Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Health & Body › Am I skinny normal or fat?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Am I skinny normal or fat? - Page 7

post #91 of 96
7/12/11 at 10:07am
^ I like you.
Reply
Reply
post #92 of 96
7/12/11 at 11:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond23 View Post
You are so fucking wrong. I'm not one to get in the middle of an internet pissing match, but your cockiness will make it my pleasure to destroy you.

Maybe to an artist (i.e: the person who made those sculptures) the ideal male body has not changed. But as far as society is concerned it has changed many times.

There was a time around the 1800's when being slightly overweight was seen as an attractive trait; it meant you were wealthy enough to eat well. The whole six pack thing didn't come into play until fairly recently, it was a movement started with farmers and other laborers who worked hard and thus developed fit bodies.

It has changed in women as well, look at the bombshell pinup girls of WWI and contrast them to models today, and what is currently seen as attractive.

To say "ideals" haven't changed in thousands of years is just plain ignorant. However, that wasn't even the argument here. He was simply stating that with todays growing obesity rate in the states, the OP would probably be considered normal, comparatively.



So, it would seem you are wrong. On both counts.

if chubby is normal, doesn't mean he's not a fucking chubby
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 96
7/12/11 at 1:37pm
I'd like to note that perceptions of attractiveness vary a lot between time periods. For example, from late 1800s through the early part of the 20th century, having tan skin used to be the sign of a laborer, rather than being associated with people who had must leisure time. This changed, to a large degree, because of the group of glamourous American ex-pat writers who spent time on the French Riviera for summers (see Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and co.)

You've merely picked 2 isolated examples that more ore less fit your thesis, and even then, it's not very compelling. The musclebound guy was probably more exciting to the Romans, than to the Ancient Greeks, who were really more interested in symmetry.

And this is just taking into account the vast generalizations. Me, I don't find your example of the muscle bound guy very compelling at all - nor, honestly, do most women I know. Their ideal would be much closer to the leaner body of the Greek athletes, triathletes, etc... I've never wanted to be musclebound, though I'd love to be super athletic.
Reply
Reply
post #94 of 96
7/12/11 at 3:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pebblegrain View Post
if chubby is normal, doesn't mean he's not a fucking chubby
+1
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post
I'd like to note that perceptions of attractiveness vary a lot between time periods. For example, from late 1800s through the early part of the 20th century, having tan skin used to be the sign of a laborer, rather than being associated with people who had must leisure time. This changed, to a large degree, because of the group of glamourous American ex-pat writers who spent time on the French Riviera for summers (see Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and co.) You've merely picked 2 isolated examples that more ore less fit your thesis, and even then, it's not very compelling. The musclebound guy was probably more exciting to the Romans, than to the Ancient Greeks, who were really more interested in symmetry. And this is just taking into account the vast generalizations. Me, I don't find your example of the muscle bound guy very compelling at all - nor, honestly, do most women I know. Their ideal would be much closer to the leaner body of the Greek athletes, triathletes, etc... I've never wanted to be musclebound, though I'd love to be super athletic.
First of all, of course I was generalizing. Secondly, I could have posted a picture of say Lance Armstong who is most definitely not a body builder (actually the picture I posted is of Gregg Plitt who is a model, not a pro body builder) and is still far closer to the Greek statues than the OP is. In fact the difference between the OP and Lance and a Greek statue is far greater than Lance and a Greek Statue. Also, the Greeks of the Classical Age were obsessed with their bodies, especially the men. They would work out continuously, shave their body constantly and try to look as good as possible, a trait that the Romans copied (the Etruscans, from whom the Romans 'descended' were not like this at all). Anyways, this is a complete left fork of the OP's question, and it really doesn't matter what 'normal' is. What matters is how to get the OP into better shape.
Reply
Reply
post #95 of 96
7/13/11 at 3:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgm9128 View Post
Even cleverer. We call it rocket sometimes as well, but I hadn't even though of that. What a delicious neologism. I hope you don't mind I use the term, myself.
Feel free.
Reply
Reply
post #96 of 96
7/15/11 at 11:45pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy View Post

I'd like to note that perceptions of attractiveness vary a lot between time periods. For example, from late 1800s through the early part of the 20th century, having tan skin used to be the sign of a laborer, rather than being associated with people who had must leisure time. .

Plus cultural differences. Not all countries like the same thing.

Factories killed the pasty look. With every wage slave stuck inside the well off decided it was better to not be. To a certain extent we're swinging back.

It's the same thing with BF levels. Being chubby used to equal well off. Today it means trailer park. Being in shape means you can afford the time and cost of a gym or even a trainer.

The guy is skinny fat. If he was 80kg he'd need a bra. No way he's that heavy.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Lifestyle › Health & Body › Am I skinny normal or fat?