What Body Fat % is fat to you?

[Michael-5]

pezus said:

Chevinator123 said:

pezus said:

Would you look at that

this!^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ calling girls @ 22%+ fat is just stupid

It's a skewed view, at least. I said 30-35% would be called fat based on the pics, so it's nice to see confirmation .

@Michael-5: Yes, you seem to think that as soon as you see some fat you should be called fat. That is just not how it's done. Being fat is being overweight (and not because of muscle) and being overweight is being unhealthy. The girls at or near 20% are nowhere near being unhealthy.

I dunno, I don't like how this classification has no marker between normal and obese, and how this classification only talks about the average, and not the ideal. There is an overweight catagory in BMI, and there should be here.

Also if you read the classifications, it doesn't define the ideal health weights for a girl. I think athletic girls (20-22%) and athletic guys (10-15%) are healthy weights, and that should be the normal. People larger then that have more weight then the ideal, and are thus overweight. People with less fat then this are less then the ideal, and thus underweight.

25-30% is the average according to this chart, and according to multiple medical accosiations 36% of Americans, and 18% of Canadians are Obese (more then fat). I think the average north american is overweight, and overweight is fat. I think our culture has just grown to accept fat people, and that sickens my mind to be honest. That Capitalistic companies profit off our poor choices in diets and bad health, and that we're learning to accept it instead of fight back.

Jay520 said:

Michael-5 said:

Jay520 said:
Dpending on which picture you use...

25%-30% is when I would recommend losing weight, though I may not call them fat.
30-35% is where I would label them fat.

If you're not fat, why do you need to loose weight? Is overweight not fat anymore?

There should be a middleground between "fat" and the ideal range. There shouldn't be only an instant difference between "ideal" and "fat", since they describe two different extremes. It's a gradial spectrum. My definition of "fat" is based on a combination of health and what looks heathy. If someone's bodyfat level could potentially negatively affect their life, then I would label that person fat.

The ideal range is self-explanatory. The middleground is where a person's level of bodyfat is not harming their life, but if they lost some fat, they would look more attractive and/or be healthier.

It's all semantics.

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.