Can ChatGPT Be My Personal Stylist? A Plus-Size Petite Experiment

Have You Heard of Personal Styling?

About 6 or 7 years ago, I had a personal colour consultation with a personal stylist friend, who told me I belonged to the Warm Spring colour season.

Now it is late 2026, and I start to wonder whether that assessment still applies because I'm now older and heavier. Haha.

And while we're at it, could ChatGPT help me figure out my personal style without having to engage another stylist?

So, I decided to run an experiment using AI.

Now I'm a Sage and a Mystic.

Wait, what is this? ChatGPT started the analysis by pointing me to the feminine archetypes questionnaire on Traitprint, which categorises personality characteristics into 12 archetypes.

My results were pretty interesting.

• The Sage: Wisdom, clarity and quiet authority.
• The Mystic: Intuition, depth and the inner world.
• The Lover, Rebel, Queen and Huntress: A four-way tie for the next position.

I wasn't particularly surprised by Sage. I do enjoy questioning things, understanding how they work and looking for evidence before drawing conclusions.

The Mystic archetype, on the other hand, is used to describe introspection, trusting one's intuition and seeking deeper meaning. And I do trust my gut feelings quite a lot.

Of course, these archetype questionnaires aren't scientifically validated personality assessments. I treated the results as an engaging exercise in self-reflection rather than a definitive description of who I am.

From Feminine Archetypes to Personal Style

ChatGPT suggested that my Sage-Mystic combination could translate into a style that was understated, sophisticated and slightly unconventional.

It even gave my style an identity: The Intuitive Elegant. Quite atas-sounding, isn't it? Haha.

According to this interpretation, the Sage influence favours clean lines, structure and timeless pieces, while the Mystic adds depth through colours, textures and subtle accessories.

I rather liked the idea.

After all, I've always been drawn to looking effortlessly polished without appearing overdressed.

But there's a difference between admiring a particular aesthetic and being able to wear it comfortably, which brings me to the next obvious challenge.

The Plus-Size Petite Problem

If you're familiar with the combination of plus size and petite, you'll probably understand why finding flattering clothing isn't always straightforward.

Many petite styling recommendations seem designed for slim women with a flat tummy and a small waist, while plus-size fashion often assumes a taller and voluptuous frame.

So where does that leave someone who is both petite and plus-size? Add a fuller midsection in midlife, and things become even more complicated.

So over the years, I've developed some fairly specific clothing preferences.

I love pencil skirts, particularly knee-length and ankle-length ones. I also wear fitted pants, usually paired with long, loose tops that provide coverage around my stomach and bottom.

Dresses? Not really my thing. I almost always feel frumpy in them.

Heels? No, thank you. I only wear sneakers or ballet flats any day.

I even told ChatGPT about all my preferences and current stylings. Surely all this information would help it understand my style better, right?

Well, not immediately.

AI Keeps Dressing Me Up Like a Slim Woman

Here's where the experiment became irritating.

Despite knowing my height, body proportions and clothing preferences, ChatGPT repeatedly showed me styling examples featuring slim petite women.

But were they representative of my body type? NO.

Eventually, I pointed it out myself to ChatGPT, as I was getting impatient.

To its credit, ChatGPT acknowledged the oversight and revised its recommendations to consider the actual challenges of dressing a plus-size petite frame.

That was probably the most useful moment of the entire exercise.

It basically shows that personalised recommendations aren't necessarily personal just because an algorithm has been fed information about you.

Sometimes, you still need to challenge the recommendations before they become relevant.

So, What Did ChatGPT Recommend Eventually?

After quite a lengthy conversation, we arrived at a style profile that actually made sense to me.

The colour direction remained Warm Spring, based mainly on my previous professional consultation.

As for my wardrobe, the recommendations became much more practical.

Instead of suggesting dresses or oversized clothing, ChatGPT focused on what I already enjoy wearing: pencil skirts, fitted trousers, relaxed but structured blouses, comfortable footwear and simple accessories.

It suggested experimenting with warm ivory, deep teal, chocolate brown, caramel and coral rather than relying entirely on black.

Black, by the way, has long been one of my preferred colours, mainly because I find it useful for drawing less attention to my midsection.

The most useful advice wasn't about changing my personal style completely. It was about paying closer attention to garment proportions, shoulder fit, fabric drape, blouse length and waistband comfort.

In other words, work with what I like instead of trying to turn me into someone else.

So, Can ChatGPT Really Replace a Personal Stylist?

After this experiment, my answer would be this: Not entirely.

ChatGPT was useful for brainstorming outfit combinations, exploring colour palettes and helping me articulate my preferences, but it also made assumptions.

It initially overlooked my body proportions when providing visual examples, and some suggestions were more generic.

A qualified personal stylist can assess fabric, fit, proportions and how different garments actually look on a person. ChatGPT cannot fully replicate that experience through a conversation and a couple of photographs.

Still, it offered something useful: an opportunity to examine my wardrobe choices more consciously.

I realised that I already have a fairly consistent personal style. I favour streamlined bottoms, relaxed tops, comfortable shoes and understated elegance.

Perhaps I don't need to reinvent my wardrobe after all.

I just need to be more deliberate about how I put everything together.

**********

Another blog post that I wrote a few months ago, which I find quite interesting when I read it again: What AI Thinks My Personality Is (After Two Years of Conversations)

Competence, Likeability and Trust Are Three Different Things

I've been watching quite a bit of crime television lately.

I recently finished all three seasons of the Turkish series Graveyard (Mezarlık), I'm currently on Season 3 of The Rookie, and I've finally reached Season 12 of Bones.

They are three crime procedurals that give me very different viewing experiences.

Graveyard is intense and often emotionally heavy. The Rookie is a much lighter watch, with plenty of humour and entertaining characters. Bones has been a long-running favourite, particularly because of its combination of science, criminal investigations, and character dynamics.

While watching these shows, I realised something about the characters that stood out to me across all three series.

Oscar Hutchinson from The Rookie

For example, the character Oscar Hutchinson from The Rookie. He is a ruthless psychopathic criminal - manipulative, opportunistic and certainly not someone I'd want anywhere near my personal or professional life.

But he's brilliant at surviving. He reads situations, identifies opportunities and makes himself useful when necessary. Even when circumstances are stacked against him, he somehow manages to find a way to stay in the game.

I find him thoroughly entertaining. You ask, would I trust him? Absolutely not. Hahaha. But I find his resourcefulness rather impressive, though it doesn't excuse his behaviour.

Inspector Önem from Graveyard

Then there's Inspector Önem from Graveyard.

She's truly capable, although she's severely underestimated in the beginning. She's determined and willing to challenge institutional failures, particularly when investigating crimes against women. She doesn't always have an easy relationship with the people around her, but she knows what she's doing.

What I enjoyed most about the first two seasons was the team dynamic between Önem, Serdar, Hasan, Selin and Berk.

They have different personalities, strengths and ways of approaching situations. They don't always agree, and they get frustrated with one another quite frequently. But they know how to work together when it matters.

However, Season 3 was disappointing. The storyline became unnecessarily complicated with an unsatisfying ending. After three seasons of investing in these characters, I expected a better resolution.

Still, I enjoyed watching how the team functioned in the earlier two seasons.

Dr Lance Sweets from Bones

And then, Bones! I've always appreciated the different expertise that each character brings to the investigations. Dr Brennan is exceptionally knowledgeable, Booth has his investigative instincts, and the Jeffersonian team (Hodgins, Angela, Dr Saroyan, and the whole rotation of interns) contributes its scientific expertise.

But my favourite character will always be Dr Lance Sweets. To me, he is the GOAT! Hahaha.

He's intelligent, perceptive, funny and kind. He understands human behaviour and can recognise things that others overlook. He doesn't need to be the most senior or authoritative person in the room to demonstrate his value.

What I particularly liked was how he could challenge Booth and Brennan without trying to compete with either of them. He knew what he brought to the table.

Competence, Likeability, Trust

Thinking about these characters, I realise that competence, likeability and trust are not necessarily the same thing.

Here's how I look at it:

Despite being a criminal, Oscar gets things done, but he primarily uses his abilities to protect his own interests, which means his intelligence doesn't make him reliable or trustworthy.

Sweets, on the other hand, combines competence with sincerity and a genuine concern for others, which makes him very likeable.

And Önem demonstrates her abilities through her actions, earning trust from her teammates, even when circumstances are difficult.

The Distinction That Matters Beyond TV Characters

Over the years, I've worked with people whose personalities and approaches are very different from mine. Some are systematic and detail-oriented; others are more intuitive or spontaneous.

I don't necessarily have a problem with either approach.

I can appreciate someone's abilities even when they work differently from me because I don't expect everyone to think the same way or arrive at decisions through the same process.

What matters the most to me is this: "Can the person deliver what they have promised and committed to doing?"

Trust is an important workplace "currency" that I associate with consistency, accountability, and demonstrated behaviour.

A confident personality who can make grand promises doesn't automatically establish competence. Neither does seniority, a job title or being particularly good at talking.

Likewise, having a difficult personality doesn't necessarily mean someone lacks ability or competency.

I've become more conscious of separating these things rather than treating them as interchangeable.

I can recognise someone's strengths without liking everything about them; I can appreciate intelligence without needing to know how it's used; and I have become very deliberate in creating opportunities to earn and learn trust, which is a very expensive "currency".

Perhaps that's also why I enjoy ensemble casts. Different characters contribute different abilities, and not everyone needs to be the star.

Anyway, I'm still watching The Rookie, and I'm quite happy to keep it as a light, entertaining series.

No need for every episode to provide an important life lesson.

Although, apparently, I can't even watch a fictional criminal like Oscar Hutchinson without thinking about competence and trust.

Hahaha.

Xennial Women's Bingo

I'm a Xennial.

Xennial is the micro-generation that sits between younger Gen X and older Millennials, with the commonly cited range being 1977-1983.

The top half of our lives was extraordinarily analogue. We have made mixtapes, survived dial-up internet, lived perfectly well without smartphones and somehow managed to meet people without sharing our live location. 😂

We also grew up when health information came largely from parents, magazines, doctors and whatever someone's aunty said. Then we became adults during the internet revolution.

Now we are in our 40's, entering perimenopause in an era of wearables, podcasts, TikTok doctors, supplements, HRT debates, health influencers, private screening packages, AI and Dr Google.

We are taking words like oestrogen, ApoB, visceral fat, bone density and insulin resistance seriously.

In fact, some of us could be taking magnesium, trying to sleep earlier, interpreting blood test results, and asking more questions before and during medical appointments.

I made a Xennial Women's Bingo card.

How many boxes can you tick? 😂

Actually, I'm also curious about something slightly more serious: How does a generation of women who grew up trusting traditional sources of health information navigate an overwhelming abundance of health information at midlife?

Because we may be the last generation that grew up without the internet, and one of the first to navigate midlife with almost unlimited health information at our fingertips.

This combination fascinates me.

When curiosity becomes a commitment.

What started as an interest in understanding this stage of life has developed into something broader.

I'm increasingly curious about how women search for health information, whom they trust, and how they decide what is worth buying, trying or paying for.

And to be honest... I've been thinking about what it means to pursue an intellectual interest seriously, especially at this stage of life.

Professional experience doesn't automatically translate into academic research competence. There are new methods to learn, assumptions to challenge and different standards of evidence to understand.

Looks like, somewhere along the way, my curiosity has become more deliberate. I'm no longer just reading because something interests me. I'm beginning to think about what it would take to contribute something meaningful to the subject.

That excites me as much as it intimidates me.

For now, I'll keep the curiosity burning as I prepare mentally and physically for my commitment for the next few years.

Why I Refuse to Stay Quiet About Perimenopause | Menopause Awareness Month

October is Menopause Awareness Month

For generations, women went through menopause and the years leading up to it, pretty quietly. In this October, which is also the Month of Menopause Awareness, I've been thinking a lot about why that silence existed for so long and why I don't think we need to continue it.

For a very long time, older women's health wasn't something people talked about openly. Partly because menopause is considered a natural stage of life, so the expectation basically goes like this: "Every woman goes through it, so just tahan only lah."

And partly, I think, because nobody wanted to be judged. But unfortunately, some of that judgement comes from other women too. The most common one that I always hear is this: "Our mothers and grandmothers went through menopause too. They didn't make such a big fuss about it."

This is where I respectfully disagree.

What Our Mothers Didn't Say

Just because previous generations went through something silently doesn't mean they went through it comfortably.

• Maybe they didn't have the words for what they were feeling.
• Maybe nobody told them that the insomnia, anxiety, brain fog, rage, exhaustion, palpitations, changing periods, joint aches or loss of libido could all be connected.
• Maybe they did mention it to their doctors, but their doctors told them it was stress, ageing, motherhood, or simply part of being a woman.
• Or maybe they just got on with life because what other choice did they have?

To be very frank, I don't see their silence as proof that menopause wasn't challenging. Sometimes silence is just silence.

Yes, It's Natural, I Know

As a Gen X woman going through perimenopause right now, I feel that women of my generation are most likely among the first to talk about this stage of life so openly and publicly.

And to some women from earlier generations, we probably sound like we're making a lot of noise over something completely natural.

But here's the thing: 'natural' doesn't mean easy.

Yes, childbirth, period, and ageing – all these are natural occurrences in a woman's life. But pain is still pain.

For some women, perimenopause is fairly manageable. For others, the symptoms can be bloody unbearable.

On some days, the irritability is ridiculous, sleep can be rubbish, anxiety turns up for no obvious reason, or my mental bandwidth disappears much faster than it used to. And sometimes noise, people and normal everyday stuff are just TOO MUCH.

And when several of these things happen at the same time, being told "it's natural" doesn’t really help.

I know it's natural. But I still need to know what the hell is happening to me.

Talking About It Isn't the Same as Blaming Everything on Hormones

This one is important. Being vocal about perimenopause doesn't mean I want to put every woman in her 40s into a box:

• Bad mood? Hormones.
• Can't sleep? Hormones.
• Forgot something? Hormones.
• Annoyed with your husband? Definitely hormones. 😂

No lah.

There are many reasons someone might feel anxious, tired, foggy or unable to sleep. Some of those symptoms may need proper medical checks because there could be something else going on entirely.

I'm not trying to blame hormones for everything. I just want perimenopause to be part of the context, so we can ask better questions.

• Could this be hormonal?
• Could it be my thyroid?
• Am I low on something?
• Is it stress?
• Could it be something psychological?
• Should I see a doctor?
• Would treatment help?
• What lifestyle changes do I need?

Asking these questions isn't making excuses. It's about being able to make informed decisions and take charge of our health.

Silence Doesn't Make Us Stronger

I have huge respect for the women before us. They raised families, worked, looked after ageing parents and kept households running, all while their bodies were changing, usually with very little information or support.

But respecting their resilience doesn't mean we have to copy their silence.

First, if we know more now, why not talk about it?

Second, if treatments and support exist, why shouldn't women know about them?

Third, if talking about it can save another woman from spending years wondering, "Why am I becoming like this?" then I'd rather talk about it, bravely.

Why I'm Choosing to Be Vocal About It

This is also why being featured on Menopause Asia as an advocate means something to me.

I don't see advocacy as standing on a soapbox telling women what they should think or do. For me, advocacy means:

• Talking openly about what I'm experiencing.
• Sharing what I'm learning.
• Asking questions that perhaps women before us were never encouraged to ask.
• Helping another woman recognise that what she's going through deserves attention rather than dismissal.

I'm still learning myself; I don't have all the answers, and I don't think every midlife symptom should automatically be labelled perimenopause.

But I do think women deserve enough information to recognise when something has changed, enough confidence to ask why, and access to the right support if they need it.

That, to me, is what advocacy looks like.

I'm not talking about perimenopause because I think women are fragile but because women deserve to understand what is happening to their own bodies.

There's no prize for suffering quietly. And silence is something that we don't need to pass down.