Originally posted by jesse morrison
Note: I am not a Misogynist!
originally posted by hansel
That you included this disclaimer should give you pause to reflect.
Hi Hansel,
With the aid of several “evaluators”, the reflection is that I am a “Skinny Redneck”.
So my question to you is—Who am I mad at, Young Beutiful Females, or my “Fat Cat” Competitors???
Something for you to reflect on—Who are you mad at???
jesse
Originally posted by Captain Amazing
Here’s what I think you’re saying, but please correct me if I’m wrong.
“Fat men have superior genes. The fact that they have a lower metabolism means they have more energy to pursue their goals. One of the main goals of fat men is to accumulate goods. This is done out of fear, and reinforced by shame, SEXUAL GUILT, and envy. One of the primary goals of fat men is to date young, beautiful women. Women are sexually attracted to fat men, and if they are young and beautiful, they will get them. Fat men like these women at first, but then get rid of them when the women get old. This is what causes class differences.”
That what you mean?
Hi Captain Amazing,
Excellent translation from pseudo-redneck social science jargon, to proper English.
Correction—sexual guilt, should read sexual jealousy.
Validating my theory—Every thing I know about class differences, I learned at the gym with biased observations.
jesse
Originally posted by Guinastasia
Wait a minute-are you suggesting that there is a limited supply of “Female Beauty”? That if one person is beautiful another person cannot be?
Please explain…
Hi Guinastasia,
Wait an hour—Are you a male or a female?
If you are a Male—Still no explanation needed.
If you are a Beutiful Female—Still no explanation needed.
If you are a Bilaterally Asymmetrical Female—Well honey, I have been told that I am a “Skinny Redneck”, perhaps we should start a support group.
jesse
:rolleyes:
Let’s say I’m a reasonably attractive female-(my prefered description, since I like to think I’m OKAY looking, but I don’t want to be conceited).
jesse morrison wrote:
According to this Cecil Adams article, it isn’t basal metabolic rate that determines if you’re fat or skinny.
Guinastasia wrote:
If I may be so bold as to attempt to translate jesse-speak into something comprehensible:
I believe what he is suggesting is that “Female Beauty” is measured relative to other females. If everybody in the population looked as good as Christie Brinkley, then Christie Brinkley would not “stand out” as being a prize more desirable than all those other women. If, however, the average female were as unattractive as a box of rocks with ants crawling on it, then Christie Brinkley would be highly prized.
Is that close, jesse?
Originally posted by tracer
If I may be so bold as to attempt to translate jesse-speak into something comprehensible:
I believe what he is suggesting is that “Female Beauty” is measured relative to other females. If everybody in the population looked as good as Christie Brinkley, then Christie Brinkley would not “stand out” as being a prize more desirable than all those other women. If, however, the average female were as unattractive as a box of rocks with ants crawling on it, then Christie Brinkley would be highly prized.
Is that close, jesse?
Hi Tracer,
Thank the Devil for translators, an excellent traslation with limitations.
What is the “most” outstanding single “qualifier” for being perceived “Beutiful” on a continuum from Christie Brinkley to a “boxy” female?
Careful in what you type, I have a plethora of memetic information in my Radio Shack Ipac Compac to counter any mis-information you may try to promote.
Your Humble Observer,
jesse
Jesse, your “plethora of memetic information” aside, you may find it lugubrious to realize that a multisyllabic vocabulary will not effect the desired paradigm shift in the thought of your homeo sapien compatriots.
By the way, do you have a license for that thesaurus?
I’m not sure what you’re getting at here, but I’ll offer this: A predisposition for fat would not translate into “good” genes for a hairless ape adapted for tropical climes. The added insulation would hinder the animal. I think maybe you need to scale down your hypothesis to a more social level. It can be argued that being fat is viewed by some cultures as being succesfull because, hey, he sure ain’t starving.
As to beauty, it’s the essence of subjective. You know, the whole “eye of the beholder” thing.
-Beeblebrox
“Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.”
Why not say ‘i need to get rid of this fat belly’ instead of coming up with some BS excuse.
Women want sexy rich men but will compromise, just as men do.
Fact facts and accept them.
p.s.
‘saying sad bastard’ is not considered very rude in england, sorry if it is in the USA
If women are attracted to fat men, why are male strippers thin and muscular? Why aren’t the men on BayWatch nearly immobilized by their own cellulite? If that was what the majority of women found attractive, that’s what we’d see.
Secondly-While it is generally a faux pas to bring up a previous thread, I feel justified in this case. In your thread on your theory of emotions (I'll get a link in a sec), you failed to provide any evidence. This thread seems to be an extension and application of that theory. For any of your points in this thread to be valid, you'll have to prove that your original theory is.
PS While I may not agree with them, I find your theories to be fascinating reading. Do you have a web site of any kind? Could you possibly e-mail me copies of some of your papers? I promise not to reproduce or provide any of the material in a forum, public or private, without your express consent. I would like to send a copy to a college friend, however. He is equally interested in unconventional theories, and will hold to a promise not to copy your material.Ah…I see Tracer. Um…well…hmmmm…
I could also put it that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Take me, for example. Actors like Tom Cruise and Ben Affleck do NOTHING for me. I prefer say, a young Omar Sharif, or Glenn Miller! Yet others think that Glenn Miller was stuffy and nerdy, or something.
YMMV.
Beeblebrox wrote:
Not nececelery.
I mean, sure, the fat hairless ape would be slower, which would make it harder to hunt and escape predators. He would also overheat more easily. But, during the lean summer months, when drought has ravaged the Serengeti and game and food-bearing plants are scarce, his fat can make the difference between surviving 'til the next rains come and dying of starvation in mid-summer.
Originally posted by Beeblebrox
As to beauty, it’s the essence of subjective. You know, the whole “eye of the beholder” thing.
Hi Beeblebrox,
Actually your assumption, conclusion, and belief is incorrect.
Try this: Google.com > “bilateral symmetry”+beauty
300 plus sites on this. I think the best one is the following.
http://www.unm.edu/~quantum/quantum_spring_2000/mirror.html
I had the good fortune of meeting Randy Thornhill and attending his course “Human Sexuality”. Randy is an evolutionary biologist at UNM. The above is about his research on bilateral symmetry.
If any females click on the above site and become upset with his research findings, then they should probably not read his recent book titled “A History Of Rape”.
jesse
p.s.—Randy is from Alabama, but is definitely not a “Redneck”. I consider him to be the top researcher in evolutionary biology, and so do most other researchers, regardless of the notoriety that he has received over his controversial book.