deviance from 'normal' human mode

Dec 30, 2012 23:44

given all the variation in humans, pondering how much we perceive ourselves as varying from the perceived average. (which is an incredibly odd concept as it is) For instance, from what I've been told over the years, I have:

short toes
wide feet with narrow heels
short, small waist
wide shoulders
tiny back (well, rib cage, given my bra band size)
wide hips
short, stocky legs
big head, or at least hat size.

I'm short for this part of Britain. 5'3. Hourglass figure. Which accounts for some of my bits being considered wide/short. I've always had more muscle (the stockiness) than would be expected for someone of my height, so I weigh more too. (I've varied between 10 and 10 and a half stone since puberty, only ever dipping below when I was running five times a week for about a month, and I expect the weight would go back up if I'd kept it up and gained more muscle, since my weight never varied when I was swimming 1k every morning at school for years, not including PE lessons)

The couple of bits of me that are *definitely* not on the 'perceived normal' variation scale are my hands and eyes - hands are child size and proportioned, eyes have pupils that are stuck on 'wide'. (they don't close down very much in bright light, meaning artificial light on during daylight is irritating and slightly painful, I have great night vision, and I have to actively concentrate to see 3D. I always wonder how much my pupils would fuck with the Voight-Kamp test in Bladerunner.)

Be interesting to find someone who was exactly average. Anyone got a bit of them that's apparently average?

body

Previous post Next post
Up