All this is better pursued in the Discussions forum rather than here - but it’s not worthwhile. Some think toys are role-models; I think they’re just toys; we could go back and forth for weeks without getting any forrarder.
I thought I read somewhere (here at the SDMB?) that Barbie’s measurements had changed several times over the years. If this is correct (and I don’t know that it is, but I think that it is), then there could be several different “correct” answers.
It’s the 18" waist that’s the killer.
- originally posted by * Mephisto
Mattel did chance her body a few years ago. They gave her smaller breasts and wider hips. The old body is still available though. I’m not good with math, but I do have both versions of the body, so If anyone is interested in figuring it out I will measure them for you.
Bah!
One of my girlfriends is SUPER curvey - if her waist isn’t 18", it’s pretty damn close. She’s 5’8", could easily get breast implants, and would still have no trouble getting around. Granted, she wears a size 9 shoe which would help with balance I suppose.
Some women have a really feminine figure - rounded hips and breasts, teeny, tiny waist. If the 5’9", 38DD, 18" waist measurements are accurate, I’m willing to bet that there are at least a few woman in the world that look like this. Of course not all women do, but I always find it a little obnoxious when people (not you Urban Ranger - the author of the article) slam woman who do.
Ok, I can’t let this go unchallenged. 18" waist? Never mind super curvy, 18" is way too small without the aid of a corset. I’m 5’2" and very petite (95 lbs) - my waist is about 26".
And there’s another measurement provided - 38DD. That 38 means 38" around the torso just below the breasts. Are you saying it seems reasonable to be 38" in the middle of the torso and 18" at the bottom of it?
When my cousins were small boys they had a lot of Heman toys. Those guys shoulders were probably wider than their height. Same with the super friend cartoons nowadays. But onto barbie.
This is a sewing site that has barbie doll measurements.
http://www.sewing.org/html/tta-barbie.html
Another site
http://www.persephone.com/dawn/trivia.html
I will do the math later as I must go shopping for clothes now.
Using the measurements from the second site of:
hieght 11.5 in
bust 14cm
waist 8cm
hips 12.5 cm
I get for a 5 foot 6 inch woman
32 in bust
18 in waist
28 in hips
18 in waist is pretty small in my book.
Well, I learned something new. As a guy, I always thought that the 38 referred to the measurment around the fullest part of the breasts. A quick search shows this not to be the case. The 38 is actually the “band size”. However, 5 is added to the measurement that Basandre described, so Barbie would measure 33" for her upper torso. With a DD cup that adds back 5" so in Barbie’s case she would measure 38" around her breasts, but that is not generally the case for other combinations of band and cup size. 
Back to the OP… no, I don’t think there’s any way you can ascertain Barbie’s “real” height just by going from Barbie herself. Even if there was some ratio that you could go by, like eyeball diameter to ankle diameter, you’d still have to be certain that these are both built to scale (the same scale) on Barbie, that neither one is exaggerated relative to the other.
A better way to guage her height, as someone suggested above, is to go by some external reference point such as her Corvette. Or, maybe she has a fashion accessory that you could go by – a scaled model of, say, a real Chanel handbag (?).
The Guinness Book of Records says that the smallest waist in someone of normal stature was that of Mrs. Ethel Granger (1905-1982) of Great Britain, who reduced (via corset?) from a natural 22 inches to 13 inches over the period 1929-1939.
Well, as gazpacho pointed out, the actual band size would be about 33", a difference of 15 inches between chest and waist.
My friend who has about an 18" waist wears a 38C. She’s slim, but has very little muscle - really small abdominal muscles - hence the teeny, tiny waist. Trust me - we wear the same size pants, but on me they fit in the hips and waist, and on her they fit in the hips and then GAPE in the waist. I’m a lot more muscular than she is, particularly in the tummy area. 
Your particular waist measurement could be due, in part, to being in good physical condition - well toned.
Far be it from me to challenge the conclusions of a high school math class, especially when the publicity implies they got the answer their teacher wanted. I’m just waiting for their proof that midgets don’t exist.
Of greater concern is the takeover of the entertainment world by aliens from another planet, who for some reason are trying not to create a product that we earthlings want to buy, but to promulgate their bizarre inter-species propoganda.
My boyfriend’s mom used to be very tiny with very big breasts. I recall hearing that her waist did, in fact, measure 18 inches at one time. (I believe this time to have been after having children.) She is about 5 feet tall and wears a size shoe, and didn’t have any trouble walking. Is it the height that makes the difference?
-Mercury
Barbie’s measurements
With regard to the ongoing claims that Barbie Dolls have outrageously unrealistic proportions that could never be obtained by a living human, I am continuing to get discrepancies between my measurements of a Barbie Doll and the measurements claimed by others including those who are taking their own measurements, so I have decided to do new measurements for which I will document my methodology for taking the measurements and the exact design year and model of the Barbie I am measuring. The claim of a 39 inch bust is not true although it is constantly repeated without being checked.
Barbie’s REAL measurements can be found on my site at http://www.toyboxbitch.com/files/PAGES/BARBIESIZE/BARBIESIZE.html
So, what would barbie’s measurements be if she was 50ft tall?
This new user is basically posting the same thing to several message boards. I have brought it to the attention of the Authoritays. Who knows what’s going on.
The real concern here should be the state of what passes for journalism today. Many sites have recommended the work of Galia Slayen. and quoted Ms. Slayen’s calculations, well she didn’t make any calculations, she just repeated something she heard somewhere without checking it, just like many oyhers have done. Her sculpture is a complete fabrication and it is very disturbing that news outlets continue to spread this myth of Barbie’s “wildly unrealistic” proportions without checking the facts, you can see proof of the real numbers at www.toyboxbitch.com/files/PAGES/BARBIESIZE/BARBIESIZE.html or
http://www.squidoo.com/the-truth-at-last-the-real-measurements-and-proportions-of-a-modern-barbie-doll
Wow, if the spammer’s photos are accurate, they did a total revamp of Barbie’s body. That doesn’t look like any of the Barbies I played with 30 years ago.
eta - Yep.
