Albatross wrote:I'm just of the opinion that, as many of us here fall in to the category of being obese, massively obese, ridiculously skinny and weedy, fantasists (and borderline fantasists), social misfits/rejects, chronic virgins, conspiracy theorists, nazi viking fixaters, black/tech/symphonic metal fans, plastic paddies, emotionally and/or physically underdeveloped teens, being severely acne'd, having delusions of grandeur or an atrociously hairy back (not looking at anyone in particular, Matty ), not to mention having a hobby that is only slightly more socially acceptable than collecting child pornography, we should probably not be so quick to point fingers at people and go 'ugh, fatties!' or 'ugh, anorexic!'.
Just my 2p.
My gaming group consist of one doctor whose gf could be on those VS shoots, one adjoint deputy (here it's like a district representative) whose gf is heavy into orgies, one lawyer who'se gf is into me , and me, total boy-toy/profound philosopher. We used to be akward nerds when we were young, but got cleared of that around 19.
Albatross wrote:I'm just of the opinion that, as many of us here fall in to the category of being obese, massively obese, ridiculously skinny and weedy, fantasists (and borderline fantasists), social misfits/rejects, chronic virgins, conspiracy theorists, nazi viking fixaters, black/tech/symphonic metal fans, plastic paddies, emotionally and/or physically underdeveloped teens, being severely acne'd, having delusions of grandeur or an atrociously hairy back (not looking at anyone in particular, Matty ), not to mention having a hobby that is only slightly more socially acceptable than collecting child pornography, we should probably not be so quick to point fingers at people and go 'ugh, fatties!' or 'ugh, anorexic!'.
Just my 2p.
My gaming group consist of one doctor whose gf could be on those VS shoots, one adjoint deputy (here it's like a district representative) whose gf is heavy into orgies, one lawyer who'se gf is into me , and me, total boy-toy/profound philosopher. We used to be akward nerds when we were young, but got cleared of that around 19.
The gaming culture appeals to a wide audience.
I'm an astronaut!
Not really, just thought posting this would make me chuckle. And it did. But I do second the whole wide audience thing, we aren't all lurking in dark closets, a pale hand reaching forth for our models before snatching back away from the sunlight.
Shadowseer_Kim wrote:btw Vlad - nice looking young lady you posted a picture of. She looks healthy and has child bearing hips.
Haha thank you! Over time I've really developed a love for curvy, somewhat thick women. Brazilian women are probably the best example. I would post some more though I don't want to detract from this thread's discussion. I would start another thread on this but it'd probably not go over well with the mods since this is a "family friendly" forum and having a thread with a bunch of bikini clad girls doesn't fit the M.O.
Squigsquasher wrote:Meh. Give me a cute Japanese girl any day.
Christ, what is it with people on the internet and asian girls?
Isnt it part of the hipster checklist?
Asian girlfriend? Check.
Nerd glasses? Check
ipod full of music noone else has heard of? check
Hours of free time to sit outside of cafe and look "artsy" and disinterested with life? Check.
etc.
Ok, you went too far this time. Call me a weirdo or a White Knight or a tranny all you want, but NO-ONE calls me a hipster and gets away with it.
Firstly, I don't have a girlfriend, Asian or otherwise. I have a very good friend who is a girl, but we've been friends for too long to be anything more.
Secondly, I have glasses, but they are NOT hipster glasses.
Thirdly, my MP3 player is a Sony.
Finally, I don't have any time to sit outside cafes and look artsy.
Squigsquasher wrote:
Ok, you went too far this time. Call me a weirdo or a White Knight or a tranny all you want, but NO-ONE calls me a hipster and gets away with it.
Firstly, I don't have a girlfriend, Asian or otherwise. I have a very good friend who is a girl, but we've been friends for too long to be anything more.
Secondly, I have glasses, but they are NOT hipster glasses.
Thirdly, my MP3 player is a Sony.
Finally, I don't have any time to sit outside cafes and look artsy.
mattyrm wrote: Im still flabbergasted at the poll results!
No wonder I get so many hot chicks, you guys are all off chasing the fat girls around Baskin Robins!
EDIT: Belay that, just looked again, some of them are a bit chunky!
Mate im not even that fussy, several of the birds in that Dove phot are relatively tidy and the fifth from the left looks actually nice looking.. but feth me, the VS chicks are essence!
Obviously, they work for VS and are therfore professional models! I'm stunned because to me, it seems the equivalent of a girly website having a picture of 5 chubby brick layers and 5 CK underwear models and all the birds saying they prefer the fat bald blokes with cement on their jeans!
Melissia wrote:I doubt he really cares what you think in the end, however.
No offense.
No, the last thing you would want to do is offend anyone...
I know he probably doesn't care what I think - the feeling is mutual. It's just an oddly futile thing to do, considering I can only see his posts if someone quotes him, or I open them (which I never do, the ignore function is there for a reason).
It probably doesn't help that no one in the VS pic is smiling (and it does look a bit touched up) whereas almost everyone in Dove pic is smiling. Even if it is unconcious I imagine that there is some element at play there. I know I'd rather spend time with someone who is having a good time and smiling instead of looking like they would rather be somewhere else and blank. Really a lot of the elements of the pictures don't match up enough to do a straight up side-by-side comparison. I can get why people choose one or the other if forced to, what I don't get is those who absolutely cannot understand why someone would choose a picture differently then them.
I think the poll is biased; you need a 'Poking a bicycle frame' option to balance against the 'Water buffalo' one, to use a well known adage from Viz..
Ahtman wrote:It probably doesn't help that no one in the VS pic is smiling (and it does look a bit touched up) whereas almost everyone in Dove pic is smiling. Even if it is unconcious I imagine that there is some element at play there. I know I'd rather spend time with someone who is having a good time and smiling instead of looking like they would rather be somewhere else and blank. Really a lot of the elements of the pictures don't match up enough to do a straight up side-by-side comparison.
Yeah, there's obviously more to it than simple physical attributes. If you naturally prefer a fuller-figured woman (as I do), then seeing a picture of a bunch of skinny, sulky-faced underwear models is probably going to repel you slightly, as it feeds into the image of them as being miserable empty-headed, humourless clones with eating disorders and cocaine habits. I'm not saying that IS the case, but it's a popular perception that does have some basis in reality. I could see why people would have an aversion to that. Prejudice is difficult to shake.
mattyrm wrote: Im still flabbergasted at the poll results!
No wonder I get so many hot chicks, you guys are all off chasing the fat girls around Baskin Robins!
If you think someone who is five foot five and 140 pounds is fat, you have a very stupid view of health...
What is your fixation with weight? Weight is meaningless. There are women that are 5'5" 140 that are gorgeous and fit and there are women that same height and weight that are corpulent and disgusting.
I look at the Dove ad and it is fat - fat - fat - fat - all the way down the line. I don't give a damn how much they weight, its obvious they either don't work out or eat healthy and if they allegedly do, they do a piss poor job of it.
mattyrm wrote: Im still flabbergasted at the poll results!
No wonder I get so many hot chicks, you guys are all off chasing the fat girls around Baskin Robins!
If you think someone who is five foot five and 140 pounds is fat, you have a very stupid view of health...
When did I say that WAS fat? I don't recall..
Although, our lass is 5'5" and 115 and about ideal weight. If she had an extra 25 lbs on her, she would be pretty chubby.
I don't think its fat exactly, what I said was its better for your health to be a bit under than a bit over. I am 5'9" and Ive been off the beer for a while so Im at 175lbs at the moment, but If I had to choose to be 15 under or over either way, Id much rather be 160lbs over 190lbs.
My knee caps hurt when I run distance if I am heavy, I dont get that issue when I am light.
You can argue will you are blue in the face, but the facts support my view not yours Mel. There have been numerous studies regarding this, being a soldier I have always kept myself in the loop regards physical issues and I have read an immense amount on this issue. Over the years I have read all kinds of studies about people on lower calorie diets and with lower body weights having increased life spans, better memories in the elderly, better cardiovascular health, less chance of getting cancer, better blood markers, cholesterol, all kinda of gak and far too many to list.
I actually read a story on the BBC website this morning regarding a fast being beneficial to your health as well. Here it is.
The fact is Mel, Its better to be skinny than fat. If you happen to be a little overweight and this upsets you then I'm sorry. But them's the facts, you simply cant make a decent argument that its better to be a fat knacker than a skinny fether.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Amaya wrote:
Melissia wrote:
mattyrm wrote: Im still flabbergasted at the poll results!
No wonder I get so many hot chicks, you guys are all off chasing the fat girls around Baskin Robins!
If you think someone who is five foot five and 140 pounds is fat, you have a very stupid view of health...
What is your fixation with weight? Weight is meaningless. There are women that are 5'5" 140 that are gorgeous and fit and there are women that same height and weight that are corpulent and disgusting.
I look at the Dove ad and it is fat - fat - fat - fat - all the way down the line. I don't give a damn how much they weight, its obvious they either don't work out or eat healthy and if they allegedly do, they do a piss poor job of it.
Exactly. The fact is, those chicks would all be in better health if they all lost 15 pounds. Maybe one or two of them would then actually be a little skinny, but so what. They would have less chance of getting a laundry list of ailments if that was the case.
mattyrm wrote: Although, our lass is 5'5" and 115 and about ideal weight
Perhaps I just do a better variety of exercise and thus have more muscle mass than her, dunno (that, and I'm a few inches taller). 115, to me, feels really underweight and unfit.
As an aside, no, it really isn't any better to be underweight compared to overweight. Those who are underweight risk heart problems, diabetes (yes, both under and overweight risk diabetes), a weak immune system, anemia, infertility, and early onset osteoporosis as well as easily broken bones, amongst a plethora of other risks associated with being underweight.
Bah, 115 pounds lifted using both legs and arms, and proper posture... not exactly that hard. Although I make no claims of being able to run fast. I injured my ankle a few times in high school playing tennis and skateboarding, so I need to wear boots with ankle support in order to do strenuous activity these days.
It depends on what kind of weights and how they're done. Someone who focuses on arm strength isn't gonna be very fast on their feet regardless, compared to someone who does a more whole body approach.
Amaya wrote:I doubt it. I don't think you understand the explosiveness needed to perform the Olympic lifts.
No I entirely do, that's why Sprinters are so large and muscular, I am well aware that sprinting is entirely different from distance running, but you are still exaggerating.
Considering Ennis can run 100m hurdles in 12 seconds, I doubt a big muscular/fat bloke could catch her, no matter how strong he is!
Amaya wrote:I doubt it. I don't think you understand the explosiveness needed to perform the Olympic lifts.
No I entirely do, that's why Sprinters are so large and muscular, I am well aware that sprinting is entirely different from distance running, but you are still exaggerating.
Considering Ennis can run 100m hurdles in 12 seconds, I doubt a big muscular/fat bloke could catch her, no matter how strong he is!
I can confirm that, as a big muscular/fat bloke, I couldn't catch Jess Ennis.
Amaya wrote:I doubt it. I don't think you understand the explosiveness needed to perform the Olympic lifts.
No I entirely do, that's why Sprinters are so large and muscular, I am well aware that sprinting is entirely different from distance running, but you are still exaggerating.
Considering Ennis can run 100m hurdles in 12 seconds, I doubt a big muscular/fat bloke could catch her, no matter how strong he is!
I can confirm that, as a big muscular/fat bloke, I couldn't catch Jess Ennis.
Lucky for her.
Hah.. I do have a soft spot for her as well, she has a nice broad Yorkshire accent and good abs and I'm fond of both.
Amaya wrote:I doubt it. I don't think you understand the explosiveness needed to perform the Olympic lifts.
No I entirely do, that's why Sprinters are so large and muscular, I am well aware that sprinting is entirely different from distance running, but you are still exaggerating.
Considering Ennis can run 100m hurdles in 12 seconds, I doubt a big muscular/fat bloke could catch her, no matter how strong he is!
I think you mean 13 seconds. Her best time was this Summer and apparently the surface is shaving a good chunk off of times.
She'll definitely outpace a 105kg lifter after the first 50 meters, but I think it would be neck and neck until then. They're pretty fething good up to about 40m.
Amaya wrote:I doubt it. I don't think you understand the explosiveness needed to perform the Olympic lifts.
No I entirely do, that's why Sprinters are so large and muscular, I am well aware that sprinting is entirely different from distance running, but you are still exaggerating.
Considering Ennis can run 100m hurdles in 12 seconds, I doubt a big muscular/fat bloke could catch her, no matter how strong he is!
I can confirm that, as a big muscular/fat bloke, I couldn't catch Jess Ennis.
Lucky for her.
Hah.. I do have a soft spot for her as well, she has a nice broad Yorkshire accent and good abs and I'm fond of both.
I'm prepared to overlook the abs because she has a very nice arse.
Jess Ennis has a very nice face actually; I would say that more often but I'd likely just be given questioning looks and asked "What's a face? Is it a like a boob?".
Avatar 720 wrote:Jess Ennis has a very nice face actually; I would say that more often but I'd likely just be given questioning looks and asked "What's a face? Is it a like a boob?".
Avatar 720 wrote:Jess Ennis has a very nice face actually; I would say that more often but I'd likely just be given questioning looks and asked "What's a face? Is it a like a boob?".
Boobs are better because there's two of them.
Mars boobs are better because there are three of them.
My wife has a very flat stomach (with visible abs, when she's working out), but a substantial backside and boobs. A flat belly is a very nice accompaniment to curves.
Albatross wrote:Why does Kovnik keep responding to my posts, when I have him on ignore? He's obviously not that much of a genius...
A) Because you keep saying ridiculous stuff, B) because it's even more ridiculous to block someone's posts because you disagree with them, and C) because you obviously can answer to them.
She's attractive, but not exceptionally so. She has curvaceous build with absolutely no visible muscle. Is caked with make up at all times. She's a stereotypical example of classic femininity.
I wonder if people really find her attractive or are they brainwashed into believing she is?
Amaya wrote:No, you're brainwashed into thinking flabby woman are more attractive than athletic ones because "muscle isn't feminine."
Or... not everyone has the same sexual preferences as you! GASP!
No, that's obviously impossible! Everyone has the exact same sexual preferences as Amaya! That's why everyone on Earth is a heterosexual male with no fetishes!
Why can't we find both scarlett johansen and athletic chicks like the pole vaulter and the hurdler attractive? Can't we just say they are all good looking and get along?
Id prefer a woman somewhere in between A and B, but Ill pick B over A any day. I think "Super Models" are far from attractive. I like curves on women, not fething edges and bones.
KingCracker wrote:Id prefer a woman somewhere in between A and B, but Ill pick B over A any day. I think "Super Models" are far from attractive. I like curves on women, not fething edges and bones.
Then obviously you've been brainwashed.
Just like men that prefer men or women that prefer women or anyone that likes Adam Sandler movies...
I gotta say, this thread is getting hilarious, mostly thanks to Amaya's childish and uninformed applying of "brainwashed" as a generalized derogatory term. Seriously Amaya, you are so brainwashed for liking thin muscular chicks and hating people who don't have the same preferences as you do. Geeze man!
Also: Scarlett Johansonn (I hate the nickname "ScarJo") is incredibly attractive. I know Amaya, I'm just conforming to convention by liking curvy women like her, but I really cannot say no to a voluptuous, calipygian babe like her, especially when her hair is dyed red. I should be ashamed, I know. I'm just a brainwashed pig...
...But guess what? I also find the Australian pole vaulter quite attractive as well! And I find women with very short, butch haircuts attractive. Really, as long as a woman isn't unhealthily skinny/unhealthily fat, I will find her physically attractive.
I put emphasis on physically because of this: I've never met any of these women, and probably never will (though I would love to!), and as such I can only judge on physical characteristics, which is one of the worst ways to judge someone. Who know? Scarlett Johansonn might be a totally shallow, banal and vain person, or she might be a funny, vivacious and sharp person. You just cannot tell from photographs.
CthuluIsSpy wrote:I can't tell..is the blond weight lifter on the right a man or a woman?
The face looks female, but the bulge in his/her pants says male.
That is Holley Mangold. She played offensive line in high school and is the younger sister of Nick Mangold, the Jets Center.
Amaya wrote:He's just making statements similar to the typical sexist male that's afraid of any woman with an ounce of muscle.
Who, me? I'm not afraid of chicks with six-packs, I just don't want to feth them. I don't find them attractive. It's not like it makes me a bad person.
Amaya wrote:He's just making statements similar to the typical sexist male that's afraid of any woman with an ounce of muscle.
Who, me? I'm not afraid of chicks with six-packs, I just don't want to feth them. I don't find them attractive. It's not like it makes me a bad person.
Sorry but I am afraid it does. All your life's choices, decisions, thoughts, and actions come down to six pack - thumbs up or thumbs down.
Amaya wrote:He's just making statements similar to the typical sexist male that's afraid of any woman with an ounce of muscle.
Who, me? I'm not afraid of chicks with six-packs, I just don't want to feth them. I don't find them attractive. It's not like it makes me a bad person.
Sorry but I am afraid it does. All your life's choices, decisions, thoughts, and actions come down to six pack - thumbs up or thumbs down.
Amaya wrote:He's just making statements similar to the typical sexist male that's afraid of any woman with an ounce of muscle.
Who, me? I'm not afraid of chicks with six-packs, I just don't want to feth them. I don't find them attractive. It's not like it makes me a bad person.
Sorry but I am afraid it does. All your life's choices, decisions, thoughts, and actions come down to six pack - thumbs up or thumbs down.
Wait, alcoholic beverage or abdominal musculature?
Alas, my fondness for the former probably precludes my possession of the latter!
Amaya wrote:He's just making statements similar to the typical sexist male that's afraid of any woman with an ounce of muscle.
Who, me? I'm not afraid of chicks with six-packs, I just don't want to feth them. I don't find them attractive. It's not like it makes me a bad person.
Sorry but I am afraid it does. All your life's choices, decisions, thoughts, and actions come down to six pack - thumbs up or thumbs down.
Wait, alcoholic beverage or abdominal musculature?
Alas, my fondness for the former probably precludes my possession of the latter!
Kovnik Obama wrote:Well. I guess I find playfighting more fun when the other can actually do something other than roll over and assume the submissive position.
Amaya wrote:I should expect ignorant crap posted about OLifting since everyone seems to think weightlifters are morbidly obese.
Nobody thinks that all weightlifters are morbidly obese, I was just pointing out that they aren't a fraction of a second slower than a professional sprinter.
I'd bet most of the top tier male lifters under 85kg can sprint 100m in under 11 consistently. Biggest issue for their time would be the start since they don't train towards it.
Amaya wrote:I'd bet most of the top tier male lifters under 85kg can sprint 100m in under 11 consistently. Biggest issue for their time would be the start since they don't train towards it.
I very much doubt that, but you might be right, to be honest I don't know enough about powerlifting to know.
I know plenty about running though, and I am well aware that sprinting is an entirely different discipline from all other types of running, I know its all about explosive power and that's why sprinters are big fethers and 10,000m runners are skinny and rangy, but still.. It just seems too fast for something you don't train primarily for.
I dont doubt they are quick off the mark obviously, due to their immense explosive power, as I said, we are just disagreeing about the degrees of separation between them and sprinters.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I must be colourblind, I thought the chick on the right was black?
I don't like these campaigns due to the fact that I'm really skinny myself due to having a high metabolism, I'm naturally very skinny and get along just fine, no health problems at all.
Also don't forget that pictures of skinny models ect in magazines can act as motivation for a lot of people to stay in shape and overweight people to get into shape, it's only a handful of people that take it too far.
I would go for nearly all of the women on the bottom pic except maybe the one on the far right. My wife is a bit chubbier than they are. At least they look healthy.
I would go for the girls on the top pic if I was judging them by their breasts up. Their hips and legs are anorexic and creepy. Though I bet their faces are the same if I could see them up close.
But that's just me. I am an outdoors person, and the top girls would die before they left the parking lot. God forbid if I tried to get them into a tent or on a mountain bike.
Skinny is a legitimate body type. Let's not shame people for their body types regardless of which ones they are.
In terms of personal preference, nearly all of the women in photo B are attractive to me, while only a couple of the women in A are.
This has a lot to do with the harsh lighting and photoshop in photo A making their skin look awful, though. In the same lighting with similar facial expressions, I am probably going to be attracted to all or most of them.
I honestly like the a lot of the bottom girls more, but then I'm not into skinny girls that much. (saying that that doesn't mean I'd turn any of the top ones down either.) Just give the bottom ones some nicer underwear and they'd look pretty sexy.
, and me, total boy-toy/profound philosopher. We used to be akward nerds when we were young, but got cleared of that around 19.
