What do you think about the "dad bod"?

do you like the "mom bod"? It's ok if you do it probably works both ways, though I think Freud was an idiot myself, a lot of people like the things he said and didnt he say that men want to marry their mothers as well as daughters their fathers.

Personally though no I dont like the "mom bod" as in the type of figure my mother, any of her friends, any kind of 40-50 year old typical mums have.. a bit overweight, big sagging breasts, a few wrinkles here and there on the face etc. Not my thing! I like youthfulness more and a more slim or athletic body for a woman.

a "dad bod" or a body with some muscle and some fat (not too much but certainly not a six pack) is probably the strongest possible body to have in nature, for any survival situation etc. You may think that people with a high metabolism, "abs", hardly any fat on them etc are the best shape a person can be, but these people will be the ones to die first in times of low food, because they cant store food on their body to be used later on. (a low metabolism is actually much better for survival). The fat will also help keep a person warm as well. So as long as its not too much and the person is obese, some muscle and some fat is actually the strongest male body to have and how men are naturally designed to be in their prime. A kind of rugby player type body is the strongest natural body for a man to have. Not a six pack.

How often do you find yourself dying from low food? In our country that's not really a thing.

Much, much more likely is getting diabetes, high blood pressure etc from your obesity.

Posted from TSR Mobile

How often do you find yourself dying from low food? In our country that's not really a thing.

Much, much more likely is getting diabetes, high blood pressure etc from your obesity.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Very sensible. So you care more about their basic level of intelligence when it comes to training and the body then what they actually look like body-wise?


If you could pick a set body type on top of them having this knowledge then what would you go for?

a "dad bod" or a body with some muscle and some fat (not too much but certainly not a six pack) is probably the strongest possible body to have in nature, for any survival situation etc. You may think that people with a high metabolism, "abs", hardly any fat on them etc are the best shape a person can be, but these people will be the ones to die first in times of low food, because they cant store food on their body to be used later on. (a low metabolism is actually much better for survival). The fat will also help keep a person warm as well. So as long as its not too much and the person is obese, some muscle and some fat is actually the strongest male body to have and how men are naturally designed to be in their prime. A kind of rugby player type body is the strongest natural body for a man to have. Not a six pack.

How often do you find yourself dying from low food? In our country that's not really a thing.

Much, much more likely is getting diabetes, high blood pressure etc from your obesity.

Posted from TSR Mobile

you dont but it's still the strongest natural body. I mean how often do you find yourself relying on your muscles in a life or death situation either? You dont, yet it still looks good, because it is still showing a strong natural body. And as I said some fat, not obese. The fact of knowing a guy is skinny and weak, despite the fact that people do not rely on their muscles for life or death situations today, could make a guy look unattractive just because you know that in the "what if?" scenario, he'd be beaten to death by a stronger man. Same for guys with low body fat, you know that in the "what if?" scenario of any survival situation they'd be amongst the first to die. So to me personally they look weak. Now I never said that being obese is good, I did explicitly say that having some fat is good, not being obese but not having a six pack, and having more of what you might imagine a "rugby player body". If you know what I mean. That is a strong body to have imo.

Fat people have higher metabolism than thin people because their fat also needs energy to survive.

In a survival situation, the thinner fitter people would kill and eat the fatter, less fit people and eat them because fatter people won't be able to run as quick or fight back.

But ye Dad bod isn't ideal in a survival situation because you just can't compete with a more lightweight efficient body. You have to carry a lot of dead weight around which is tiring. It's a lot less tiring to do things when you have lower body fat % .

I know what you mean, on the one hand I like the kind of fedor body I linked, or like I think Ray Mears would do well in the wild he's got some bodyfat (which is a good thing for his survival) but he's also not out of shape he can hike all day. I think this is a good way to be. But then again also you have the super skinny people in some tribe who will be running after a gazelle for 3 days and nights until the gazelle tires and they catch it.

well funnily enough I read a tragedy story about people being capsised at sea, but the skinny girl died quickly, the fat guy survived because his fat kept him warm enough and he floated until help arrived. I think the girl just got too cold to go on. Hit by a car though yeah I think having some muscles to absorb the shock like strong neck muscles could help out maybe!

That's mostly a myth btw. Persistence hunting is extremely inefficient and tribal folks very rarely ever engage in it as it isn't worth it.

The extent to which endurance hunting occurred in the past is debatable and if it did it certainly didn't involve jogging after an animal for hours, rather it involved tracking it for days while walking.

The human body is not designed for long distance running at all which again, explains why long distance runners, who are meant to be athletes, die sooner than sedantry fat people.

Well what happened with me was I was just getting pulled out really far by the current and because I was a weak little kid I couldn't do anything about it. If it happened now I'd be able to swim back (I'm not really a good swimmer but I'd be able to just power through it lol). I ended up getting saved by some surfers lmao.

I think someone with a lot of muscles would be equally well equipped to fight off the cold though because one of the main mechanisms for generating heat is your muscles shivering. So if you have a lot of muscle mass it will be more effective. But ye, fat people do float lol.

Ye thats exactly what it was. I took the impact pretty much square on my shoulder and arm which I braced against my ribs. And that whole shoulder/back/chest area is the meatiest area of my body so it pretty much did absorb most of the shock. And because I don't weigh that much either I ended up getting thrown off and landed on my feet because (that agility . I was wearing rollerblades lmao). If it there wasn't any muscle mass there I'd probably have broken something tbh. (was a land rover btw)

yeah i think we are more so designed for long distance walking, though I do know it's true that humans have more endurance than most animals, whilst they are faster than us they do tire quicker and we can out last most other animals on the planet in an endurance race, evolutionarily we are right up there at the top for endurance, and we did specifically evolve to be this way, so it's quite likely we did hunt by endurance running after animals at one point in our evoultion, for example dogs cant sweat and they lose all their heat from their mouth by panting, in contrast humans evolved to sweat all over their body, to lose bodyhair to be able to lose heat quickly, if this wasnt important it wouldnt have been selected, so i think our ancestors probably did endurance hunt, or endurance was important to them in some other essential ways in order for these traits to have occurred.

I'd rather be a sexy dad.