The term “small fat” is used to describe someone who is slightly larger than the thin beauty ideal, but smaller than what society typically considers “fat.” There is no universal agreement on the exact weight range that constitutes a small fat, but generally it refers to people who wear sizes 14-18 in standard US clothing sizes. Small fats face some discrimination and bias due to their size, but not to the same extent as larger bodied people. Their bodies are often still accepted and represented in mainstream media, whereas larger fats are excluded or treated as abnormal. This article will provide an overview of who is typically considered a small fat, the history of the term, and the experiences and challenges that small fats may face.
Typical Size Range for Small Fats
As mentioned, there is no definitive weight or size cutoff for who is deemed a small fat. It is a broad, subjective categorization that lies somewhere in between thin and visibly plus size. However, most agree that standard US dress sizes 14-18 fit into the small fat demographic. Here is an overview of the typical measurements associated with those sizes:
| US Size | Bust | Waist | Hips |
|---|---|---|---|
| 14 | 39-41 inches | 31-33 inches | 42-44 inches |
| 16 | 41-43 inches | 33-35 inches | 44-46 inches |
| 18 | 43-45 inches | 35-37 inches | 46-48 inches |
These sizes typically correspond to a body mass index (BMI) of 25-30, which is classified as overweight but not obese. By comparison, straight sizes run from 0-12 and plus sizes 18+. So the small fat range falls in that in-between zone.
However, some short or very curvy small fats may measure as a size 14-18 yet still have a BMI in the healthy zone. Similarly, a taller or more slender person could have a BMI over 30 yet require a size medium or large. So it is the overall visual appearance and clothing size, more so than strict weight measurements, that determine small fat status. But in general, someone falling in the size 14-18 and BMI 25-30 range is likely to be viewed by society as a small fat.
Origins of the Term “Small Fat”
The concept of small fats as a distinct category is believed to have originated in the fat acceptance movement of the 1960s and 70s. Groups like The National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (NAAFA) aimed to reduce size discrimination and improve quality of life for overweight individuals.
In the 1990s, the idea of small fats gained more traction through the burgeoning fat-o-sphere of blogs and online communities. Writers like Lesley Kinzel and Marilyn Wann discussed the unique challenges of being not-quite-plus-size. The term “small fat” was popularized as a way to label this identity.
The categorization reflected an acknowledgement that smaller plus size people still faced stigma and bias, despite being closer to societal beauty standards. It gave community and validation to those struggling to accept their bodies in a culture obsessed with thinness. Small fat was positioned in contrast to terms like midsize or “straight plus” that erroneously implied a non-marginalized identity.
So while the terminology is modern, the concept of small fats has roots in size acceptance movements of past decades. It continues to resonate with those whose bodies fall slightly outside the dominant beauty standards.
Unique Challenges for Small Fats
While small fats do not face the exact same level of oppression as larger bodied people, they still encounter many frustrations and biases due to living in a fatphobic society. Some key challenges include:
Clothing access
Though more plus size clothing options exist now, shopping remains difficult for small fats. Standard size 0-12 clothes rarely fit or flatter their bodies. But many specialty plus size brands start at size 18 or 20 and ignore the 14-16 market. Malls and department stores frequently carry the lower straight sizes and then jump to a limited plus section. This means small fats are left with few choices and the message that their bodies do not deserve representation.
Negative body image
Small fats contend with endless messages that thinner is better. Some may have dieted to squeeze into a size 10 or 12 in the past, only to later gain weight back and now inhabit a bigger body. Internalizing that a size 14 is “bad” can batter self-esteem. Fear of future weight gain and loss of thin privilege impacts mental health.
Health concerns
Many doctors lecture small fats about losing weight for health, ignoring the role of genetics and healthy behaviors. Getting adequate testing and screenings for issues like heart disease or diabetes can be difficult. The assumption is often that higher weight directly causes problems, rather than looking at environmental and wellness factors holistically. This leads to inadequate care.
Accusations of vanity sizing
Since size 14-18 exceeds the “average” American woman’s size, many claim vanity sizing is to blame. They argue a size 18 today is equivalent to like a 14 in the past. However, women’s bodies have always come in diverse shapes and weights. Suggesting small fats are exaggerating their size contributes to anti-fat attitudes.
Exclusion from full-fat spaces
Some very fat positive groups and resources define fatness more rigidly, starting at size 20 or 24. Small fats may feel awkward participating or uncertain if their struggles are valid. Despite also facing oppression, they are not always fully welcomed by their more visibly plus size peers.
Comparison to Midsize
At first glance, the terms small fat and midsize may seem interchangeable. Both descriptors aim to define an in-between state of being not thin but also not visibly plus. However, many activists argue that midsize glosses over the stigma still faced by people who wear larger straight sizes.
Midsize originated in the body positivity movement to recognize bodies that diverged slightly from the thin ideal. It encompasses sizes 6-14, occasionally extending to 16. There is an implicit assumption that midsize folks still have an acceptable body in mainstream society. Small fat specifically focuses on the marginalization faced by those in sizes 14-18.
Here are some key differences:
| Small Fat | Midsize | |
|---|---|---|
| Typical Size Range | 14-18 | 6-14 (sometimes 16) |
| Social Experience | Discrimination and stigma due to higher weight | Outside beauty standard but closer to cultural ideal |
| Clothing Access | Limited options, difficulty shopping | Can shop straight sizes at most stores |
| Mainstream Representation | Minimal/negative | Small but increasing |
So while midsize and small fat may appear synonymous, the term small fat specifically denotes facing size-based oppression despite having a lower weight body than stereotypical fat activists.
Small Fat Representation and Activism
While small fats do not see themselves reflected in mainstream media and advertising, activism is slowly shifting representation. Here are some key moments in small fat visibility and empowerment:
The Chubsters by Marilyn Wann
Author and fat activist Marilyn Wann coined the phrases Fat!So? and used the term “chubsters” in her 1998 book to describe small and midsize fat people. Her work encouraged embracing the word fat and validating people of all sizes.
Lesley Kinzel’s Two Whole Cakes blog
One of the first popular fatshion bloggers in the late 2000s, Kinzel’s work explored the complexity of being a small fat who did not meet stereotypical expectations of fatness. Her writing gave voice to an in-between experience.
Brown and Kelli Jean Drinkwater’s activism
Fat femme performer and activist Kelli Jean Drinkwater produces theater exploring queerness and fatness. She also models for brands like Lonely Lingerie and ModCloth as a small fat. Activist Aubrey Gordon created the hashtag #LivedExperience to share the diversity of fat experience and center small fat voices.
The rise of body positive retailers
Several size inclusive clothing companies have used small fat models in recent years. Brands like Swimsuits for All, Universal Standard, and 11 Honoré are expanding to offer chic styles in sizes up to 18-20. More options are slowly becoming available.
#SmallFatsExist on social media
To combat erasure and build community, small fats have shared photos and stories on Instagram using tags like #smallfats, #smallfatstyle, #smallfatvisibility, and #smallfatsexist. Connecting through social media provides support and empowerment.
While still underrepresented, small fats are working for change through writing, art, activism, and entrepreneurship. Gradually, society is beginning to acknowledge diversity in plus size experience.
Conclusion
In summary, the term “small fat” developed within fat activism to describe a state of being not fully thin yet also not visibly plus size. It encompasses around sizes 14-18 and BMIs 25-30. Small fats face unique frustrations around clothing access, stigma, and exclusion from full-fat and mainstream spaces. Their identity sits in contrast to the often-interchangeable concept of midsize.
Small fat representation is slowly growing but much work remains. By sharing stories, celebrating diversity, and demanding options, small fats are carving out space for their right to exist comfortably in their bodies. They are part of the broader movement to shift society’s understanding of fatness and beauty.