Jay520 said: Michael-5 said: I agree, mostly. I think people who are just slightly overweight are curvy. Girls can still be good looking curvy, but they don't have athletic, ideal bodies, so they are overweight. I think your definition of fat is what I would call obese. If you're so overweight where it's causing you to develop health problems, then that's a serious health issue, and more then just appearance. --- Anyway, these pictures are largely from an article which talk about the "normal" BFP. Normal is clearly above Ideal, and I was curious to see if people accept this. I know I don't, and it's hard for most people to accept my point of view because most people have a "normal" body wieght, which I consider to be overweight, since it's more then the ideal. I think everyone with a solid mental capability should have an ideal body image. Why can't people? Why do people over-eat? I say this as someone who eats less then a girl 2/3rd my size, with a slow metabolism, and no problems staying skinny. I don't mind if people want to be in the "normal" or accepted body fat range, but I would like them to accept that they are overweight, even if it's only slightly. Curvy isn't bad, more cushin for the pushin as they say. "fat", "overweight", etc. They are just labels with no inherent, precise meaning. You can label people what you like as long as it's not obviously inaccurate. As a society, we should accept any weight that doesn't cause health problems.

As long as people keep their opinions to themselves, I think everything is fine.

I would never go up to a girl who is curvy, overweight, fat, etc and tell her that, and they can't read minds so it doesn't really matter. With guy friends I will try to encourage them to loose weight when a) it causes health problems, b) affects their ability to pick up women. I encourage all my overweight friends to work out with me, I push them to get skinny, they push me to bulk up (since bigger people have more natural strength).

However I disagree on what should be the accepted normal weight.

 I think the accepted normal weight should be "healthy", not "not unhealthy." Are these the values that we're trying to pass on? People should strive to be healthy, both mentally, physically, and social, not stive to be not unhealthy, but it's your opinion so who am I to tell you that you're wrong?

---

As an anaology, I want a couple to be a great couple, with romantic dates, great talks, and a good sex life. What you want is a couple that just "works" but doesn't have to work particularly well.

Michael-5 said: Jay520 said: Michael-5 said: I agree, mostly. I think people who are just slightly overweight are curvy. Girls can still be good looking curvy, but they don't have athletic, ideal bodies, so they are overweight. I think your definition of fat is what I would call obese. If you're so overweight where it's causing you to develop health problems, then that's a serious health issue, and more then just appearance. --- Anyway, these pictures are largely from an article which talk about the "normal" BFP. Normal is clearly above Ideal, and I was curious to see if people accept this. I know I don't, and it's hard for most people to accept my point of view because most people have a "normal" body wieght, which I consider to be overweight, since it's more then the ideal. I think everyone with a solid mental capability should have an ideal body image. Why can't people? Why do people over-eat? I say this as someone who eats less then a girl 2/3rd my size, with a slow metabolism, and no problems staying skinny. I don't mind if people want to be in the "normal" or accepted body fat range, but I would like them to accept that they are overweight, even if it's only slightly. Curvy isn't bad, more cushin for the pushin as they say. "fat", "overweight", etc. They are just labels with no inherent, precise meaning. You can label people what you like as long as it's not obviously inaccurate. As a society, we should accept any weight that doesn't cause health problems. As long as people keep their opinions to themselves, I think everything is fine. I would never go up to a girl who is curvy, overweight, fat, etc and tell her that, and they can't read minds so it doesn't really matter. With guy friends I will try to encourage them to loose weight when a) it causes health problems, b) affects their ability to pick up women. I encourage all my overweight friends to work out with me, I push them to get skinny, they push me to bulk up (since bigger people have more natural strength). However I disagree on what should be the accepted normal weight.  I think the accepted normal weight should be "healthy", not "not unhealthy." Are these the values that we're trying to pass on? People should strive to be healthy, both mentally, physically, and social, not stive to be not unhealthy, but it's your opinion so who am I to tell you that you're wrong? --- As an anaology, I want a couple to be a great couple, with romantic dates, great talks, and a good sex life. What you want is a couple that just "works" but doesn't have to work particularly well.

I think there's confusion on the term "accept" here. Of course we should always *strive* for the best. I agree with that. I disagree that we shouldn't *accept* everyone who is not the best. You are saying we should reject - the opposite of accept - people who are not the best, or ideal. I disagree, I want people to be the best, but the only people I would actually reject are those who are unhealthy. I would accept everyone who is not unhealthy, even if they aren't at an ideal weight.

The problem in your analogy is that a relationship's purpose is to love someone, be romantic with, have deep talks with, etc. at the expense of time, commitment, energy, etc. So of course a relationship that doesn't accomplish these goals is flawed from the core and may have more costs than benefits. The body on the other hand does not have such purposes. Unless you're an athlete, the only purpose of your body is to allow you to function productively and keep you alive and healthy. If your body accomplishes these goals, then I would accept that body, though I would want you to be better.

Define "skinny". Skinny used here usually has s negative connotation which usually means minimum muscle and minimum fat. If that's what you mean, then I agree with your friends to gain some muscle. Nothing like a bodybuilder or anything, but a bit toned with some muscle. That's just me though. If you are healthy, I will accept you.

Jay520 said: Michael-5 said: As long as people keep their opinions to themselves, I think everything is fine. I would never go up to a girl who is curvy, overweight, fat, etc and tell her that, and they can't read minds so it doesn't really matter. With guy friends I will try to encourage them to loose weight when a) it causes health problems, b) affects their ability to pick up women. I encourage all my overweight friends to work out with me, I push them to get skinny, they push me to bulk up (since bigger people have more natural strength). However I disagree on what should be the accepted normal weight.  I think the accepted normal weight should be "healthy", not "not unhealthy." Are these the values that we're trying to pass on? People should strive to be healthy, both mentally, physically, and social, not stive to be not unhealthy, but it's your opinion so who am I to tell you that you're wrong? --- As an anaology, I want a couple to be a great couple, with romantic dates, great talks, and a good sex life. What you want is a couple that just "works" but doesn't have to work particularly well. I think there's confusion on the term "accept" here. Of course we should always *strive* for the best. I agree with that. I disagree that we shouldn't *accept* everyone who is not the best. You are saying we should reject - the opposite of accept - people who are not the best, or ideal. I disagree, I want people to be the best, but the only people I would actually reject are those who are unhealthy. I would accept everyone who is not unhealthy, even if they aren't at an ideal weight. The problem in your analogy is that a relationship's purpose is to love someone, be romantic with, have deep talks with, etc. at the expense of time, commitment, energy, etc. So of course a relationship that doesn't accomplish these goals is flawed from the core and may have more costs than benefits. The body on the other hand does not have such purposes. Unless you're an athlete, the only purpose of your body is to allow you to function productively and keep you alive and healthy. If your body accomplishes these goals, then I would accept that body, though I would want you to be better. Define "skinny". Skinny used here usually has s negative connotation which usually means minimum muscle and minimum fat. If that's what you mean, then I agree with your friends to gain some muscle. Nothing like a bodybuilder or anything, but a bit toned with some muscle. That's just me though. If you are healthy, I will accept you.

I could post a funny picture saying Prepare your A**s, just for the bold, but....it's NSFW.

No reason to recject "curvy" girls, they can still be hot, and personality is the most important thing, lets not forget that.

When I say "accept" I mean accept them as normal weight. Normal shouldn't be defined by the average weight, which has ballooned in the last few decades because of consistantly lower fast food quality. Normal should be defined as the weight people would weigh with a proper diet and exercise, like they would have been 10,000 years ago, in nature.

Just because a large portion of people are over-eating, and under-exercising, doesn't mean that the normal healthy weight of people should increase proportionatly too. 50 years ago, people were a lot skinnier, and I think 50 years ago, the accepted normal was also a lot skinnier.

---

As for your definition of skinny, I disagree. I feel that nowadays people want to be skinny, and being skinny has a healthy conotation because noadays skinny is 18-20% BFP, which would have only been normal decades ago. My point is, just because people are getting bigger, normal weights shouldn't increase proportionatly. If 20% BFS was normal 50 years ago, and for hundreds of years before that, that should still be considered normal.

P.S. Not sure if that skinny comment was directed towards me, I don't think I'm skinny, I'm about 13-14% in comparision to those pictures. I just want more defined abs, lol, but who doesn't?