Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Community Conversation => Transsexual talk => Topic started by: Renate on November 10, 2009, 08:09:31 AM

Poll
Question: When I stand up straight, feet together:
Option 1: I'm XX and my knees touch votes: 1
Option 2: I'm XX and my ankles touch votes: 2
Option 3: I'm XX and both touch votes: 4
Option 4: I'm XY and my knees touch votes: 1
Option 5: I'm XY and my ankles touch votes: 9
Option 6: I'm XY and both touch votes: 20
Option 7: Other votes: 3
Title: Leg geometry?
Post by: Renate on November 10, 2009, 08:09:31 AM
Stand up straight, legs relaxed, feet together.
Do your knee bones touch? Or your ankle bones? Or both?

(Since most of us haven't had a chromosome test, the XX/XY is only our presumptive type.)
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: KerstinVienna on November 10, 2009, 09:00:25 AM
I've been thinking of that for a long long time! for me there are "male" or "female" legs.
My legs are "male" => only my ankles touch ... thats why i dont wear short skirts etc ... some friends tell me my legs look good but I dont like them
perhaps it will become better after srs? perhaps my fat redistribution will speed up after surgery, so my legs wont look so thin.

Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Autumn on November 10, 2009, 09:41:59 AM
Knees and ankles touch.
This is a good thing? It feels weird to have contact on the side of the knee.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: KerstinVienna on November 10, 2009, 09:57:18 AM
my opinion: legs, where ankles and the knees are touching, look more feminine than "typical" male legs.

I think its better if both are touching because if not, one side of the knee has more pressure than the other, so it looks better and is healthier too

Of course it can vary, neighter bow legs, nor X-legs are good. I m trying to find the golden medium ;)

Kerstin

(it would be much easier to explain that in german ;)
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Eva Marie on November 10, 2009, 10:18:52 AM
I think that my legs have a feminine shape, but I also tend toward being bow legged  ::) My ankles might touch, but the knees - no way.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: KerstinVienna on November 10, 2009, 10:35:34 AM
this summer i compared the legs between men and women, thats why this thread caught my attention ;)

yes, shape makes a big diffrence too!!

ive always been very skinny, hrt changed that (55lbs), but I still need more fat. I'm "ectomorphic" (?) so I'm having troubles gaining and keeping weight. it has advantages and disadvantages ;)
Perhaps SRS will give my estrogene more power!? and give my body more shape!
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Zelane on November 10, 2009, 11:24:13 AM
Do you mean not everyones legs touch knees? News to me.

I wasnt aware of this difference between the sexes. Its there are other thing in the legs or other body parts (besides the obvious?)
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: KerstinVienna on November 10, 2009, 11:36:17 AM
Quote from: Zelane on November 10, 2009, 11:24:13 AM
I wasnt aware of this difference between the sexes. Its there are other thing in the legs or other body parts (besides the obvious?)

my opinion: There is a difference! take a closer look to legs ;) ok its not something everybody notices and its not THE key feature :) my legs dont make me a man, but i dont want to wear a skirt.

Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Myself on November 10, 2009, 11:52:38 AM
I might just be silly (I can be ! :D) but won't your ankles always touch if you are putting your feet together? or do I just not know what ankle really is.

Isn't the thing to measure is actually the Q-Angle? (which varies a lot between the sexes) Did you know up to 20% women have android pelvis? the width of the pelvis and length of the femur bone determine the q angle.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: KerstinVienna on November 10, 2009, 12:05:18 PM
;) well if you have knock knees, your ankles dont touch, and if you have bow legs, your knees wont touch!
ok thats the extreme, and everyone varies! When I was talking to a orthopaedist he told me, that bow-legs knees have much more pressure on the exterior part of the knee, and it should be distributed evenly


(I hope my englisch is understandable ;) )
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Myself on November 10, 2009, 12:18:31 PM
Depending on how I stand I can have the knee touch or not touch O_o I am not sure about the ankles at all. That's all with feet together.

If I stretch my legs, the knees won't touch and have some gap.
If I relax them, my knees will get closer and might touch though I am not sure if it's bone or not.

In both cases, the bone below the knee goes outwards a bit and curves in so the feet touch, again not sure if it means the ankles touch. I think they do. (I am just not sure where to position "ankle" for some reason)

My bf says his knees won't touch, but I am not sure if he was stretching or not.
He isn't sure about ankle either.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: clhere on November 10, 2009, 02:30:55 PM
XY and both my knees and ankles touch but just about. I have an ectomorph type body though.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Myself on November 10, 2009, 02:33:54 PM
0well about 50-50 results from the.. umm.. one section of the forum.
I think that kinda cancels any meaning to it.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Silver on November 11, 2009, 03:20:28 PM
Your knees and ankles are supposed to meet. Anything else can be diagnosed at knock knees or bow legs.

The difference is in the angle of the knee, the taper of the thigh, and the distance between the femurs.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: childofwinter on November 11, 2009, 03:45:18 PM
I know there's a Y somewhere as I did a family history test to determine my ydna haplogroup a few years ago, so I'm at least XY. My ankles and knees both touch.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Steph2003 on November 11, 2009, 06:35:54 PM
I've inherited bowed legs, so nothing quite touches (except for my thighs near the crotch!) :laugh:

S
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: gothique11 on November 13, 2009, 01:53:31 AM
Um, my knees don't touch at all! Is that really bad? I seem to walk fine and stuff, my legs don't hurt. I don't think I have bow legs -- what is that anyway? And how bad is it to have? Is it gonna 'cause all kinds of health problems? Gah!

and, because I constantly forget, xx vs xy -- I always get them mixed up. o_0 So, I didn't do the survey.

But, I'm more worried 'cause I read everyone elses responses that says your knees and ankles are supposed to be touching -- but my knees don't at all!  :'(
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Silver on November 13, 2009, 01:55:38 AM
Quote from: gothique11 on November 13, 2009, 01:53:31 AM
Um, my knees don't touch at all! Is that really bad? I seem to walk fine and stuff, my legs don't hurt. I don't think I have bow legs -- what is that anyway? And how bad is it to have? Is it gonna 'cause all kinds of health problems? Gah!

and, because I constantly forget, xx vs xy -- I always get them mixed up. o_0 So, I didn't do the survey.

But, I'm more worried 'cause I read everyone elses responses that says your knees and ankles are supposed to be touching -- but my knees don't at all!  :'(

You're a little bow-legged. Since it's not causing you problems, it's probably not a big deal so don't worry.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: gothique11 on November 13, 2009, 03:06:33 AM
Oh, wait, if I look in the mirror and stand up straight they seem to touch, but when I bend the top part of my body to look down they don't.  :o Actually, when I bend town, too, my ankels don't touch, either, but then when I went to the mirror, they both touched (but I guess I'd actually stand up straight.).

Blah, okay, I'm so confused. Why did I even click this topic -- I find obsessing over all of these little things is usually pretty counter productive to everything. o_0

Post Merge: November 13, 2009, 03:09:53 AM

shifting your weight around changes it too.... just noticing... I can get my knees to just touch and my ankles don't. So, yeah, you can do all kinds of small changes in just shifting your weight a bit, slouching or not, pulling your shoulders back, moving your hips a bit forward or a bit backwards -- it all equals different results. So, really, if someone wanted to they could change the results to suit what they want the result to be.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Renate on November 13, 2009, 06:38:08 AM
I got started on this subject from another post.
I don't think that it "means" anything, I was just wondering.

Since then, I've considered that having your knees not touching does not mean bow-legged.
Your legs are attached to your pelvis at a pretty good center-to-center distance.
To stand with your feet together is actually unnatural, that is, with your legs converging.
More natural is to stand with your feet apart at the same pelvic distance, with your legs parallel.
Then if your knees are inside or outside of this vertical line could you you consider it knock-kneed or bow-legged.

(XY is the most common chromosomal type for males.)
(XX is the most common chromosomal type for females.)
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: insanitylives on November 13, 2009, 06:47:29 AM
my knees touch and the rest of my leg looks duckish.

Yeah. knock kneed and pidgon toed.

Fun. And yeah, I look funny when I walk
(I've been told I walk like a boy with messed up legs. yeah that's true (ignoring my gentics. stupid xx chromsones))
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Ms Bev on November 13, 2009, 07:02:37 AM
I presume I'm XY
With my feet together, only my knees touch the slightest bit.  It's hard to tell.  I said nothing touches.
Is that a good thing? a bad thing?  Marcy says I have great legs  That could be bad too, I guess??



Bev 
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: aubrey on November 14, 2009, 12:38:38 AM
Both knees and ankles touch and everything seems aligned when standing with feet hip width apart, but I was born bow legged thankfully they corrected it right after.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: SusanKC on November 14, 2009, 01:32:37 AM
Both touch.  I'm pre everything except attitude.  Remember, birth females have wider pelvis's, affecting the thigh bone angle, connected to the ... never mind.  Remember also, males have a couple of attachments that get in the way, forcing a wider stance for comfort.  Senator Craig waasn't totally wrong.  >:-)

SusanKG
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Naturally Blonde on November 14, 2009, 10:00:29 AM
I don't quite understand the nature of the post? the objective for me is to get the right fat distribution on my legs, ankles and butt. You could be XX, XY, YY etc but without the right fat distribution your legs may look male. My legs are particulary thin and boney and don't fit the profile.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Myself on November 14, 2009, 10:09:00 AM
I am not sure if fat alone will affect it, there is the Q-angle, remember? which is probably unrelated to the nature of touching ankles and knees.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Sarah_Faith on November 14, 2009, 10:02:51 PM
I went out with my girlfriend not this halooween, but last halloween.  I wore her leggings and she said herself that I had better legs than her!  I've worked a long time to get slim legs, long time indeed. Now, my girlfriends leggings look better on me than on her. I had guys telling me that they would 'take me home'. Dream come through for me. Back to my point. Leg geometry. Imo, if there is a difference, average person wont notice it. Shave your legs and that's it imo. Very few people are gonna question it any further.
Title: Re: Leg geometry?
Post by: Alyssa M. on November 14, 2009, 11:13:01 PM
I have seen some pictures of trans women where you can tell they have more masculine legs. But I don't think it has much to do with the question of whether the knees touch. It has more to do with their overall length compared to the torso (men's are comparatively short), the angle of the thighs (straighter for men; slanted outward for women), and the width of the hips (narrower for men). Musculature is also a factor -- women's muscles are simply not as defined most of the time. Fat has little to do with it, really.

Frankly, I think my legs are one of my better physical assets, and that's true for at least one other trans woman I know. A skirt, depending on the cut, can be a good way to show legs off and make them look longer, and often flatter a figure with narrower hips. If I want to look my best, I definitely prefer skirts or dresses. Heels too, if I can get over being self-consious about my height. Because of the way they alter your stance and lengthen the legs overall, heels just make legs loke more feminine.