Thursday, December 20, 2007

Topfree in Scandinavia

In Sweden and Denmark there is a new movement for women to bathe topless in swim baths. They sure have my support.
The article is in Danish, but the gist is that they stage topless bathe-ins as a protest against rules demanding tops. And they seem to gather sympathy, at least in Denmark. Sweden tends to be a bit more conservative, so I don't know how the movement goes there. (Though it started there.)


Anonymous said...

It's legal here for women to go topless, but none do. I don't think that's country-wide, it's just this particular city's bylaw or something.

Monsieur Beep! said...

I particularly dislike those white stripes caused by bathing suites, where the sun has no chance to tan the skin.
Mind you, photographers: if you take photographs of models whose skin shows white stripes, I consider this highly unprofessional!
It just looks disgusting, so much worse as if actually wearing a suit. Such a nude person should avoid showing up in public.

Anonymous said...

It's funny, beep, in Brazil they love that look. I don't.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

M.B, you are not alone. Me, I don't mind much.

Cliff Prince said...

I don't mind either way -- to some people the tan-lines and pale under-skin are sexy because they display some kind of "forbidden" aspect of something, I guess.

I find that these sorts of experiments inevitably cause me to reconsider female beauty. I want to partner with a woman whom I consider "hot" (of course) like the people generally pictured in, for example, Eolake's site DOMAI. I don't tend to see women who look that good going to public bathing pools to stage topless protests. Usually the first thing I notice is the belly -- most women are wider from basically their lower rib-cage down to their knees, than any DOMAI model is. Then there are the droopy breasts. I wouldn't be seeing these bodies as "comparable to DOMAI models" except for the fact that they're posited in front of me as "here we are, look at us, deal with it." So, instinctively, I look, compare, and go "Yuck. Please don't make me look at you."

I don't mean to defend this attitude. I am not trying to say I'm "right" to have that instinct. But I do think it's natural, and normal, for me to WISH to interact (including, by visually observing) with people who are pleasing to me. And if the pleasingness isn't going to happen, then it's also "right" in a naturally oriented way for me to experience an absence of having-been-pleased.

The whole thing gets very confusing very fast. I just frankly wish I had a hot girlfriend, and I think it would all be very simple instead. :)

Anonymous said...

"They sure have my support."

Support seems to be the last thing they're looking for, Eolake :)
I'm so old, I remember when gals wore
their falsies on the outside!

- Ray.

The Dissonance said...

Joe Dick sez, It's legal here for...

Where's here again? (I must have missed the memo.)

Anonymous said...

That would be too much information. I wouldn't want one of you nut jobs tracking me down and making an example of me.

And we only wake you up for the important meetings.

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

You think that if we know your city, we can track you down based on that photo of yours?
Yeah, I can see that.

Pascal [P-04referent] said...

Uncanny! Just before logging on, I had read precisely about that in a news magazine.
The article ended by saying: "For some reason, lots of men support them." Gee, I wonder why... ;-)

Funny, me, the main thing that makes me uneasy is the nudity of circumcised men. Because it always feels like they're mutilated. Which, technically, they are.
I mean, I feel it quite reassuring that the most sensitive part of my body still enjoys its natural protection...

I fully understand the position expressed by Final. Yet I have to say I support these women, not simply because I like the idea of a pretty sight (I do), but because it's a matter of fundamental freedom. Apart from my Domai tastes, I strongly believe that prejudice against less "perfect/pretty" women is unfair.

I'm a sincere believer in these two quotes I shamelessly stole from some obscure web site:

"To be offended by the visual appearance of another person is prejudice, akin to racism. The right to exist, uncovered, should hold precedence over the right not to view this, for the objection is irrational." - Terri Webb

"Body shame, like prejudice, is not natural. It is learned from others and benefits no one." - Unknown

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

I am puzzled by why apparently most American men are circumcised, even gentiles.

Pascal [P-04referent] said...

P.S.: In my youth I used to absolutely hate the tan marks left by swimsuits. But then they designed models that precisely leave marks much more in harmony with the body's lines.

For women, at least. Nowadays, I'm being told that wearing a speedo would make me look ridiculous, "because it's totally out of fashion". But it was perfectly fine when I was 18, so WTF?!?
Are shorts a progress, then? I challenge anybody to honestly tell me that the tan marks they leave don't look just embarrassing. ):-P
Ladies, we need your support in return, okay?

Besides, I have great legs, so I resent being coaxed by Society to hide the asset they represent.

I'd love to just go "peshah!" on the swimsuit designers and arbitrary trendsetters the day naturism becomes a universal norm. I know nobody who looks uglier naked than in a swimsuit, anyway, so why bother?

The best style for both men AND women was designed 50 to 100 thousand years ago. Word life, yo!

Alex said...

There is immense pressure on the parent toward circumcising your kids. The Dr's here in the US promote sanitary reasons for doing it.

Then there is the "social" aspect. If 95% of the kids are circumcised, then your kid will be "the freak" in the showers at high school.

It's a frickin' big question you have to answer when you and you wife have just gone through 48 sleepless hours of induction and c-section. Gah! why didn't we have the internet back then?

The "evidence" presented to us before hand tipped the balance. I'd talked to people who took care of it in adulthood and were better for it, my experiences, medical advice and social pressures.

Funnily one of the few kids we know who is in mostly in tact is a Jew (I forget the story, but the didn't complete the procedure).

Pascal [P-04referent] said...

About circumcision in the USA:

"Health reasons" were brandished for decades. Like the removal of the tonsils or the appendix, which today have been proved to be in fact very useful (how unexpected!), the intact foreskin was presented as increasing the risk for penis cancer. All hollow talk, there's no risk if you maintain HALF a decent hygiene by washing from time to time.

Another more sneaky excuse was "mental health reasons": complete circumcision makes masturbation a practical problem. And, as we all know, onanism causes blindness, deafness, stuttering, psychosis, depression, impotence, Aids, warts, celibacy, blushing, sterility, and (gasp!) acne!

Circumcision is a widespread trend in the USA because a vast part of the population are brainwashed to be prudes, period.

Our Creator wasn't a complete moron, that's all I have to say. Enough "improving on perfection" already.

BTW, many American jews today are militating for the suppression of circumcision, just like slavery and the capital lapidation of blasphemers or Saturday workers are officially prehistorical practices unbefitting of a modern world:

Alex said...

I agree with Joe, I prefer a level of anonymity. I've had alumni wanting to get in touch, just because we were both ex-pats, despite graduating 20 years apart. I have contributed on sites where some of the characters are marginal, and prefer some "distance". I have an on-line friend I jokingly call my stalker, she'd found all my e-mail addresses and tried to initiate a chat session before I even had a chance to work out who she was. Kinda weirded me out a bit.

I believe in a major metro area such as the Greater Bay Area there is more than one Alex. Should be tough to find me.

Alex said...

Tan-lines. I think the idea of revealing forbidden has a great deal to do with my preference for even tans in nudes. It takes away some of the sex. Look at a final pose of a photo strip sequence, especially one with a warm smile, it is a pleasing nude. The photos before, half way out of a dress, or teasing lingerie with the flirty pout are more sexy.

So, an absence of tan lines gives a little more Eve, and less minx.

Having said that, I don't strongly object.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I, too, find the "sanitary reasons" idea a bit ridiculous, especially these days when people bathe regularly. I mean, I too am "bigger, longer, and uncut", although here circumcision is not anywhere near as common as in the U.S. and never has been.

Anonymous said...

Pascal said:

And, as we all know, onanism causes blindness, deafness, stuttering, psychosis, depression, impotence, Aids, warts, celibacy, blushing, sterility, and (gasp!) acne!

So that's what caused all that! Damn! Why didn't somebody tell me before now?!

Eolake Stobblehouse said...

"I think other people have the same problem with me! Unless Eolake is joking here and I can't tell."

It's both!
Which is interesting.

Cliff Prince said...

Pascal responded to me with:

"To be offended by the visual appearance of another person is prejudice, akin to racism. The right to exist, uncovered, should hold precedence over the right not to view this, for the objection is irrational." - Terri Webb

"Body shame, like prejudice, is not natural. It is learned from others and benefits no one." - Unknown

In theory I agree with these statements. I "get it." But then, I visit college campuses (as part of one of my jobs) and regularly see MORBIDLY OBESE young women (or men, I suppose, though the issue is not half as great) who are encouraged to continue their unhealthy lifestyles and "be proud of themselves for who they are." As though a physically unhealthy, incapable body were somehow "laudable" and as though anyone who would wish for his fellow humans to be healthy is bigoted against some. There's a make-over show hosted by a gay man soon to air here in the USA, all about how fat women are "more real" and should be "proud" of who they are.

Sitting on a couch when you should be exercising isn't something to be "proud" of. If you've driven your temple to shame, you should be ashamed of it. Sorry to be harsh, but really ...

I'm not really for anorexia. I'm not really for morbid obesity. I'm for "healthy." Thing is, my definition of "healthy" and "worthy of esteem" tends toward the medical rather than the mental, and therefore differs greatly from the current PC trend.

Oh and Pascal, I get what you're saying totally. I realize my response here is rather stridently against the two quotes. I don't mean to argue against these quotes, or your point of view, at all. I DO, however, mean to disagree with the PC police who would tell me (a) I am supposed to find unattractive women to be attractive merely because those women have mutually deluded one another about their body's worth despite medical evidence to the contrary, or (b) I'm "bigoted" because I only want a certain body type. My "want" is biological. It fuels DOMAI, among other things.

Then again, wouldn't life be a lot easier if I could find ugly to be desirable? That which others don't want, I do want, and suddenly I'm in a buyer's rather than a seller's market.

About circumcision: genital mutilation, silly practice, might really psychologically harm some folks perhaps. Recently I heard that a good friend of mine had had a circumcision done on her new son and I was stunned. She said, "Well, otherwise he'd be made fun of in the locker room." How many men's locker rooms has she been in? She was so blithe about it; to her it was like having molars removed. "We do it when he's young so he won't remember it. He hardly feels a thing." Then why does he say AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.

In the year 2007 it's a despicable practice. I think a lot of people can simply live a normal life having been circumcised, and it isn't really an issue for them; but others are suffering. Why continue it?

And back to the original subject. I think, if today's women were all as healthy as an aboriginal young human female who worked hard with her body all her early life, I probably wouldn't be unhappy with their appearance. It's seldom that a National Geographic flashing nudie disappoints, if the woman is young. It's often that a North European or North American top-free protest does disappoint, even if the woman is young. Maybe that's simply part of it -- we're gaining in undesirability. Perhaps it's a good thing, a response to world overpopulation or something? :)

Anonymous said...

Then again, wouldn't life be a lot easier if I could find ugly to be desirable?

Or if women could. then you might get some

Anonymous said...

The Greater Bay Area? Thanks for the info, my little honey muffin. And I already know what you look like from your avatar photo!
Soon I'll find you, and grab you, and kiss you, and hug you, and squeeze you, and make you turn blue with joy! That should put some color on those yellowish cheeks of yours.

Love, your Elmyra.

Pascal [P-04referent] said...

"Bigger, longer, and uncut" is always valued more, as I've verified at Virgin's media store.

Your point is perfectly valid.
Acceptance of one's appearance is normally meant when you differ from arbitrary standards, like the milky-wite skin until the 19th century, or the tall and anorexic fashion model look, or the worship for huge boobies (no matter how blatantly fake). I'll probably never say it enough: HEALTHY IS BEAUTIFUL.

A girl who's plump, within the range of normally healthy, is beautiful. A morbidly obese person is unhealthy, and although they need to overcome the vicious circle of their self-loathing which incarnates in bulimic compensation, they really should also understand that being morbid is not something desirable, and effort to return to the normal range is essential. Be it only for their health!
Also, some theoretically healthy bodies I just can't find pretty, when I see that the soul mirrored by their face is unhealthy: narcissic, neurotic, shallow, etc. That's why I've long declared that my first beauty criterium is the face. I need a healthy soul to feel attracted.

Now, a body that's been mutilated by accident or cancer, well, one can't help it, and it'll require an effort of acceptance from oneself AND from others. That acceptance is usually very clear among naturists.

Being proud of yourself no matter how you are, physically OR mentally, is the sure recipe for killing any idea of self-improvement effort, and is the pernicious propaganda of extremist "political correctness".

"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." - Douglas Adams
The same could be said about bodies. If the outer image that you project of yourself is one of serious self-neglect, it's just as if you were an unkempt stinky hobo whose clothes could stand up without your help. (And maybe even run away.)

Morbid obesity has become so widespread in the USA that PC-ness tends to decree that "whatever happens, the majority is always right, and the widespread becomes the norm, defining the new standards of normal."

"If you've driven your temple to shame, you should be ashamed of it. Sorry to be harsh, but really ..."

If you excuse Final, please remember to include me in your magnanimity then. :-)

My intention, as you've clearly understood, was not that "everybody is beautiful", just that "nudity = shame" is undefendable in itself. You may be strident, it's no problem since I didn't feel targeted. We think globally alike, expressing it differently and focusing on different elements that rub us the wrong way.
I can't help it, I like the way you think. :-)


This probably explains why children remember nothing of that period.
Amnesia is a survival mechanism! ):-P

"It's seldom that a National Geographic flashing nudie disappoints, if the woman is young."

You're quite right about the beautifying effects of an active life on the silhouette.
I tink their only problem is that a lifetime of not wearing breast support makes them sag prematurely. Living constantly topless isn't all benefits for the libido...
Or maybe sometimes it's ethnic. It seems the breast shapes in many native tribes are different from the european average. I don't know, perhaps it's lifestyle, perhaps it's genetics, or both. I saw a movie about the Himbas of Namibia, they don't have those oddly cone-shaped bosoms seen in other topless African populations like the Masai. But the age-related sagging is undoubtable.
Bras ARE useful, and not just for running. :-)

Completely off-topic, looks like our troll couldn't find a trollette during his sabbatic to decrease his pent-up frustrations.
A couple of trolls going at it A.M.M.G.A.B.R.O. (always makes me go a big rubbery one).

Cliff Prince said...

Funny how I collect the trolls ...

Anyway, thanks for your smart responses, Pascal. I'm going to be a bit more picky than you -- healthy ALONE isn't enough, for me at least, to consider a person beautiful (physically, visually speaking). The person ALSO has to have the luck of the genetic draw. A completely healthy but naturally unpleasing face and physique would be reasonably considered both healthy and not beautiful, I think.

Hannah said...

Hmm... not entirely sure it's worth opening this can of worms further...but here goes nothing...

I think people in general need to find a balance in the question of "what is acceptable?" I'd certainly find my life easier if I wasn't teased and stared at on the street and if I could find clothes at actually fit properly and that I actually like. That's what I mean by acceptance - we all have problems, be it weight, an accident, a big nose, whatever.

I get really, really sick of the term "morbidly obese". Yeah, I know I have a big health problem. Yeah, I know that there is an increased risk of heart and other diseases, plus diabetes. But constantly throwing that in my face really isn't helping. And it IS wrong for me to jump the other way and try to deal with each day as it comes, because I'm pretty sure the doctors do mean well. At least, I hope so. At the very least, I'm aware of the fact that morbidly obese isn't healthy.

I certainly can't blame everything on an eating disorder and actually refuse to. But if I were to count calories every day, I'd go nuts. I hate gyms. I try and stay active, but that's hard. You know how hard it is to see people stare when you climb out of the pool? At least I'm sure that I'm not pretty in this form, I can't accept myself as somewhat attractive. Between what I think of myself and the obvious reactions from others. You can only have such a thick skin, after all, and you can only laugh so much off. Especially when it's not actually funny.

I think you can only come so far with self loathing. It really only makes things worse, gives you more vicious circles to deal with, more things you have to fight to stay upright on a daily basis. Somebody once told me that you have to accept yourself as you are before you can actually begin to change - or if you do change, to actually be able to be satisfied with the result. I'm not entirely sure if that's 100% true, but there's certainly some truth in it. So now I do things because I want to - I dance because I want to, not because it's a form of exercise. Sure, it's good for you, but I do it because I like it. I go swimming from time to time because I like it. I take a walk because I want to move or I'm tired of sitting still. I run for trains sometimes just because I enjoy feeling my body work. And I try and watch out for binges, try and keep temptation away. I deal with it as I can, one day at a time. It feels like the world is working against me in so many ways, that I'm being told "you're ugly because you're fat" and "you won't ever be successful because of the way you look." It's just another thing to deal with. One day at a time. Work on my condition, on my weight, on my well being, however possible.

So maybe it's wrong that I've totally given up on men. After all, why set myself up to be ridiculed when I seem to be fairly self sufficient? Why be with someone when I can't even accept myself - why should they? After all, I'd be ashamed to be seen with me most of the time. Why in the world should I ever consider myself to be beautiful? Is that even possible, considering this groundwork? Or really, is it even necessary? I don't think so... deal with yourself, be yourself, be sure of yourself, I think that's a good bit of what beauty is. And if people don't think you're their form of beauty? Okay - I don't see a problem with that, that's an opinion.

There just needs to be some sort of balance between accepting everyone as they are, no matter what they look like and give them the basic respect that you'd give anyone else and realizing that no, it's not healthy. That you're quite possibly wasting part of your life by not being everything you can be. It goes both ways.

Sorry for the very long post and perhaps over sharing. I'm not trying to over share, I'm just trying to bring my own experiences to bear on this discussion.

Hannah said...

Oh, yes. And to comment on the original post - you go girls! :)

Not that I would probably dare from the get go, since I'm the one topless on the nude beach... but it would be awfully nice when those stupid straps keep sliding... :)

Anonymous said...

final your fugly why else take down your pic

Cliff Prince said...

Hannah: Oh, I think I very much DO accept "less than ideal" female bodies, and the people who come wrapped in them. What I don't accept, is the idea that I have to consider those bodies to be either (a) beautiful merely because they exist, or (b) interesting to me in a sexual manner when they aren't. It's propositions (a) and (b) that I disagree with.

In fact, I sometimes used to get myself into trouble by treating people with respect in every direction. Including unattractive young women, I'd actually speak with them, respect their opinions, let them have equal say on group projects, that sort of thing. This inadvertently sent the signal to these women that I ALSO desired them romantically or sexually. I did not, and the prime reason was that their bodies and/or faces were not appealing to me in a romantic or sexual manner. Thus, I became a de-facto sexist for having "judged" them to be unworthy "only" because of something "shallow."

Men who had not treated them with respect in the first place, thus, got more "points" from the greater group at large. Me, I listened and paid attention and accepted their views and thus accidentally led them astray, so I got treated as a "jerk." I did much worse than the men who thought, "She's fat and ugly, why should she be allowed to function in our group project at all?" Those men rejected AT THE OUTSET the unattractive women's opinions on the basis of the fact that the women were unattractive. I on the other hand had the sense to reject their bodies for what their bodies were like, while accepting their opinions on the basis of what their opinions were like. Hyopcritical humans that they were, the unattractive women were angrier at me for treating them with respect even though I didn't want to fuck them, than they were at the callous jerks who didn't even treat them with respect in the first place.

Over time I learned to ameliorate this acceptance of mine. Now when I respect someone's opinion but notice that she might be getting the wrong message about my eventual interest (or lack there-of) in her romantically or sexually, I make sure to try to subtly disabuse her of any potential misapprehensions. I hint about my last girlfriend the super-model; or my addiction to internet porn, at least! :) It is indeed part of my communicative responsibilities to NOT fool people (whether desirable to me or not) into thinking I'm interested when I'm not, so even if the unattractive ladies somehow got the wrong idea from an absence of evidence, merely in the context of me being a decent dude, nevertheless it's up to me to try to keep problems from happening next time.

I do my best. Nobody's perfect at human interaction. I'm probably one of the weaker performers in that field. But it points out an interesting conundrum in our society. I personally would wish to feel "allowed" to judge bodies on the basis of those bodies. If a woman's body is hot to me, I want to be free to consider her body to be sexually alluring. Yet somehow, this is more offensive than believing that if she's ugly, she must also be stupid.

I'm well aware of the many pitfalls in these arrangements. I'm not saying that female people ought not go top-free. I'm all for THEM making choices for THEMSELVES. If a woman wishes to behave a certain way, and that behavior in no manner influences my own wellbeing, then I fervently believe she has a right to performing that behavior whenever she chooses. What I'm arguing for, is not a curtailing of top-free behavior.

Rather, I'm arguing for my right to choose my own desires. I don't have to find a body to be beautiful merely because it's human. If the body is an ugly human body, then it's just ugly, period. Male or female. That's a fact. Our politically correct world quite often wishes to contradict that fact. "You're not supposed to judge people negatively" the PC police say. Or, "You're sexist if you think a skinny woman is more physically attractive than this NORMAL woman" (and they show a picture of normal that could only have ever been the norm after the late 20th Century in the developed West because of the obesity it depicts).

"Normal" means ... what humans were born to be. And that means, almost too skinny. That's where we're the healthiest, have the best immune systems, live the longest, accomplish the most tasks both physical and mental, get the most out of life. AND look the best to potential mates. There's a reason for that.

"Normal" does NOT mean ... that which you see on the street most of the day. Especially not in North America.

So, I see this new television show in which a gay man does a "make over" for a rather fat young woman. He wants to teach her to "accept her for herself" and "be proud of who you are." I say, bollocks. BE EMBARRASSED about who you are. CHANGE IT. Lose weight, develop an interest in exercise, learn to LIKE exercise (and if you don't already LIKE it, that's because you're SICK; all humans enjoy using their bodies to their fullest potential, it's a birthright and a natural instinct!). Sure, be proud of what you can accomplish, and sure, don't let the skinny-model advertisements make you feel worthless. But also, don't just get some facial cosmetics, buy a new dress, wear spiky heels, and then expect me to tell you that you're sexy. If you're overweight, you'll only be sexy after you LOSE WEIGHT.

Simple concept. Not something the PC world wants to accept as truthful.

Anonymous said...

Final's so ugly he could be a modern art masterpiece.

Final keeps reversing himself - any time anyone calls him on anything, he changes his stance and says "no, this is what I really meant".

What a spineless goon.

Hannah said...

Perfectly clear, Final Identity. Also, very interesting to hear the points from another side.

You say that "by being the good guy" the women tend to start getting romantic interests. I do wonder if that's not because there's finally a guy they think is willing to accept them for what they are - pretty or not - and that they react like any other woman would. The only reason I never let it happen is because it's work and there's professional boundries. Though personally, I know I do better once I've proven I'm a useful part of the project group and do have an intelligent part to play and that people aren't going to look at me weird because 1. I'm a woman and 2. I'm not exactly representative.

Hmm, ok, enough rambling. Cool that you do actually respect their opinions and realize that looks doesn't equal intelligence.

Just out of curiosity - what do you say about those people with an eating disorder or hormonal problems? Do you expect them to get up off their fat *** so that they can get in shape and be more pleasing to the rest of society?

I get the idea - and I may very well be wrong - that the whole thing kind of offends you, this entire discussion. Or even the fact that the discussion could/need even take place.

Cliff Prince said...

There are certainly people who have a certain set of life circumstances which preclude them from having a healthy body. Just like someone who contracts cancer through no fault (or even through fault, come to think of it!) of their own, I wouldn't disparage them for their appearance and lack of hair after chemotherapy. They didn't pick the cancer! So too with someone who genuinely has a hormonal imbalance. I'd have to think of them as someone with medical issues.

But really, that's beside the point. I hope I would have seen a large person, concluded he or she probably had valid opinions, as I hope to do nowadays anyway, and then LATER come to understand about the medical condition. Any modification to a position of negative judgment which the medical information might have caused, would have been unnecessary, because I wouldn't have taken that negative judgment in the first place! (Or, at least, I would hope so.)

Now, if you're asking whether or not I'd be interested in dating a large woman, if she did have a "good sound medical reason" for being large? No.

That's because what sort of person I'm interested in dating, is based partly on what size that person is. Not on whether or not her size is "legitimate" or "excusable" or "based on laziness or medical condition." Merely, what the size IS. In itself. To put it bluntly -- sexual allure is important (to all human heterosexual males), and size contradicts allure. (There are a few "sexy but big" women; they are few and far between, and generally bigness is diametrically opposed to sexiness. Cf. DOMAI.)

I once knew a young woman. She was someone who was not of interest to me, but I could readily see how, if she were someone else's type, he'd probably find her attractive. She "worked it" nicely, to an adequately subtle degree, without excess, and was generally a happy balanced person.

But. She also kept on claiming that she ran in marathons and regularly finished quite successfully. In the 3:45 range. Ridiculously fast, she said she ran. And yet she didn't. Anyone who met her could instantly see this fact. She wasn't lanky at all, she had no muscle tone, she hated going to gym, she was never out and about with running shoes on. I asked her about this propensity to lie, and her answer quite stunned me.

"Men like women who are athletic." I guess she did not understand, that the STATEMENT that she is athletic didn't really mean ANYTHING to a man. The thing a man likes about an athletic woman, is her lithe supple BODY. The ACTUAL FACT of muscularity (to a reasonable degree) and youthful fitness (to an appropriate degree) and so on. She actually had not understood, that it wasn't all about SAYING what you "liked to spend time on." It's not about whether or not we approve of your HOBBY. It's about whether or not we LIKE YOUR BODY.

Her mistake gave me an amazing little insight into the miscommunications that happen between the genders. "My goodness!" I thought to myself, "If a bright woman like this thinks that the only thing that men want in a woman who runs marathons, is the fact that she knows the latest numbers of the Kenyan national running team, what will she think of next!" Really, to her it was like model trains. "I thought men would like me more if I showed an interest in the things they say they want."

No no, not TALKED about showing an interest. LOST WEIGHT by actually TAKING an interest. One is just blather, the other is REALITY.

I'm often surprised by one particular type of language often used larger women who dislike the fact that men reject them because of their size. The women say, "I want the man to know the REAL me." Your fat is real, honey. The FANTASY version of you, which is vivacious and outgoing and living life at large, DOESN'T EXIST because you sit on the couch eating Ho-Ho's and watching "Oprah." The REAL ME is exactly and precisely the person whom he is rejecting. Really.

For me, the rejection takes place only (I hope) in terms of access to my bedroom. The rest of it generally shouldn't matter. Good at work? Great, we'll work together. Great cook? Fine, we'll cook together, have a dinner party. Funny? OK, then, we'll share a laugh. Not hot looking? Then I don't think of her as hot looking, and therefore I do not want to bed her. It's a 1:1 equation. Very straightforward. I'm constantly surprised at how difficult women seem to want to make it.

Looks hot = is considered hot = we want to have sex with her.

How much more simple could it get?

Hannah said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Hannah said...

You're right, it's really not that complicated.

It's how you feel about yourself, how healthy you are, genetics, the person looking in the first case, etc. When looking for a mate, people are going to look for their definition of beauty, whatever that happens to be; and no, generally, overweight isn't the image most people have of their ideal mate. It's not healthy to be overweight and it shouldn't be something you accept as being a part of you for the rest of your life - your body is malleable. It's something that you can do something about, you just have to figure out what works for you as a person.

Sorry guys, for letting this get so personal. It's just a topic that really does cut close to the bone for me. Still, an interesting discussion and very useful for adding another perspective.

Monsieur Beep! said...

Isn't it sad, this "body competition"? Only: it's one of the cogs which makes the evolution machine work. Knowing this, why bother? You don't have to be among people when you want to do good to your body, be it fat, skinny, or normal (standard?). There're lots of places where you can enjoy how your body feels, in the woods, at a remote pond or so.
But then there's the yearning for the other sex, that's where it starts all over again. Evolution's to be blamed. But we know...

Being at the skinny end of the competition scale, I know what I'm talking about.

Anonymous said...

Final once again had taken a large number of words to say nothing at all.

Anonymous said...

Thank you so much for Final Identity's selfless support to the economy.

Your check is in the mail. Dear friend.

P.S.: The wife said to come have dinner with us on NY's Eve. We're counting on you!

Pascal [P-04referent] said...

I do have a few trolls myself.
You know, from that period in the Eighties when the little plastic hairy rood nood things were everywhere.

"Mojo, baby, yeah, let's shag!" - (Some sex-symbol from the early Eighties)

WHAT can of worms? :-)

From your photo, which shows enough, I doubt that you are in the "morbidly" obese category, which is, in layman's terms, "so obese, it makes the obese look slim". Way beyond rubenesque. As wide as they are tall. With "clear and present danger" to the health, beyong mere risk statistics. A BMI of 40 and beyond. That's DOUBLE the excess weight defining obesity. (So hurry and calculate yours before you jump to conclusions!)
You don't watch much Jerry Springer, obviously.

Rejection of the politically correct speech "everything is beautiful and proud" is one thing. Hurtful remarks are the other extreme, and all extremes are bad. [PC-ness was an extreme response to daily insensitive rudeness.] An excessively poor self-image destroys the motivation needed to make efforts. And sometimes, very intense efforts are paramount for one's survival. My aunt's latest BF dropped dead one evening while peacefully having dinner. At 40. She wasn't TOO devastated, because she had seen it coming.

What really counts, is to be informed, and to do your best. Not to judge or be judged. Anorexia scares me, but those peole need my help, not my adding rocks on their burdened backs.
When I mention the beauty appeal of mental health, I also mean that people comforting themselves by putting others down are ugly. (Ugly as a troll, you could say...) You'd be surprised at the visual appearance of some of the women I find attractive.

"Somebody once told me that you have to accept yourself as you are before you can actually begin to change"

That's zenly stating the obvious, young gasshopper. Auuuuummmmm!...
Or, to put it in Western terms: "Why should I try to change? I'm not like that anyway. And talk to the hand." Self-honesty: a rare treasure. The corner stone of any happiness.

"So now I do things because I want to"

Forcing onto yourself something you hate is the best way to soon give up!

"So maybe it's wrong that I've totally given up on men."

I'd say it is. Men who can look and see beyond the initial appearance seem to be rare, but I'm sure I'm not the only one on the planet! (I need to believe it, for the survival of my modesty. ;-) You probably shouldn't expect to meet a different hunky Prince Charming every other day, but don't consider yourself dead and buried just yet, either. Because you're not, not until YOU start believing it. Like that "nothing to fear but fear itself" expression, see?

"After all, why set myself up to be ridiculed when I seem to be fairly self sufficient?"

Um... just be careful to remain honest with yourself. Sometimes, you'll convince yourself you're self-sufficient, while in reality you're just sheltering in the lesser-seeming of two unhappinesses. That's only a half-solution.

"Why be with someone when I can't even accept myself - why should they?"

Because sometimes our harshest judge is ourself! I think this may be something of an unconscious confession here: you're still at odds with who and what you are today. You "don't accept yourself". And you're maintaining the self-loathing vicious circle. This is just as detrimental as denial.

"Why in the world should I ever consider myself to be beautiful?"

Hey, you can "not be beautiful" without being ugly either! Why are people so allergic to the idea of being rather neutral? The planet's chock-full of average people.
I have an aunt who's undoubtedly overweight, but quite far from "morbidly obese". She's also a very happy person, and makes SOME effort weight-wise, but not too much. I'm positive she's much healthier that way than if she looked like a constantly grumpy Claudia Schiffer, from following a strict and stressful diet. Her mind is healthy, and her body's still in the okay range.
If you ARE in the obese range, and manage to return to the "simply overweight" one, remember there should be lots of men who'll find you markedly more interesting than the average American big mamma.
Do you have any idea how exasperating it is to live with a perfectly slender woman who deprives herself of any and all pleasure in life? Just follow your common sense. Nobody's honestly perfect, anyway. Except liars and steroid users.
Be healthy, and be happy. It's that simple. You know how much effort you can reasonably make successfully. Do it and be content with that. Any improvement IS good news, and a valuable personal accomplishment.
This applies generally, not just to Miss Hannah here, of course. Honesty -it works both ways-, and sense.
The end.

"I hint about my last girlfriend the super-model; or my addiction to internet porn, at least! :)"

I think you have a better chance of being convincing with the latter. People will more readily believe somebody to be like them.

"what do you say about those people with an eating disorder or hormonal problems?"

For hormonal imbalances, there's no debate: they need specific treatment, otherwise it's very likely to become dangerous fast. It may not make them *beautiful* of slim, but definitely more healthy, and therefore more optimistic, hence more appealing.

As for eating disorders, well, I think they can be put on the same level with drug addictions: it's a behavioral problem that BECOMES a medical issue. If I'm upset that I got dumped and start stuffing my face with sweets all day long, sure, there are medical solutions, but it's not something that sneaked up on me without my having a say, either. It's not like cancer.
Any eating disorder that doesn't originate from a brain lesion is behavioral in origin. And behavior implies one's responsibility. It's not as if overweight people all had a psychosis, which is a fully medical pathology. Smoking, alcoholism, heroin... Lack of willpower and/or intelligent caution, one must assume the choices made as adults, or give up their right to vote.

Naturally, we are far from equal against weight gain. Especially because of raw genetics. But we are all dealt our own hand from the gene pool, it's never perfect, and we have to deal with it our whole lives. Show me ONE person who was born with the favor of all the gods. There's no such beast. Perfectly healthy, beautiful, smart, sensible? A silly myth. Imperfect is our nature, dealing with it is our destiny.
I assume my own little physical shortcomings, because I have to. I owe it to myself, and have little other choice but to give up and blame the Government. I wasn't born with any really serious genetic defect or pathology, so I consider I'm normal, on the slightly lucky side, and I'm thankful for that. For the rest, efforts await me. And you. And him, and her.

It may take LOTS of courage sometimes. But hey, do you have anything in your schedule, that's more important than improving your life?

"It's just a topic that really does cut close to the bone for me."

Hmm... Either it cuts very deep, or your bones really aren't very thickly wrapped!
(See? What did I tell you? :-)

Monsieur Beep stated the obvious...
"Being at the skinny end of the competition scale, I know what I'm talking about."

Your avatar photo already revealed that, you know.
You're all skin and bones, young man, you should eat more.
And perhaps start shaving that facial fuzz, hmmm?

Monsieur Beep! said...

Whoooahh - this is comment # 39 or so, even beats any post dealing with religion, politics, sex - amazing.

Sensitive Pascal said: You're all skin and bones, young man, you should eat more.
Pascal these are exactly the words I had to listen to over and over again during my younger years, spoken even in my closest family. "Mirror mirror on the wall - Am I really like what they say I am?" and I twisted and turned to find some good aspects, but the outside insinuations always won.
When I look back, most of the objections were made from a point of view of persons who were a bit bigger than I was, thus shifting the point of normality a bit to the bigger side.
I'm cured today, mainly because of a very nice comment from a wise argentinian lady which she made to me some 20 years ago: "don't worry, some day they will envy your beautiful slender body."
Now, in my fifties, her prophecy has indeed come true!!.
Now I love my slender body, I even have been doing some nice self portraits during the last years mainly to gain self-confidence, which I will publish at flickr some day, after digitalising the slides.

It's the same with "big" people. Their smiling face is ALL that counts, and big people CAN laugh, making the belly shake!

Cliff Prince said...

I know plenty of "big" people who can't laugh at all, and plenty of "small" people who can. I think it's a natural human instinct to give someone "credit" for one thing if they happen to be failing at another -- but I like to resist that temptation. For example, we sometimes think that blind people necessarily sing well. But they don't necessarily. SOME musicians who are brilliant at music are also blind. That doesn't mean either (a) bad eyesight means better musical skills or (b) all people with bad eyesight have any characteristics in common other than their level of eyesight. But we persist, we feelbe humans, in assuming that a lack in A must mean a surplus in B.

Anonymous said...

Final, you are a special kind of stupid.

Anonymous said...

"big people CAN laugh, making the belly shake!"

HO! HO! HO! That is so true!

Anonymous said...

I have yet to meet a special kind of troll.
A first-year poking his amateurish wand up their nose is enough to make them hopelessly lost. All brawl, no brain. And the head down the drain.
All right, actually Ron sent a drain pipe UP the troll's head. But it made little final difference when it had a toilet for a hat. (Giggles!)
The memory was well worth those five house points.