Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Why should it be acceptable for men to look like this? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by King Leonidas)
    Could you explain the science behind this please, I'm interested
    This review paper gives lots of into: http://faculty.bennington.edu/~sherm...-singh2002.pdf

    There is even the suggestion that fat stored around the buttocks and thighs acts as a reservoir of fatty acids for foetal brain developement, although I think this is pretty speculative: http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/sites/secur...0published.pdf
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by All_TheCyanide)
    Biology student here- I'm pretty sure women naturally are supposed to have more fat than men (to protect fetuses) and after being pregnant are more likely to be overweight because some women's metabolisms slow down after they have kids (not sure why this is, but this was was case with my grandma).

    And biologically, curvy women = greater fertility = should be more attractive to men for reproductive purposes. Curvy isn't equivalent to obese, though. The two are different things entirely. So the "curvy" argument doesn't work for guys (even though that's just a mocking picture).

    You can't really shame either gender for weight, though, because people can have metabolic issues etc. that can affect their weight. I know OP is responding to an earlier thread but it needs to be said.
    Girls have a higher BF threshold. I.e. you need to have over 30% BF if you're a girl to be considered obese (if we're classifying obesity by bf as opposed to bmi) whereas men with 25-26% BF are considered obese.

    So I don't know what this argument is supposed to show.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by King Leonidas)
    Could you explain the science behind this please, I'm interested
    Childbearing hips! Women with wider hips = less likely to have complications in childbirth.

    Plus bigger boobs = tricking men into thinking they produce more milk (evolution up to it's old tricks again, obviously this isn't true but it's how women attracted men back in the day, and men selected for bigger bwabs in women as they were preferred)
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    This is excellent.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cornelius)
    Girls have a higher BF threshold. I.e. you need to have over 30% BF if you're a girl to be considered obese (if we're classifying obesity by bf as opposed to bmi) whereas men with 25-26% BF are considered obese.

    So I don't know what this argument is supposed to show.
    I might be wrong, but I think the other poster was explaining the reasoning behind why women's obesity threshold is higher. Without their explanation, all you've done is give some fairly arbitrary numbers (albeit backed, presumably, by some kind of health authority).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Childbearing hips! Women with wider hips = less likely to have complications in childbirth.

    Plus bigger boobs = tricking men into thinking they produce more milk (evolution up to it's old tricks again, obviously this isn't true but it's how women attracted men back in the day, and men selected for bigger bwabs in women as they were preferred)
    Nah. It's might be, however, because women with larger breasts are smarter and hence could have been evolutionarily selected for survival reasons. http://nhne-pulse.org/study-women-wi...s-are-smarter/

    How could "evolution" trick anyone into doing anything? It is simply the process by which the most survivable reproduce the most. Larger breasts which were falsely associated with greater fertility would serve no survivability purpose and be deselected.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    I might be wrong, but I think the other poster was explaining the reasoning behind why women's obesity threshold is higher. Without their explanation, all you've done is give some fairly arbitrary numbers (albeit backed, presumably, by some kind of health authority).
    There are some complaints that it's not as easy for women to be "slim" because women have naturally higher BF%. Which is quite false as the threshold for what is considered "slim" (or average or w/e) is lower for females than for males (classifications take into account natural differences in BF).

    But I am not sure what he meant exactly by his post, I only used his post to make a point which many people ignore (perhaps he doesn't disagree).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Men pay the social price of being obese by having no poontang.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 41b)
    Nah. It's might be, however, because women with larger breasts are smarter and hence could have been evolutionarily selected for survival reasons. http://nhne-pulse.org/study-women-wi...s-are-smarter/

    How could "evolution" trick anyone into doing anything? It is simply the process by which the most survivable reproduce the most. Larger breasts which were falsely associated with greater fertility would serve no survivability purpose and be deselected.
    Well you know, that's what I was taught in lectures by one of the most prominent human evolution researchers in the country, but hey ho, of course I am wrong.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Well you know, that's what I was taught in lectures by one of the most prominent human evolution researchers in the country, but hey ho, of course I am wrong.
    Sounds like it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cornelius)
    Girls have a higher BF threshold. I.e. you need to have over 30% BF if you're a girl to be considered obese (if we're classifying obesity by bf as opposed to bmi) whereas men with 25-26% BF are considered obese.

    So I don't know what this argument is supposed to show.
    It's supposed to show that, biologically, it makes more sense for women to have more body fat. Women have to carry babies for nine months and for a lot of women it's hard to get rid of the extra weight from pregnancy. When you consider that plus the fact women naturally have more body fat because they need it to protect babies in utero, I don't understand why this kind of fat-shaming attitude is often more harshly to women. Girls who profess to loving food and eating a lot are shamed, whereas for boys it's considered normal.

    That's not to say that men aren't shamed too, but metabolic issues and genetic makeup aside, women are more likely to be fat than men. And by "fat", I don't necessarily mean obese.

    Personally, I think a person's weight is their business and that nobody has a right to shame them for it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr Smurf)

    I actually think the guy on the left has a nice face, he does need to loose some weight for health reasons but he should be able to get a gf.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cornelius)
    There are some complaints that it's not as easy for women to be "slim" because women have naturally higher BF%. Which is quite false as the threshold for what is considered "slim" (or average or w/e) is lower for females than for males (classifications take into account natural differences in BF).

    But I am not sure what he meant exactly by his post, I only used his post to make a point which many people ignore (perhaps he doesn't disagree).
    Her. I'm female. Assuming you're referring to my post? Why do you assume I'm male?

    (Original post by redferry)
    Childbearing hips! Women with wider hips = less likely to have complications in childbirth.

    Plus bigger boobs = tricking men into thinking they produce more milk (evolution up to it's old tricks again, obviously this isn't true but it's how women attracted men back in the day, and men selected for bigger bwabs in women as they were preferred)
    This. Also, a woman with more fat on her is more likely to survive from an evolutionary perspective and produce healthy offspring, whereas an underweight or skinny woman has less fat to protect the baby.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vickidc18)
    I actually think the guy on the left has a nice face, he does need to loose some weight for health reasons but he should be able to get a gf.

    Anyone should be able to get a relational partner.
    No excuses I say.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by All_TheCyanide)
    Biology student here- I'm pretty sure women naturally are supposed to have more fat than men (to protect fetuses) and after being pregnant are more likely to be overweight because some women's metabolisms slow down after they have kids (not sure why this is, but this was was case with my grandma).

    And biologically, curvy women = greater fertility = should be more attractive to men for reproductive purposes. Curvy isn't equivalent to obese, though. The two are different things entirely. So the "curvy" argument doesn't work for guys (even though that's just a mocking picture).

    You can't really shame either gender for weight, though, because people can have metabolic issues etc. that can affect their weight. I know OP is responding to an earlier thread but it needs to be said.
    Clinical Sciences student here - your metabolism slows down as you age, it's normal for all genders. It really is up to people to make an effort.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by catsis)
    Clinical Sciences student here - your metabolism slows down as you age, it's normal for all genders. It really is up to people to make an effort.
    My grandma's metabolism slowed only after she had children, though. Her husband didn't have to shift a pregnancy weight, since he wasn't the one carrying a child for nine months. Therefore, she weighed more than he did.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I said something awful and regret it

    obesity is a social problem and individuals need to take responsibility
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by Smash Bandicoot)
    Edited out!
    Literally speechless.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrDystopia)
    Literally speechless.
    It's not lile I LIKE these ideas I purport they are things I have learned through a period of 5 years in existential isolation

    PLenty of people need this 'dark enlightenment', not just the obese. I needed it. It's not just to do with the ugly truth of attraction, it's to do with the reality of humanity
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by All_TheCyanide)
    My grandma's metabolism slowed only after she had children, though. Her husband didn't have to shift a pregnancy weight, since he wasn't the one carrying a child for nine months. Therefore, she weighed more than he did.
    Yes but everyone's metabolism slows down. Her husband's metabolism slowed down too. There are other things to take into consideration as well. Was she at home taking care of the kids while he was working? Was he a bit more active than her?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.