# Eat a sandwich! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 3, 2006, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758 "2006-02-03T00:01:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/141 "2006-02-04T06:08:30Z")
> [@jakeline](#): > > I’m being wooshed here, aren’t I? This is a joke, right? You can’t POSSIBLY be serious. No, **jakeline** , you’re fine. It’s **Epimethus** who has been whooshed, bigtime. ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/142 "2006-02-04T06:14:48Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > If this is not too forward, what is your bra size? Because my point here is not that being thin is unhealthy. It’s that “popsicle stick with two canteloupe halves stuck to it” look that so many models and actresses sport is what I have a problem with. Either you have the big boobs OR you have the flat stomach, has been my experience of normalcy for women, with room for exceptions, of course. AMEN. Super skinny bodies with gargantuan boobs attached are pretty rare in real life. Yet the media has been a bunch of busy little bees cramming this down our throats as the ideal of female beauty. > [@](#): > > Another problem I have is the elevation of one body shape over all the other possible, healthy, normal shapes a person can have. Unless you are a size 0-2, you are fat. **This is what a lot of women seem to think** , and it’s a very bad way to look at yourself. Unrealistic images like this are not good for girls to internalize. bolding mine A lot of women think this because this is what is put in front of us as what we should be, and they, the media, and a HELL Of a lot of men, constantly remind us of what we fail to be. And by the way, boobs, if real are FAT. That’s right boys, great big globs of FAT, FAT, FAT…jiggly, gooshy…NOT toned or firm body parts OH no…it’s FAAAAAAAAAAAT! The very SAME fat that you dis us for, and put us down for if a bit of it should be on, GOD forbid, our butts or tummies. Same EXACT kind of fat too. Only difference in a boob is that it’s got some mammary glands too. Unless of course it’s a fake boob, then it’s a freaking PLASTIC BAGGIE for God Sake!!! Stupid media anyway… ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/143 "2006-02-04T06:34:09Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > They are not unrealistic if the women (in this case) come by them honestly, i.e. through good diet and exercise. As for breast implants, I have no problem with them as they are a personal choice any woman (or man) should have the right to make. And breasts, real or augmented, are very feminine. It’s the nature of breasts. The problem, and you’re either not getting our point, or purposely ignoring it, is that breats aren’t something one CAN “come by” through diet (no matter how good) or exercise, again, no matter how good. You obviously don’t know all that much about women’s bodies if you think that they can. We are either born with the size breasts that we have, or we buy a set. Period. Working out and eating correctly is NEVER going to give a woman a size 0 body with size 22 breasts. Which is what we are talking about when we say “unrealistic” or “unnatural”. Hugely oversized breasts on a tiny body aren’t common. Yes, Yes…we know, it DOES happen, but it is not a common body type, NATURALLY. And for hollyweird and the media to showcase those who are tiny and have had breast implants, as if it WERE natural and attainable only by “proper exercise and diet” is wrong and insulting. > [@](#): > > And JS in that picture looks quite normal to me. The argument that most women’s ribs and hips are well padded in America does not convince me that this is either “normal” or healthy – it’s just the norm. I know that on Animal Cops people get arrested when they allow their animal to rich the stage where their RIBS are showing through their skin. One doesn’t have to be “well padded” (nice euphamism) to be normal or healthy. > [@](#): > > I’m not trying to be contencious here, I’d really like to know why you think that “normal” is between a size 8 and 16 (or somewhere in there). It may very well be the average in N.A. but why is it “normal” when most studies say that people are getting fatter on average. So far I haven’t seen anyone try to say that ONLY 8 - whatever size is normal. What I HAVE seen people say is that 8 etc is JUST as viable and healthy a size as the highly touted zeros and 2s. By the way, Cindy Crawford wears an 8, so does Drew Barrymore. Gabrielle Reece weighs 175, more when she is actually playing and isn’t modeling. These are NOT “well padded” women. From what I read in this thread, the beef is NOT “only size 8 and up is to be considered normal”, but “we’re sick of being told that ONLY size 2 and below is normal and desireable”. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/144 "2006-02-04T06:38:44Z")
**CanvasShoes** , thank god you showed up! ::smooch:: ---
**Author:** ![CanvasShoes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@CanvasShoes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CanvasShoes)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/145 "2006-02-04T08:16:08Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > **CanvasShoes** , thank god you showed up! ::smooch:: Awww…it’s nice to be missed by someone!! (I just got back from Katrina…whew…). ---
**Author:** ![Hilarity\_N.Suze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hilarity_n.suze/32/6223_2.png) [@Hilarity\_N.Suze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hilarity_N.Suze)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/146 "2006-02-04T09:00:52Z")
> [@trublmakr](#): > > Minor nitpick, but no. Petite sizes are for short women, and relaxed fit is the way the pants or whatever hang, the waist size and length remain standard. Clothing sizes aren’t, IME, changing. And I conduct a lot of personal research on the subject of shopping. When I was in my mid-20s, on a bet I stepped through a tennis racket. (No strings.) And this wasn’t one of your modern wide-bodied tennis rackets, no sirree. It was an old-fashioned one. The bet I had made was that if I could get my boobs through it I could get everything through it–being that I was quite busty, but otherwise scrawny, i.e., you could see my bones, etc. 5’5" and about 95 lbs. At this time, in the mid-70s, I wore a size 5 or a size 6. I never, ever ran into anyone smaller than I was (shorter, yes, but not smaller) and if I’d worn a size smaller I would have been shopping in the children’s section. In fact I generally bought my jeans in the boys’ section, because otherwise anything that fit my waist (21" at the time) in the women’s section would hit me right above the ankles, which was not at all cool at the time (especially since it would have probably had a flare in those days). Thirty years and 30 lbs later…_I still wear a size 6._ Yet, amazingly, that size 5 skirt from the late '70s? Cannot begin to zip it. And yet people say there is no size inflation. (Wait, maybe it shrank. Yeah, that’s it . . . it shrank, 30 lbs means nothing.) But wait, there’s more. I also have some vintage clothes, including a whole bunch given to me by a friend of my mother’s because she thought they were too young for her. They fit me (or I should say, don’t fit me) exactly the same way the late-'70s size 5 doesn’t fit me. And yet these dresses, from American manufacturers, made in the late '50s-early '60s, _are a size 10!_ Sounds to me like 2 is the new 10. ---
**Author:** ![Stillwell\_Angel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/96bed5/32.png) [@Stillwell\_Angel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stillwell_Angel)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/147 "2006-02-04T13:23:22Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > I’m one of them, too. I’m 5’4" and weigh about 115 lbs. It’s not my fault. I eat a very high-fat diet, consisting mainly of cheeseburgers and potato chips. I just don’t seem to gain weight. It has to be in the genes, because all of the women in my family are slim. > > My co-workers tease me about being “scrawny” all the time. They constantly offer me food, and then roll their eyes when I say I’ve already eaten. “You never eat,” they say. I also get constant comments on my weight: “You look like you’ve lost weight again! If this keeps up you’ll blow away in a strong wind.” I used to drink Slim-Fast shakes at lunch to get the vitamins that are lacking in my diet. That was a big mistake. People started thinking I was anorexic. > > I’m offended by it, to tell you the truth. It’s just as rude to joke about how skinny someone is as it is to tease a fat person. As a result, I wear baggy clothes, and in the winter, multiple layers,to try to look more substantial. I feel just as self-concious as I imagine a heavy person must feel. Amen. I could have written that myself. People at work think nothing of making fun of my scrawny-ness, but what would happen if I mentioned their flabby bellies or thunder thighs?? I’d be raked over the coals and labeled a heartless bitch. Their comments about my small size are demeaning and make me feel like they are insinuating that I have not yet joined the ranks of real womanhood because I don’t have a belly pooch or love handles. It usually goes something like this: Snarky co-worker: I was your size once. Me: Blank stare SC-W: Whan I was in _first_ grade! Sorry mean co-workers, I’m almost 40 years old and have been a mother for 12 years, I’m every bit the woman you are, regardless of what size I wear. And I also have learned to abstain from any mention of trying to gain weight. They can spend hours discussing the latest fad diet their into this week, but if I mention my quest to add a few pounds I get the :rolleyes: Okay, so trying to improve my body in my own way is not as important as your attempts to improve yours. I’ll just be taking my biggie sized combo meal and eating in my office today, thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Epimetheus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c4cdca/32.png) [@Epimetheus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Epimetheus)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/148 "2006-02-04T14:59:10Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > On preview, I see you’re admitting that your previous posts were “immature and incoherent.” Good, that’s a step. Now let’s not try to pretend that you were doing it on purpose. Just 'fess up to being a jerk and let’s move on. I’m not going to reply to your second post b/c I feel I’ve adequately covered the topic in this one, and frankly, I’m tired of reading your tired arguments. No, I was saying that my two previous posts were deliberately written to be immature to prove a point. Obviously missed. I was deliberately being incoherent to mimic your ranting style, and being insulting to show you how it feels, since you felt the need to berate those debating with you. But as far up there on your high horse as you are, I can see how you missed it and just automatically assumed I was an idiot. Nothing new I am sure, your level of pretension is astounding. > [@](#): > > I’m pleased that I could shame you into getting back on topic. It’s kinda hard to take you seriously after your best retort was telling me to take my lithium (all that diagnostic psychiatric acumen come from your Psych 101 class?), but OK, Doc, let’s go. I never left the topic, and you certainly did not shame me. Like some random bloke on the internet is going to make me feel shame? For standing up for others? Uh, yeah. > [@](#): > > No, and where are you getting that? I have said over and over that there should be a big range of what’s normal. I think there are size 12 women who are normal, and size 2’s. My point, that I feel I’ve made _over and over_, is that only the size 2 woman will be used in the media, thus giving the strong impression that it’s the only acceptable body type. Jessica Simpson is one of those girls, and that’s what I object to. Nothing personal to JS, I’m sure she’s a very nice person. Well, then you are definately misrepresenting others positions then, because neither myself, LHOD or alice\_in\_wonderland are advocating that size 0 and 1 women are normal. If you weren’t busy telling us what we are saying, you might learn that. > [@](#): > > Oh, girls like that are normal. It’s _women_ like that I question as the norm. When I was 18, I was like that, and I work with teenagers and a lot of them look like that. It doesn’t last them far into their latter years of life. I think I’ve said that over and over also. Being and idiot again then. 18 is not a girl. It is a young women. 20-23 are not even teenagers anymore, and dismissing the young as not part of the norm is pretty ignorant. I also specifically stated that college was not my only sample size and that women my own age (28) often have similar builds. Sure, I admit it less frequent, but you never said “normal women are those between the ages of 25-45 and have had 1.5 kids.” You set up your own little defintion and of course it is going to be true. But who is living in the fantasy world now? > [@](#): > > Ah, now the truth comes out! It all makes sense now! You’re on a college campus and you’re trying to extrapolate _that sample age population onto how women are built as an entire gender_, across the decades? No wonder you’re so clueless. You’re looking at women in the prime of their beauty, before time and gravity and natural bodily processes happen. Things change, and if you want to date women your own age in the future, you’d better get used to it. Again, see above. > [@](#): > > Oh, for fuck’s sake. I have 34DD’s, so no, I do not have a distaste for big boobs. I also have no problem with flat stomachs when both are naturally occurring. Someone women have both, but not a lot, and definitely not a lot of women in their 30’s and over. Breasts are made of fat. Most women who have fat in one place have it in another. It’s very odd to have stacks of it all on your chest and none on your ass, hips, and/or belly. esp. over the course of a lifetime. This is a fact and I will find cites if you want. Can you really be disputing this? So you are saying that women in size 0-1 that have big boobs are all having surgery? Wow, your sweeps are getting smaller and smaller, but still pretty sweeping. And I am well aware of how breasts are composed. I also now many heavy women that have small breasts, so size alone does not dictate a persons breasts size, genetics do. And yes, find me your precious little cites. I imagine they will not be forthcoming. > [@](#): > > First of all, I work in a school full of teenagers, so I think my sample size is even younger than yours. Unlike you, though, I recognize that it’s idiotic to compare very young women to the whole female population. It’s this attitude, this fixation on the look of a woman in her prime as the normative expectation for female beauty, that leads so many beautiful, diverse-looking women to feel inadequate. If you could for one second realize that you’re looking at only one small sample age group and stop thinking that’s the standard, you’d get what I’m saying here. 18-23 isn’t 13-16. I am not the one looking at one sample age group, that would be you. > [@](#): > > Next, where did I ever say that a skinny girl with large breasts = implants? The conclusion follows from your argument. If you are not going that direction you better clarify, because all your little arguments lead right up to it. > [@](#): > > I see teenage girls all the time who have big breasts who are tiny, naturally. They are also 13-14, so this for them is normal and healthy. In cases like JS’s, her body type and her breasts don’t match, which looks fake and weird to me. I guarantee if you showed me a woman whose breasts were natural and who had a toned body, I wouldn’t say she was emaciated or bizarre. Really, 13-14 year olds with big breats? Hmm, will have to take your word for it, but don’t remember them having such big breasts when I was in that age range. > [@](#): > > Like I said, physician, heal thyself-- you know what projection is but you don’t recognize when you’re doing it. I am happy with my body type. I wish more people were happy with theirs. If I though I had to look like JS or LL, I wouldn’t be happy, though, and I see a lot of girls who haven’t accepted themselves for how they are. It makes me angry to see them suffer. Do you feel any sympathy for them? You keep using the term projection in the psychological sense, but I don’t think you realize what it really means. > [@](#): > > A defense mechanism, operating unconsciously, in which what is emotionally unacceptable in the self is unconsciously rejected and attributed (projected) to others whereas I have been merely : > [@](#): > > a prediction made by extrapolating from past observations An alternative to the term projection that basically referrs to drawing and inference. Of which there is nothing wrong with that, in fact in logic and in debates it is acceptable. Especially when you don’t outright state your premise. > [@](#): > > I think we ALL need to think about our attitudes towards women’s bodies. I have spent plenty of time thinking about it. Considering that I live in one, I have been thinking about it all my life. You have been oggling women all your life, but do you really know what it’s like to be one and deal with a sick cultural standard for your body? Maybe you do from your side of things, but not from a woman’s POV. Of course “oggling” women doesn’t give me a sense of what it is like to be one. But that isn’t the debate, and that isn’t my argument. The fact that I haven’t been a women gives me an outside viewpoint that is fresh from your own. You have been one, and therefore you have all the biases of one, all the viewpoints from only the inside. I have your description as well as others descriptions to go on, and an outside perspective. > [@](#): > > I think a flat stomach is feminine when it FITS THE WOMAN’S BUILD. I personally don’t care what _you_ think is feminine, since you’re really not my target audience. Well, I don’t really give a rats ass what you think is feminine either. You are a women, unless you happen to be gay, you don’t need an attraction for them. Thats like me setting the standard of attraction for men, it doesn’t matter what I think, it only matters to the guy what the women think. > [@](#): > > Those decrepit bagmen that cat-loving bagladies like me go after are dealing with a sample size of ADULT women who are well past the gravity-defying days of our high school and college years. We’re all OK with it over here, but then, we’re not living on a game preserve for women circa the age of 20. Again, you aren’t the only adult, 18+ is considered adult, no matter what you think it should be or not. Claiming otherwise is simple delusion. Now, granted I am only 28 (with your tone I asusme you are like 40- typical of older people to dismiss the young as kids), but I started college when I was 26. I spent 10 years out in the work force, and still continue to do so. I come from a pretty decent sized city, and go out regularly. Now granted I don’t hang around retirement homes so I can’t speak for the upper portion of the population, but while there is a shift in body size as age progresses, my experience doesn’t support your claims that after some determinate age in which a girl becomes a women, they suddenly lose it all. I will say this again. College isn’t my only sample size. It was an example that was given to prove your claim wrong. > [@](#): > > Enjoy them while you can. Soon enough you will be too old to date them, and then what will you do? You’ll have to settle for someone your own age, and your unrealistic expectations might trip you up. I am too old to date them IMO. > [@](#): > > I’m being wooshed here, aren’t I? This is a joke, right? You can’t POSSIBLY be serious. It is of course hyperbole, but I am serious, yes. In what why do you find this so silly you would think it is a joke? There have been many very sucessful non-JS body types out there, even some larger ones. They have had very sucessfull careers, and have even been the roll model for many kids and adults alike. There could be more, which would shift the perception further that it is ok to look however one wants. Getting up in the spotlight takes some serious self-esteem. I think I am comfortable with my body but I couldn’t be an actor. I seriously think the reason there isn’t more larger people on the silver screen is because often self-esteem drops as size increases. Which IMO is a shame. ---
**Author:** ![Epimetheus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c4cdca/32.png) [@Epimetheus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Epimetheus)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/149 "2006-02-04T15:02:10Z")
> [@Epimetheus](#): > > Well, then you are definately misrepresenting others positions then, because neither myself, LHOD or alice\_in\_wonderland are advocating that size 0 and 1 women are normal. If you weren’t busy telling us what we are saying, you might learn that. Oops, I mean that 0-1 women are not the norm. Not saying those that fall into that size are not normal and are some kind of freaks. Just that it is at the bottom of the bell curve. A matter of percentages rather than normalcy. (which I don’t equate) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/150 "2006-02-04T15:09:13Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > Same right back atcha. At this point, I’m becoming increasingly convinced that you don’t get it. I really can’t help you with this attitude, but I do think you need to spend some time thinking about your attitudes towards women’s bodies. > > See how much fun this is? :rolleyes: YOu said some disparaging things about a certain body type. You got confronted on it, and denied that you’d disparaged a certain body type. I quoted the places where you’d said these things, and you said you stood by them. I concluded that you were in denial. You responded with, essentially, “I know you are, but what am I?” What are you, nine? I’m done with you. I thought you could talk like a grownup, but instead you resort to low blows that make no sense. If you decide to talk maturely, let me know. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/151 "2006-02-04T16:45:47Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > What are you, nine? > > I’m done with you. I thought you could talk like a grownup, but instead you resort to low blows that make no sense. If you decide to talk maturely, let me know. You say this to me when your compadre Epimethius resorts to calling me a baglady, but not such chastisement for him? You’re full of it. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/152 "2006-02-04T16:52:31Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > You say this to me when your compadre Epimethius resorts to calling me a baglady, but not such chastisement for him? You’re full of it. “Compadre”? WHere have you seen me responding to him at all? I saw that insult toward you, rolled my eyes, and exercised the pagedown key over the rest of his posts. He’s not my compadre, my ally, or my friend in this; what he says is not what I say. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/153 "2006-02-04T17:07:19Z")
> [@Stillwell Angel](#): > > Their comments about my small size are demeaning and make me feel like they are insinuating that I have not yet joined the ranks of real womanhood because I don’t have a belly pooch or love handles. Wow . . . you know, I never thought of this aspect, but you’re right! That excactly the impression that I was getting but never quite knew how to put into words. I don’t have kids, so that probably adds to my not-a-real-woman burden. > [@](#): > > And I also have learned to abstain from any mention of trying to gain weight. They can spend hours discussing the latest fad diet their into this week, but if I mention my quest to add a few pounds I get the :rolleyes: Me, too. Every time I go to the doctor’s office, I wear my heaviest clothing, but she’s not fooled. She hounds me ceaselessly: “Have you been drinking milkshakes like I told you? Are you eating enough salt? How about french fries? Do you like french fries? I want you to eat at least one large order per day.” She’s a great doctor, but man, is she one nagging bitch! 😃 For me, though, any weight gain seems to be a temporary victory. The problem is my appetite-- I really can’t “stuff” myself. Once I’m not hungry any more, that’s it-- I can’t eat another bite or it gags me. My body seems to calculate internally what I’ve eaten: if I had pizza for lunch, I won’t be very hungry at dinner. It gives me an unusual problem: I feel guilty if I eat “healthy.” I think that instead of eating that delicious steamed rice and veggie dish, I should have gotten a cheeseburger. I’m probably one of the only women in the Western Hemisphere that doesn’t like chocolate. Nor do I like cake, candy, or pie. My co-workers always bring those things in to share, and when I refuse, they always point out that this is why I’m so skinny-- I don’t eat anything. They don’t believe me if I told them I had half of a large pizza the night before. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/154 "2006-02-04T17:15:24Z")
> [@Epimetheus](#): > > No, I was saying that my two previous posts were deliberately written to be immature to prove a point. Obviously Oh, you’re full of it. I never insulted you, said you needed to be medicated, or called you a baglady. Those were unprovoked ad hominem attacks and you know it. That’s poor rhetoric and served only to make you look like an ass. > [@](#): > > I never left the topic, and you certainly did not shame me. Like some random bloke on the internet is going to make me feel shame? For standing up for others? Uh, yeah. So calling me a whackjob, a baglady, and making fun of my cats was ON TOPIC to you? No, sorry. And it’s not you that’s standing up for others, it’s me. I’m the one advocating a more liberal interpretation of the female form so that women of different shapes and sizes can feel good about themselves. You’re idealizing women between 18-22, which is unrealistic and wrong. > [@](#): > > Well, then you are definately misrepresenting others positions then, because neither myself, LHOD or alice\_in\_wonderland are advocating that size 0 and 1 women are normal. If you weren’t busy telling us what we are saying, you might learn that. So now they’re NOT normal? What? I think they ARE normal, but they are not the ONLY normal. > [@](#): > > 18 is not a girl. It is a young women. 20-23 are not even teenagers anymore, and dismissing the young as not part of the norm is pretty ignorant. They are very young women and some of them are still finishing up their filling out, some are fresh out of puberty. You were holding them ups as your sample population, which is ludicrous. You can’t compare a 20 year old woman with a 40 year old mother of three and have the same expectations. Is my point. > [@](#): > > So you are saying that women in size 0-1 that have big boobs are all having surgery? Please show me where I said that. Some women that size are getting boob jobs, though. In my experience (and I know women of ALL different ages, from 12-70’s) the vast majority of women who are size 0-2 are A or B cups. Their breasts often look larger than they are because the rest of the woman is so small, or because they wear foundation garments that accentuate what they have, but they rarely are that big in general. This is why Jessica Simpson looks wrong. > [@](#): > > And yes, find me your precious little cites. I imagine they will not be forthcoming. [Here you go:](http://www.healthstatus.com/articles/Body-Fat-Distribution-Factors.html) > [@](#): > > Women are at a disadvantage, as their physiological processes (child bearing and hormone functions) require a plus of essential fat, the “sex-specific fat.” Thus the total percentage of body fat is higher, moreover, this part of essential fat is hard to dislodge. Secondly, women have less calorie-burning muscle than men, which makes it more demanding for the female to achieve a trimmer figure. Women [naturally have fat on their bellies, hips, and thighs:](http://www.a-to-z-wellness.com/fat/Body-Fat-Distribution-Factors.htm) > [@](#): > > While generally, body weight is influenced genetically, hormonally and by the body maintenance condition (the activity routine), it seems that the fat distribution is influenced by age, genetic inheritance, race, but to a greater extent by gender specific hormones. They are responsible for the distribution of fat in certain zones of our bodies: thus, estrogens which are responsible of the typical female sexual characteristics will influence the fat deposition in the pear format, favouring its laying on the hips, thighs, and belly… Women are [supposed to store fat:](http://tinyurl.com/9ekq2) > [@](#): > > The average woman has enough stored fat to survive a 60–90 day fast. Not JS, but the AVERAGE woman. JS would be dead on Day Three of that 60-90 day fast, methinks. Have you had enough? > [@](#): > > Really, 13-14 year olds with big breats? Hmm, will have to take your word for it, but don’t remember them having such big breasts when I was in that age range. Yep, 13-14 year olds with big breasts who look like they’re 18. It’s true. They will probably look more like 23 at 18, and then more like 30 at 23. Girls are maturing much younger than they used to, which I also think is dangerous for them, developmentally. > [@](#): > > You are a women, unless you happen to be gay, you don’t need an attraction for them. Thats like me setting the standard of attraction for men, it doesn’t matter what I think, it only matters to the guy what the women think. First of all, bozo, the singular for “women” is “woman.” These two words are not interchangeable. Second, women seem to care what other women think, even more than they care what men think. I am not setting a standard for what’s attractive nor was that ever my point. My point, which is getting pretty belabored now, is that the cultural standard is unhealthy. > [@](#): > > Again, you aren’t the only adult, 18+ is considered adult, no matter what you think it should be or not. Claiming otherwise is simple delusion. They are not a representative sample of what all women should look like. They may be adults in the legal sense, but their bodies are young and have not started secreting the hormones that will change their bodies. > [@](#): > > Now, granted I am only 28 (with your tone I asusme you are like 40- typical of older people to dismiss the young as kids), Wrong, but OK, whatever. > [@](#): > > Getting up in the spotlight takes some serious self-esteem. I think I am comfortable with my body but I couldn’t be an actor. I seriously think the reason there isn’t more larger people on the silver screen is because often self-esteem drops as size increases. Which IMO is a shame. What’s a shame is that you’re part of what keeps them out of the spotlight and you don’t even realize it. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/155 "2006-02-04T17:29:12Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > “Compadre”? WHere have you seen me responding to him at all? I saw that insult toward you, rolled my eyes, and exercised the pagedown key over the rest of his posts. He’s not my compadre, my ally, or my friend in this; what he says is not what I say. Your dismissal of me as “not an adult” because I disagreed with you and tossed your own condescension back at you is pretty ridiculous. I think I’ve stayed on my rhetorical tack and have argued my points as effectively as I can in this environment. Your reaction to my arguments makes me think you don’t really want to get into this conversation with me, so you too are resorting to taking shots at me and acting like I’m not debating with you, when it’s you who isn’t debating with me. This thread is getting really tiresome. I can’t keep repeating myself when everyone is arguing against ME and not MY POINTS. Clearly is is a button issue for a lot of people, and it’s hard to see straight about it. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/156 "2006-02-04T17:32:38Z")
Also, **Epimethius** , what makes you think Jessica Simpson has great self-esteem? She has had serious weight fluctuations, a nose job, two boob jobs, and collagen injections in her lips. If she loved herself and was happy with her body, why would she fuck with it so much? She was beautiful before any of these alterations, and now she looks plastic and fake. I think she’s more to be pitied than scorned, that she’s submitted herself to doctor’s knives to attain this look that YOU hold up as natural and healthy. Ditto for Lindsay Lohan, who was very ill because of this alleged “self-esteem” you claim she must have in order to be in the spotlight, and the Olsen girl, and god knows which other celebrities. It’s just so screwed up. ---
**Author:** ![Lilairen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8491ac/32.png) [@Lilairen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lilairen)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/157 "2006-02-04T17:49:00Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > Wow . . . you know, I never thought of this aspect, but you’re right! That excactly the impression that I was getting but never quite knew how to put into words. A lot of the people I’ve run into have made the “real woman” thing pretty damn explicit, too. I’ve been told that men who are attracted to my body type are hebophilic homosexuals in denial, because my small breasts and skinny form are “adolescent boy” rather than “real woman”. I don’t even _know_ what my “size” is. And I put “size” in scare quotes because women’s sizing is _fucking insane_. I just go try stuff on until I find things that fit on the rare occasions I hunt clothes. I strongly suspect nitwits would mistake me for someone in good physical condition. ---
**Author:** ![Gala\_Matrix\_Fire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4da419/32.png) [@Gala\_Matrix\_Fire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gala_Matrix_Fire)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/158 "2006-02-04T19:52:11Z")
**Rubystreak** , I’m on your side. I don’t have anything to say that won’t be shouted down, so I’m not bothering, but I am on your side, if that helps any. Okay, I will add something. The idea that the only reason other-than-slender women are not media superstars is that they all have low self-esteem is one of the most outlandish ideas I’ve ever heard, and I’ve been around for a long time. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/159 "2006-02-04T20:42:31Z")
> [@bluethree](#): > > **Rubystreak** , I’m on your side. I don’t have anything to say that won’t be shouted down, so I’m not bothering, but I am on your side, if that helps any. Are you on her side that women of all shapes and sizes ought not to be insulted? If so, I’m on that side, too. Are you on her side that it’s not insulting a certain shape and size of women to call it emaciated, toothpick-armed, desperately needing carbs, etc.? Because if so, I’d be curious in hearing someone back up that claim. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![roshia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6bbea6/32.png) [@roshia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roshia)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2006, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758/160 "2006-02-04T21:45:11Z")
Just a nitpick, but do you have a cite for Lindsay getting implants? Yeah, she, uh, blossomed quite a bit in a short period of time, but it seems unlikely she actually got implants considering that they disappeared as she lost weight. Silicone doesn’t do that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/eat-a-sandwich/342758.md?page=9)