IF they didnt like me before Mentality
Replies
-
Something that occurs to me often reading posts like this (and some a whole lot worse in terms of the level of loathing of former selves) is whether all is well when the weight is lost. Because often I suspect it isn't. Self hatred and it's evil twin (perfectionism) are very tough habits to break.
Anji, this is a very important point that I hope everyone here sees!!!Also, I've noticed various opionions from state to state in America. I can't pinpoint where and how, but if you say its Northern and Southern, then yes, the difference in attitude is plain to see.
Anna, This is very true and just validates what I was trying to say earlier.0 -
There is still the explicit assumption here that bigger women are viewed universally as less attractive. That
Do you think it's a false statement that bigger women are viewed universally as less attractive?
I understand that there are exceptions. But generally speaking it appears (to me) that thinner is more attractive both for men and women. For example, most movie star men right now have a thin look I do not find attractive. But I know I'm in the minority on that. So you don't think that men who find the larger female form attractive are also in the minority?
I prefer stocky men. Most forum topics on the subject would indicate men prefer 'curvy' women, and that women dont like thin men or are intimidated by men who are too buff! And that's on a fitness site. Let alone what normal people think :laugh:
There is a whole porn industry for BBW women!!
I think 'thin' is overrated on here, and I agree with Lorro, there is sometimes an undercurrent of self loathing that comes from fat and thin alike.
Seeing yourself as unnatrative will, for sure, make you unnatractive!! .:flowerforyou:
Unfortunately, though, what the men of the main forums at least view as 'curvy' has very little to do with what the average woman looks like when she's truly 'curvy'. Very slim, highly-toned and yet voluptuous, in a way that is simply not achievable for the majority of female body types seems to be the most-desired shape. We're talking no more than 25% body fat, at an absolute maximum (what do most men think breast tissue is?! There's a reason they shrink when we do!), as far as I can see, on a small frame, with wider-set hips than most smaller frames have, and more cleavage than is typical in someone of that physique.
Lorro, I absolutely take your point, but in western society we are bombarded day-in, day-out with exactly that message - that being bigger makes a woman less attractive. If we're honest, most of us are at least partly here because we want to fit more closely to this ideal, and thereby increase our 'atrractiveness-quotient'. I agree that there are exceptions to the rule - individual perceptions of beauty and attractiveness certainly varies, but the overwhelming message in the culture most of us are exposed to incentivises and rewards female slenderness above and beyond almost anything else. You're right that it isn't an absolute statement, but the way women are treated and objectified in our society means that it may as well be, so many people unthinkingly accept and subscribe to it.0 -
As food for thought...
What I have observed is that whenever a thread on female body types preferred is posted with Marilyn Monroe or similar as a choice and a Twiggy looking body as an alternative an overwhelming majority of men pick Monroe.
What is always been curious to me is that an equal majority of women are surprised by this with most thinking the extreme thin lady is what a guy wants.
Equally curious and a bit annoying is many women refuse to accept this no matter how many times it is shown.
On the other hand the closest equivalent I have seen on MFP are threads having ladies post pictures of what they consider eye candy.
I have never once seen an average Joe body posted...it is universally a well honed,chiseled physique without an ounce of paunch or fat displayed.
Am I suggesting that women are hypocrites or more shallow then men...not in the least.
What I am though is that body image is much more of a female "obsession" then a male one.
That could be somewhat cultural but think it is much more likely to be some residual instinct where the desire to be considered attractive to the most fit male.
The cultural part is what conditioning the mass media does...20 guys saying they like curves and a naturally feminine figure will be canceled out by one so called fashion magazine that is aimed at late teen,early twenty girls saying that no figure is the ideal.
It is kind of sad to me.0 -
As food for thought...
What I have observed is that whenever a thread on female body types preferred is posted with Marilyn Monroe or similar as a choice and a Twiggy looking body as an alternative an overwhelming majority of men pick Monroe.
What is always been curious to me is that an equal majority of women are surprised by this with most thinking the extreme thin lady is what a guy wants.
Equally curious and a bit annoying is many women refuse to accept this no matter how many times it is shown.
On the other hand the closest equivalent I have seen on MFP are threads having ladies post pictures of what they consider eye candy.
I have never once seen an average Joe body posted...it is universally a well honed,chiseled physique without an ounce of paunch or fat displayed.
Am I suggesting that women are hypocrites or more shallow then men...not in the least.
What I am though is that body image is much more of a female "obsession" then a male one.
That could be somewhat cultural but think it is much more likely to be some residual instinct where the desire to be considered attractive to the most fit male.
The cultural part is what conditioning the mass media does...20 guys saying they like curves and a naturally feminine figure will be canceled out by one so called fashion magazine that is aimed at late teen,early twenty girls saying that no figure is the ideal.
It is kind of sad to me.
The thing about Marilyn is that people are like "She was a size 12/14" but they forget that sizes have changed. Looking at her measurements 35-37, 22-23, 35-36. This would put her in about a size 3/4 now with an hour glass figure which is most women don't have.0 -
The thing about Marilyn is that people are like "She was a size 12/14" but they forget that sizes have changed. Looking at her measurements 35-37, 22-23, 35-36. This would put her in about a size 3/4 now with an hour glass figure which is most women don't have.
It doesn`t matter,you can call her a 40 or a 0,those terms are arbitrary and make no difference.
Was she more "perfect" in figure then an average lady?...Sure but it doesn`t change the basic point that most men are attracted to a curvy,feminine figure then a rail thin one that has very few curves.0 -
I stand by my point. I know what people would want to hear also...Florian, nobody's talking about 'physical attraction' per se!! We're JUST talking about WEIGHT!!!
Just fat - not teeth or hygiene or looks or anything else!!! :laugh:
However, if weight is your be all and end all to attraction, then you've got the right end.........:huh:
Never did I say that weight is my "be all and end all to attraction"...
See, this is precisely what I'm saying: physical attraction is consider a lesser/shameful kind of attraction. You consider I should still be attracted even though some physical traits are not to my liking.
Whereas mental/emotional traits not to my liking would be understandable and acceptable, and people would accept the fact I am not attracted then.
No, what I want, and will have is: someone I am attracted to physically AND personality wise.
Why, when someone writes that they want to be physically attracted to their partner, people immediately assume that the person is shallow and ignores completely the mental aspect of things?
And WEIGHT is part of the physical attraction. Nothing could be more physical than weight, nothing affects more your body shape, physical condition, posture, clothes than WEIGHT (a person's size - how tall or small they are - might be the other one).
Yes, I am serious. Weight is part of the physical attraction.
Yes, I said it. Boo me all you want.
Weight is something I see when I look at someone - and something I cannot pretend I do not see. One of the first things I see. Yes, it is part of the physical attraction.
Whether I prefer this weight or that weight is my business, same as whether I prefer this size or that size. Heck! It can even be a deal breaker if I think this is such an issue for me.
But yes, as revolutionary as it may seem, weight is part of physical attraction.
And yes, some people might not care about puss - their call. This is what I meant. I reflected the question on the OP ("he likes me more now that I've lost fat" becomes "he likes me more now that I've lost the puss"), or on everyone, by taking some obvious physical example that everyone would hate. Everyone draws the *physical* line where they want. For some people, crooked teeth are the deal breaker (not for me), for some people weight is the deal breaker (so so for me), for some people size is the deal breaker (it is for me), for some people (probably most) puss is a deal breaker (it is for me).
All physical traits fall under the "physical attraction" umbrella. So does fat.
Now read me again, it doesn't mean "fat people are ugly" (neither does it mean that blonde people are ugly or people with crooked teeth are ugly), it just means that some people will draw the line here. THEY will draw THEIR line here.
Now, this is another topic, but there is something else to consider in the equation, some traits are less desirable in some societies. Yes, weight is less desirable in our western societies, which means it's going to be a deal breaker for more people than it might be in some other societies (a combination of time/space/people). I'm also pretty sure heavier women were more desirable in the past (when food was more scarce or in a matriarchal society perhaps, or even in a society pushing a specific body image as desirable, but this is also another topic).
At any rate, being part of a given society and having my own preferences, I don't feel ashamed to say that: no, I'm not particularly attracted to overweight women. This is not a deal breaker for me either, mind you. And I might have a different eye on someone who lost weight (from a purely physical standpoint, not even mentioning the changes in personality).
About change, over time now. While I admit that we age, and there is a normal amount of decay that will happen to the human body (I'm conscious of that), why does one has to become fat as they grow older?Also, assuming you marry someone for all their attributes and over the years they put on weight, are you going to leave them??
IOW, does fat make that much difference??
It's like accepting that if one becomes violent over time (in the relationship) I should accept that. No. I shouldn't and I wouldn't.
Read again, I didn't say I would dump a girl after 10 years because she gained weight/fat. I am just saying: no, becoming fatter over time is not something than HAS TO happen. This is not part of the normal ageing process (well, I know it is more difficult to lose weight as you get older - I understand that and this is fine).
So if this is not part of what is to be expected as one gets older (gaining weight, or becoming more violent), no I don't think I should accept this. I don't think I should be ashamed to leave someone for that reason.
I would be ashamed if I was saying to someone: "oh, you have more wrinkles, you hair are becoming white, your skin is less elastic - this is horrible". Yes, I would be ashamed then. But I don't think like that.
So yes, I might or might not dump someone because they gained weight in a LTR. This is a valid enough reason to me. Of course, the decision will be pondered against other factors such as time we spent together, global mental/emotional attraction I've got for the person, etc.
Imagining the hypothetical case I had a first date with a "healthy" girl, whose personality I liked, and the next day - on another date - I see her and she would weight 1000 pounds, yes I would dump her. I know this is impossible, but in this case I've got 0 vested interest in the girl, so yes, the decision would be made quickly. Then everyone is free to draw the line in between depending on personal preferences.
I would friend-zone the girl, unconsciously. If she had been thinner, I might have fancied her, unconsciously. So I wouldn't express it, it would just happen.So, assuming you're attracted to someone cos they are pretty, smell nice, make you laugh, nice teeth, kind, generous, no puss (ffs!!! lol)............etc BUT they are on the chubby side of average, are you going to say "I would fancy you if you were thinner" ??
Yes JJ. What would be nice is indeed if other people could stop pretending they are not "shallow". Or even better, if we had to stop calling ourselves "shallow" (what I do because I want people to give me a break, and then they can think they are better people "Oh, he says this because he is shallow!" - so it's a win/win and everyone keep their pride, honour and good morals) because at the end of the day it's just called being "human".I'm not trying to say overweight women are hopeless when it comes to finding love. But let's be real here. The guys say in one thread, I wouldn't do that. Then they say in another thread, well I can get someone fitter and hotter. They say in one thread, "oh it''s not just about looks" but in another thread when someone has a hot new girlfriend all the congratulations are about how hot she is. Not how awesome you found someone with a great personality. I don't have a problem with it, but let's all stop trying to pretend. I'm shallow and I know it. And vain.
Yes. I think this is very true in our Western societies, and whoever is saying the contrary is fooling themselves.Do you think it's a false statement that bigger women are viewed universally as less attractive?
I understand that there are exceptions. But generally speaking it appears (to me) that thinner is more attractive both for men and women. For example, most movie star men right now have a thin look I do not find attractive. But I know I'm in the minority on that. So you don't think that men who find the larger female form attractive are also in the minority?
Sure, this is not an absolute truth, but in our societies it is relevant and as real as it can get, even though it is a construct of our societies.
TL;DR: Yeah, sorry it was a really long post.0 -
The thing about Marilyn is that people are like "She was a size 12/14" but they forget that sizes have changed. Looking at her measurements 35-37, 22-23, 35-36. This would put her in about a size 3/4 now with an hour glass figure which is most women don't have.
It doesn`t matter,you can call her a 40 or a 0,those terms are arbitrary and make no difference.
Was she more "perfect" in figure then an average lady?...Sure but it doesn`t change the basic point that most men are attracted to a curvy,feminine figure then a rail thin one that has very few curves.
I don' t think anyone's disputing that. The problem is that what is considered 'curvy' by the media, and, judging by other main forum boards, a lot of men, is still a physically-unachievable body type for the vast majority of women. Monroe, for all her famous curves, was still pretty petite, and had a figure that is only achievable, based on body type, for a very small minority of women. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen threads where someone, almost always male, states that 'curvy' is just a word used by women who don't want to admit they're fat, and then goes on to provide a picture of someone famous who "properly demonstrates" what 'curvy' should be. That 'curvy' goddess is usually an improbably-voluptuous size 2-4 (US). The majority of size 2-4 women don't have those sort of curves, and the majority of larger women can't ever hope to emulate them, because the physical type being held up as 'perfect' is one that only a tiny percentage of the population can achieve without surgical intervention!
These boards also often opine that celebrities only a little larger (Kim Kardashian, Kate Winslet etc - both beautifully curvy women with slightly more-achievable physiques) are 'fat'. Essentially, women are being held to an unachievable ideal, and increasingly, with greater media saturation, many men seem to believe that women should match that ideal in order to be 'attractive'. Of course women have just as many 'ideal-body' concepts when they're looking at men, but my perception is that women tend to be more pragmatic when it comes to actually choosing a mate. Men, perhaps not so much, if the historical prevalence of middle-aged men seeking out nubile young partners for their physical attributes is any indication.0 -
Well it seems to me that women don't dress or try to look a particular way because that's what men want, but more because that's what they see in fashion magazines or however they think they are the most attractive, which is fine. But they always make assumptions that guys like a certain body type when in reality all guys are different. And most of them seem to have this false notion that we are only attracted to rail thin women that look like models. In reality, we generally just want someone who looks healthy and is comfortable with herself.As food for thought...
What I have observed is that whenever a thread on female body types preferred is posted with Marilyn Monroe or similar as a choice and a Twiggy looking body as an alternative an overwhelming majority of men pick Monroe.
What is always been curious to me is that an equal majority of women are surprised by this with most thinking the extreme thin lady is what a guy wants.
Equally curious and a bit annoying is many women refuse to accept this no matter how many times it is shown.
On the other hand the closest equivalent I have seen on MFP are threads having ladies post pictures of what they consider eye candy.
I have never once seen an average Joe body posted...it is universally a well honed,chiseled physique without an ounce of paunch or fat displayed.
Am I suggesting that women are hypocrites or more shallow then men...not in the least.
What I am though is that body image is much more of a female "obsession" then a male one.
That could be somewhat cultural but think it is much more likely to be some residual instinct where the desire to be considered attractive to the most fit male.
The cultural part is what conditioning the mass media does...20 guys saying they like curves and a naturally feminine figure will be canceled out by one so called fashion magazine that is aimed at late teen,early twenty girls saying that no figure is the ideal.
It is kind of sad to me.
Why do women typically have like 200 different pairs of shoes? To me it's more about impressing their girlfriends or feeling better about themselves than trying to impress men. And the fashion industry itself has nothing to do with men, whatever is "in style" theses days has nothing to do with what most men would think is attractive. Also we probably wouldn't care either way.
My point is, in the theory of this thread, is that just because we didn't like someone before they lost weight it doesn't mean that we're shallow and we only want rail thin women. It's more about the fact that maybe they weren't comfortable with themselves, we thought maybe our lifestyles were different, or they just didn't look healthy. Women are the ones that are generally obsessed with weight, not men.0 -
The thing about Marilyn is that people are like "She was a size 12/14" but they forget that sizes have changed. Looking at her measurements 35-37, 22-23, 35-36. This would put her in about a size 3/4 now with an hour glass figure which is most women don't have.
It doesn`t matter,you can call her a 40 or a 0,those terms are arbitrary and make no difference.
Was she more "perfect" in figure then an average lady?...Sure but it doesn`t change the basic point that most men are attracted to a curvy,feminine figure then a rail thin one that has very few curves.
I don' t think anyone's disputing that. The problem is that what is considered 'curvy' by the media, and, judging by other main forum boards, a lot of men, is still a physically-unachievable body type for the vast majority of women. Monroe, for all her famous curves, was still pretty petite, and had a figure that is only achievable, based on body type, for a very small minority of women. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen threads where someone, almost always male, states that 'curvy' is just a word used by women who don't want to admit they're fat, and then goes on to provide a picture of someone famous who "properly demonstrates" what 'curvy' should be. That 'curvy' goddess is usually an improbably-voluptuous size 2-4 (US). The majority of size 2-4 women don't have those sort of curves, and the majority of larger women can't ever hope to emulate them, because the physical type being held up as 'perfect' is one that only a tiny percentage of the population can achieve without surgical intervention!
These boards also often opine that celebrities only a little larger (Kim Kardashian, Kate Winslet etc - both beautifully curvy women with slightly more-achievable physiques) are 'fat'. Essentially, women are being held to an unachievable ideal, and increasingly, with greater media saturation, many men seem to believe that women should match that ideal in order to be 'attractive'. Of course women have just as many 'ideal-body' concepts when they're looking at men, but my perception is that women tend to be more pragmatic when it comes to actually choosing a mate. Men, perhaps not so much, if the historical prevalence of middle-aged men seeking out nubile young partners for their physical attributes is any indication.
In all honesty you could show me a picture of either of those two and I would have no clue who they were,I pay 0 attention to Hollywood and its trimmings.
As far as someone calling them fat I will take your word on it but also suspect it is women who are more then men.
Does everyone have a picture perfect male/female dream...sure but neither usually hold out for that.
There is so much more involved in attraction but there still is a basic something that everyone uniquely has for themselves.
I stand by what I started with...it is no more wrong for a person to find someone appealing after they have lost weight then it would be if they gained or changed some other physical attribute or personality characteristic.
Somehow it is taboo for it to be weight though and to me that is simply self deluding.
Everyone should be looking at ALL aspects of their lives for possible improvements.0 -
Something else to put out there...
I asked a very good lady friend here once why the Twiggy body style has become the fashion norm when it seems that a vast majority of men do not prefer that at all.
Her answer surprised me,it was frank and not politically correct but perhaps truthful.
She said that it was because many to most fashion designers and industry people were gay males that simply did not find the traditional (Monroe) body style attractive.
This is in no way an attempt to have a discussion about sexual orientations so lets not go off in the weeds on that but if true perhaps something ladies should ponder as they determine if the mass media portrayal of body image is really something they should pursue.0 -
Something else to put out there...
I asked a very good lady friend here once why the Twiggy body style has become the fashion norm when it seems that a vast majority of men do not prefer that at all.
Her answer surprised me,it was frank and not politically correct but perhaps truthful.
She said that it was because many to most fashion designers and industry people were gay males that simply did not find the traditional (Monroe) body style attractive.
This is in no way an attempt to have a discussion about sexual orientations so lets not go off in the weeds on that but if true perhaps something ladies should ponder as they determine if the mass media portrayal of body image is really something they should pursue.
In the late 80s, early 90s the models moves away from the Twiggy stereo type with Kathy Irland, Cindy Crawford, Tyra Bank. etc. Most women now if looking at what type of body they want will typically look more towards a VS model not a model that is in Vogue.
It seems this post has taken a turn from the original question into what people think is more attractive. Someone that went from morbidly obese to average would be attracting more people not because they fit an ideal body type but because they appear healthier and more active. So the mentality of "You didn't like me when I was heavier" is mainly a cop out.0 -
It is not shallow to be attracted to someone, or place an importance on being physically attracted to someone; after all, it would be pretty hard to further the species if nobody was having sex with their partner! It is shallow, however, to make appearance the sole or even the main criteria for dating. That being said, there is a reason people are attracted to thinner, more fit people as a general rule, and it's purely evolutionary. We're wired this way -- we want to be with someone who is healthy and strong enough to produce healthy and strong children, thereby preserving the species. Back in older times people were attracted to larger mates, because it was a sign of prosperity and yeah, they did live longer, because they weren't starving to death. Taking something that is so intrinsically a part of us and calling it shallow seems to me to be distinctly unfair.
As with all rules, however, there are exceptions. There are men and women who are attracted to larger people, obviously, and I don't believe that overweight people have to be unattractive. There is something to be said for a larger person who still goes out every day to work out, keeps track of their diet, and dresses well and maintains good hygiene. I don't think it's possible to call that person gross or unattractive, even if you're not necessarily attracted to them. Along with that, nobody should have to hate themselves because of their weight. Society is far too judgmental of overweight people, which is a detriment. Nobody is motivated by being told they're disgusting. Promoting a positive, healthy outlook on fitness is a great idea! Holding up some woman with a nearly impossible body shape to achieve naturally as an ideal is a terrible one.
Sorry if this is a bit disjointed. I've been working on it for the past hour between balance sheets!!! :sad:0 -
Something else to put out there...
I asked a very good lady friend here once why the Twiggy body style has become the fashion norm when it seems that a vast majority of men do not prefer that at all.
Her answer surprised me,it was frank and not politically correct but perhaps truthful.
She said that it was because many to most fashion designers and industry people were gay males that simply did not find the traditional (Monroe) body style attractive.
This is in no way an attempt to have a discussion about sexual orientations so lets not go off in the weeds on that but if true perhaps something ladies should ponder as they determine if the mass media portrayal of body image is really something they should pursue.
It's somewhat difficult to avoid when it's being blasted at one from every conceivable side, but yes, it's a valid point, and at least in part I'd agree with your friend. If asked, the designers themselves would probably say that the clothes they design hang better on very thin (ie. non-curvy) bodies, but given the success of Dior et al with the New Look, perhaps the reality is that designers working today are less adept at creating clothes that utilise cut, drape and technical detail to make women, with womanly shapes, look their best. Couture/made-to-measure is typically now less than 2% of a designer's clientele, so perhaps many of those skills have been lost in the drive for lower costs. Side-tracked just a bit!
In essence, I, and many others here concur that weight is a valid reason to find someone attractive or not. I think the point we've all come some way away from (or a long way :laugh: ), is whether or not the same person who did not find you attractive when you were overweight is a wise/possible/sensible/positive option, if, post-weightloss, they suddenly decide to make a move. What I, and others have suggested, is that perhaps they are not, if the only factor preventing them from acting on their interest in a person was some extra pounds. Surely the aim is to be with someone who loves and is attracted to all of you, not just your body?
Anna made the point that we've all seen people heavier than we are who clearly have loving relationships. Presumably their partners either find excess weight attractive, or, love/are attracted by that person for who they are - their personality, their eyes, the whole package, disregarding or discounting their physique, which the world at large tells us should be the ultimate attraction-preventer.0 -
This thread has remained on my mind for a few days now... Basically I'm wondering if it boils down to it being 'normal' when a guy likes an average size woman, but considered a fetish when he likes someone larger? Thoughts?0
-
This thread has remained on my mind for a few days now... Basically I'm wondering if it boils down to it being 'normal' when a guy likes an average size woman, but considered a fetish when he likes someone larger? Thoughts?
There is always a somewhat vague and fluid perception of what "normal" is in regards to weight,height,body shape and so on.
No one can define that to a letter but yes when something falls obviously outside of it then it is natural for curiosity to be raised.
To me it is just one of those things that no one needs to worry about because what is the point?
If he or she finds one attractive and desirable as they are then what difference does it make what others think of it?0 -
So, "All of you = you - your body" then according to you? Your maths do not compute with me.whether or not the same person who did not find you attractive when you were overweight is a wise/possible/sensible/positive option, if, post-weightloss, they suddenly decide to make a move.
What I, and others have suggested, is that perhaps they are not, if the only factor preventing them from acting on their interest in a person was some extra pounds. Surely the aim is to be with someone who loves and is attracted to all of you, not just your body?
If you don't allow someone to NOT be attracted to you based on your body, then you are saying that "all of you" equals you minus your body (your body shouldn't matter in their perception of "all of you"). Which means your personality only should matter, mostly.
Again, physical attraction is treated as inferior, is not deemed decent enough to be part of "all of you" (since it cannot veto the overall attraction, whereas personality can).
Moreover, you are implying that people who don't like your body do not like your personality. Which is another "reflex" people have.
Someone doesn't like you, you say: "the aim is to be with someone who loves all of you, not JUST your body". Just your body?
if a person doesn't like your body, it doesn't mean that they hate your personality. Someone can be attracted to your personality, not your body. Then you change your body, and they become attracted to you. So, then they were never attracted to "just your body" (or not attracted, thereof).
I still don't understand why people always seem to think (like it is some sort of reflex) of the two things as exclusive.
"You hate my body = you hate my personality". No, this isn't true. Same as you can change your personality, you can change your body and become attractive to someone.
I stand by what I said, and that would be something like that:
All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)
And then you can give a different weight to mental and physical aspects all you want according to personal preferences (and I would agree that most people would give less importance to the physical side of thing).
I'll tell you one thing though, people interestingly feel they are more "their personality" than "their body", funnily enough.
Thus why we tend to (by default) think that people should see past our bodies, thus we implicitly think that someone who cannot see past the body is shallow. But I say no.
You are as much your personality as your body. Your body is you, too - I know, sounds incredible eh? Yet so few people seem ready to accept that.
So if you want someone to love the "all of you" (and this is what I want), then you want them to love your personality and body.
And I don't mean that you should look like a model (physical) or that you should be the smartest, funniest person on the planet either (personality), but just enough for the other person to like you (no dealbreakers, whatever your physical and personality deal breakers are).
Yeah. I was just thinking about the exact same thing. It might be a fetish for some people, particularly if the person with the fetish dumps the partner when they lose weight.Basically I'm wondering if it boils down to it being 'normal' when a guy likes an average size woman, but considered a fetish when he likes someone larger? Thoughts?
I think for most people they just don't care that much about weight.0 -
Lorro, I absolutely take your point, but in western society we are bombarded day-in, day-out with exactly that message - that being bigger makes a woman less attractive. If we're honest, most of us are at least partly here because we want to fit more closely to this ideal, and thereby increase our 'atrractiveness-quotient'. I agree that there are exceptions to the rule - individual perceptions of beauty and attractiveness certainly varies, but the overwhelming message in the culture most of us are exposed to incentivises and rewards female slenderness above and beyond almost anything else. You're right that it isn't an absolute statement, but the way women are treated and objectified in our society means that it may as well be, so many people unthinkingly accept and subscribe to it.This thread has remained on my mind for a few days now... Basically I'm wondering if it boils down to it being 'normal' when a guy likes an average size woman, but considered a fetish when he likes someone larger? Thoughts?
Really I don't see it that way at all. There are a very small people who like excess weight as a fetish. There are others who will like a range of women of different sizes, with weight being of lesser importance and other aspects of appearance being of greater importance and then there are others who could not find anyone overweight attractive. The world, the people in it and their likes/dislikes in terms of their reactions to the people they meet are far more diverse than a fitness website would lead you to believe, or than the results of canvassing of preferred body shape. If I think about the men I have liked, their body types vary, but within a certain range. My best friends range is larger, but she doesn't actively seek out plus sized guys. I agree with Carl, it's poinless to worry about it, but I know that most women do. I did myself when I was newly single and I had no reason to, either in terms of my past experience nor as it turned out, my future. The only place I have felt it matters is in online dating and that's one of the reasons I prefer to meet guys face to face.
Kate I agree with you too - there's no place for political correctness in dating.
I get what you are sayng Diva, but for me there's a world of difference from thinking that one's appearence may be improved and one's dating pool widened by weight loss and believing that being larger makes one inherently unattractive. I know the media doesn't help and when you are single there is a natural tendency to focus on more critical comment and imagine that all guys have these uniform standards of the idealised woman. Life isn't like that for many men and women, you'll know this from your own experience. Not all guys think this way and those that don't are not all fetishists.
As you can probably gather, my interest in this subject is because women are way more critical of themselves than they deserve and it limits their lives and happiness. And here's the proof (to my mind) about what is really going on - so many of the the thinner women, closer to the idealised versions of feminine perfection, are just as self conscious, critical and unhappy with their bodies and their imagined imperfections as their larger sisters. Yes there is an obesity epidemic and it's right that we should all be concerned about that and act on it as a health issue, but there is also an epidemic of poor self esteem and self hatred which are just as devastating to quality of life.
edited to add: I totally disagree with fat = low quality dates comment. Again this implies that guys are going for larger women when they would prefer not to (the men only use fat girls for sex comment in another guise). Fat with poor self esteem may mean you put up with poor dates when you should walk, but that is a different matter. As for the you're fooling yourself if you believe weight doesn't matter comment - well yes I know it does matter quite a lot, but how would you know how much unless you were a confident fat woman?
What matters to me and most women I know is: can I find a guy I like, who also likes me, if I put myself out there. For that a guy who likes me needs not to be a needle in a haystack. But I'm not bothered if, when I go out, 50, 60 70% of men don't fancy me. I am equally, if not more picky about different things. Being thinner makes things easier, but it's not a panacea and believing being overweight makes you unattractive will mean you won't find the guys it doesn't matter to, who will like you just for being you, not because of your size (or lack of it). 0 -
All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)
No one said there was going to be math involved. :sad:
But yeah,women need to get past this hating their bodies if they don`t measure up to their ideal but then resenting a guy for doing the same.
You want someone you consider attractive and desirable by your unique wishes and so do we...don`t insist that something should be off the table because you are sensitive about it.0 -
Am I suggesting that women are hypocrites or more shallow then men...not in the least.
What I am though is that body image is much more of a female "obsession" then a male one.
I completely agree with you, but most of the time we're being completely not serious. I might think some hot buff celebrity is the best, but in real life I don't go for types like that. Maybe if I was a really hot girl I'd take it more seriously, but the majority of women aren't being serious.
But yes, women are more obsessed with body image.
In this month's Cosmo, something like 70% of men said that if a girl took her clothes off and her body was unexpected, they wouldn't care. 30% said they would care. Stuff like this worries me, because knowing my luck I'll get the 30% guy...hahaOf course women have just as many 'ideal-body' concepts when they're looking at men, but my perception is that women tend to be more pragmatic when it comes to actually choosing a mate. Men, perhaps not so much, if the historical prevalence of middle-aged men seeking out nubile young partners for their physical attributes is any indication.
This is exactly what I would say if I was that smart lol.
Time and time again in here, I read that men want to sleep with a woman on the first few dates, and some of them will even break up with the girl if she doesn't. How can you know someone so well by date three that you want to have sex with them? The short answer to that is that he is attracted to her body/how she looks, etc and it's probably not about her brains/personality at that point. Women don't judge men as closely on their looks as a lot of people think, they judge themselves the most.0 -
Am I suggesting that women are hypocrites or more shallow then men...not in the least.
What I am though is that body image is much more of a female "obsession" then a male one.
I completely agree with you, but most of the time we're being completely not serious. I might think some hot buff celebrity is the best, but in real life I don't go for types like that. Maybe if I was a really hot girl I'd take it more seriously, but the majority of women aren't being serious.
But yes, women are more obsessed with body image.
In this month's Cosmo, something like 70% of men said that if a girl took her clothes off and her body was unexpected, they wouldn't care. 30% said they would care. Stuff like this worries me, because knowing my luck I'll get the 30% guy...haha
Christine,you are way too young for me so this is not a come on but if I was with you and you were naked it would not be in that 30%
Accept this as a fact with all guys and don`t think about it any more.0 -
Lorro, I absolutely take your point, but in western society we are bombarded day-in, day-out with exactly that message - that being bigger makes a woman less attractive. If we're honest, most of us are at least partly here because we want to fit more closely to this ideal, and thereby increase our 'atrractiveness-quotient'. I agree that there are exceptions to the rule - individual perceptions of beauty and attractiveness certainly varies, but the overwhelming message in the culture most of us are exposed to incentivises and rewards female slenderness above and beyond almost anything else. You're right that it isn't an absolute statement, but the way women are treated and objectified in our society means that it may as well be, so many people unthinkingly accept and subscribe to it.This thread has remained on my mind for a few days now... Basically I'm wondering if it boils down to it being 'normal' when a guy likes an average size woman, but considered a fetish when he likes someone larger? Thoughts?
Really I don't see it that way at all. There are a very small people who like excess weight as a fetish. There are others who will like a range of women of different sizes, with weight being of lesser importance and other aspects of appearance being of greater importance and then there are others who could not find anyone overweight attractive.
Anji, I totally agree with you here. I guess I was just wondering what others thought because really isn't the idea that a fetish is anything outside of the usual sexual norms (whatever that is)? And if some people on this thread are claiming that being overweight makes it harder to find a mate, then wouldn't that open one up to anything outside of "normal"?
For the record, I know I need to lose weight and I have insecurities when it comes to my body (as we sort of agreed everyone does) but I'm also a confident person and know I have a lot of other great qualities to offer, so am not ashamed of myself or putting myself out there to date.
All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)
No one said there was going to be math involved. :sad:
FFF - Your full explanation of this is awesome and makes soooo much sense.
But like Carl, math is not a strength of mine :laugh:0 -
Am I suggesting that women are hypocrites or more shallow then men...not in the least.
What I am though is that body image is much more of a female "obsession" then a male one.
I completely agree with you, but most of the time we're being completely not serious. I might think some hot buff celebrity is the best, but in real life I don't go for types like that. Maybe if I was a really hot girl I'd take it more seriously, but the majority of women aren't being serious.
But yes, women are more obsessed with body image.
In this month's Cosmo, something like 70% of men said that if a girl took her clothes off and her body was unexpected, they wouldn't care. 30% said they would care. Stuff like this worries me, because knowing my luck I'll get the 30% guy...hahaOf course women have just as many 'ideal-body' concepts when they're looking at men, but my perception is that women tend to be more pragmatic when it comes to actually choosing a mate. Men, perhaps not so much, if the historical prevalence of middle-aged men seeking out nubile young partners for their physical attributes is any indication.
This is exactly what I would say if I was that smart lol.
Time and time again in here, I read that men want to sleep with a woman on the first few dates, and some of them will even break up with the girl if she doesn't. How can you know someone so well by date three that you want to have sex with them? The short answer to that is that he is attracted to her body/how she looks, etc and it's probably not about her brains/personality at that point. Women don't judge men as closely on their looks as a lot of people think, they judge themselves the most.
Look at it in respect to what you want and evaluate it equally...you want a guy to be moving to an emotional commitment that satisfies a desire you have.
He is looking for a lady to move to a physical one,just how we are wired and ladies use that phrase too.
Yours is not more important then his,that thinking is selfish and defeating.
He should be wanting to move to where you wish and you should be moving to where he does...if not then it is not going to work.
Religious convictions fall outside this and each party knows at that point they have limited the pool to like minded.
Or they should know that,otherwise they are in for a very disappointing experience.0 -
Christine,you are way too young for me so this is not a come on but if I was with you and you were naked it would not be in that 30%
Accept this as a fact with all guys and don`t think about it any more.
Christine, I agree with Carl here. If a guy wants to be with you physically, the chance that he will be disappointed by your body is very slim. He has a clue before the clothes come off! I think performance (i.e. being a lazy lover, etc) might be more of a disappointment when you get to that stage than body alone.0 -
Anji, I totally agree with you here. I guess I was just wondering what others thought because really isn't the idea that a fetish is anything outside of the usual sexual norms (whatever that is)? And if some people on this thread are claiming that being overweight makes it harder to find a mate, then wouldn't that open one up to anything outside of "normal"?
weight fetishism is when the weight itself is a sexual turn on
All of you = (coefficient1 x mental) + (coefficient2 x physical)
Love the maths flimflam! And the reminder that your body=you. :happy:
]0 -
Yours is not more important then his,that thinking is selfish and defeating.
He should be wanting to move to where you wish and you should be moving to where he does...if not then it is not going to work.
Religious convictions fall outside this and each party knows at that point they have limited the pool to like minded.
Or they should know that,otherwise they are in for a very disappointing experience.
I think that how you get along should be more important than how you get along in bed! That is how I feel. This is not any religious for me, it's just my experience.0 -
Yours is not more important then his,that thinking is selfish and defeating.
He should be wanting to move to where you wish and you should be moving to where he does...if not then it is not going to work.
Religious convictions fall outside this and each party knows at that point they have limited the pool to like minded.
Or they should know that,otherwise they are in for a very disappointing experience.
I think that how you get along should be more important than how you get along in bed! That is how I feel. This is not any religious for me, it's just my experience.
My point is that you have elevated that to a point he has to strive to attain only upon satisfying all your personal qualifiers.
That is where it becomes selfish (sorry to put it that way but don`t know any other) because you or anyone else have now elevated a want of yours above anything the other party does.
Women always say they don`t want a doormat,which has been stupidly equated with being nice,but then will say if you don`t bow down to my perhaps unreasonable wishes here we are done...then what do they actually want.
Accept a guys desires and deal with them but also don`t consider your own to be sacred.
It is a two way street.0 -
Christine,you are way too young for me so this is not a come on but if I was with you and you were naked it would not be in that 30%
Accept this as a fact with all guys and don`t think about it any more.
Christine, I agree with Carl here. If a guy wants to be with you physically, the chance that he will be disappointed by your body is very slim. He has a clue before the clothes come off! I think performance (i.e. being a lazy lover, etc) might be more of a disappointment when you get to that stage than body alone.
Exactly,maybe I am strange but I do not want to have sex with a lady I do not find desirable whether it is for physical appearance reasons or their personality.
A perfect 10 that is a royal ***** can get lost as far as I am concerned.0 -
It's all about where (or rather "when") you draw the line.
Time and time again in here, I read that men want to sleep with a woman on the first few dates, and some of them will even break up with the girl if she doesn't. How can you know someone so well by date three that you want to have sex with them? The short answer to that is that he is attracted to her body/how she looks, etc and it's probably not about her brains/personality at that point. Women don't judge men as closely on their looks as a lot of people think, they judge themselves the most.Of course women have just as many 'ideal-body' concepts when they're looking at men, but my perception is that women tend to be more pragmatic when it comes to actually choosing a mate. Men, perhaps not so much, if the historical prevalence of middle-aged men seeking out nubile young partners for their physical attributes is any indication.
Fact: you can never truly know someone (know them 100%). So then you have to decide by yourself where ("when") you draw the line for all the different actions that constitute a "relationship".
When do I know him enough for a kiss? 99 dates. When do I know him enough for sex? 1 date. When do I know him enough for marriage? 2 dates. Of course nobody associates a real number with these actions, people mostly play it by ear AKA "When I'm ready..."
Now you probably screamed in horror: "Marriage after 2 dates? Is he mad?". Well, the point is then people draw the line when they see fit.
When (as a man) you've kissed 50 girls and dipped your biscuit in half of them, I'd say you are pretty much ready for sex after the 2nd or 3rd date because sex has lost its newness.
Personally, I'd actually consider a more serious action giving a kiss to a girl (a more meaningful one) rather than having sex with her. Let's not even talk about being "open" about my feelings... This is for me the highest level of intimacy, and so, yes, sex will happen before I say "I love you" to a girl.
Similarly with girls... You realise then sex isn't such a big deal, and it's also quite pleasant (so start thinking "why not have it then...").
Also, what "people play it by ear" means that in reality if you meet a man who inspires you confidence (and as you become a better judge of character), then you'll just end up naked with him earlier rather than later.
Last point, I've had many women telling me "It's like I've known you for months" after only a few dates (2-3). So then it becomes relevant to have sex on the 2nd-3rd date. It really depends on the level of intimacy you achieve with the person, and how quickly it goes.
It's very hard to put a number on it, but yes, my expectation is that I will realise as quickly as possible that I am compatible emotionally with a woman (by the 3rd date), and achieve a connection that would take months to achieve with other people.
Interestingly (and horrifyingly at the same time), your question can then become: "If I haven't had sex by the 3rd date, is it worth pursuing the relationship as that means I'm not getting a fast connection with the person, fast connection that I could certainly achieve by going for another man?".
So as you get more experienced, faster sex means often that you've achieved an emotional connection faster with the person, this is desirable... And following that principle, you should screen all the men with who you don't want to have sex that early.0 -
It's very hard to put a number on it, but yes, my expectation is that I will realise as quickly as possible that I am compatible emotionally with a woman (by the 3rd date), and achieve a connection that would take months to achieve with other people.
Interestingly (and horrifyingly at the same time), your question can then become: "If I haven't had sex by the 3rd date, is it worth pursuing the relationship as that means I'm not getting a fast connection with the person, fast connection that I could certainly achieve by going for another man?".
So as you get more experienced, faster sex means often that you've achieved an emotional connection faster with the person, this is desirable... And following that principle, you should screen all the men with who you don't want to have sex that early.
I don't agree but I do enjoy reading your thoughts on the issue.
My point is that you have elevated that to a point he has to strive to attain only upon satisfying all your personal qualifiers.
That is where it becomes selfish (sorry to put it that way but don`t know any other) because you or anyone else have now elevated a want of yours above anything the other party does.
Accept a guys desires and deal with them but also don`t consider your own to be sacred.
It is a two way street.
Of course it is a two-way street! I don't disagree. But sex is something extremely risky (emotionally risky and risky to your body) and important (at least to me), so in the beginning, I think getting to know each other's personality is tantamount over sex. And if a guy can't accept that, well I'm not going to want to explore a relationship with him further - but it doesn't mean I am selfish.0 -
It's very hard to put a number on it, but yes, my expectation is that I will realise as quickly as possible that I am compatible emotionally with a woman (by the 3rd date), and achieve a connection that would take months to achieve with other people.
Interestingly (and horrifyingly at the same time), your question can then become: "If I haven't had sex by the 3rd date, is it worth pursuing the relationship as that means I'm not getting a fast connection with the person, fast connection that I could certainly achieve by going for another man?".
So as you get more experienced, faster sex means often that you've achieved an emotional connection faster with the person, this is desirable... And following that principle, you should screen all the men with who you don't want to have sex that early.
I don't agree but I do enjoy reading your thoughts on the issue.My point is that you have elevated that to a point he has to strive to attain only upon satisfying all your personal qualifiers.
That is where it becomes selfish (sorry to put it that way but don`t know any other) because you or anyone else have now elevated a want of yours above anything the other party does.
Accept a guys desires and deal with them but also don`t consider your own to be sacred.
It is a two way street.
Of course it is a two-way street! I don't disagree. But sex is something extremely risky (emotionally risky and risky to your body) and important (at least to me), so in the beginning, I think getting to know each other's personality is tantamount over sex. And if a guy can't accept that, well I'm not going to want to explore a relationship with him further - but it doesn't mean I am selfish.
That is my point,you have made that act a be all and end all thing.
I am not saying you should compromise that but understand in doing so you have restricted the dating pool and no it does not make all guys who are not looking for that pond scum.
Of course follow the path you are comfortable with but don`t be surprised by the outcome.0
