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.

Well MY wife is a supermodel doctor olympian with degrees in nutrition, kinesiology, and psychology, and she says that
-with a few exceptions, chicks look bad in tuxes
-the women hating on the skinny chicks are just jealous
and that skinny chicks ripping on the chubbywubs is like winning a race and then going back and tripping the other guy before he can cross the finish.

I like a few from each pic, but the skinniest of the top row bothers me more than the biggest of the bottom row. I don't find the boniness of girls in the top picture to be an attractive feature, though I do like slim girls. I think overall my brain prefers pictures of slim girls, but all the girls I've been particularly attracted towards in real life are larger than any in the top row, usually UK sizes 12-16, the very-thin look doesn't do it for me in reality. So that's odd.

Corpsesarefun wrote:
I'm not agreeing with Mel

Good, I was worried for you.

I just find it odd how your wife is so incredibly accurate based on a single photo.

How is "they don't look unhealthy" incredibly accurate? It's not like she's calling out anything specific. She says they look like they're at the lower end of a healthy weight range, but that they don't look undernourished or anorexic.

Stop spazzing out, redbeard. I never claimed to be an expert or that my opinions were "incredibly accurate"

Melissia wrote:Stop spazzing out, redbeard. I never claimed to be an expert or that my opinions were "incredibly accurate"

Good. Because they are very few women who look good in tuxes.

rubiksnoob wrote:

Melissia wrote:Stop spazzing out, redbeard. I never claimed to be an expert or that my opinions were "incredibly accurate"

Good. Because they are very few women who look good in tuxes.

Bah. Uniforms, tuxedos, businesswear, formal wear, etc look good on most people. Women are no exception.

Frazzled wrote:

Am I the only one saddened to find Matty, instead of taking great joy in dismembering the combined miltary might of Argentina with a sock and a broken spork, is now spending time arguing with pre-teens on FB? How the mighty have fallen!

Sorry but we're going to have to confiscate your man card Matty.

Hey I like arguing on the internet, that's not a man card offence.

feth me, you frequent the OT board, you are as guilty as I am!

I like the top one better, although I think it is because they look sexier (shiny and glamorous) rather than because they are skinnier. A curvier lady who was oiled up and had her hair done in a similar way would look pretty sexy, too.

Melissia wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:

Melissia wrote:Stop spazzing out, redbeard. I never claimed to be an expert or that my opinions were "incredibly accurate"

Good. Because they are very few women who look good in tuxes.

Bah. Uniforms, tuxedos, businesswear, formal wear, etc look good on most people. Women are no exception.

Ehhhhhh, it would have to be cut for a women's figure. . . women in men's tuxedos just look kind of odd.

rubiksnoob wrote:Ehhhhhh, it would have to be cut for a women's figure. . . women in men's tuxedos just look kind of odd.

Duh.

Same with men in women's jeans. It just looks wrong.

Melissia wrote:

rubiksnoob wrote:Ehhhhhh, it would have to be cut for a women's figure. . . women in men's tuxedos just look kind of odd.

Duh.

Same with men in women's jeans. It just looks wrong.

Well there you're wrong. That's jus' darn purty.

Dunno about that, but for some reason it makes the men wearing them act weird. Maybe it's the compacting of the junk.

Melissia wrote:Stop spazzing out, redbeard. I never claimed to be an expert or that my opinions were "incredibly accurate"

No, you just accused me of lying about my wife's profession and her opinion because her trained opinion (which I never said was incredibly accurate) differed with yours. You insinuated that I'd go so far as to fake a legal document as well.

In short, you're calling me a liar. I may have some interesting opinions from time to time, I'll admit that. But I don't need to lie on the internet to back them up. And certainly not about my wife's achievements.

So, you if you'd like to apologize for calling me a liar, I'll stop "spazzing" out.

You're wrong about this one, and while I'm not claiming to be an expert - or even that my wife is an expert, she IS a registered dietitian, and ultimately, I trust what she says on the matter a lot more than anyone who isn't.

The women in the top photo make me shudder, sorry matty.

While the bottom set look to have nicer asses (or rather they have asses where as the top set don't).

Also if I'm going to be asked to cuddle I prefer the softer woman.

7 month into a deployment regardless of you preference for females (aimed at the guys) they all look "GOOD"

rubiksnoob wrote:Well MY wife is a supermodel doctor olympian with degrees in nutrition, kinesiology, and psychology, and she says that
-with a few exceptions, chicks look bad in tuxes
-the women hating on the skinny chicks are just jealous
and that skinny chicks ripping on the chubbywubs is like winning a race and then going back and tripping the other guy before he can cross the finish.

Son, I like what you've done here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rubiksnoob wrote:

Melissia wrote:Stop spazzing out, redbeard. I never claimed to be an expert or that my opinions were "incredibly accurate"

Good. Because they are very few women who look good in tuxes.

Tuxes or women's tailored suits? Tuxes I've not seen many. Women's tailored suits you betcha.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/71351741@N07/7181502350/in/pool-womenintuxedos
Classy!

Redbeard wrote:No, you just accused me of lying about my wife's profession

No, I said I had no reason to believe your statements, because anyone can claim anything about themselves or their loved ones on the internet and it's hard to prove or disprove any of it, photographic evidence or no.

Which is true. Or perhaps you think that being skeptical about people's claims of expertise on the internet means I think that everyone is a liar?

mattyrm wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Am I the only one saddened to find Matty, instead of taking great joy in dismembering the combined miltary might of Argentina with a sock and a broken spork, is now spending time arguing with pre-teens on FB? How the mighty have fallen!

Sorry but we're going to have to confiscate your man card Matty.

Hey I like arguing on the internet, that's not a man card offence.

feth me, you frequent the OT board, you are as guilty as I am!

You can take my man card, when you pry it from my cold, dead hands!*

*watch out though. My body will be booby trapped by spring loaded now really pissed off wiener dogs.

Redbeard wrote:

Melissia wrote:

Redbeard wrote:The top group are not unhealthy, they're just thin. They're at the bottom of the healthy range weight

When I can clearly see their ribcage, and make out the details of each individual rib with relative ease while they are standing in a relaxed position and not stretching out, they are not healthy.

Well, thank you for your uneducated opinion. Like I said, my wife, a trained and registered dietitian disagrees.

Whilst I cheerfully defer to expert opinion, it would be fair to say that it's difficult to shake the visceral feeling that the girls in the top row would look more healthy (and indeed more attractive) if they drank more milk, snorted less coke, had a few good dinners and spent more time outdoors.

A few links to back up my statements that supermodels tend to be unhealthily underweight, though:
http://www.lovelyish.com/716874967/supermodels-are-biologically-unhealthy/

Looking at these models and their BMIs, it is clear that they are severely underweight, as are many models who run the runway.

http://www.lindora.com/faqs.aspx?faqID=17

Occasionally we are asked if we will help someone become "super-thin" or "thin like a supermodel." We will decline to participate when someone wants to drop below a healthy weight. The habits developed by many supermodels trying to become or stay super-thin lead to very unhealthy lifestyles.

Keep in mind, supermodels are actually supposed to be taller than average (5'8" is considered short in the industry), and yet they are supposed to weigh less than average as well (with weights of 115 or less being common).

This is NOT healthy.

Melissia wrote:A few links to back up my statements that supermodels tend to be unhealthily underweight, though:
http://www.lovelyish.com/716874967/supermodels-are-biologically-unhealthy/

From "About" Lovelyish.com:

From the latest celebrity outfits to how-to's for homemade shampoo, Lovelyish has the fresh fashion and pop culture content you crave. Based in New York City, we bring you exciting daily content on style, beauty, celebrities, dating and everything in between, from book reviews to cupcake recipes.

Glad you're getting your nutrition advice from a good source.

Melissia wrote:A few links to back up my statements that supermodels tend to be unhealthily underweight, though:
http://www.lovelyish.com/716874967/supermodels-are-biologically-unhealthy/

Looking at these models and their BMIs, it is clear that they are severely underweight, as are many models who run the runway.

http://www.lindora.com/faqs.aspx?faqID=17

Occasionally we are asked if we will help someone become "super-thin" or "thin like a supermodel." We will decline to participate when someone wants to drop below a healthy weight. The habits developed by many supermodels trying to become or stay super-thin lead to very unhealthy lifestyles.

Keep in mind, supermodels are actually supposed to be taller than average (5'8" is considered short in the industry), and yet they are supposed to weigh less than average as well (with weights of 115 or less being common).

This is NOT healthy.

True enough Mel, but like I said, better too skinny than too fat.

Who do you think is gonna live longest?

The chicks in the VS ad, or Roseanne Barr?

The skinny chicks are prettier, but chubbies try harder. Just my experience.

Also, I'm no dietitian, but isn't BMI hotly debated for being horribly inaccurate?

Just saying

mattyrm wrote: Who do you think is gonna live longest?

The chicks in the VS ad, or Roseanne Barr?

Neither one. Being underweight is just as bad as being over, just in different ways. And for people who have a psychological urge against gaining weight and eating, gaining weight is just as hard for them as losing weight is for those obsessed with eating.

Unless you naturally have that bodytype. Didn't we already have a thread discussing that ultimately it's going to come down to the individual level, and that bell curves have fat tails and individuals can blow the 'averages' out of the water if they're genetically predispositioned that way and/or also live a lifestyle that would exaggerate that?

Now, I imagine that would be more valid for an exceptionally active individual, like a sand volleyball player, than someone with an incredibly low energy intake, but unless the ladies in the top row can be medically shown to be individually unhealthy then I see no reason to disparage their bodies.

Now, if the standard for modeling was actually unnatural, i.e. 'be 6' tall, weigh 110 lbs, and have 20 of those lbs be in your bra', that would actually be something that could be discussed, medically.

That actually is close to the desired body type for supermodels.

Mind you, it was far worse during the sixties and seventies.

Prefer the top, but then I am skinny myself.

In general, fat dudes are more attracted to fat chicks.

Law of gravity.

To suggest the VS models are malnourished is as absurd as saying the Dove ones are fat. The VS ones are all thin, certainly but being able to see some rib is absolutely no sign of malnourishment whatsoever. Both I and my missus are thin enough that you can see some rib showing if we're topless: neithe rof us are malnourished, in fact we eat rather more than most, we're just both active and naturally on the skinny side. Equally, although all the Dove models are on the heftier side, some more than others, they're nowhere approaching obese. It's sadly unsurprising though that 'fat fascism' is now apparently a double-headed coin thrown at people who are neither unhealthily thin nor unhealthily overweight.

And to suggest that the VS girls resemble concentration camp survivors is pretty outrageous. i mean okay, anyone can exaggerate for effect, but there's exaggeration and blatant stupidity.

In general, fat dudes are more attracted to fat chicks.

I want to disagree but I kind of agree....just seems I've seen more skinny guys with "heavy" females than "heavy" males with "heavy" females