Skinny chicks: an Evil plot to dumb down the next generation?

page: 9
53
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Phenomium
 


hi. wrong thread.


second line. to go with the first line. cause i haven't got any other comment on your post. which is a good thing, methinks.


No, it's the right place. I was responding to MissVicky on why this conspiracy and many others ARE INDEED, women
s faults. It's the right place.




posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by jonhplayer
 


i tend to agree with the poster who suggested fatty acids such as from fish (example: salmon) feed the brain, which may result in clearer thinking, not necessarily smarter thinking. my mom had advanced alzheimers, which severly clouds the mind. 12 hours after feeding her salmon, she was clear as a bell, could remember our names and carry on conversations that made sense. it probably works similarly for IQ tests and the like. clear focus can result in more correct answers to more questions, not necessarily the questions that depict high intelligence. i wonder if they weighted that in their scoring.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I knew my years of chasing 50 inch hips was really me subconsciously searching for an ideal mate to expand my capacities with. I was engaged to a 32-28-42, and eventually had a daughter together. My daughter is living proof that the hip to waist ratio plays a huge factor in intelligence!! She's a super brilliant kid!! Thankfully though, I'm no longer with her mother and have found myself a new, more wonderful and pleasant girl with 32-24-40. (I like itty bitties, I.B.T.C.!!)



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Sparkitekt
 


that's the pear shaped figure, which was extremely popular in renaissance art (see boticelli's primavera, xr.com... for an example). it was a sign of affluence.


[edit on 6-9-2010 by undo]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by kosmicjack
Size has little to do with sexiness


Nonsense !









My thoughts exactly








posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by davespanners
 


Heh...1994! Really? Just goes to show how much attention i pay to such things.

I seriously don't think i heard it mentioned until mid 2000's, ah well, not that i missed much.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
With all due respect, and I believe your OP was a bit tongue-in-cheek anyway, no plot is necessary. (Some) People do this to themselves in a materialistic, marketing culture. Just be who you are, driven in what you want to do, see a bigger picture, don't get too hung up on meaningless crap, and you will naturally meet others of like mind. Just ignore it. This is no (or at least little) effect from manipulation if it is readily dismissed and viewed in context as the crap it is.

BTW, I like the spitfire, naturally expressive, almost waifish chicks with a sort of 1920's classic look. Affectation is disgusting to me. Sure, a little bit of pageantry is fun, but only if there is not a hollow shell underneath. Plus, I also like them with some plumpness on top of the petite. I think it is really rare for anyone to truly be attracted to extremely skinny women. All men (heterosexual) like curvature, except for a rare exception. Plus, if she has a sultry confidence, that carries her in my mind, and flaws in body can be easily ignored. I don't think anyone but pop tarts and shallow, "Jersey Shore" boys are obsessed with a specific image, and as such, are easily manipulated by pavlovian marketing schemes.

Form your own conspiracy, and have babies with a fat-bottomed girl. Just make sure it is not a Kardashian, as those types of girls just feed off of the archetypical whore, and they will bite your head off after copulation, being very selfishly primal and narcissistic and almost insectoid in their mentality. Here's to fun and natural and genuine and clever and un-self-conscious fat-bottomed women everywhere. They truly do make the world go round!



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
It's attitudes such as yours that lead 15 year old girls to starving themselves because they're "too fat".


No, it's 15-year-old girls that lack observational skills, awareness, and above all, self-esteem, that make them starve themselves.

Do not try to shift the blame on to me, just because I don't sugar-coat the truth.


Originally posted by Jenna
Comparing her to a beached whale is demeaning. Calling her a fatty when she's not is demeaning. Calling her porky is demeaning.


The ''beached whale'' reference is clearly hyperbole !

Now, she is a bit fat, isn't she ?

I think she's got a beautiful face, but could do with shedding a few pounds.


Originally posted by Jenna
Talking down to any female who looks like her or wants to is demeaning.


When have I ''talked down'' to any female that looks like her ?

You're not making stuff up again, are you ?

I am just recommending that any girl that uses the example of Christina Hendricks, as an ideal body shape to aspire to, should look again, and try someone a little less - dare I say it - ''porky''.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
He means to be demeaning because he knows you will react.


I congratulate you on mastering telepathy. However, I suggest your readings are a little awry.


I post what I feel like, and if what I post is regarded by some as ''demeaning'', then so be it.

However, I don't intentionally demean anyone.


Originally posted by antonia
The funny thing here is I've seen her IRL. She's not fat. Stacked to be sure, but not fat. The women probably weighs 150 max and she carries it well. I can't hate and it's not because I'm fat. I give credit where it's due and I'll call a fat woman when I see one.


Now come off it, she carries more pounds than is generally considered attractive.

I'm not insulting her because of it; purely passing comment.


Originally posted by antonia
The language the person you responded to used should tell you everything about how small their mind is.


Ah, the classic ad hominem attack !

I find it ironic that someone passing comment on another's intellect, would use the oldest logical fallacy in the book, to try and make their snide point.

What's wrong with the ''language'' I use ?


Originally posted by antonia
They probably know little about actual aesthetics let alone what actually constitutes fat in a medical sense.


I have my own aesthetic standards, thank you very much.

Of course when everyone colloquially refers to someone being ''fat'', they are referring to the medical definition of the word.



Originally posted by antonia
I find it pointless to shame such people.


Correction. You find it impossible to shame such people, because you are unable to.


Originally posted by antonia
I doubt any 15 year old with a brain takes that guy seriously.


I'm not in to 15-year-old girls.




[edit on 6-9-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Sunsetspawn
 


You are just proving my point;

Size has a lot of relevance to the sexiness of the individual.

For example, that skinny chick is immediately not sexy, because of her unattractive body size/shape.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


Time out. Lets look at reality. The reality is TPTB are not pushing a new concept to the people.
Consider this:
Greeks had male olympians and female olympians. They had gyms and various practices for staying in shape. Its called survival of the fittest and its very old news.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
being female and meeting the criteria you set for hourglass shapes to retain additional fat, i can tell you without a moment of flinching, that the red head you posted links to, is not fat. she's large breasted but not fat, and i'll tell you the clues to look for (cause i know first hand):

1. no double chin.
2. no fatty pockets on her underarms (below her biceps)
3. no fatty pockets over her eyes
4. slender hands as well, with tapering fingers.


''Fat'' is a colloquial term to describe someone that carries a few too many pounds.

I acknowledge that she clearly isn't fat, compared to some other chicks.

She's large-breasted ( albeit fake ), but she's also got too much weight around her chest, shoulders, hips, stomach and bum.

I agree that she doesn't have any of those four signs of fatness that you mention, but that doesn't mean she's not ''fat''.


For example, my ex-girlfriend had a very nice figure, apart from the fact that she easily put weight on around her stomach.

She clearly wasn't fat, but the poor girl had such a metabolism which meant she easily put weight on around her belly !


Originally posted by undo
what you are perceiving as fat, is her voluptuousness (what a word!).


You see, I believe completely the opposite...

What you are perceiving as voluptousness, is actually her carrying too much weight.

I've encountered quite a lot of ''voluptuous'' women, but I really don't think Mrs. Hendricks can be defined, purely in that manner !


Originally posted by undo
(and that evening gown color doesn't compliment with her skin tones. it washes her out. had she worn a gown in the shade of lavendar she wore on the magazine cover, she'd look great. i'm guessing the designer considered her hair color but not her skin color, when selecting the color for her evening gown. see color theory.
)


Blah, blah. blah. Boring, girly talk.



[edit on 6-9-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


i think that's the gown itself, which is cinched oddly in the evening gown photograph. my daughter has large bones. she carries more muscle mass and weight than a smaller boned counterpart. her karate instructor said she isn't fat in the slightest, but rather, stout. so in addition to you mistranslating her voluptuousness as fat, you are also misinterpreting bone size and clothing gathers, as fat. that's not a fat lady.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 


Telling someone to "shred a few pounds" is extremely insulting and shallow.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by spikey
 


Ugh, Spikey - you are a sexist.

You only go with perfect girls - good luck finding a nice wife! (Or any wife).



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 04:02 AM
link   
The theory/study does make good sense. Although I married a trim fit woman and our daughters were both straight A students.

But this evidence is the most viable answer to Idiocracy that I have heard.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
i think that's the gown itself, which is cinched oddly in the evening gown photograph. my daughter has large bones. she carries more muscle mass and weight than a smaller boned counterpart. her karate instructor said she isn't fat in the slightest, but rather, stout. so in addition to you mistranslating her voluptuousness as fat, you are also misinterpreting bone size and clothing gathers, as fat. that's not a fat lady.


I have searched on google images for her, and she still looks overweight while wearing other dresses.

What you say about being ''big boned'' is actually true. Some people have just got bigger and thicker bones, which contribute to their natural size.

I don't know whether Mrs. Hendricks naturally falls in to that category, but she is certainly packing a couple of pounds too many.



posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 04:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by hentaiboy22
Telling someone to "shred a few pounds" is extremely insulting and shallow.


No it's not.

It's an honest appraisal of what is, and isn't, sexually attractive.

Guess what ? Human sexual attraction is extremely shallow !


If some women feel happy while being overweight, then that is of no problem to me. However, they can't complain when men are ''turned off'' by their body shape. We all know the score.

[edit on 7-9-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]





new topics

top topics



 
53
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join