBWs? Because one of them is going to look a lot fatter than the other. Or if you have someone who's 5' even and 300 lbs.....she may "look" like an SSBBW, but is 50 lbs short, according to the 350 lb defintion. 

I'll also ask this question.....is it so important to be able to ID women as BBW, BBW, SSBBW like it is some game of Duck Duck Goose? Does everyone have to be labeled as a shape that fits into a hole? Can't people just, I dunno, be?


----------



## NancyGirl74 (Jun 8, 2008)

I call myself an SSBBW because...well, that's what I feel I am. Some would say I'm a small SSBBW and maybe that's true but personally I feel too big for the general BBW label. Maybe it's just me. Lately the term Midsize BBW has been used when addressing myself and women in my size range. I guess it's as accurate as any but it makes me feel like a midsize sedan. Like Tooz said, "I'm just a fat chick." 

In my experience FAs seem to prefer SSBBWs but their definition of SSBBW varies quite widely. It's somewhere between 300 and 400 lbs depending on the FA in question. So I guess some times I'm a fatter fat chick and some times I'm a not-quite-as-fat fat chick. Its all a matter of point of view and who is doing the viewing.


----------



## bigsexy920 (Jun 8, 2008)

And DO you mean within Dimensions or within society? Again its all perception and as Nancy said its all in who is doing the looking.


----------



## NotAnExpert (Jun 8, 2008)

bigsexy920 said:


> And DO you mean within Dimensions or within society? Again its all perception and as Nancy said its all in who is doing the looking.



Either way, the evaluation is external. Granted, people can't live in a vacuum, but the most important opinion should always come from oneself. External labels should not determine what rights and privileges one has in society.


----------



## bigsexy920 (Jun 8, 2008)

I totally agree with you. I like Tooz think im just a fat girl. Ive said it before as well. I'm just like anyother woman just bigger. 





NotAnExpert said:


> Either way, the evaluation is external. Granted, people can't live in a vacuum, but the most important opinion should always come from oneself. External labels should not determine what rights and privileges one has in society.


----------



## wistful (Jun 8, 2008)

AnnMarie said:


> As for Belle's comment about the BBW label possibly being an apologetic one, I just don't feel that way. I actually like the SS because it lets potential mates who are into LARGE BBWs know that I am indeed on the large end of the scale, and I have no issue with my size. Since there are size 12/14 girls who will use the term BBW as a descriptor, I think the SS is a big help in sorting out the wide range (small/midsized/SS) of sizes we can come in.


 
This is pretty much the same reason I started using the term supersized myself.Some time ago when I was actually trying to meet people,I wanted a way to let guys know I was more then just a bit chubby.Unlike Dims which can be fairly supersized friendly,much of the rest of the bbw world isn't.While I agree that the term supersized isn't exactly elegant and that it is a touch dehumanizing, it's also the fastest way I know to express to the world that I'm fat with a capital F.I knew someone once who told me tongue-only half-in cheek, "I really hate the term supersized..I just prefer to call myself really,really fat." I personally don't posess such moxie(though I do admire it) so supersized it is.


----------

