do women like big guys?
- Thread starter the lapalminator
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm like a rabbit's foot, a horseshoe, and a heads-up penny bound together with four-leaf clovers. That's how. Yay irish jokes!
lol wut(?)tomtom94 said:
There's a direct correlation between largeness and survival? You do recognise why there is a reason why there is polymorphism represented by the vast array of human phenotypes right? Not everyone is massively built and 6' for a reason. Diet and long term Darwinism as per adaptation to local environment.
Can you honestly say that height would help you whilst spelunking in caves seeking refuge from storms, or when tracking prey through dense forest?
For example ... given a 'big guy' has reduced surface area to volume ratio, he's unlikely to deal with the heat and humidity of the tropics as well as a smaller person with a greater surface area to volume ratio.
A smaller guy is going to beable to run further, for longer, and take less time to 'cool down' than a big guy of equal health and vitality.
Well your thought is wrong. a 'Big guy' who has to cover lots of ground in a hot environment is going to be less successful than a skinny guy in the same environment.tomtom94 said:
A big guys reduced surface area to volume ratio means compared to a tall skinny guy means that the big guy will not only retain heat longer, but also store it faster. Meaning increased lethargy, higher perspiration and more time sitting down and having a breather to offset the reduced enzyme action of haemoglobin which is affected by the heightened increase of temperature in the body of which takes more time to 'cool' than the tall skinny guy.
That being said a tall skinny guy will not beable to retain the heat necessary to survive in extremely cold climates as well as a big short guy.
Early humanity occupied more diverse habitats than any other species and as such we have developed unique phenotypal differences rather than fostering evolved homogeneity of appearance and physique.
'Strength' shouldn't be measured by the physical attribute of being 'strong' ... if you measure strength by it's modern precept then it's almost a pointless exercise to compare it to survival. After all ... all the muscles in the world will not be as effective as speed, guile and agility in putting food on the fire for the tribe.
A tribal female is more likely going to be attracted to a smart, successful hunter rather than a guy with lots of useless muscle.
Being 6'3", with a shoulder width almost equal a door is what initially attracted my girlfriend. So height/size can be a factor.
In terms of weight, I know a fair few porky fellas who certainly pull good looking women. Guessing it ties into the 'security' thing.
Ultimately though it's just about confidence. And being twice the size of everyone else in the room can kinda help with the confidence, heh.
In terms of weight, I know a fair few porky fellas who certainly pull good looking women. Guessing it ties into the 'security' thing.
Ultimately though it's just about confidence. And being twice the size of everyone else in the room can kinda help with the confidence, heh.
I know it's so HARD!SimuLord said:
Urm...I do not know, but you've reminded me of what a friend quoted from a guy i've never met but is presumably "big"(no not penis-wise) and she said he said that big guys have to act nice to attract a partner because they can't rely on their looks.
For women it tends to be more down to jsut personal preference. There are extremes of either wich are not attractive but in my friendship group at least the girls tend to prefer guys who have nice arms and chest and a six-pack is always a plus, they also tend to like taller guys at least just for the comfort of that protected feeling when a bigger (either taller, or muscular or both) guy gives them a hug.
I apparently give good hugs for just this reason, free hug anyone?!
Nah, but seriously it all comes down to personal preference in the end.
I apparently give good hugs for just this reason, free hug anyone?!
Nah, but seriously it all comes down to personal preference in the end.
If you're talking about height then I think that shorter guys lose out. We lose out in a lot of areas, statistically we're paid less for a start..I blame my parents, the bastards.
more importantly, in a cold environment where food is scarce, the ability to build large body mass can be indicative of good genes in that environment. That same kenyan put into Norway would be a sad sad creature.dathwampeer said:
what we see as beautiful is almost entirely cultural. If a civilization prizes wealth over everything else, their idea of beauty could be quite grotesque compared to those who value hard work and self-sufficiency (although the hard worker would look quite grotesque to the other culture as well).. Think of practices like footbinding.. To men in that culture, the idea that that woman is completely incapable of doing ANYTHING for herself, and is basically helpless to her personal assistants (and the fact that she HAS personal assistants) is very very sexy. A guy on the frontier would look at that same practice and just think "wow, that woman wouldn't be able to help me at all" ergo, ugly, disgusting.
We psyche ourselves up about beauty, but it truly is in the eye of the beholder, and every beholder even within the same culture, is different. Noone is really so universally ugly that they could NEVER find anyone to love them.
As a big strong man myself, I can safely say...
It's still personal preference. Sure, women are generally less shallow and can still like guys with extra padding (so to speak), but from what I've seen it's rare that ladies actively pursue fat guys. They're out there though; every fetish imaginable surely is.
Also:
It's still personal preference. Sure, women are generally less shallow and can still like guys with extra padding (so to speak), but from what I've seen it's rare that ladies actively pursue fat guys. They're out there though; every fetish imaginable surely is.
Also:
http://picdump.darph.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/sisko-facepalm.jpgBaldry said:
Well actually, to be truthful, a large physique meant you 'ate quite well' ... as per the saying 'To grow fat and complacent' of which is inextricably tied to the concept of gaining large amounts of capital ... because your girth was an advertisement of your prosperity (and your lack of days without food as well as the reduced need to display agency to produce coin) in many parts of Western Europe.dathwampeer said:
Culturally speaking a lean figure in medieval Europe meant a lowly station.
Whilst obesity has been mostly stigmatized throughout history, obesity in the medieval world meant something different than it does today. Obesity was a sign of prosperity ... or at the very least old money.
Part of the reason why you have the depiction in Western Europe of jolly fat people in the old tales even up till Early Modern Era. Jolly because they could be slothful. Fat ... well.... because they were rich and never had to do anything.
As cultural attitudes changed from feudal to early nationalism, as well as the rise of the industrialists and the perception of the non-noble elite (such as the Esquires in Britain), the display of agency was seen as the means to success .. so the image of obesity changed, whilst the figure of a lean(ish) industrialist/Explorer who displayed hardship, dedication and intrepidation became a slowly evolving romantic figure of what it meant to be all you can be for the masses.
Well that's part of the reason anyways <.<
Whilst I agree that attraction may play a part in the matter, I think it is only in the very modern world whereby your assertions are correct.
Fat or thin, tall or short. From Tribal society to Early nationalist metropolitan population clusters. Women and men want someone of benefit to themselves in a social setting.
Only in the very modern era, plagued by decadence, has attraction to abstract qualities such as lots of muscle mass been relevant as a means to determine a mate and partner.
A tribal female would prefer a fast, smart and stealthy hunter over a walking wall of muscle.
Similarly in an early nationalist economy a husband or wife would be looking at social connections that would benefit both families.
We still do it today ... but I think we've grown much more decadent and as such abstract qualities are now also taken into account wqhen picking a mate. But the qualities of which you refer to have only slowly emerged in the last 800 years, whereby higher Humanity has had about 100 k years of pre feudal society by which your qualities of finding a mate wouldn't apply.
