Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm in the walrus camp.

That thing is sexy.

mattyrm wrote:Sorry I missed this bit...



Who is she?

She's fething lovely.. I like a woman who looks like she could at least attempt to keep up with me if we went for a run.

And she's not that much heavier than the VS models. If you can call them unhealthy but not her, your talking gak!

Allison Stokke. She became internet famous a while back after some pictures of her popped up on a few different gossip sites. At 5'7, and being a pole vaulter, she's probably right between 130 and 140. That's not a huge difference in weight, but when you consider that she's 3-4" shorter than your average VS model, and about 15 lbs heavier, its a pretty big difference in actual physique.

She's freaking perfect. Z'all I can think of while she's on my screen.

That 1st pic. Damn. Pole action and all on top of things.

Kaldor wrote:Just so we're all clear, the girls in the bottom photo are skinny. We're just comparing them to overly-idealised pictures on the internet. I think maybe one of them crosses the line from 'skinny' into 'normal'.

I've been around female athletes most of my life and spent about 8 years living and working on college campuses, none of those women qualify as skinny. Most of them fit pretty squarely into "normal", with a couple qualifying as "big", but none of them are fat. And it isn't like I haven't known women that had model type physiques, they do exist outside the world of fashion, and they are no less realistic than any other body type. The issue arises when we start pretending that there's only one standard of beauty, which is something I think most people figure out as they age.

If you want a point of reference: 5'4, 100 lbs is skinny. 5'4, 130 lbs is normal. 5'4, 160 lbs is big. Anything above that is probably getting into fat territory unless the woman in question has a ridiculous amount of muscle mass, though body composition also comes into play. Truthfully, if look at the majority of major actresses, they mostly tend to be somewhere between skinny and normal. "Ridiculously skinny" pretty much only applies to professional runway models, both male and female.

Kaldor wrote:
They're just not ridiculously skinny like we're used to seeing.

I imagine that most people, even the horrid nerds ( ) that populate this place, interact with, or at least see, more women on a daily basis than pictures of women.

dogma wrote:I've been around female athletes most of my life and spent about 8 years living and working on college campuses, none of those women qualify as skinny. Most of them fit pretty squarely into "normal", with a couple qualifying as "big", but none of them are fat. And it isn't like I haven't known women that had model type physiques, they do exist outside the world of fashion, and they are no less realistic than any other body type. The issue arises when we start pretending that there's only one standard of beauty, which is something I think most people figure out as they age.

I guess I was a little to quick to start dealing out labels. One persons normal will be another persons extreme. To me, it's 'normal' to have a little bit of fat on a body. Most of the girls in the bottom picture have less fat than I would call normal. They're close to the line, but I wouldn't say any of them have an average build. Don't get me wrong, they're none of them atheletic, but I think they fall into the correct end of the skinny spectrum.

dogma wrote:I imagine that most people, even the horrid nerds ( ) that populate this place, interact with, or at least see, more women on a daily basis than pictures of women.

I like to call it 'supermodel syndrome'. When you see someone on the internet, or in a movie or the TV or a magazine, you don't compare them to normal people. You compare them to your created expectations for that medium, and so instead of comparing the girls in the bottom pic to the hags at your local club, you compare them to the girls on the cover of cosmo or the VS models in the top pic, or Angelina Jolie, or Jessica Biel, or whoever. And you rate them accordingly, but artificially, low.

When in reality if you saw those girls dressed up at your local bar, you'd break your own back to try and get them to come home with you, and you rate them significantly higher.

I'm not referring to you in particular, but the internet (and people) in general.

Kaldor reminds us that Americans aren't the only nationality with a high percentage of fat people.

Mannahnin wrote:Kaldor reminds us that Americans aren't the only nationality with a high percentage of fat people.

Yeah, pretty sure Australia overtook America as the fattest nation on earth a few years ago...

You reminded me of that when you called the girls in the bottom pic "skinny".

Even in America, they don't count as skinny.

Kaldor wrote:
I like to call it 'supermodel syndrome'. When you see someone on the internet, or in a movie or the TV or a magazine, you don't compare them to normal people. You compare them to your created expectations for that medium, and so instead of comparing the girls in the bottom pic to the hags at your local club, you compare them to the girls on the cover of cosmo or the VS models in the top pic, or Angelina Jolie, or Jessica Biel, or whoever. And you rate them accordingly, but artificially, low.

I think that's true for a lot of younger people, especially in high school when the way you engage with the opposite sex is relatively limited. But once you get to college, or simply out of your parents' house, and the prospect of bringing girls home becomes realistic and convenient things start to change as the means by which you appreciate beauty and gratification become more immediate, and less tied to public figures. I mean, maybe its just me, but I stopped finding celebrities sexually interesting years ago both because I know what professional makeup can accomplish, and because I've had enough experience to realize that there are plenty of attainable women that are every bit as good looking.

Kaldor wrote:
When in reality if you saw those girls dressed up at your local bar, you'd break your own back to try and get them to come home with you, and you rate them significantly higher.

I don't know, maybe it just the bars I frequent, but I regularly see girls (generally aspiring models) that fit the VS mold, and have ever since college. They're by no means the norm, but there's enough of them around that they're not completely alien. Honestly, I think the bigger issue is simply the nature of the internet as hyper-critical of nearly everything, though it has been fairly tame here because no one has out and out called either group hideous.

Kaldor wrote:Just so we're all clear, the girls in the bottom photo are skinny.

No, they aren't.

Kaldor wrote:Also love seeing the nerds on here insisting they wouldn't be interested in women from either picture.

Guys, you wouldn't sleep with any of the women in any of the pictures. We know. But it wouldn't be because of your choice...

That's generally insulting.

Vaerros wrote:That's generally insulting.

It's also generally true.

Not really. It's a convenient cheap laugh, though.

I thought it was funny.

Well, we never accused you of having elitist tastes, Boxy.

I just like laughs. Cheap or otherwise.

But how do you feel about cheap beer?

I don't like ripping on my nerd kindred. Maybe a little good-natured ribbing.

Seriously lads, you lot have surprised me. I cant help but feel this thread is clearly full of spite and envy.

The VS girls aren't "too skinny" they are slim. Are we really claiming that most women if they are honest would prefer to be fat? They don't look like "concentration camp survivors" lets have it said. I would post some photos of actual camp survivors, but frankly we all know its in bad taste.

Why is it ok to insult gorgeous people? I mean, granted I have a personal stake in this because I am ESSENCE OF MAN but still.. I get raged at for insulting fatties all the time! But here we are and all the fatties are waddling in here and throwing insults at people that aren't gluttons! As Seb said, its horrendous double standards. What really annoys me is that fatties seem to think that its never their fault so its fine to rip the piss out of people for their "good genes" and 90% of the time its nonsense. I gained weight every single time I had a lenghty leave, I would go on the piss for 3 months, come back 20 pounds heavier and then eat healthy and train hard until I was back to my best. That's how it works! You don't think I want to eat a pint of Ben and Jerries every day?! They seem to wallow in self pity and convince themselves that cakes and candy taste like ash in our mouths!

I mean take Kaldor.. seriously.. the girls in the bottom picture are SKINNY?! How can you say that with a straight face?!

A woman of 5'5 is supposed to weigh about 115-135lbs right?

Ergo, you either have no idea what BMI means, you were making a joke, or you are a proper fat knacker and think that insisting every fattie you see is actually slim is merely a really clever way of staying skinny without having to diet.

Which one is it?

Well, speaking for myself, I genuinely do prefer thicker ladies. I'm not hating on the gals in the upper picture, but I really am more attracted to the women in the bottom picture.

Mannahnin wrote:But how do you feel about cheap beer?

Depends on the day I've had, really.

Mannahnin wrote:I don't like ripping on my nerd kindred. Maybe a little good-natured ribbing.

Reading between the lines, I tend to imagine the person doing the ripping is an angry virgin nerd himself but is in denial. Which makes it that much funnier.

Monster Rain wrote:Well, speaking for myself, I genuinely do prefer thicker ladies. I'm not hating on the gals in the upper picture, but I really am more attracted to the women in the bottom picture.

Oh yeah I understand that, I wasnt talking to you was I!

gak Ive been out with all sorts of shaped chicks, and I don't mind half of the birds in the bottom picture.. well, more like 2/3s. I'm just saying, they aren't fething skinny are they!

If they are too skinny, then she is "perfect weight for height and build"

Kaldor wrote:Just so we're all clear, the girls in the bottom photo are skinny. We're just comparing them to overly-idealised pictures on the internet. I think maybe one of them crosses the line from 'skinny' into 'normal'.

Errr....what? They're not skinny in all. In fact, I think that the Dove people hired them precisely because they weren't skinny and were a bit less attractive than the girls from the Victoria Secret picture.

Also love seeing the nerds on here insisting they wouldn't be interested in women from either picture.

I would smash all of the VS girls with the fury of 1000 Samurai. There's only one (maybe two if we're stretching it) girl(s) on the bottom Dove picture who I could genuinely say that I would smash.

Also I got a good laugh out of the "seeing the nerds here", as if you aren't a nerd too? I mean c'mon, look at your signature. You're 30 years old and playing tabletop wargames. I'm sure the panties drop when girls see that.

Guys, you wouldn't sleep with any of the women in any of the pictures. We know. But it wouldn't be because of your choice...

But of course, you could. Because you are awesome. Because you are a Grey knight! And you are the best! Although I'm sure you would totally reject any of the Victoria Secret models on the basis that they're too skinny for you.

Who are you really kidding though?

In other news, Mattyrm has got it. Why is it cool to make fun of people who are attractive/popular or whatever? Because it's a defense mechanism. It makes you feel better about being 300lbs at 5 foot 10 if you say that some good looking person looks like they haven't eaten for 10 days.

Also don't get me started on the super fat women who think that they have curves. Curves means an hourglass figure. Not the curves from the fat slopping down your body and congealing into a thick cottage cheese-looking mass. That is not attractive.

This right here is what I consider to be "thick". Girl is clothed but I just put it in spoilers anyway

Aye she's pretty nice, I don't go much fatter than that though.

5lbs over that and they start to look like if they cut themselves shaving marshmallow foam would come out.

Yeah, skinny was probably a bit hasty. They're none of them over-weight however, and the girls in the top photograph are far too skinny. Their ribs stick out, their knees are the thickest parts of their legs, their faces are sunken, they just look malnourished. They aren't athletic at all, which is the only saving grace for being that skinny.

Vladsimpaler wrote:Also I got a good laugh out of the "seeing the nerds here", as if you aren't a nerd too? I mean c'mon, look at your signature. You're 30 years old and playing tabletop wargames. I'm sure the panties drop when girls see that.

I'm a nerd. I'm know a lot of nerds. I'm sure you know a lot of nerds too. Going by the nerds I know, my comment wasn't off base.

mattyrm wrote:
The VS girls aren't "too skinny" they are slim.

Eh, if they're the average professional model then they are 5'11, 115 (its hard to tell without direct context). I dated a girl that was 5'4, 100 and she was damn skinny. Add 7" to that and I can't imagine "slim," especially given that the girl I dated was anything but slim or muscular, though not fat.

mattyrm wrote:
They seem to wallow in self pity and convince themselves that cakes and candy taste like ash in our mouths!

I hear that all the time. "Oh, you're only fit because you don't enjoy food." feth off, I drink at least 3 days a week and eat whatever I want, I get away with it because I run 49 miles a week. I can put up with this because I'm vain as hell, and I'm not afraid to admit that.

What Dogma said, up to a point. I don't see ribs (although that could've been shoped), so I won't say anything about them being unhealthy thin. Hell I've had ribs showing the majority of my life and it wasn't because I wasn't eating properly, just that I'm ectomorph. I lose muscle mass while sleeping, damnit.

Were they petite (5'- 5'4), they would be gorgeous. Usually models aren't.

That said, I still think they are way hotter than the bottom ones. Might be the faces too...

I guess that this thread shows that one man's rose is another man's thorn.

I see them. I can make out plenty of detail on them as well, despite the blatant shopping.

Their breasts were shopped too from the look of it, which is why I made the comment that, and I mean no offense to flat-chested girls, the ones on the bottom have the advantage of having boobs.

mattyrm wrote:Are we really claiming that most women if they are honest would prefer to be fat?

Could you stop putting words in peoples' mouths?

At five foot ten-- about normal for a runway supermodel, with five foot eight and nine being considered short for the career-- you'll likely want to be around 130-170 pounds. A lighter framed woman would want to be on the lower end of that scale, while a heavier framed woman would want to be on the latter end.Most women at the heights of 5'4 and 5'5 would be closer to 120-160, as an ideal weight depending on their frame.

When you're ~5'10" / 110lbs, you're endangering your health just as much as any woman who's 5'4 and 180 pounds.

Kovnik Obama wrote:although that could've been shoped

The fashion industry would never do such a thing.

dogma wrote:

mattyrm wrote:
They seem to wallow in self pity and convince themselves that cakes and candy taste like ash in our mouths!

I hear that all the time. "Oh, you're only fit because you don't enjoy food." feth off, I drink at least 3 days a week and eat whatever I want, I get away with it because I run 49 miles a week. I can put up with this because I'm vain as hell, and I'm not afraid to admit that.

Yeah that's what I'm talking about. I fething love booze and ice cream. If it was calorie free I would drink bitter 7 nights a week and polish off a pint of Ben and Jerries every night before bed.

People in good shape generally look after themselves because they want to look good. Call it shallow if you like, but it takes work and determination to get your ass to the gym 6 days a week and lay off the cakes. If we are mocking people that have self control and discipline, we might as well mock people that go to University or do charity work!

Melissia wrote:

mattyrm wrote:Are we really claiming that most women if they are honest would prefer to be fat?

Could you stop putting words in peoples' mouths?

At five foot ten-- about normal for a runway supermodel, with five foot eight and nine being considered short for the career-- you'll likely want to be around 130-170 pounds. A lighter framed woman would want to be on the lower end of that scale, while a heavier framed woman would want to be on the latter end.Most women at the heights of 5'4 and 5'5 would be closer to 120-160, as an ideal weight depending on their frame.

When you're ~5'10" / 110lbs, you're endangering your health just as much as any woman who's 5'4 and 180 pounds.

Im not putting words in peoples mouths Mel! gak loads of people mock those women, both here and on the campaign page. Surely if you are a big fat fether and you are ripping the gak out of them and saying they look like they got stuck in an elevator for 6 weeks you ARE saying "its better to be fat than skinny" aren't you?

Regards the health thing, I disagree, I think being underweight has less health risks than being overweight unless you are talking serious malnutirtion, and none of the VS girls are anywhere near that.

Christ its obvious! None of the VS models are dangerously underweight. Not a single on of them.

This is dangerously underweight.



This isn't. (Victorias Secret)



Clearly not a single one of those women is a health risk. They are all really slim, sure they are. But no doctor or medical professional would look at that picture and go "feth me, go eat or you are going to kill yourself"

As I told you, my missus is at the low end for BMI, and I just asked her.. she is 5'5 and 116lbs exactly, and she seems pretty much ideal weight, she works out and has a decent amount of muscle. Never had an issue with the Doc or anything, are you really telling me she is at serious risk if she dropped 5 or 6 pounds, or stayed the same weight and gained 2 inches in height?

Like I said Mel, don't take it the wrong way cos I'm not saying you are a fat knacker or anything, obviously I dont know what anyone here looks like im just talking in general, but I think people seem to be desperate to say that slim women are "OMG anorexic rats!" because it makes them feel better about themselves, but lets not cheapen and demean the suffering of anorexic people by claiming that petite slim Victoria's Secret girls are at serious risk of death.

mattyrm wrote:Im not putting words in peoples mouths Mel!

Yes you are. You're being an donkey-cave by effectively insinuating that everyone who criticizes them is fat.

The women on the bottom are painful to look at, just as much as the one on the top image.

As I told you, my missus is at the low end for BMI, and I just asked her.. she is 5'5 and 116lbs exactly, and she seems pretty much ideal weight, she works out and has a decent amount of muscle. Never had an issue with the Doc or anything, are you really telling me she is at serious risk if she dropped 5 or 6 pounds, or stayed the same weight and gained 2 inches in height?

Try five or six inches in height, and the answer would be yes.

Kovnik Obama wrote:What Dogma said, up to a point. I don't see ribs (although that could've been shoped), so I won't say anything about them being unhealthy thin. Hell I've had ribs showing the majority of my life and it wasn't because I wasn't eating properly, just that I'm ectomorph. I lose muscle mass while sleeping, damnit.

At 5'9 195 I have ribs showing. I've had them since 5'9 230, and it has actually been problematic.