do women like big guys?

[RowdyRodimus]

Yes, but not all of them.

This question is pretty open ended though, what kind of "BIG" guy are you talking about?

overweight. not totally obese

Ah, then you're fine. Get a tan and go for asian girls. I don't know why why but I seem to see hot asians with big guys every time I go into a sushi bar.
I don't know why though. Find out how that works and get back to me.

Don't even really need the tan from my experiences. I've found they like guys that can make them laugh and be goofy with in private. Especially the nerdy ones. Nerdy Asian girls are the best.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Yea I was actually going to add the obesity as a stature through medieval thing in but I decided it would be just bombarding.

When I say big I don't mean fat though. I mean large build muscular. Large skeleton. i.e. broad shoulders and the like. The traits associated with strength in the western world. That's ran as far more of a constant through our history than obesity has.

And the point about a tribal woman prizing leanness was also what I was getting at. It's entirely cultural. As someone else quoted me on. In places like Norway. A large build and even slightly chubby would have been prized because it is a quality someone in a much colder climate would want.

I think what has contributed to our, frankly bizarre idea of generic beauty has been a mix of multi culturalisation. With people from all backgrounds forming large communities near each other. And their idealisations of beauty being broadcast via media. Films, Music ect. It's created some sort of hybrid of many cultural preferences. Most of which these days can be attributed to wealth. Advertising is one of the best forms of brainwashing out there. Easily.

In the 20-21'st century. I'd say celebrities and stars can be blamed for influencing our current ideals. Much more than cultural background in some cases. Especially seeing as in the western world. Survival is practically a given. There's no need to fish for genetic traits that allude to it any-more.

Whilst you make a good point, I would counter saying that that leanness in, say, central Plains Africa would be prized not for cultural reasons .... but merely because it's simply better to be lean, agile and cunning.

Its basic survival ... the guy whose huge and bulging with muscle is much more likely to be detected, and strength is meaningless because it only takes 28 lbs of pressure per square inch to throw and penetrate a rather sharp spear half a foot into the side of a fleshy herbivore.

A lean, well toned hunter occupying half the space of a muscular behemoth like a modern bodybuilder will beable to get closer to his prey, therefore strike more accurately, therefore hunt more efficiently and successfully. In the end feeding his tribe better and therefore being seen as a favourable mate because he can provide.

It's simple pre-coin economics. The lean, agile guy is 'richer' than the bulging He-Man.

And I would still debate your qualities of muscular being seen as better in Europe. Afterall you have the rise of 'the Gentleman' (which is why I referencesd the esquires of Britain). If they were young they were characterized as lean.

During the early modern era you had a lot of nobles who wore archaic armour such as breastplates under (or over) their corselets.

For Example, King Carlos I of Espania (Charles the Fifth of Holy Roman Empire) at the birth of the Enlightenment (albeit of which had yet to truly progress past the bouyndaries of the northern citystates of what would eventually be known as Italy).

http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.s9.com/images/portraits/5506_Charles-V15000000-15580000.png&imgrefurl=http://www.s9.com/Biography/Charles-V15000000-15580000&h=459&w=354&sz=360&tbnid=sJvqFl77U4xW-M:&tbnh=128&tbnw=99&prev=/images%3Fq%3DPortrait%2Bof%2BCharles%2BV&zoom=1&q=Portrait+of+Charles+V&usg=__35zMLMIsMiy6X8OK-Ifg7P5jOzA=&sa=X&ei=uUaVTNCNC8ikcZbaraQF&ved=0CCoQ9QEwCA

As we can see his enflamed jaw (of which is exagerated as to give him even greater credibility as a inheriter-King of the Habsburg states)

He is possibility the finest examplar of power at the Birth of European dominance and colonialism.

But as we can see ... his armour archaic (as was a popular look in portraiture ... as many nobles associated themselves with the romance of the 'militarized noble' trying to recapture elements of chivalry and honour from tradition) ... but he isn't exactly a domineering figure. Despite sporting the red plume of war (gotta remember this was a particularly brutal period in European history that he lived within) his stature is refined and graceful.

http://www.wga.hu/art/t/tiziano/10/21/12charle.jpg

He's not exactly an imposing figure. To give you an idea of how eligible Charles V was ... he was the man who controlled the world's first true Superpower ... an Army in excess of 340'000 troops, at the time Europe's greatest naval force, and an empire that stretched across the world thanks to Spain's early conquests in the New World.

So I would debate your assertion that everybody in Europe tried to look tough. I don't think thats an attituide that has ever changed in some extent in the majority of males... I just don't see it as important as proving nobility. I mean Charles V could have ordered Titian to make him look better built and more fearsome, but the only thing he asked of titian was to exagerate his jaw and chin a little more in order to solidify his inherited claims in central Europe.

 

[newfiegirl 110]

I actually prefer it, to some degree. Rail thin men aren't for me. But they have to be tall enough to wear it well .

I concur. I prefer a guy with some padding. Muscles are great on a guy, but for snuggling...not so much.

 

[DefunctTheory]

I actually prefer it, to some degree. Rail thin men aren't for me. But they have to be tall enough to wear it well .

I concur. I prefer a guy with some padding. Muscles are great on a guy, but for snuggling...not so much.

I was waiting for that post.

My greatest advantage. I'm told I'm more comfortable to hug than all the teddy bears in the world combined, with a dash of fuzzy puppies.

 

[soul_rune1984]

As long as they're not obese (for health reasons) I don't really care about size. As long as they're a good person.

 

[Skorpyo]

Yes, but not all of them.

This question is pretty open ended though, what kind of "BIG" guy are you talking about?

overweight. not totally obese

Ah, then you're fine. Get a tan and go for asian girls. I don't know why why but I seem to see hot asians with big guys every time I go into a sushi bar.
I don't know why though. Find out how that works and get back to me.

O.O

*Calls tanning salon*

Breeeep... "Hello, this is..."

"APPOINTMENT! FUCKING NOW!"

OT: In my case, no. Women in Colorado seem to like scrawny, squeaky guys.

 

[BGH122]

hello escapists, so just a simple question and you people seem to be the most reasonable ive encountered

awnser plz

Women certainly prefer taller men [http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2005/08/when-women-prefer-taller-men.html].

I read something in the BPS digest that mentioned facial structure too, but it was too long ago to remember accurately.

 

[Wadders]

6' and 110... wow. I knew a guy like that... He used to date a girl that was the same height and just as skinny. I used to joke that them having sex must be like throwing a bunch of pointy, jagged rocks in a bag ad shaking them about.

I crack myself up.

Heh, I'm 6' 2", and only about 11 stone, which is about 154 in your crazy ass American way of measuring weight. Which is why I often prefer birds with a lightly more sturdier build

More cushion for the pushin' as they say

OT: as many people have probably already said, as long as you're obviously comfortable with your body type, it wont matter in some cases. Sure most girls might prefer someone with the build of a Rugby player, but it's far from totally neccessary. But I guess if you're ripped, you will get more attention from a certain type of girl.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Sure most girls might prefer someone with the build of a Rugby player

What kind of rugby player? A prop forward has a different build to a No 8/Lock who has a different build to a scrum half who has a different build to a winger.

 

[Dags90]

What kind of rugby player?

This kind:

(The naked kind, that is)

I'm sure his personality is huge, too.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I know it's an advantage that would equate to success in a certain area. That's what I'm kinda getting at. The culture see's it as attractive because it's what is necessary for their survival. So it becomes a cultural norm. That's kinda my whole point.

As for the nobility and aristocracy... Well they comprised a relatively small portion of Europe. I'd still say strength was more of a factor for most of the masses in attraction. As it automatically signals protection. Being rich and wearing fancy clothes suggests they can provide for a family in a different way. But that kind of manner didn't become common place for the public until the 17th century at the earliest. Until then it really was just the 'upper crust' that that even applied to.

Well that's the thing, you had the nobility and everybody else. Marriages were born of social, economic or political reasons.

The daughters of the peasantry were married off to the best suitors the parents could find all in the hopes that they wouldn't have to provide for them out of their limited capital.

King Charles the V was not a child born from a loving family, but a complex set of arrangements that had been planned for three generations in order to produce a series of extremely powerful, extremely wealthy inheriters.

King Charles was literally born an Emperor (and was born for the strict purpose of being the most powerful emperor of the day)

Same thing for the peasantry. The prettiest young girl would be considered a good suitor for a Child who would grow to be the inheritor of a good mill or successful farmstead. It wasn't attraction ... it was circumstantial.

The wealthy (by plebeian standards) boy gets the prettiest girl in the village. The girl gets (by plebeian female standards) a 'good' future life. Attraction didn't factor into it. Only convenience.

 

[Wadders]

Sure most girls might prefer someone with the build of a Rugby player

What kind of rugby player? A prop forward has a different build to a No 8/Lock who has a different build to a scrum half who has a different build to a winger.

Agh, I was generalising. I just mean big, well built.

I guess someone the build of Shane Williams would be preferable to someone who looks like Allen Jacobsen, but I dont know, I'm not female

EDIT:

Pics for referance -

Shane Wiliams - wing

Allan Jacobsen - prop

Happy now?

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

What kind of rugby player?

(The naked kind, that is)

Pfffft... One of the props at my old club who played in the C-grade was nicknamed 'Camel Toe'... for reasons as obvious as they are disturbing when you think about it.

 

[Roamin11]

Yes, but not all of them.

This question is pretty open ended though, what kind of "BIG" guy are you talking about?

overweight. not totally obese

Okay I'm glad I read down far enough (next time say overwieght guys) WELL:

It goes like this... Most shallow women who don't have a kink for men who are overweight probably don't like guys with a bit of gut. But, women who are looking for a soul mate will be more than willing to look past the fatty exterior and look at the guy within... Now if you are fat but a nice guy or whatever attitude they find compatible, then you?re set.

 

[Dogstile]

Seems that most women prefer men who are taller than them, if only slightly - in the same way that men tend to prefer women who are shorter. Guess it might have something to do with primal instincts... Or maybe it's just because on average, women are shorter than men, so this kind of couple is just more statistically likely.

One thing I find quite interesting is that among couples I know, tendency seems to be the shorter the girl, the taller the guy. It's like they were all aiming for a specific average height.

I am 6 feet tall.

Damn. Exactly my height. Out of curiosity how much taller would you like a bloke to be? (Yay for opportunitys to ask fellow tall people questions!)

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Ahhh you're talking about arrangements. Such as trading for land or livestock. Or even just to get into a reputable family.

Yes that did happen. But it's worth noting that wasn't the norm for everyone. Say in an entire village. Maybe 2 or 3 daughters would have been bartered off for capital or stock.

Otherwise the unfortunate folk that didn't own land would never have gotten laid.

The vast majority of a country still married based on bases urges. The sad fact of the matter is most would just have ended up together because they slept together. Wealth was and still is a very powerful aphrodisiac. But there weren't many people who fit that bill.

Well no, they weren't bartered off per se. But yes the vast majority of society ran like this. This is how people thought o.o Why do you think such romantic tales as Romeo and Juliet exist? From a modern perception we look at it and it's "ahhhh star-twixt lovers and the tragic skeins of fate" ... no.... Shakespearian plays were contemporaneous social commentaries.

Tragedy befalls those that attempt to find happiness rather than duty to one's station. World imperfect.

For example, Macbeth was a play that he performed in front of the court of King James warning them about the corruption of noble courts when you have a house divided by jealousy and officials having political passions beyond their station.

The world and relationships you speak of now are VERY VERY modern. Quite literally the last 120 years.