Five years ago, I wrote a post about the conclusions I had come to about how I was a Flamboyant Gamine.
Of course, this being so long ago, I didn’t really understand a lot of David’s system. I somehow understood intrinsically that I was a Flamboyant Gamine, but I didn’t really understand what my body was showing me. Reading that post, I have no idea why I didn’t think I was a Soft Gamine except for pure instinct, and that I knew that attempting to dress taking into account what I saw as my “curves” was a disaster.
I’m always learning new things from David, and one of the things he has said recently is that Women start with a baseline of curves. Men have a baseline of length and width. Having measurements that indicate a bust, waist, and hips are not enough to add yin. The most yang women can have a body shape that would be considered “hourglass” if you put it into a calculator.
What matters it how clothing falls around the body. On a Dramatic woman, they have their long vertical:
(And no, I am not suggesting people try clothing on to see! David has an exercise to figure this out on Strictly Kibbe.)
For me, as an FG, it is a mixture of long and short:
For an R, their curves need to be accommodated:
Having a bust, waist, and hips does not mean that you have to accommodate curves. It may sound funny, but I dress to accommodate my lack of curves, width, and balance. I am not a unicorn among FGs, because what I have is a baseline of curves, and not curves that need to be considered. I simply have a juxtaposed mix of yin and yang, and yang wins out.
Elizabeth StewartNovember 5, 2019 at 6:13 am
What a helpful post! The photos really clarify the differences. What I learned in working through David Kibbe’s exercises was not only the category I belong to (extreme Yin), but the fact that each has its own beauty. A lot of people say that, of course, but it took the exercises for me to really feel and understand that statement, for which I’m eternally grateful. In this celeb-obsessed world we tend to think only the very slim, yang women are truly beautiful, but this is such a recent phenomenon. I think Marilyn would be thought of as too large today!Reply
stylesyntaxNovember 5, 2019 at 11:19 am
Yes, I think the beauty of the exercises is that they show you who you are by showing you the beauty of who you are, and giving you the tools to remove resistance and actually appreciate it. As I said before, I think we know, but it’s hard to allow ourselves to see it.
I have heard from yin women that while a lot of women want to be TR, especially, the actual reality of being yin-dominant is very different, since the current version of curves that is popular in the media today is a very yang version of curves.
GDecember 21, 2019 at 2:14 am
So if one dresses to accommodate their width, they are automatically a natural type? I have a friend who is 5’2…she has a wide bone structure, broad, squarish hands and feet, long arms (for her height). Moderate vertical line. She’s very pear shaped though (wide, round hips and prominent buttocks), short and wide waist, and her chest and shoulders look small in comparison. She looks sturdy overall even with her yin height and hips, with taut flesh (except for the waist, hips and thighs which are rounded, broad and fleshy). She looks her best when she dresses to balance the width of her hips (for eg. Boot cut jeans are much more flattering on her than slim fit or skinny jeans, discovering bootcut trousers was a ’life changing moment’ for her). When she tries to draw attention to her curves with belts or anything with fitted waist emphasis, it makes her look wider and disproportionate. Knee-length bias cut dresses look great. Open necklines and a slightly looser fit in blouses look beautiful on her. Slightly heavier shoes also look better on her than sharp or delicate ones. In terms of accessories, slightly longer necklaces and dangly earrings look beautiful. She has very long, naturally curly hair and it looks perfect on her. I had suspected her to be soft natural for awhile (it was between that and flamboyant gamine), but didn’t think they could be pear shaped or short. I always thought they needed to have wide shoulders.
stylesyntaxDecember 21, 2019 at 2:21 am
Well, she for sure wouldn’t be a Flamboyant Gamine!
If she is broad all over… it wouldn’t really matter that her hips are wider than her shoulders, because the accommodation through the ribcage area would still be necessary. I would say SN seems correct, maaaybe R, definitely neither Gamine.
GDecember 21, 2019 at 11:05 am
The reason why I initially thought that FG was a possibility was because her bone structure + fat distribution is very similar to Jennifer Love Hewitt (who Kibbe typed as FG). Same elongated oval face shape and long neck, taut upper half, but wide and fleshy from the waist down. My friend does look shorter and abit more sturdy than her though, with a wider waist, and a taut bustline. We did try both FG and R on her, and she hated both. Delicate feminine detailing, lightweight fabrics on her bottom half, and small rounded shapes in jewelry don’t look right, quite frumpy and aging, does not complement her stronger looking curves. FG recommendations looked pretty bad too, it made her look boxy and wider. So yes, definitely neither. SN seems to be the best match so far. Wearing loosely structured tops (or anything with a slight ‘wrap’ to it) seems to really bring out her Yin in the best way possible (which is what she desires, to look more proportionate, but also feminine and graceful). PS. I am binge reading your blog, and learning so much! Thank you for putting out all this info!
stylesyntaxDecember 22, 2019 at 8:38 pm
You don’t get to your Image ID by comparison to a celebrity or anyone else. 🙂 As you mentioned, she has some things in common with JLH, but has some key differences. Those key differences can be the very things that make JLH FG and your friend SN (or something else). You can find what would be considered a pear shape in other systems in any Image ID.
megNovember 5, 2019 at 6:30 pm
what a helpful post! I only recently realized that a lot of women were using body shape calculators and measurements to determine whether they’re curvy or not(both in the Kibbe world and not) and that that’s what David keeps addressing and that his idea of curves is the same way I was seeing it. Now my confusion over those discussions makes so much more sense haha for me it is the opposite, that if I put my measurements into a calculator it will probably call me a rectangle or something yet when I look in the mirror it’s very clear curves, and that was causing me distress at some point cause the calculators and reality didn’t match up, so coming from that place I didn’t understand what the conversation was about since I had no idea people were using measurements. I imagine there’s a similar kind of frustration if you’re “curvy” on paper but don’t see curves in yourself yet keep trying to dress for them, or assign yourself to an image id that needs to accommodate curves and then end up feeling like there’s something wrong with you, which is the opposite of how it should make you feel. I think you would need to have a very specific body type to make it so your measurements directly translate to curves that you need to accommodate irl but measurements don’t matter anyway like you said hahaReply
Alex MNovember 13, 2019 at 3:25 pm
Your post from 2015 about why you are NOT a curvy FG and feeling frustrated that FG and G seemed to have been mooshed together still resonates with me. I am 5’6.5″ (the exact same height as Audrey Hepburn), but I have NARROW, “delicate” angularity, NOT broadness. I actually thought I was a pure D, because my body looks so angular and narrow. My friend is a textbook FN and her hands compared to mine are night and day – both long, but hers are wide and broad where mine appear “tiny” or “birdlike”. I have a lot of softness in my face though, so I started looking at G types. Pure G, with its narrow emphasis, seems to fit me a lot better that FG, because even though I think I look like a G with extra yang, I don’t have that broadness or width at all. What do you think?Reply
stylesyntaxNovember 13, 2019 at 4:41 pm
According to what David has said in the FG Facebook group, FG will not be broad or wide anyway! But I would look at your body, not your face. You could still be a Dramatic and not a FG. You need to have the combo of opposites throughout your body, not just a more yin face on a yang body.
Alex MNovember 13, 2019 at 5:06 pm
As I’ve gotten older (27 now) and am not as skinny-skinny as I was when I was young I see more softness in my body – I’d described myself as pear-shaped. I struggled when I tried to dress as a pure D, pictures have confirmed I do best when I have blocks of colour, not just long lines from head to toe. An FG withOUT broadness or width sounds just right for me, thank you for the update!
stylesyntaxNovember 13, 2019 at 5:55 pm
Well, the idea of a long line being a single color isn’t really correct–it’s more about connecting the outfit throughout. An Image ID with a long line will just connect their outfit throughout, but you wear different colors on top and bottom, or whatever.
CarissaNovember 23, 2019 at 6:05 pm
That’s very interesting. Not to piggyback. How would you suggest that line to be connected for someone in the D category?
stylesyntaxNovember 23, 2019 at 6:19 pm
I believe David means to carry a color throughout an outfit.