Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should your S.O./Spouse have a say so if they feel you are too thin or too large?
Options
Replies
-
I think it all comes down to reasonable expectations. If I marry a woman that is in good shape, I think it is reasonable to expect she will continue to be in good shape, taking into consideration the realities of life, including childbirth, age, medical conditions, etc. I don't think it is acceptable to lapse into obesity just because one feels secure or comfortable in a relationship. The same rules apply to me, so all is fair...8
-
heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
18 -
jessiferrrb wrote: »I love it when it all gets down to athlete pics to "prove" that BMI does not work for us common people. The sad truth is that for most of us, at a BMI of 25 or even 24 or for many 23, we are not looking that good any more. The fact that there are lots of people in whatever country one might be who are very overweight, it really does not change anything.
Reese Witherspoon is supposedly at a 25 bmi, Tom Cruise is at 26. they look pretty good to me, and would still look good with a few more pounds. ashley graham comes in at 29 and i would not kick her out of bed; same with denise bidot. these arbitrary lines in the sand are sad.
personally, i tend more towards sapio-sexual considerations than i am concerned whether my partner is carrying extra weight. if it's a health concern, if it inhibits sex drive (not performance, but obesity can impact that too) then i would address those issues with him, but the aesthetics aren't a driving force for me. **unless we're talking tinder.
And this is why there are no rules in preferences and there is also maybe some cultural influence about what is normal or going a step further, desirable. You finding Ashley Graham or Denise Bidot (had to look them up I admit) looking good is awesome for you and for anyone who feels this way. I cannot talk about sexual attraction as I am not bisexual, but I would have felt pretty awful for myself if my body looked like this. Different people have different ideas about what is beautiful and sexy. And this is ok, it is not a crime or a moral issue.2 -
I have no idea where the Reese Witherspoon BMI came from, googling her gives me something around 20, which looks far more reasonable: http://www.celeb-height-weight.psyphil.com/reese-witherspoon-height-and-weight-how-tall/1
-
STLBADGIRL wrote: »Sorry for the long post - but hold on - it is a good read. But I read this one day and it is one of the inspirations why I started this thread.
I didn't know what to do. We dated for a year and I had a connection with her that I've never had with anyone. I was truly, 100% head-over-heels emotionally and mentally in love and she loved me too. She told me that I was the one, that she had no doubts. And we've both been in the dating world for ten years or so, this isn't coming from two inexperienced kids.
But from the beginning I wasn't completely physically in love. She has an absolutely beautiful face but an overweight body -- maybe 30 pounds too, not obese. That's it -- just 30 pounds (on a small frame). It's hardly anything! In the beginning I just didn't think it was that important, because we connected so, so well. Because I loved her so much. I said to myself that the physical side doesn't matter so much and she is very pretty anyway.
But during the relationship it started to nag at me. I didn't have that urge to just jump her passionately like I've had in other relationships. I would touch her all the time, but in a comforting way, it didn't feel so sexual. She would always want sex more than me and when I would initiate it was more of me making a conscious decision that we should have sex rather than some physical need to be inside her. I did enjoy it though. When we'd be out in public sometimes my eye would wander towards others women and I'd imagine what sex with them would be like. That never really happened to me much in past relationships.
I encouraged us to be active. I managed to get her to go running with me sometimes but she always hated it. I told her I was going on a diet and asked if, when we ate together we could eat healthier. She said sure, but she has little willpower. She is always trying to stay on diets but never seems to manage. During the course of the relationship, despite any effect I could have, she didn't lose weight and even gained a little. I would cringe when later she'd go back for a second piece of cake or something. I hate myself so much for cringing like that and for thinking, "don't do it!" I don't want to think these things!
She's always had issues with her weight and her body. She was obese as a child and it's had a huge effect on her life. Yet somehow she's managed to build up her confidence and self-esteem from that point and now she's pretty happy with her body. I wanted nothing more (I have never wanted anything more) than just to talk to her about this and ask her if maybe she could show me that she really cares about staying in shape, that she will work at this problem from her side (since I can't seem to do anything to change it from mine mentally) and then maybe we can overcome it together. But I couldn't do it -- it would wreck her happiness forever and I knew it. I couldn't talk to her about this one thing that was killing us because it would kill her just to hear it! "I'm not physically attracted to you" - I know the effect that would have and she would not recover from it. She even told me once that a boyfriend asking her to lose weight/change her appearance would be the immediate kiss of death because we should love each other unconditionally and it shouldn't matter what we look like. She's so right. I just wish I were as good a person as she is.
And now I'm stuck. Weeks after the break-up I'm still completely in love with her and still completely on the fence about whether this was right or not. On the one hand, when you consider a lifetime of companionship, how can being a little overweight/physical attraction matter at all? It should be irrelevant! I don't want to care about it at all! But on the other, would this slowly eat away at us -- eventually making me resentful or crushing her because I never seem as passionate with her as other husbands/boyfriends are? What if she figured out my problem? It would destroy her.
I had truly hoped that during the course of that year, something would change. Either I would mentally overcome this block that I have or she would get in better shape and the block would be overcome that way. But it hasn't happened.
I gave her another reason for the breakup. I hated lying about it so much. And now I fear I'll never, ever find a connection like that again -- that in gambling for everything, I will find out that I've really lost everything. She is truly one of a kind. Love and life just pours out of her like a broken faucet. When she laughs, she really laughs. And when she cries, she really cries. And I'm the one crying now.
Please someone invent a way for us to re-wire our brains. I just want to be attracted to her. I'll pay anything.
Thanks for listening.
TL;DR: I love her, I love her, I love her, but I can't get my body to feel the same way and I hate it.
EDIT: By the way, I should mention that I ended it because she really wants that lifelong commitment and I thought it was unfair of me to keep seeing her indefinitely knowing I had this problem. Breaking up with her has been easily the hardest thing I've ever done.
EDIT2: For those who are saying that I need to tell her the real reason because she should have a chance to change, I get you. I really, really want to tell her.
But that's taking a tremendous risk with her happiness and self-esteem. I know her very well now. I'm telling you it would absolutely crush her. She has issues with depression as well, largely related to weight/body issues. I've seen the effect of someone else saying something a thousand times more subtle to her and it was brutal.
It's bad enough that I'm walking away when she really, truly loved me, I can't bring myself to destroy her life for the next 10+ years too.
I understand what you're saying. I want desperately to tell her because if there's any chance of saving us -- I want to take it. But this just cannot be done. If there is one thing I care more about than us, it's her.
Honestly? This person has made one of the most common mistakes and his story has nothing to do with the question in your OP. He did not have a partner who changed. He chose a partner believing he could change her. Which is alwaya a terrible idea, because people do not change. It is the most common sad story:
- Start dating a guy who parties all night, and think your influence will turn him into a model husband
- Marry someone with no ambition, and wonder why he has not matured and is not pursuing a different career path after marriage
- Have kids with someone who is always swearing/drinking/smoking, and be upset he is not magically transformed into a model dad.
And so on...
And in your story? This is not love, sorry. It is a confused guy looking for a partner, a friend, a companion. But being "in love" requires sexual attraction to start with. I am not saying it is all about the attraction. But without it, it is not "in love". It is a close friend, a soulmate even, but not a lover.6 -
I have no idea where the Reese Witherspoon BMI came from, googling her gives me something around 20, which looks far more reasonable: http://www.celeb-height-weight.psyphil.com/reese-witherspoon-height-and-weight-how-tall/
Same people who claim Marilyn Monroe was a modern size 12 and fat.
They use a picture of her taken while she was pregnant and ignore her actual measurements to try to obfuscate. She was actually 5'5" tall and her measurements were 36-24-34 and at her heaviest her waist measurement was 28.5" and weighed 117 pounds when she died.2 -
And in your story? This is not love, sorry. It is a confused guy looking for a partner, a friend, a companion. But being "in love" requires sexual attraction to start with. I am not saying it is all about the attraction. But without it, it is not "in love". It is a close friend, a soulmate even, but not a lover.
I think we need a new thread for this one.....but what is being said above. It's why I've never understood the whole 'Friends With Benefits' relationship. Isn't a friend that you want to bump uglies with the very definition of a boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse? If you like and admire someone, but are not physically attracted to them, you have a friend. If you like and admire someone and you want to jump their bones and they feel the same way...you have a romantic relationship.
Maybe I'm just too old and too married to understand.5 -
mom23mangos wrote: »
And in your story? This is not love, sorry. It is a confused guy looking for a partner, a friend, a companion. But being "in love" requires sexual attraction to start with. I am not saying it is all about the attraction. But without it, it is not "in love". It is a close friend, a soulmate even, but not a lover.
Maybe I'm just too old and too married to understand.
I came to that conclusion about this thread for myself a long time ago
3 -
I have no idea where the Reese Witherspoon BMI came from, googling her gives me something around 20, which looks far more reasonable: http://www.celeb-height-weight.psyphil.com/reese-witherspoon-height-and-weight-how-tall/
it came from google, but my point was not that reese witherspoon's bmi is accurately reported on the internet, my point (again) is that bmi isn't something tattooed on your forehead - you can't look at someone and say "oh *kitten*, she's a 23 and i don't go above 22." bonus fact -people can look really good above a 22, (if you don't like reese find another example). so setting bmi as a cut off for attraction is silly. you don't have to be attracted to people who look like ashley graham or denise bidot either. you do you boo.2 -
Honestly? This person has made one of the most common mistakes and his story has nothing to do with the question in your OP. He did not have a partner who changed. He chose a partner believing he could change her. Which is alwaya a terrible idea, because people do not change. It is the most common sad story:
- Start dating a guy who parties all night, and think your influence will turn him into a model husband
- Marry someone with no ambition, and wonder why he has not matured and is not pursuing a different career path after marriage
- Have kids with someone who is always swearing/drinking/smoking, and be upset he is not magically transformed into a model dad.
And so on...
And in your story? This is not love, sorry. It is a confused guy looking for a partner, a friend, a companion. But being "in love" requires sexual attraction to start with. I am not saying it is all about the attraction. But without it, it is not "in love". It is a close friend, a soulmate even, but not a lover.
I said after reading this it inspired this thread... And that is should you have a say so in your S.O./Spouse's weight if too large or too thin.
----
We have different ideas and definitions of 'in love'....so I disagree with you on requiring a sexual attraction.
1 -
heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
So in your world, market value is determined solely by outward appearance and BMI.11 -
heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
how high is your market value4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
So in your world, market value is determined solely by outward appearance and BMI.
Right, not how much money you make, the genetics you bring to the table, intelligence, good character, pleasant to be around...?
And apparently this so called market value is objective?
In any case, market value seems like a strange phrase. Unless you're trying to pay a competitive rate for a hooker16 -
WinoGelato wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
So in your world, market value is determined solely by outward appearance and BMI.
Right, not how much money you make, the genetics you bring to the table, intelligence, good character, pleasant to be around...?
And apparently this so called market value is objective?
In any case, market value seems like a strange phrase. Unless you're trying to pay a competitive rate for a hooker
did you say that out loud. lol6 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
So in your world, market value is determined solely by outward appearance and BMI.
Right, not how much money you make, the genetics you bring to the table, intelligence, good character, pleasant to be around...?
And apparently this so called market value is objective?
In any case, market value seems like a strange phrase. Unless you're trying to pay a competitive rate for a hooker
did you say that out loud. lol
Just saying that's what it sounds like to me
I don't treat women like a cut of meat at the market, so I don't think of women I date in terms of market value. So the thought seems strange to me 14 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »heiliskrimsli wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »SpotLighttt wrote: »is this a case of - the more people have going for them, the more preferences they hold?
Just a thought.
So your suggestion is that only someone without stuff going for them would stay with a spouse who gained a few lbs and became a 25 BMI?
Because no one in this thread has actually been talking about initial attraction.
The higher your market value the more you can be picky yourself. It's how the whole thing works.
So in your world, market value is determined solely by outward appearance and BMI.
Right, not how much money you make, the genetics you bring to the table, intelligence, good character, pleasant to be around...?
And apparently this so called market value is objective?
In any case, market value seems like a strange phrase. Unless you're trying to pay a competitive rate for a hooker
did you say that out loud. lol
Just saying that's what it sounds like to me I don't pick up girls like a cut of meat at the market, so I don't think of women I date in terms of market value. So the thought seems strange to me
i hear you.
4 -
STLBADGIRL wrote: »
----
We have different ideas and definitions of 'in love'....so I disagree with you on requiring a sexual attraction.
May I ask then what is the difference between being in love and having a close friend or even brotherly love? I have a couple of female friends and a guy friend I am very comfortable with, have very many things in common, can openly talk to them, have common interests. One of my girl friends, I could very easily see myself living together, knowing she will be there for me whenever I needed her, us never ever getting on each other's nerves, having common interests, from professional interests to books we read to the kind of gym we would use, we laugh together, we understand each other, we have shared things no one else knows, and this friendship has lasted decades, many times long distance. Still, I am not "in love" with her, because I am not attracted to women. As having sex is not something that was ever an option. If I was single (she currently is) I could totally see myself moving in with her and knowing I could never ask for a better roommate/companion/"adopted" family. But, we are not in love, the thought is as disgusting as asking me if I am in love with my brother.
How do you define being in love, without attraction? I am not asking if a marriage is possible without attraction, it sure is, it was/is the norm for extended periods of time in human history at different places and cultures. But chosing a husband because he can provide, or because he has a sense of humour, or because he treats you good, without any desire to have sex with him, this is not being in love, is it?3 -
STLBADGIRL wrote: »
----
We have different ideas and definitions of 'in love'....so I disagree with you on requiring a sexual attraction.
May I ask then what is the difference between being in love and having a close friend or even brotherly love? I have a couple of female friends and a guy friend I am very comfortable with, have very many things in common, can openly talk to them, have common interests. One of my girl friends, I could very easily see myself living together, knowing she will be there for me whenever I needed her, us never ever getting on each other's nerves, having common interests, from professional interests to books we read to the kind of gym we would use, we laugh together, we understand each other, we have shared things no one else knows, and this friendship has lasted decades, many times long distance. Still, I am not "in love" with her, because I am not attracted to women. As having sex is not something that was ever an option. If I was single (she currently is) I could totally see myself moving in with her and knowing I could never ask for a better roommate/companion/"adopted" family. But, we are not in love, the thought is as disgusting as asking me if I am in love with my brother.
How do you define being in love, without attraction? I am not asking if a marriage is possible without attraction, it sure is, it was/is the norm for extended periods of time in human history at different places and cultures. But chosing a husband because he can provide, or because he has a sense of humour, or because he treats you good, without any desire to have sex with him, this is not being in love, is it?
You said sexual attraction. That's what I disagree on.0 -
What I learned from this thread:
One of these two women has bad body odor from her rolls and folds of fat, doesn't take care of herself at all, is good in bed because she's bouncy and motivated, but is bad in bed because she lacks stamina and endurance and flexibility, is lazy, has bad lifestyle and value choices, and is unworthy of marriage.
The other one is somehow fine and acceptable. The question is, which one?
22 -
I think if my weight started affecting my health and mobility I'd want my S.O to step in 6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 913 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions