Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was just watching the NCAA tournament with some buddies and this subject came up, as there was a waitress that was on the bigger side, that a few of us found to be quite attractive. I have always thought that a woman's shape is more important than here size. The waitress that we were staring at was probably around 5-8 180lbs. She had really great curves and a pretty face. I think some of my buddies were afraid to admit that our waitress was attractive as they were making jokes about her backside and saying that she was too big.
what is your opinion on this?
i think that if a girl has big jugs, she can overcome a certain amount of being overweight. the bigger the jugs, the more fat she can overcome. but i think there is a point where even beachball sized hooters arent going to erase the fat gut, double chin, bloated face and mashed potato legs that she has.
Pulled up some pics. I have to agree with JJ, as there were some very plain jane pics amongst to model posed ones. If I saw her on the street I would probably not recognize her.
The poll is more favorable than I thought it would be.
Pulled up some pics. I have to agree with JJ, as there were some very plain jane pics amongst to model posed ones. If I saw her on the street I would probably not recognize her.
The poll is more favorable than I thought it would be.
i think the poll needs to specify how overweight we are talking about.
I don't really think so, considering how many posts we've seen categorically insisting that being overweight at all is terrible.
ok, so what exactly is "weight"? people probably have their own definition of what is considered the right weight. i would imagine there has to be some cushion, even if its only 5-10 pounds, of whats a decent weight to be.
Last edited by CaptainNJ; 03-28-2013 at 04:00 PM..
The "official" measure is the Body Mass Index, which I think is deeply flawed.
On a similar note, I've noticed that the word "obese" has a connotation of being a huge fat person, but on the BMI it starts at 30, which really isn't that big.
The "official" measure is the Body Mass Index, which I think is deeply flawed.
On a similar note, I've noticed that the word "obese" has a connotation of being a huge fat person, but on the BMI it starts at 30, which really isn't that big.
its definitely flawed, but there is enough room there to cover most people so that if they are overweight, they are probably pretty chunky. i know that people who develop a lot of muscle mass dont fit right with BMI but im not sure about other groups with issues.
i used my wife as an example. she currently fits in at normal weight and is high for her historically. but still she would need to add another 22 or so pounds before she would fit into the overweight group (and thats almost 20% more bodyweight).
ok, so what exactly is "weight"? people probably have their own definition of what is considered the right weight. i would imagine there has to be some cushion, even if its only 5-10 pounds, of whats a decent weight to be.
That's true, and there are always going to be people who think anything above being super thin means automatically fat. I mean, I got called fat by a few guys when I was in the 120 lb range at 6'1. I have wide hips and wore a size 11/13 at that weight so by their measure, since I wasn't a size 2, I was fat.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.