r/Kibbe

https://preview.redd.it/2nvqll0apb2h1.png?width=550&format=png&auto=webp&s=9dc21025e3622fa8839833c592dfeba4bcadd21e

Long-time lurker on this sub. For YEARS I have struggled to type myself, and mostly gave up and just went with a general "mostly yin" because I could not seem to type myself no matter what I did. I thought SC, SG, TR, everything but R.

Then, I saw this picture of Marilyn Monroe, and it all clicked. I'm a Romantic.

I had this idea that romantics had to have no width, waspish waists, super wide hips, and DDs. But in this picture, Marilyn is so fleshy, soft, rounded, and sweet but not girlish in a way that challenged my perception of Rs.

I tried on a super romantic dress. Ruffles, rose patterns, thin straps, waist emphasis, short, and I look SO FINE!!!

Anyway, I just wanted to share because this is a very satisfying "ah-hah!" moment for me.

I'm quite short and curvy. I do not like my figure being part of the outfit at all. i don't like the feeling of an emphasized waist, nor the look of tapering on anyone. I typically wear looser tops and bottoms aiming for flowy and cohesive. This helps with my comfort but even in them I appear full figured and they can look seperate from me. It makes me really uncomfortable.

Is there middle ground?

Every t-shirt I try looks “off” on my arms no matter the sleeve type. Just not flattering. I prefer to wear a tank top or sleeveless shirts instead despite not loving my arms. I wonder this preference aligns with any kibbe types? Thanks!

Nearly all tank tops seem to hit in an awkwardly short place and/or they are too thin. Where do you yang peeps get your basic tanks from?

The best fabric I've found was this double-lined one from express. It's smooth but not taught and clingy. This fabric isn't found in all their contour shirts and those shirts hit right at the top of my jeans in an unflattering way.

I have been told by an AI analyser and multiple people on Reddit, including here (https://www.reddit.com/r/theatricalromantic/comments/1t1vu36/ive_been_told_im_theatrical_romantic_do_you_agree/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) that I'm flamboyant gamine OR something involving vertical, including that I look MUCH taller than I am (155.6cm - it has to be more precise than the nearest feet and inch,because millimeters matter when determining forearm to height ratio). That's a little over 5"1. I know that this is a controversial phrase but for the sake of at least understanding scientifically what the brain is picking up on to decide if you look taller than you are or not, I looked at standard proportions of different body parts, and how they tend to vary with height.

What I theorise is that I look taller because, according to my best attempt to measure my forearm the way recommended, my ulna length to standing height ratio is within the normal range but is more typical of taller women. It means people will be used to seeing women on the taller end of average have my forearm to standing height ratio, NOT short women like me.

If this is really what makes you look taller than you are, then should it be used in Kibbe typing, because it has an impact on how clothing looks on you?

It's important if you do this for yourself to get your properly, precisely measured height, I'm lucky that I know mine is 155.6cm (1556mm) as it was measured and documented by a doctor to the ACTUAL nearest millimeter (NOT just rounded clumsily up or down to the nearest feet and inches and then converted to the nearest round number in centimeters, again, it has to be from an ATTEMPT at least to be as close as possible to the nearest millimeter). Same with the ulna length measurement. Use a range with a few millimeters either side to account for measurement error, and put the numbers from that range into your calculator when you divide one number by the other to get the coefficient.

According to the University of Southampton, this is how to measure your own ulna bone length:

• Position the arm: Bend your non-dominant arm across your chest, keeping your palm flat against your opposite shoulder with your fingers pointing upward.
• Locate the endpoints: Feel for the bony tip of your elbow (the olecranon). Then, find the bony, prominent knob on the pinky side of your wrist (the styloid process).
• Measure: Place the tape measure at the tip of your elbow and measure to the midpoint of the prominent bone on your wrist.
• Record: Read the measurement in centimeters (to the nearest 0.1 cm)

For an adult female, the ratio of ulna length to standing height typically ranges from 1:6.5 to 1:7.0.

The system is not about literal shapes. It's not about roundness – it's about concentricity. It's not about straightness – it's about vertical continuity. If you evoke outwardness, you just do, no matter what gender you will be presenting yourself as.

Fashion sense itself indeed is constantly being recultivated by what happens in our society, but the intuition behind the Kibbe system is not subject to it.

I'm not saying that the system is objective and that it exists outside of our shared subconscious… I'm just saying that the intuition behind it seems to be cultivated in a very intricate way and that it might be intertwined with many things that don't change easily because they're essential to the way we think even outside of fashion/art.

By the way, I've noticed that many people in this sub don't treat the long vertical like a distinguishable feature. They're only willing to talk about it through the automatic vertical, which is however only an indicator, not a feature itself…

---

EDIT:

It is indeed unlikely for a male body to be able to create a double curve - but this in fact makes the double curve a mere indicator. Its reliability could be 100% in women and it would still be just an indicator (cause it doesn't carry the essence of the ID).

Now to the automatic vertical. Have you ever asked youself what this "automatic vertical" thing actually is and how it works? There seem to be different limits to how big certain male and female bones can be (I don't know where these limits lie and what accounts for them, but they do seem to exist). There are many different configurations that can make one ID and in many cases it seems that the size of some bones can make up for the size of different bones (and for the overall height of the individual), BUT: since there are different limits to different bones (and since the limits vary for males and females) there seems to be only so much height in females and only so much height in males that can be made up for by something else. To make it short: the automatic vertical is also only an indicator (no matter how reliable for each respective sex).

---

How many times have we heard that someone is only conventionally curvy, but not curve dominant? Doesn't that basically mean that a very curvy body can still "evoke vertical continuity"?

How many times have we heard that weight change doesn't affect one's ID? Hormone therapy might activate some new genes, but in effect we're still mostly talking about fat, muscles, skin, and bone density. I know there might be some greater structural changes too, but firstly, I don't think they change your ID, and secondly, most people here seem to think that mere social transitioning changes one's ID – and that's what I wanted to discuss primarily.