I prefer the way skinny women look.

[Green]

5'4" 165 is the average size of a woman here in the states, according to the link I posted last night. That's my weight and 10 inches shorter.

 

yes and a lot less muscle so its more fat

 

but forget statistics they lie. The average woman I see (and I see many) look like crap

[Els]

yes and heres the stats of women who compare themeselves to beyonce

 

height: 5'5

Weight: 165 and UP

Waist: Big

Hips: migh not be big but fat

 

Beyonce herself aint that bad but she isn't that hot atleast her body isn't I havn't seen her in bikinis or anything like that recently so I wouldn't know. Lady gaga showed a lot more skin then beyonce. Women of her size wear clothes that mold. And she isn't that fat, but she represents women who are fat that claim to have her body type.

 

Considering the media hype about Beyonce's 'awesome body', then, and considering how much importance you place on media standards, why then do you disagree that Beyonce's body is 'awesome'? Oh wait, so now the media isn't always right?

[Mad Max]

yes and a lot less muscle so its more fat

 

but forget statistics they lie. The average woman I see (and I see many) look like crap

 

 

True. But then again, most guys look like crap as well. That same link had the average guy at 5'9 1/2" 190. If you add 5 pounds for each inch, that means the average 6 footer weighs 200 pounds.

 

Most people seem to believe that guys should be bulky, but that's not so. The average male model weighs no more than 175 pounds and the ones you see on the runway are 6'0"-6'1". It's lean muscle.

[Els]

yes and a lot less muscle so its more fat

 

 

You need to go back to high school, hon. A normal, healthy woman will always have more body fat composition than a normal, healthy man, and less muscle composition. Pure, indisputable medical facts. To rival a man's body fat/muscle composition, a woman has to be an athlete on a diet/training routine so extreme that she will usually be anovulatory (to simplify things for you, that means she doesn't have periods and is thus infertile).

 

That is of course no excuse for being medically overweight (before you jump on me), but saying that women have more body fat than men is really like saying that males have smaller breasts than women.

[Els]

There you go, some easy reading so you can sort out your facts before posting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage

[Mad Max]

There you go, some easy reading so you can sort out your facts before posting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage

 

 

I'm between 6-7%. Guys like Ray Lewis and Terrell Owens are around 4-5%. Their bodies look like sculptures.

[Els]

The fact that you are at 6-7% doesn't necessarily make you any healthier than a guy who is at 14-17%. Body fat is only detrimental after a certain amount; having any less than that amount doesn't help you one bit.

[Green]

There you go, some easy reading so you can sort out your facts before posting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage

 

You are so silly as I already know more about this then you. So are you fat?

[Els]

You are so silly as I already know more about this then you. So are you fat?

 

Mmhmm. So what was the point of saying that 'women who weigh the same as Mad Max have less muscle so it's more fat'? Does it matter that they have 'more body fat', when that is merely the way they are biologically made?

 

I also find it highly unlikely that you know more about human anatomy/physiology than me given my profession, but I'll humor you. If you really must know, I weigh 115 lbs. How about you?

Edited November 15, 2010 by Elswyth

[Green]

Mmhmm. So what was the point of saying that 'women who weigh the same as Mad Max have less muscle so it's more fat'? Does it matter that they have 'more body fat', when that is merely the way they are biologically made?

 

I also find it highly unlikely that you know more about human anatomy/physiology than me given my profession, but I'll humor you. If you really must know, I weigh 115 lbs. How about you?

 

I weigh over 200 with no gut, and the reason it matters that a woman shorter then him weighs about the same and has WAY LESS MUSCLE is because that means her gut will be bigger.

[Els]

What is your height and body fat composition, Green?

 

The woman's waist and abdomen might be larger (depending on her fat distribution) because she is shorter, not because she has less muscle. A woman will always have less muscle, period.

[Green]

What is your height and body fat composition, Green?

 

The woman's waist and abdomen might be larger (depending on her fat distribution) because she is shorter, not because she has less muscle. A woman will always have less muscle, period.

 

go back and read this thread I gave out as close to an aproximation of my height as I'm willing to give

[Els]

Sorry, but I don't exactly have the time to go through 37 pages to find your height because you don't want to mention it again. That's all fine though. TBH, I've rarely known a man to be 200+lbs and not even a little bit overweight (unless they're professional weightlifters/athletes, or extremely tall).

[Mme. Chaucer]

go back and read this thread I gave out as close to an aproximation of my height as I'm willing to give

 

Is your height some kind of classified top secret information????

[theBrokenMuse]

Sorry, but I don't exactly have the time to go through 37 pages to find your height because you don't want to mention it again.

He said '6"2 I believe (but I'm too lazy to go back and find it to confirm )

[Els]

He said '6"2 I believe (but I'm too lazy to go back and find it to confirm )

 

Ah, I see. Well in that case, he has a BMI of 27, which is slightly overweight for the average person (people with unusually high muscle mass ie athletes excluded). That brings us to the issue of his body fat content then.

[theBrokenMuse]

I am overjoyed, once again, to provide University evidence of things I said on this forum. Many people would love to pin me down when I express specific viewpoints about the way society is, about the way women are, about the way men are. My opinions are indeed opinions, but they are based on experiences that has happened in my life. And I have a wide range of experience in a large number of areas. For some people that's excepted as an answer. For others, that's not enough. So every once in a while, I just pull another scientific study of what I believe or what I have said all along.

 

The words in bold are quotes from the article. At the end I'll show the link to where I got it from so that people don't think I'm making this up. This study is a few years old, but I challenge anyone in here to find a study that contradicts what this says.

 

Note the politically-correct word in the first sentence:

 

Heavy-set women ...

Notice how they didn't say fat women.

 

... are likely to face worse socio - economic outcomes than slimmer colleagues, but fat men do just fine, a new research study has found. "Body mass significantly decreases women's family income," the study by two researchers at New York University found. "However ... men experience no negative effects of body mass on economic outcomes."

Haven't I said something like this before? You need to let your chubby, little daughter know that she either hits the treadmill TODAY or she better plan on going to graduate school so that she can pay her bills because no man if going to pay for them. The study I bring to you is documented evidence.

 

Dalton Conley, director of NYU's Center for Advanced Social Science Research, and NYU graduate student Rebecca Glauber found that a 1 percent increase in a woman's body mass index -- a measure of weight relative to height -- pushes family income down by about 0.6 percent. Similarly, the researchers found a woman's "occupational prestige," a measure of the social status of differing jobs, also dropped as body mass rose, ...

In other words, the fatter you are, the less prestigous your job is. With the exception, of course, to Oprah Winfery. There are exceptions.

 

... although to a somewhat lesser degree: 0.4 percent for each 1 percent increase in body mass. Conley said the marriage market appeared to account for most of the differences in body mass-related outcomes among women. "Women who are heavier for their height tend to have lower chances of getting married in the first place.

This is a Univeristy PROFESSOR we're talking about here.

 

If they do get married they tend to marry spouses who have less earning power.

Now I KNOW I said that in another post before. If your husband makes $28,000 a year, you're probably a 4 on a scale of 1-10. How many times have I said something like this before? The university study at NYU says that's a FACT.

 

If they do get married they tend to marry spouses who have less earning power and they also have a higher likelihood of getting divorced,"

That's because men trade up.

 

"All those three factors reduce their total family income."

That's right.

 

Conley and Glauber also found that the conventional wisdom that tall men were more successful than shorter men did not hold true. "The talk is that height for men is what slimness is for woman, but it turns out there is absolutely no effect," Conley said. The study, which was recently posted to the Web site of the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research,

So you want to know where my statistics are coming from, THAT's where they're coming from.

 

did not definitively rule out the possibility that a lower socioeconomic position to begin with might lead to a high body mass reading.

That's probably true.

 

But Conley said the research, which compared outcomes between sisters and between brothers, suggested this was unlikely.

I'm going to add something to this. For men, body mass appeared to have very little impact. Body fat does not reduce their economic status, it does not reduce their chances of getting married. It does not increase their liklihood of divorce or separation or widowhood.

 

The fact that a MAN is fat does not keep him from having a good job, does not keep him from making a lot of money. Having a lot of money, however, does make it more likely that he'll get a divorce.

 

So girls, if you want to make more money, if you want to marry husbands who make more money, and not get dumped later on, you gotta hit the treadmill. You better find the butt blaster at the gym there and start working out. Because if you don't, it's gonna cost you cold, hard cash!!! The study said it. I just read it to you.

 

If you have a daughter who's fat or fugly, you better start putting money away for college right now because no man is going to pay her bills. And if she does marry, as the study says, if they do get married they tend to marry spouses who have less earning power and they also have a higher likelihood of getting divorced. These are factors that reduce total family income.

 

Now is the time to take a good, hard look at your daughter. Look, I know you think she's cute. If people are asked how attractive they think your daughter is, and if she gets a disapproval rating, you better start making sure those grades go up, you better make sure that she saves up and you save up for college, graduate school. I also recommend that she start hitting the treadmills. I don't care if she's twelve -- get her out there! Stop with the happy meals. Stop with the HotPockets.

 

Fat and fugly girls make less money, marry poorer guys, end up getting men who are less successful, they end up getting divorced in higher numbers.

 

The facts speak for themselves. And if you don't believe me, here are the links:

 

http://www.antobie.com/nz/all-other-info/motivation

http://www.nber.org/papers/w11343

I'm not seeing the paper because I'm not paying to download a PDF file however, aside from the fact that I am quite curious about the control group involved for this paper, I've always been quite baffled by people's lack of reasoning when it comes to deciding not only on who gets hired but who deserves raises and the like. People tend to act like utter retards in this way (I have never experienced this crap, luckily) but how can this nonsense not make people want to pull their hair out about the way that the intellectual lightweights of the world are making important decisions for companies?

 

It reminds me of the time I worked in an office where it was a father and son running the place but at the time that they needed to hire a temp for the duration of a leave I needed to take the father was in the hospital so the son in his late twenties was left to do the job. I had been invited to sit in on the interview and was told to ask questions as I would have to train this person to do my job which was quite specialized. Holy Sh**! He about outright dismissed every eligible (and qualified) male that entered the interview and the first hottie that entered the office got the job even though she literally had never even sent an email before and I was working with all kinds of different programing languages and customized computer programs.

 

It was beyond obvious to me that she could not do this job. I knew she could never learn what she needed to learn within the week they gave me to train her and I told him so. He told me "she was a smart girl and would be a quick learner. :rolleyes:" It was the most painful week of my life and no, she most certainly was not a 'quick learner'. About a month into my leave they were calling me up and begging me to consider cutting it short. It seems little miss beauty queen was seriously hurting their bottom line - who woulda thunk it?

[Els]

Rofl. Most of the pretty girls I know don't have men paying their college bills either - because their bfs are mostly guys they met in highschool/college and are really as broke as they themselves are. It's not as common as you think, unless the girl doesn't mind getting with a much older male (whom she most likely doesn't love) just for his $$.

[LucreziaBorgia]

*******

 

wrong thread

[dreamingoftigers]

Just for the record, I do find Beyonce attractive.

 

DreamingOfTigers said: Also the much higher the chances that he is overweight as well, thereby increasing the odds of him being in a relationship with an overweight woman.

 

Especially if he does not make a lot of money.

 

With men, it's about attracting the hottest women their money can afford. For women, it about getting the most successful guy their looks can afford. It doesn't work the other way around. A fat man with a lot of money has a better chance of attracting a thinner woman than it is for a fat woman with money to attract a hot guy, regardless of how much money he makes.

 

Yes, I do acknowledge that a slimmer guy with money can (I said can, not always) attract better looking women than a fat man could, if he makes a lot of money as well. But a slim guy (even if he's attractive) with little money cannot attract hotter women because his wallet is not thick. If they want him strictly for sex, then that one thing. But if they want a relationship with him, then they'll look for another guy who has more money.

 

For women, even though a guy's physical appearance does play a role, they are attracted to his money. For men, it's not so much about how much money she has. Men don't care about that stuff, especially if he makes a lot of it. He's going to get with the hottest woman his money can afford. If he's with a fat girl, that means he cannot do any better. Unless, of course, he has a fetish for fat girls. Generally, however, men prefer slimmer women.

 

Having been dedicated to revamping my lifestyle lately and reading a whole lot about a whole lot, I have reached a couple of conclusions. I think being obese tends to come from being unable to regulate your emotions/eating. And that will lead to other factors in your life becoming rather unworkable. Due to brain function issues and metabolic damage that make you become obese, you have less energy. You really do and I am the first one to admit it.

 

I have made pretty good money in the past, but that is because I have poured every single ounce of it into my work and not into anything else in my life that needed doing. The point I am getting to is: there is a good chance that a decent percentage of obese people do not pour that limited energy into work, they may pour it into socializing, keeping their house clean, whatever else goes along in life besides work. This does two things: it devalues the work that obese people do that is valuable and focussed because there is a societal attitude about it. And those folks also make less money.

 

Generally though, people who have the same attittudes and socio-economic platform end up together, it isn't so much an example of women being greedy bitches (althought that exists). I know that with my husband and myself we would enjoy going out to eat together. He even came up with the "bypass burger"

[Green]

I think he said he's much taller than 6'', I can't be sure because Green seems to be a fantastic writer and Tolkien has never been my favorite writer .

 

I enjoy getting patronized by you, I really don't get why you added the Tokien reference must be a 100% swedish thing. So are you in Sweden or in the United States looking at fat women out and about all day like me. I actualy have no animosity to fat women and believe they have every right to exist and be fat (not that they choose it just uneducated about certain things) I just refuse to call them attractive for I TRUELY do prefer the way skinny women look and they are beauty and the fact that there are chubby chasers doesn't make them beautiful any more then a cat eating a rat make it tasty

[theBrokenMuse]

Due to brain function issues and metabolic damage that make you become obese, you have less energy.

The less physical activity people do the less energy they seem to have... a whole lot of larger people lack that activity. Plus, there is also the fact that a lot of larger people do not feel good about themselves which makes them more susceptible to low-grade depression and high sugar, high fat type of foods don't exactly help ether. I would think that would have a lot more to do with it than 'brain function issues'. Honestly, brain function issues sounds like an excuse for a person to keep maintaining a lack of self-control over one's eating habits more than anything.

Edited November 15, 2010 by theBrokenMuse

[Green]

The less physical activity people do the less energy they seem to have... a whole lot of larger people lack that activity. Plus, there is also the fact that a lot of larger people do not feel good about themselves which makes them more susceptible to low-grade depression and high sugar, high fat type of foods don't exactly help ether. I would think that would have a lot more to do with it than 'brain function issues'. Honestly, brain function issues sounds like an excuse for a person to keep maintaining a lack of self-control over one's eating habits more than anything.

 

 

Ok this is an entirly different issue yes 400lbs plus people often have serious brain problems not to mention health concerns (like that can't really walk at all or very little) but I think women stop being attractive far before major health concerns and mental problems. Like a 160 lbs women has probably zero chance at being HOtt

[112233]

Conley and Glauber also found that the conventional wisdom that tall men were more successful than shorter men did not hold true. "The talk is that height for men is what slimness is for woman, but it turns out there is absolutely no effect," Conley said. The study, which was recently posted to the Web site of the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research,

So you want to know where my statistics are coming from, THAT's where they're coming from.

 

The latest research I read on the "tall men are more successful" statistics were that the data was biased and misunderstood in the past. In fact, if there is any bias toward tall men, it's toward men who were tall during their teens compared to their peers.

 

The researchers theorized that this might be due to the way people learn to interact with others also occurs during this time of their lives.

 

 

I'm not an expert but I don't see anything unreasonable in this.

 

 

As for fat or ugly women having a hard(er) life, anyone with eyes can see that, but I guess it's good to have the science.

[112233]

Ah, I see. Well in that case, he has a BMI of 27, which is slightly overweight for the average person (people with unusually high muscle mass ie athletes excluded). That brings us to the issue of his body fat content then.

 

Don't take this personally El, I actually enjoy your posting. I just have to point a few things out. First, if I recall correctly, he said "taller than 6' 2" so there's that.

 

Second, BMI completely falls apart for people who deviate significantly from the average height. The core issue is that volume (and weight) increase with the cube whereas height is a linear dimension, and the BMI formula doesn't do the math appropriately for that. If you read up on it you will see that for very short people, BMI makes them look healthy when they can be quite chubby and for very tall people a relatively slim person will rank as "overweight".

 

I think BMI is an interesting and useful number but it has to be combined with other factors.