I realize that. However, if MY thighs touch, I’m no longer thin. That’s what we’re talking about.
No chastising her for bringing up the “thin girls are sluts” thing? :rolleyes:
That might be because she acknowledged in the same breath that it was stupid.
You get a grip-- you’re the one suggesting Marilyn Monroe is so fat compared to you. I’m just calling you on it.
WRONG. I mentioned that the gap you so admire is not admired by everyone. I also said that was absurd bullshit with no correlation, just like thighs touching has no real correlation to fatness. YOU are the one saying the fat girls are sluts. I’m disagreeing with that nonsense.
Really, it’s you who can’t read, because I said:
Read that again, slowly, and you’ll see that I’m NOT saying that. You, however, said:
YOU are the one making a correlation, NOT me. I don’t expect you to admit it or anything, but I think I’ve amply demonstrated that it is you calling people sluts, not me.
Oh bullshit, you came into this thread and favorably compared yourself to Marilyn Monroe.
You’re the one who’s a head case if you feel the need to denigrate the obvious beauty of Marilyn Monroe so that you can feel superior. LAME. You don’t like being called out on your self-aggrandizing, hateful nonsense, but I think it’s clear who’s the nutcase here. Look in the mirror, admire your better-than-Marilyn thighs, and you’ll have your answer.
a) she didn’t say “thin girls are sluts”
b) back in the day the boys in my schools said the same thing (ie, if a girl had a space between her legs it was from so much sex she couldn’t get them together anymore, etc); however, they also said that girls with boobs were sluts, girls who wore ankle bracelets were sluts, girls with a gap between their front teeth were sluts, etc. Honestly I think it was wishful thinking on the part of the boys. Sadly I had none of those characteristics and thus never got asked out on dates.
Oh, come on…not-so-thinly veiled. The message was clear:
and
The comment had no place in the discussion.
Perhaps, but your comments didn’t either. There’s no love lost between Rubystreak and myself - if she makes a snarky comment it’s practically expected. I was (and still am) surprised by your comments though. Like I said, they seem surprisingly mean spirited coming from you.
No, just her arms and thighs.
Yeah, that’s a big news flash. People aren’t attracted to all different kinds. :rolleyes: You brought up the fact that some people thought slim girls were sluts; not me. It had no place in the conversation except to make the less-than-slim girl feel somewhat superior to the thin sluts. It wasn’t a comment on how attractive or unattractive they looked; you tied promiscuity to it.
Just my thighs and arms. In some pictures. I’m sure the Ghost Of MM thinks you’re just swell for defending her, though.
I don’t care how big a shrine you think MM deserves. The fact that I don’t agree with it is perfectly valid.
I was just striking back at an obvious dis. Her opinion means nothing to me.
This whole thread is sad on so many levels-I never heard the gap-legged promiscuity comments growing up, although I find them incredibly offensive. I don’t think gap legs look “ugly” but I don’t think touching thighs look ugly either and I strongly object to either one of those being held up as a standard of beauty or even worse thinness or fitness. “Oh my gaw, ‘er thighs are touchin’! What a porker!”
Even worse is the assertion that “skipping meals” in any way shape or form resembles a proper diet. That just makes me want to bang my head against the wall.
Perhaps, Kalhoun, none of the women in this thread will be affected by what you say, but the chances that your own daughter (if you have one) would be/was affected by statements like “I’d take her lunch away for a month!” is pretty high.
You’re still equating non-touching thighs as evidence of slimness but everyone else with touching thighs as fatty mcfatersons. There could have been plenty of thin mean girls who said said statement about heavier gap legged girls. This just points to what everyone in this thread is saying-no matter how much you claim it’s just a standard you’re applying to yourself-you really are applying it to everyone as a gauge of whether or not they’re fat or thin.
Somebody get a bowl of milk, looks like we got a catfight on our hands!
MEOW!!!
I was wondering if the guys reading this thread were staying out of it, like they’d stay out of the kitchen when they hear their mother and sisters shrieking at each other.
No. For me, it’s more about how it seems that all women, no matter their body structure, seem to have body issues. There’s just no getting in the middle of that.
You are either being deliberately obtuse to derail the conversation off criticism of you, or you have not been reading carefully. Some mean-spirited assholes say if you have a gap, it means you’re a slut; other mean-spirited assholes say if you don’t have it, you’re fat. Both camps are assholes and are wrong. I don’t think the space or lack of space between a woman’s legs means ANYTHING, by itself. YOU said that fat girls (ie, those whose thighs touch) were slutty in your neighborhood. I never said anyone was actually really a slut, just that the gap you so admired and touted as a mark of beauty isn’t a universal standard of attractiveness and had negative connotations in my mind from the idiotic, sexist bullshit that teenagers said.
Was that clear enough for you? If alice_in_wonderland is backing me up on my interpretation, then you know you must be wrong.
Sorry if my preference for my own thighs offends you. I’m not holding anything up as a standard. The rest of you are reading something that isn’t there. It is a personal preference and a personal opinion. Nothing more.
Well good thing I didn’t say anything like that. If you’ll read the thread more carefully, I said ages ago that I was not suggesting that seriously. Jesus. Has everyone lost the abililty to comprehend the lighter side? It. Wasn’t. A. Serious. Suggestion.
:rolleyes:
Oh fercrissakes…sometimes touching thighs don’t indicate thinness or fatness. There. Happy? Surely you realize that sometimes, touching thighs indeed indicates chubbiness or even a weight problem?
Please don’t tell me what I’m “really” applying to anything. If you choose to believe that I’m using a sweeping brush to denigrate every woman who has thighs that touch, there’s nothing I can say to change that. My opinion on the subject is mine and you’re all free to agree or disagree.
Can you accept the possibility that what you have said in this thread is perhaps not communicating what you intended it to communicate?
**Ogre - ** Amen.
It’s downright confusing. I dare say that no woman is safe from the disparities of other women, no matter their body shape/size. I’ve heard men disparage women but it never gets down to the level of detail that other women seem to bring to the table.
Yup, Ogre is dead on. In case there any doubt that many women in America have a problem with body image, this thread dispells it.
Woo boy. Where else but in America can we have so many people obese and yet still have people holding Monroe up as somene who was “too fat.” (Look at those thighs and arms … nah, people were too busy looking at other things!) It makes me wonder if the very fact that the fact that so many women have internalized the Kidman prepubertal thighs not touching physique as the ideal is what drives so many to clinical obesity … cause since they are doomed to fail to meet that ideal in any case, they may as well just forget about excercising and eating healthy.
A Monkey With a Gun, I just wanted to stop in and say thanks for the OP. I briefly argued with you recently in a thread where you made the claim that the media don’t hold up extremely thin women as the only ideal. I dropped out of that discussion because lots of people were arguing my side, better than I could, and because I didn’t have the time. It seemed obvious to me that this idea was one you’d supported for quite a while and weren’t going to give up easily.
I became aware of the media problem when I had friends with eating disorders, so it’s a somewhat personal issue with me. I appreciate the fact that you reconsidered your opinion based on receiving more evidence, and were willing to post about it.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled catfight…
- Pretending the thread didn’t get derailed : *
Re: Marilyn Monroe - she was a size 12 at her biggest. That’s not even considered plus -sized.
Re: Nicole Kidman - she looks thin on camera, but in person (according to my husband), she’s almost skeletal. And her head looks ginormous compared to the rest of her.